Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan Read online

  BROTHER TARIQ

  THE DOUBLESPEAK OF TARIQ RAMADAN

  Brother Tariq

  The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan

  CAROLINE FOUREST

  Translated into English by Ioana Wieder and John Atherton

  Contents

  Foreword DENIS MACSHANE VII

  Preface xiii

  Part 1 TARIQ RAMADAN: His RECORD AND BACKGROUND I

  I "Islarris Future" or the Future of 3 the Muslim Brotherhood?

  2 The Heir 42

  Part 2 DISCOURSE AND RHETORIC 109

  3 A "Reformist" but a Fundamentalist III

  4 An "Islamic Feminist"137 but Puritanical and Patriarchal

  5 Muslim and Citizen, but Muslim First! 166

  6 Not a Clash but a Confrontation 196 between Civilizations

  7 The West as the Land of "Collaborations" 226

  Notes 235

  Index 255

  Foreword

  Triq Ramadan is a global phenomenon, speaking and writing as he does with such great fluency in French, Arabic, and English. Not for centuries has Switzerland had a native son who enjoyed such fame and impact as a communicator. In Europe, he is the most quoted and circulated writer on his religion, Islam, and on the issues related to the Muslim community in Europe and further afield.

  Despite being an author with several books to his name, and a regular contributor to the opinion pages of the world's newspapers, it is at rallies in France, or at Muslim gatherings in Africa, the Middle East, and elsewhere that Tariq Ramadan makes many of the telling interventions that reveal his thinking and his ambitions. Most are recorded, to be played later to a wider audience, as guidance or as religious-political talks. Caroline Fourest has done us a great service by listening to, transcribing, and translating Ramadan's words, since the picture on offer to those who only read his books or columns in English, or who only hear him speak at conferences in Britain, is necessarily limited. Ramadan grew up in a Francophone culture and spoke Arabic from birth. His profile is very different in France and in Switzerland, and for anyone who seeks to understand him, this biography is essential reading.

  In spite of having been born in Switzerland and educated in the Frenchspeaking part of that country (the question of his higher academic qualifications and the reasons that led him to quit his job as a schoolteacher make interesting reading), Ramadan stresses his family background as the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood and as the son of the main propagator and propagandist of Muslim Brotherhood ideas beyond Egypt after 1950.

  For most of the twentieth century, the different currents of religious politics in the Muslim world were little known beyond a narrow circle of specialists in Europe's universities and research institutes. The politics of the Arab world, particularly in the second half of the last century, saw a confusing mixture of regimes-some cast in a nationalist, socialist, fascistic, or authoritarian European mold, others based on absolute monarchies blessed with unlimited oil wealth.

  The interstices of ideology and religious belief are difficult to trace. The abolition of the Caliphate and the rise of a proto-modern state, Turkey, with its largely Muslim population, further complicate the picture-as indeed do the quarrels between different branches of Islam, notably the Sunni-Shia conflict.

  A further twist of the kaleidoscope of political and religious identity in the Arab world came from the issue of the Jewish right to create a state called Israel in a part of the world that Jews had inhabited continuously for much longer than Christians or Muslims had lived in lands that they claimed as their own. Add to this the various struggles for national identity, as French and British colonialisms were dismantled ...

  The great movements of people and ideas over the past half century have resulted in the development of major Muslim communities in Europe: in Britain, with links to Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh; in France, with links to the Mahgreb; and in Germany, with links to Turkey. The Islam of these new communities has varied, but, as there turned out to be no easy solution to the problems of social equality, acceptance in political and civil society, or economic opportunity, the issue of religion/ideology and identity became more pressing.

  The development of Muslim communities in Europe coincided with the last quarter of the twentieth century, when it seemed that the best values of Europe-those associated with the Renaissance and the rationality of Galileo, with the Enlightenment appeal of Voltaire to drive out superstition, with the welcome liberation of women and gays, and with freedom of expression-were starting to gain the upper hand over conservative religiosity and the dominance of women by men. Under the umbrella of the Euro pean Union, nations turned their backs on conflict, decided that disputes should be resolved by secular and democratic rule of law, and that the right of people to speak, travel, and live their sexuality free from religious constraints should be upheld.

  I first came across Tariq Ramadan when I was working in Geneva before my election to the House ofCommons in 19 94. It was the early r 9 dos, and he was involved in an attempt by Muslim activists in Geneva to stop the production of a play by Voltaire. It is certainly true that Voltaire managed to insult all religions, and he was odious about Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike. But he is also commonly held to have coined the immortal phrase about disagreeing with what a person has to say but defending that persons right to say it-a concept that makes the difference between life worth living and life lived under the orders of authority from on high.

