 |
| How west thing about Islam? |
By; Sayyed Yousif al-Khoei
Let me begin by telling you a little story. On my first
visit to the US a Journalist friend, who lived in an exclusive part of
Washington invited me to discuss the situation in Iraq. When I got there my
friend said: “Yousif, I have a little request from you and would appreciate it
if you could assist”. The request was in fact quite a simple one. “Come and shake
hands with my neighbor who is a nuclear physicist”. I was rather curious but
happily obliged. Afterwards I found out that the neighbour was rather upset,
perhaps even a little worried – when he had earlier learned that a Shi’a Muslim
was coming to visit next door. In taking me around, my friend had simply wanted
to show this highly educated man that he had nothing to fear. Apparently, this
physicist had never met a Shi’a Muslim before – and all his impressions of me
were based on media reports.
The Western media’s coverage of Islam is generally regarded
as problematic by many Muslims today. This is due to various complex
historical, political, social, religious and cultural reasons. Whilst it would
be wrong to generalise or take a uniform view about the Western media, it is
nevertheless true to say that certain sections have, for a variety of reasons,
portrayed Islam in a negative light, as atavistic, struck in the past, violent,
anti women, etc. What is also clear is that this is having a negative effect
both on Western public opinion and on Muslim minorities in the West.
History
I can’t avoid a bit of history here – because how we view
history conditions how all of us see the world, and hence in the end how the
press see the world too. The story of relations between the West and Islam and
the way they have seen each other is a long twisting tale; Even to summarise the
Western view of Islam, particularly in Europe, we need to go back to early
Church fathers .. the Crusader .. the creation of cultural stereotypes, et. For
much of the Middle Ages, Islam was viewed as the opposite to Christianity and
characterised by the fear of an impending invasion by a foreign force. From the
writings of those days, as well as artistic depictions, it is clear that the
emphasis was on the “other” religion. A comparison with attitudes then with
some of the more recent essays on Islam shows startling similarities. Sir
Alfred Sherman, a former adviser to Margaret Thatcher, has written about the
‘Muslim threat to Christian Europe’ and the gradual Muslim colonisation of western
and central Europe’. Bernard Levin holds similar views: ‘Do you realise that in
perhaps half a century, not more, and perhaps a good deal less, there will be
wars in which fanatical Muslims will be winning? As for Oklahoma, it will be
called Khartoum-on-the-Mississippi, and woe betide anyone who calls it anything
else.’ Levin wrote. In the United States, the effect of history is generally
less apparent for obvious reasons, not least the fact that US contact with
Islam and Muslims is a fairly recent phenomenon.
In France, however, there is on the one hand, a strong
anti-clerical tradition rooted in the Enlightenment and adherence to Catholism
on the other. In spite of this dichotomy, Muslim cultural expressions seem to
be anathema to both.
Terminology
When examining Western media attitudes towards Islam, it is
important to recognise the cultural background of Western journalists who, in a
sense, reflect the societies in which they are born. The question of terminology
and of defining specific discourses is of fundamental importance. Recurring
metaphors such as: fifth column, bridgehead, enclave, Trojan Horse and enemy within,
can be used in reference to Muslims by some tabloids. The use of terms such as
“cruel”, “fanatical”, and “barbaric” are not unusual. Islamic “fundamentalism”,
“extremism”, the Muslim “terrorist”, the Muslim “threat”, the “Islamic Bomb”,
have become key buzzwords used freely by the main news agencies and followed by
the rest. The words ‘Islam’, ‘Islamic’ and ‘Muslim’ are often used
interchangeably even by some respectable and serious news organisations. Such “newspeack”
which has become part of popular cultural discourse, is bound to have an impact
on the uncritical mind. This has lead to theories among many Muslims of a
systematic and continuing propaganda for which there are few rules.
I must emphasise that we are not talking here about
legitimate critical analysis of Muslim politics, society and even culture. It
is inevitable and healthy to debate, criticise and condemn, sometime robustly,
opinions and practices with which one disagrees. But this does not, and should not,
mean that the extreme and cruel treatment directed against women by the
Talaban, for example, should become la licence for blanket criticisms of the
Islamic faith or people.
Muslim Minorities
The demonisation of Islam, or at least the widely held
perceptions of it is leading to an alienation of Muslim communities as
minorities in the West. For many young Muslims, fear and distrust of Islam is
an everyday reality. Coverage of the social, economic and political problems,
such as immigration and education, has added to a sense of isolation; there is
open hostility to Muslim demands for state funded schools in line with their Christian
and Jewish counterparts – the call for Muslim schools has been painted in the
press as a call for turning playgrounds into training and recruitment of fundamentalists.
