Europe and Islam - the way ahead - Anwar Ibrahim

About seven years ago, someone wrote a book entitled 50 Reasons Why Anwar Ibrahim Should Not Be Prime Minister. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out what kind of book this was or what sort of person the author of such a book would be. But just let me share with you some thoughts about this matter.

This book was part and parcel of a despicable political conspiracy to assassinate my character. And this was no low-level, ordinary conspiracy but one orchestrated at the highest levels backed by virtually unlimited financial resources. The ultimate objective was of course to destroy my political career and to do whatever it takes to see that I would never become prime minister of Malaysia.

Of course, I took legal action against these culprits for defamation of character then itself and the High Court granted me an injunction in 1998. But the matter dragged on with no resolution in sight.

Fortunately, after my acquittal and release from incarceration, the Kuala Lumpur High Court gave a judgment in my favour in respect of this defamation suit. The judge set Aug 16 for assessment of damages (and the hearing is in progress this week).

Suffice to say that the outrageous lies and allegations in the book caused great pain to me and my family, particularly my children, and also my friends. And as a result of the heinous acts of the conspirators, I was harshly removed from all my positions in the government as well as the party and then subjected to those preposterous, but nonetheless, very cruel criminal charges.

Anyway, I don't wish to harp on this too much. This matter is way overdue. So I want and I pray it will be resolved soon. The sooner, the better, so that I can put this entire episode behind me. As they say, you just have to move on.

‘Terrorism and Benladism’

So on that note, let me now say a few things about Islam and Europe.

The great Belgian historian Henri Pirenne has said that the cause of Europe's break with the tradition of antiquity was the rapid and unexpected advance of Islam. It is not that the blame game on Islam was invented by him but, to my mind, this radical thesis set in train a new era in evaluating the impact of religion on civilisation, an impact which is still pervasive today.

According to Pirenne, Islam shattered the classic tradition of the Roman Empire and destroyed the ancient unity of the Mediterranean states. The Muslim conquest was totally unlike the previous invasions. The Germans, for example, had conquered the region earlier but they were absorbed by the populations. The Arabs were completely immune to their influence and this had nothing to do with language or a sense of ethnic or cultural superiority. According to Pirenne, the only reason was religion.

To quote him,"While the Germans had nothing with which to oppose the Christianity of the Roman Empire, the Arabs were exalted by the new religion of Islam. It was this and this alone that prevented their assimilation."

It is not my intention to re-ignite the old flames of controversy by either suggesting that Pirenne was right or wrong, but I believe I am not alone in saying that this historical burden of the Arab conquests of the Mediterranean continues to colour, if not altogether dominate, the kind of discourse that we are having today.

In current discourses, for example, the notion of a clash of civilisations resonates well among certain quarters. The spectre of Islamic fundamentalism haunts our forums and this term is now interchangeable with ‘terrorism’ or ‘Benladism’. If it was religion then, it is religion now, even more so. But the irony is that these are not religious discourses but discourses on democracy.

It has been said that this is all symptomatic of Islamophobia. To be sure, the terms ‘democracy’ and ‘terrorism’ are worlds apart. They are as opposed to each other as paradise is to inferno. As I have said before in other forums, while democracy is associated with the rule of law, terrorism is invariably linked to the rule of violence. Democracy liberates man and gives him freedom and equality and the institutions of civil society. Terrorism holds man hostage and gives him fear and uncertainty.

Let me just go back to the thesis which says that it was the religion of Islam and this alone that prevented Muslims from assimilation and try to relate how political discourses have fallen prey to the ravages of Islamophobia.

Islamophobia is the irrational fear of Islam or Muslims subsumed under a belief that they are religious fanatics who hate non-Muslims. This blind fear also leads to the association of Islam with violence, extremism and terrorism and the rejection of democracy and human rights. This has led to irrational and racist chanting such as was expressed recently by a senior European politician that ‘Muslim civilisation is inferior to (that of) Europe’. Writers have also capitalised on this fear by resorting to using sensational and often racist titles in order to sell their books.

Islamic state ideals

And to my mind, of even greater importance is that Muslim leaders should break free of the obsession of sloganeering about the setting up of the ideal Islamic society, that is, the Islamic state, and get on with the task of establishing the institutions of civil society so that freedom and democracy can have free rein; so that social justice will be an essential part of governance; and so that poverty will be eliminated and education will be made a birth right.

