Categories
Society

[2120] Of future Swiss minarets, or lack of it

There are several countries that, in my mind, symbolize tolerance and openness to different cultures. The Netherlands was one of them, until the rise of right-wing politics best represented by Geert Wilders as its public persona. Switzerland was probably one of few that belonged to this class. The reputation of Swiss humanitarianism further enhanced that image. Such generalization is mostly likely naive, especially after the successful referendum to specifically ban the building of minarets in that little Alps country.

I was aware of the movement to ban it much, much earlier but somehow I considered it as a fringe group’s initiative that was likely to fail. What I did not know, or bother to find out was that the Swiss People’s Party (SVP), the one pushing the initiative, is a major party even if it does not dominate Swiss politics. It is in fact, the largest party in that country.[0] I have clearly underestimated influence of right-wing politics there.

The hostility to minarets is worrying not primarily because it is backed by coercion and really, an attempt at subjective measurement and imposition of taste, which is the classical response from libertarians. Behind the hostility is really incapability to tolerate religious differences and downright racism. A high-ranking SVP official said, “This was a vote against minarets as symbols of Islamic power.”[0a]

Granted, Muslims can practice their religion without the minarets. What matters in all religions should be sincere belief, however irrational such belief may be. Minarets, everything physical and if I may add, religious laws imposed by state as demanded by conservative Muslims, are just ostentatious showing of piety.

That however is not the issue. The issue is the drive behind the ban, which is xenophobia directed against Muslims.[0b] As rightfully pointed out by the Times, the yes vote “played on fears of militant Islam… There are some 350,000 Muslims in Switzerland, or 4 per cent of the population. Most bear as much similarity to the theocratic fanatics of al-Qaeda and the Taleban as Archbishop Rowan Williams does to the snakehandling sects of Appalachia.[1]

It sends the message that Muslims are increasingly facing restriction in ways that they could practice their belief peacefully without causing actual discomfort to others. It sends a message of prejudice. The SVP’s black sheep poster sends an even stronger message of intolerance that really fueled the move to ban minarets.

It is a gross generalization to say the Swiss society is becoming intolerant in black and white terms, given that only 58% of voters voted yes. There is a sizable — very large — minority that is probably liberal enough to oppose the move. The federal government itself does not favor passing the motion. Moreover, turnout was in the low 50s. Unfortunately, 58% of yes out of total turnout is sufficient to sanction the state to ban it. More instructively perhaps, out of 22 out of 26 cantons — the highest administrative division in Switzerland — voted yes.[3]

There are more nuance to that fear that probably attracts centrist voters to the wrong side of the divide. Unlike in Malaysia where the accusation that foreigners commit disproportionately more crime than local which is not supported by statistics, statistics in Switzerland may actually indicate that Muslim immigrants disproportionately commit crime compared to Swiss. But the operative word is immigrants rather than Muslims. Yet, even that does not tell the whole story.

Like Indian students in Australia who seem to disproportionately become victims of crime probably because they live in unsafe neighborhood due to financial constraint (as well as a myriad of other factors),[4] financial constraint is probably the reason why these immigrants had to resort to crime. I am not absolving criminals but that issues of financial constraint which push groups to the societal margin has to be addressed. There are suggestions that this is a result of strict citizenship requirement.[5]

That problem of financial constraint should not be solved through means advocated by economic left, no. Immigrants would ripe disproportionate benefits while contributing very little. That is a recipe for other disaster. Rather, citizenship processes need to be liberalized and integration made easier. Without citizenship, these immigrants will find it hard to support themselves respectfully and contribute to betterment of Swiss society and beyond.

And of course, it is easier to lump good citizens and as well as good immigrants who are Muslims with Muslim immigrants who actually commit crime. That is the nature of generalization. It is easy to do.

But even if that issue is solved, I doubt SVP and all right-wingers there would be happy. A racist would only use issue such as that only as a proxy of his or her ultimate goal.

But all that is in Switzerland. What does it matter to Malaysia?

Our own xenophobic racists have one more example to refer to, saying, “they did it, why can we not do the same?”

That is not constructive.

There also a question of identity in Switzerland which immigration will affect in a big way. This not really a question of racism and it is a legitimate concern. However, the world is changing and the best way is to adapt.[6]

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[0] — The proposal had been put forward by the Swiss People’s Party, (SVP), the largest party in parliament, which says minarets are a sign of Islamisation.[Swiss voters back ban on minarets. BBC. November 29 2009]

[0a] — But Martin Baltisser, the SVP’s general secretary, told the BBC: “This was a vote against minarets as symbols of Islamic power.” [Swiss voters back ban on minarets. BBC. November 29 2009]

[0b] — Supporters of a ban claimed that allowing minarets would represent the growth of an ideology and a legal system – Sharia law – which are incompatible with Swiss democracy. [Swiss voters back ban on minarets. BBC. November 29 2009]

[1] — The referendum held yesterday is different from these. Instead of seeking to balance the conflicting claims and allegiances that characterise modern democracy, it targets one group for discriminatory treatment. The ”yes” campaign played on fears of militant Islam. Its posters depicted a woman clad in a burka, alongside a forest of minarets that resembled missiles.

There are only four minarets in the whole country, and none is used to call the faithful to prayer. There are some 350,000 Muslims in Switzerland, or 4 per cent of the population. Most bear as much similarity to the theocratic fanatics of al-Qaeda and the Taleban as Archbishop Rowan Williams does to the snakehandling sects of Appalachia. Many come from the Balkans, where a Muslim population recently suffered ferocious persecution under the genocidal designs of Slobodan Milosevic. [Intolerance of Islam. Times. November 30 2009]

[2] — The nationalist Swiss People’s Party has led several campaigns against foreigners, including a proposal to kick out entire families of foreigners if one of their children breaks a law and a bid to subject citizenship applications to a popular vote.