Even the first person who won the lottery in Britain found his religion, Islam,
on trial on the front pages of the tabloids. Other stories, such as the
marriage of a young Turkish man to a thirteen-year-old English girl, who fell
in love while on holiday in Turkey, was sensationalized with negative
connotations about the boy’s religion, occupation and social class. Prince
Charles also came under fierce attack from some sections of the press for
admiring aspects of Islam.
The Other level of alienation is related to using racist
terminology, perhaps subconsciously. It is pertinent here to mention a report
by the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia under the aegis of the
Runnymede Trust, a British think-tank who have, in my opinion carried out some
admirable investigations into this area. In their report Islamophobia: A
Challenge to us All, published last week, they list eight aspects of
Islamophobic discourse, including many of the points I have raised here today.
They highlight an article in the Sun tabloid newspaper (12 November 1991) where
a column spoke about encouraging immigrants to assimilate through scrapping the
method of learning the alphabet (A for apple, etc) and introducing a new one.
“A for Ayatollah, B for Baghdad, C for Curry, F for Fatwa, H for Hizbollah, I
for Intifada, J for Jihad, O is for Onion Bhaji"”. The overlap between
Islamphobia, or anti-Muslim prejudice and racism is quite obvious here.
The problem is, however, in Britain for example, Muslims are
unable to resort to legal remedies to address this problem as religions are not
covered by anti-racist legislation. If some of the writings were written about
Blacks rather than Muslims, they would have been hauled in front the Race
Relations Board and the Press Complaints Commission, if they were written about
Jews, they would have been instantly accused of anti-Semitism and condemned.
Middle East Politics
Fundamentalism, of course, has to remain the prerequisite
for discussing the various forces at play in the Middle East (whether these be
political, economic or social) because it acts as a catalyst in terms of
defining the larger picture to an audience that is not expected to understand
the complexities of an “other” culture. So much easier to call a wog a wog,
easier on the tongue, easier on the brain and certainly easier on the
recipient’s ignorance. But to suggest that the notion of fundamentalism is used
primarily to paint the background picture to conflicts in the Middle East is an
oversimplification.
Political events in the Middle East have undoubtedly been a
major factor in the coverage. The Middle East is necessarily a media godsend
because it is always newsworthy. And it is always newsworthy because of dynamic
political developments in the region that are ever-changing and unexpected. But
aside from the oil price rises in the 1970s and the question of Palestine,
arguably the most important and interesting Islamic phenomenon of recent years
was the Islamic Revolution in Iran. In international Political terms, this has
had a devastating impact on Western foreign policy considerations that are now
seemingly so polarised as to be irreversible. Concomitantly, this had an absolutely
profound influence on the Western media’s coverage, which pursued its own
process of polarising Islam and Muslims. The visible militancy of the Iranian
Revolution was used as a yardstick for discussing all things Islamic, all
things Muslim. This representation of revolutionary Islam was so powerful,
biased as it was, that it was a key factor in determining how Shi’a Islam in particular,
and late Islam per se, would be covered in the Western media during the 1980s.
Following the end of the Cold War, the Rushdie affair and
the Gulf conflict, in addition to what many in the West perceived as the need
to have a new foe after the collapse of Soviet communism, has given Islam a
much higher profile in the Western press. This was accompanied by pictures
coming out of Afghanistan of violent and repressive acts committed in the name
of religion, as well as the spread of the increased use of violence in settling
political disputes in other Muslin countries, notably in North Africa. The
indiscriminate and frequently murderous violence of an Islamist fringe have
proven a boon to the media who, in turn, have used such images to gain larger
audiences.
But it is not all about gaining audiences, of course. The
coverage of Bosnia and Chechnya, for instance, were sympathetic. Here the
manifest to Muslims was generally reported with compassion and knowledge, often
at great personal risk to the reporters; Unlike many political circles, the
media were generally alert to the suffering of Muslims.
Oklahoma: A Watershed
The Bombing in Oklahoma City, USA, was watershed in the way
Muslims were, up to then, being reported in the West. In many ways it was a
catharsis in terms of the use of terminology and the automatic assumption of
Muslim involvement in terrorism. It happened at a time when the Western press
were complacent about investigating the many causes and varieties of terrorist
action around the world. In Britain , this undertow of hate was capped by one
of the most astonishing pieces of journalism I have ever seen. The Today
newspaper published on its front page the heartrendering picture of an American
fireman carrying a dead infant from the wreckage, under the headline: “In the
name of Islam”. The paper refused to apologise even when it was quickly discovered
that the perpetrators were not Muslim.
Oklahoma happened out of the blue but the assumption of
Muslim involvement was something that had been festering out of control for a
long time. To make the connection, however superficial, was easy and one could
get away with being wrong. What else did people expect?