Let me take a moment to move from Europe to Southeast Asia (and) all this talk about fundamentalism and how democracy cannot work in Muslim countries. Let's just look at Indonesia and I dare say it can serve as a model of democracy for the world.

There were attempts to galvanise Islamic radicalism, but when Muslims in Indonesia were asked to choose between ideological exclusivism and moderation they overwhelmingly chose the latter. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying they are perfect but mind you, they had languished for over 30 years under corrupt dictatorship. So when they decided to seize the day, they opted for a free press, an independent judiciary and free speech. They voted for freedom and democracy. And the changes brought about now provide an enduring lesson on making that giant leap from autocracy to democracy without violence or bloodshed.

The other important lesson from Indonesia is that the impetus for democratisation of the Muslim world can and must come from Muslims themselves. And that is what Indonesia has done. Why must such a process be driven by America or Europe or any other region for that matter? But I am not saying to the West to keep their hands off.

I call on Muslims who are opposed to democracy to change their mind set and work towards developing a vibrant democracy. Marshall the forces of freedom and harness them so that Muslims may stand up for their fundamental dignity and establish the institutions of democracy, freedom and civil society.

While the history of Islam's expansion is replete with the stories of conquest, it is equally true that Islam was also spread through commerce and trade, notwithstanding Pirenne's theory. Even as it spread its wings, multi-cultural and multi-religious societies evolved.

Muslim societies in this regard stood out for their tolerance and moderation, not chauvinism or bigotry. Isn't it therefore conceivable that when the seeds of democracy and freedom are planted in the hearts of Islamists, these values will germinate in the psyche of their worldview?

In the current tide to move to democracy, Islamist political parties, and for that matter other parties as well, should be bound by a compact to respect and honour the values and principles of democracy and freedom, and not to renounce them upon gaining power.

Embracing democracy

For the Muslim world, a more productive pursuit lies in finding how democracy and freedom can resonate through Islam's public and private realms. For Islamists in particular, embracing democracy and freedom should carry no stigma. Accepting democracy and freedom is not converting to Western values or ideals, nor does it mean that they will have to stop criticising European or US foreign policy, culture or values.

Likewise, it is also misconceived for Europe to view the movement of Islamists to democracy from the prism of so-called die hard fundamentalist groups in the Arab world. This fallacy has led to the assumption that Islamists are diametrically opposed to the West and will have nothing to do with them, or worse, that they will work towards the destruction of Europe.

While the bloodshed of Algeria's aborted elections of 1992 continues to haunt us, the lessons of history should fortify instead of weaken our conviction to pursue freedom and democracy.

(The attacks on the US on) Sept 11 (2001) should never be allowed to take us backwards. That there is a need to wage war on terror is not in dispute in as much as terrorism terrorises all. But the zeal with which this war is being prosecuted should be reinforced by the conviction to forge ahead to promote the principles of freedom and democracy where they are needed most, not sacrifice them on the altar of expediency.

All Muslim countries must seize the moment now to adopt modern, democratic constitutions, hold free and fair elections, ensure the separation of powers and guarantee fundamental civil liberties including allowing the full participation of women in political life. They must put a stop to extra-judicial procedures, arbitrary arrests, and the use of the state apparatus to silence political opposition.

With these institutions and practices in place, abuse of power will be checked, corruption can be more effectively dealt with, and economic wealth can be more equitably distributed to the people.

In principle I maintain that the philosophy should be ‘ask not what Europe or the West can do for you but ask what you can do for yourselves to secure freedom and democracy’. And of course, I am not talking about nominal democracy but real democracy - liberal or constitutional democracy.

Real commitment

Having said that, I recognise that merely asking questions is not going to take us anywhere. The fact remains that Europe or at least the European Union has made some significant efforts in promoting democracy.

However, I would characterise the European approach as being overly cautious because of the fear of rocking the boat. All this rhetoric about social justice, freedom and human rights - where is the action?

Is there a real commitment given to establishing contacts with Arab NGOs? And if you keep funding only ‘safe’ groups, that is, those with a decidedly secular, pro-Western outlook you are not dealing with it holistically. Are we saying that the traditionalists don't count for anything?

Arab states of the Mediterranean continue to be dominated by autocratic governments that restrict political freedoms and that is to put it mildly. Institutional and political reform, if any, has been limited and transient. Of course, I am not saying that the European Union must be the keeper of the conscience of the Middle East.

But to have any meaningful impact, the over-riding objective should be to promote political, economic, and social reform which is sustainable in the long run. Anything less would be an exercise in futility.