  John Stuart Mill described "the necessity to the mental well-being ofman- kind (on which all their other well-being depends) offreedom of opinion, and freedom of the expression of opinion." I was deeply disturbed when the city of Geneva (near which Voltaire lived, so that he could, if necessary, escape the heavy hand of the religious and absolutist ancien regime of eighteenth-century France) refused to support freedom of expression, and instead allowed religious ideology to impose censorship. Ramadan argued that it was a question of decency, or good manners, not to insult Muslim identity by staging the Voltaire play. Mill also deals with this objection in his famous essay on freedom of thought and discussion, pointing out the "impossibility of fixing" where the "bounds of fair discussion" should be placed. To place religious belief beyond the bounds of polemic and intellectual assault is to deny all of Europe's heritage and values.

  I was further shocked a decade later, when Ramadan identified as "Jews" those left-wing writers and intellectuals in France who took positions different from his own on international politics. For many on the Left-and for most in the democratic socialist parties of France and Switzerland-Ramadan's remarks about Jews were unacceptable, and he lost much of the audience he had had in those countries.

  Ramadan is a supreme finder of words that elide and hide meaning, that glide away sinuously from confrontation. The great service of Caroline Fourest's book is that we can read here much of what Ramadan has said in many different settings and in various languages.

  This book was first published as Frere Tariq by the mainstream French publisher Grasset in 2004. It is a disgrace that British and American publishing houses did not bring out a translation sooner, and this American edition by Encounter Books is most welcome (an English edition has been published by the London-based Social Affairs Unit). Ramadan has been the subject of half a dozen other books in French, and it is high time that readers of English had a fuller understanding of his beliefs and words.

  The Tariq Ramadan of today may, of course, be a different man from the Tariq Ramadan of five, ten, or fifteen years ago as described by Caroline Fourest. (I said and believed in things earlier on in my political life that I would not say and do
not believe in now.) Unlike Caroline Fourest, who is a devoutly militant atheist, I respect religious belief. But I cannot accept the supremacy of religion over democracy, and I am dismayed at any arguments that appear to subjugate women to men or to religion.

  I was recently in Pakistan. In the north of the country, three people were stoned to death after accusations of adultery. The mosque used its loudspeakers to call the faithful to witness the lapidation. On his website, Ramadan calls merely for a "moratorium' on lapidation, and he elides the religioussanctioned stoning to death of people with state-authorized capital punishment. He has refused to call for the immediate abolition of stoning. I have read his justifications many times, and the words fall into neat, eloquent patterns. But they do not use his high authority to call without equivocationnow and worldwide-for an immediate end to this barbaric practice. The loudspeakers of mosques will call people to witness this inhuman act again and again, until such time as every shaper of Muslim opinion says it must stop, and until the people organizing such evil are put in prison. And the same goes for so-called "honor killings," where men murder their daughters or wives in the name of a perverted interpretation of Islam.

  There are other problems to do with the "double discourse" that rightly condemns the perpetrators of the 7/7 attacks in London, but does not con demn those who prepare suicide-bomb terrorists to kill Jewish children and women in the Middle East. As Jason Burke and other investigators of terrorism linked to fundamentalist religiosity have shown, it is the same ideas, the same passions-often the same men-who have developed the suicidebomb killer of the innocent and harmless in both the Middle East and Europe. To say the murder of a Christian woman or child on the London Tube is to be deplored, but the murder of a Jewish child or a mother on a Tel Aviv bus is not to be condemned with equal vigor is to enter a moral universe that all decent people should shun.

  Readers must make up their own minds. This book is rigorous in quoting from sources, and no one has challenged its accuracy, even if Ramadan and his supporters dislike its tone and content.

  Ramadan is clearly one of the most gifted communicators of our times. His brilliant talents could help shape a new life for Europe's twenty million Muslims, so that they could live in peace and respect with and for their faith-but do so in a manner that does not challenge the right of every European to live a full, secular, rule-of-law life, in which women and gays face no discrimination, and where electoral democracy decides the common laws we live under.

  In Egypt, the country of Ramadans grandfather, there is a need for renewal and reform that will allow true democracy to put down roots and avoid both of the twin fundamentalisms-the nationalist statism and antiSemitism of Nasser, and the subordination of the Egyptian people to religious rule, expressed most notably in the denial of the rights of women.

  Though for a short time a schoolteacher in Geneva, Ramadan has spent most of his life as an activist writer-preacher. It is perhaps too much to ask him to carry the burden of history by appealing for an end to the Islamism that is causing so many problems, in so many different ways, in so many different parts of the world.

  Born in 1962, Ramadan has had to act as the link between so many different worlds. Perhaps he is simply asked to do too much, or to say and do things he simply cannot say or do.

  But as we search for answers to questions both about the meaning of Islam for our society and for British Muslims, and about the meaning of Islamism as a powerful ideology in the modem world, we should strive to understand the words and ambitions of this important man. We are at the beginning of a long process of comprehension, and it is important that researchers, policy makers, and the general public have as much access as possible-in English-to the key texts and statements of the key players in this new area of concern to democracy. It is for all of us to make judgments, based on what we believe and understand. But to make a judgment, we need evidence. And this book provides important evidence on one of the most significant phenomena of our times.