After all, was not Muslim terrorism on everyone’s mind
anyway? The media jumping to conclusions was the chicken coming home to roost
in terms of the perception of news analysis in the West as a whole. It also
brought home an important lesson that many of us have forgotten: the simple
power of the media in being able to swing opinion, instigatechaos and
suffering, and then simply retire to a corner claiming professional
miscalculation. But can we as human societies, really afford such
miscalculations?
The Muslim Response
The Muslim response has been influenced by the relative
sense of marginalisation Muslim communities feel in the West. Certainly in the early
days, Muslims rarely, gave feedback to the media about their feelings on what
is written or broadcast about them. This is also due to lack of experience and
organisation on the part of the Muslim community and partly due to apathy and nonchalance.
Such an attitude has been greatly induced by the inward-looking nature of many within
the ethnic Muslim minorities. Many developed a siege mentality and do note ever
read, let alone wish to respond to the tabloids. The lack of any clear
leadership and representative Muslim voice has not helped either as the Media
does not know who speaks for the community.
The Muslim response has been inadequate. Responses in the
main have either been apologetic or radical and confrontational. The apologists
are always eager to portray an essentially non-threatening and pious Islam
which can accommodate and reflect the prevailing standards ofmoral behaviour in
the West. The radicals are always keen to appear in the media and say what many
in the media want to hear, thus further enforcing existing stereotypes.
How to counter negative stereotypes?
There is no magic cure to counter these stereotypes. What is
needed is a gradual process of dialogue and education. Muslims in the West need
to become pro-active respondents rather than passive recipients. The Muslim
Community need to organise effective lobbying groups rather than rely on ad-hoc
responses to ad-hoc situations. This should be coupled with participation in
the objective analysis of events. To a certain extent, BBC Radio is already
taking heed of Muslim sensitivity and Muslims are given some airtime on certain
religious days. We, at the Khoei Foundation are involved in the process, as are
others such as Professor Akbar Ahmed, the BBC’s
Roger Hardy and the broadcaster, Michael Wood – just to name
a few. In terms of the depiction of Muslims in film and drama, there should be
a conscious attempt to relay a balanced and non-stereotypical picture of Muslim
peoples and cultures. The current Hollywood emphasis on Muslims as marauding
terrorists needs to be addressed, and once can refer to many examples here,
including Disney’s “Aladdin” and the latest action flic, G I Jane. The use and
abuse of terminology s an important issue because terminology defines the social
as well as the intellectual discourse in this area. Cultural exchanges are
needed at a level other than investigative journalism so that journalists and
writers are more sensitive to Muslim feelings and sentiments. Criticism should
be constructive and set out against the background of objectivity. If Muslim
communities are themselves to articulate a response to what they see, hear or read
in the media, they should have access to those areas of the media that are
seemingly inaccessible to them. There will always remain a minority of people
who present a uniformly negative image of Islam and Muslims, not out of
Ignorance or misunderstanding but for ideological or political reasons or maybe
religious bigotry – we must isolate these people and not let them dictate the discourse.
I started with a handshake story and will suitably end with
one. During the same trip to the US which I referred to at the beginning, we
were in a meeting at the United Nations when a young (female) American
journalist walked in and shook hands with everyone. A Muslim friend refused to shake
hands for apparently “religious reasons”. This young journalist was so
embarrassed that she nearly cried. I asked my friend later whether it was
really necessary to embarrass her in this way – his reply was that he was only
fulfilling his Islamic duty. As a Muslim, I wondered whether such indeed was
his duty or merely his religious intransigence.
Ina any case, it highlighted for me, like the earlier
example of the nuclear physicist, the powerful effects of stereotyping and the
responsibility of all of us, Muslims too, in wearing ourselves away from such
stubborn resistors to our humanity and towards mutual understanding and complementarity.
We have reached an apex in our mutual recognition of each other’s existence.
What we have not reached is a common understanding of each other’s ingrained
prejudices and the reasons for their perpetuation. The Runnymede Trust’s report
lists a number of steps that could be taken to address the issue of
Islamophobia, including a greater range of positive images of Islam in the media,
a more balanced and responsible use of Muslim spokespersons, more expert use of
public relations methods, modification and strengthening of existing codes of
practise, appointment of more Muslim reporters and journalists, consideration
of Islamophobia in education at all levels and provision of seminars and
training to raise awareness of Muslim issues and cultural particularities among
journalists and the media generally. In my opinion, in addressing the coverage
of Islam, the greater onus is upon the Western media who must critically
re-examine their coverage and particularly the use of terminology in reporting
Muslim issues. The journalism of the West, as I said, reflects its culture and
the journalist’s culture will change as society and people change.