  Denis MacShane

  June2007

  Preface

  I would really have preferred Tariq Ramadan to remain true to his promise: the promise of a proud and dynamic Islam, but one that was enlightened and modern. I can well understand that a number of Muslims in the West see in him a model, or even a hero-especially now that he has been demonized and can play the martyr's role. Will devoting a whole book to him succeed only in further demonizing him and so providing him with yet another platform? When challenged by demagogues, democrats have only one weapon: education-an education that is difficult even to begin in the course of a single article or in a TV program, when one is pressed for time and forced to improvise, allowing the demagogue to escape with a flippant remark, an evasive answer, or a lie that is soon forgotten. The best of programs can serve to alert people, sow doubt in their minds and wake them up, but it can be only a brief spark, a snapshot. Tariq Ramadan is one of those people who perform admirably on the spur of the moment. In a few seconds he has anyone who suspects him of "doublespeak" backed into a corner. The accusations have been around now for more than ten years without really harming him. Again and again the question arises but is never resolved: is he an intellectual who advocates a modern, liberal Islam; or is he a smooth, astute, well-mannered Islamist preacher?

  People are divided on the matter. In Europe, the United States and North Africa-wherever he goes-his public statements and growing celebrity spark off endless debates between adherents to "the sincerity theory" and proponents of the "duplicity theory." The former are often irritated when the media persist in mentioning his family ties with Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. As if that was proof of something. Are we responsible for our grandparents? They fail to understand the intransi gence of his critics, which they attribute at best to a misunderstanding of his message, at worst to "Islamophobia"-even when these critics are themselves Muslim and almost always Arab.

  Those who are somewhat skeptical but well intentioned have read other articles that speak of Tariq Ramadan in favorable terms, as someone holding out the promise of "a modernized Islam," an expression that he himself never uses but that some journalists have attributed to him. Pushed by curiosity they decide to make up their minds on their own by attending one of his lectures for the general public that are organized by left-leaning bodies such as the Human Rights League (Ligue des droits de l'homme), the European Social Forum, or UNESCO. On such occasions, nothing is said that shocks them; on the contrary, it is a "reformer's" speech, the speech of someone who claims to be attached to secularism, even if he wants to see it evolve. To confirm their impression, the most dedicated leaf through one of his books (often too boring to be gone over carefully). A few may even go so far as to stop by an Islamist bookshop and buy one of his audio cassettes (in most cases, it will never subsequently be taken out of its plastic wrapping). Others have made an effort to listen to what he has to say. But listening doesn't bring understanding. They remain convinced that accusations of "doublespeak" are not justified. Doesn't he always speak of reform, of education, of appealing for dialogue? Is he not hard on the traditionalism of certain Muslims? Does he not invite Muslims to "speak in clear terms"? Here and there certain statements may rub them up the wrong way, leaving them a bit uncertain, with the impression of not having understood everything, but nothing bears the slightest resemblance to Hassan al-B anna's line or to the rhetoric of the Muslim Brotherhood. The problem is: none ofthem have read Hassan alBanna. They constitute the perfect public for Tariq Ramadan, who excels at producing speeches that raise no hackles-unless, that is, one actually takes the time to fit all the pieces together: his language, his allusions, his points of reference and the evolution of his discourse. Unless, finally, one sets aside fleeting impressions to take a look at what is hidden behind. And that takes a whole book.

  I dedicate this book to all those who have been impressed by Tariq Rama dan and yet are willing to listen, learn, and understand the sterile ideology that lies behi
nd his rhetorical dexterity. In writing this book I have followed the advice that Ramadan gives his followers (and which I myself have always heeded without making a big issue of it): never caricature an enemy, but carefully study his words and deeds, the better to do battle with him and confront him with dignity.

  Nevertheless, I did hesitate before embarking on this undertakingnot through fear of retaliation, but through dread of what such a dissection implied: months spent in reading, analyzing, checking, and double-checking, so as not to become a prisoner of first impressions, so as to omit nothing and exaggerate nothing. The process is particularly exhausting when it is a question of tracking a rhetorician as skilful and verbose as Tariq Ramadan: a hundred or so cassettes, fifteen books, 1,500 pages of interviews and articles on him published in the English, French, German, and Spanish press, never mind the historical studies of the Muslim Brotherhood and of Hassan al-Banna, the brochures published by the Ramadan family, and the countless investigations and interviews necessary to unscramble pieces of the puzzle. For even though the contrast between Tariq Ramadan's language on the cassettes and the language he uses in talking to journalists is in itself instructive, it is not sufficient. Ramadan's rhetoric is so complex that it cannot be decoded without supplying the context and filling in the allusions, which are often fleeting. Once this work was accomplished, it was necessary, for the sake of clarity, to measure the impact that he has had on his followers. It is understandable that others have got lost in this process or have given up midway. I am relieved not to have done so. While it is true that even non-mystics can sometimes feel they are entrusted with a mission, I must admit that I fulfilled this one with the unpleasant sense that it was both urgent and necessary.