The party’s controversial posters have shown three white sheep kicking out a black sheep and a swarm of brown hands grabbing Swiss passports from a box.

The current campaign posters showing missile-like minarets atop the national flag and a fully veiled woman have drawn anger of local officials and rights defenders. [Intolerance of Islam. Times. November 30 2009]

[3] — See Minarets controversy in Switzerland at Wikipedia.

[4] — The Senate Committee has criticised the state governments of Victoria and New South Wales for not providing public transport concessions to overseas students. This has been a long standing demand of groups representing Indian and other overseas students. Lack of public transport concessions has also been partly blamed as a reason for attacks on Indian students as they prefer to walk home to save fares. [Attacks on Indian students not racism: Australian Senate report. Economic Times. November 27 2009]

[5] — Over 20% of Switzerland’s population is foreign. Most have been in the country for many years, and around a third of them were born in Switzerland.

Swiss citizenship remains very difficult to come by, and being born in the country does not give the children or even grandchildren of immigrants the right to be Swiss.

Crime figures

The Swiss People’s Party claims that foreigners commit more crimes than the Swiss, and says this justifies deporting them and their families.

In fact, crime statistics are not at all clear, partly because not all Swiss regions count crime in the same way.

A recent study by the Federal Department for Foreigners found that while, at first glance, foreigners appear to be committing more crime than the Swiss, foreigners, especially young men, are also more likely to be charged – whereas young Swiss may be let off with a caution for the same offence.

The study also found that young foreigners living in Switzerland were more likely to be unemployed and living in socially deprived backgrounds, than the Swiss.

But despite the complex nature of the problem, the blunt approach has clearly struck a chord with many voters. [Swiss row over black sheep poster. BBC. September 17 2007]

[6] — To date there are only two mosques in the country with minarets but planners are turning down applications for more, after opinion polls showed almost half the population favours a ban. What is at stake here in Switzerland is not merely a dislike of foreigners or a distrust of Islam but something far more fundamental. It is a clash that goes to the heart of an identity crisis which is there throughout Europe and the US. It is about how we live in a world that has changed radically since the end of the Cold War with the growth of a globalised economy, increased immigration flows, the rise of Islam as an international force and the terrorism of 9/11. Switzerland only illustrates it more graphically than elsewhere. [Switzerland: Europe’s heart of darkness?. The Independent. September 7 2007]

Categories
Politics & government

[2067] Of focus on Islamic credential is both exclusive and plastic politics

A contest between PAS and UMNO within conservative Malay settings is more likely than not a race to the bottom. It inevitably degenerates into a deplorable inquiry regarding which between the two political parties is more Islamic than the other. While doing so, PAS effectively resorts to exclusive politics that is clearly inconsistent to its assertion that PAS is for all. If the Islamist party is really for all, it needs to adopt a more inclusive approach in engaging UMNO.

In the past, the question of who could enter heaven became a campaign material. Back in January 2009 during the Kuala Terengganu by election, the implementation of hudud gained currency as an election issue.
The most recent example of exclusive politics happened when the top leader of the party, Nik Aziz Nik Mat labelled Islam as practiced by UMNO as plastic.

UMNO did employ the same tactic of inclusive politics with respect to Islam. When PAS finally gathered its weight to say no to the idea of both sides cooperating with each other, UMNO accused PAS of doing a great disservice to the Muslim community.

In the beer controversy in Selangor, UMNO ridiculed PAS for kowtowing to DAP and while doing so, questioned the Islamic credential of PAS.

The ugly debate is an exercise at exclusive politics because it prevents non-Muslims as well as secular Malays from relating to PAS, and UMNO for that matter. While the mudslinging between PAS and UMNO on their Islamic credential can be hilarious at times, it is ultimately damaging to both.

Previously when information could be contained, exclusive politics worked. A party could appeal to local electorates and ignore the rest. Messages could be tailored to be inclusive at one time and exclusives at others. Inconsistency was not much of a great concern, especially so for UMNO since they controlled the media.

These days however, as the common wisdom goes, information flows freely. As a result, any entity with national aspiration does not have the luxury of playing to such exclusive politics. Continuous emphasis on Islamic credential as it is happening has the potential of eroding the possibility of realising national aspiration, which, for PAS, ultimately leads to becoming part of the federal government.

It terribly mocks the slogan ”˜PAS for all’ that it campaigned on earlier and in many cases, as the liberal elements in PAS try to project to wider Malaysian audience.

The truth is that this emphasis on Islamic credential, at the manner at it is done, with apologies to Nik Aziz Nik Mat, is plastic. The punches and counterpunches on Islamic credential are all about form and less about substance.

It is plastic — empty, worthless — because beyond that rhetoric lie no concrete solutions to problems besetting Malaysian society. It does not address the economy, crime, corruption, health and a gamut of other factors that affect the life of Malaysians.

Worse, that debate, as we are witnessing through the press — traditional or online, establishment or otherwise — is more often than not an attempt at negative campaigning. That creates a victim and that victim is Islam itself. Unfair as the association may be, it is hard for the common masses to not to generalise when individuals who claim to represent the religion, on both sides of the fence, failed to be mindful of their words, even as they enter the month of Ramadan.

The route that should be preferred by both sides is one that contains inclusive messages with substance.

PAS should really concentrate on matters that everybody, regardless of religious or irreligious beliefs, can relate to without much consternation. Such matters can be about good governance coupled with concrete policies that can benefit all that it wishes to pursue while being part of the Penang state government.

Surely, good policies that incorporate such universal values and its implementation come far closer to realising whatever ideals Islam promotes than the act of claiming to be a better Muslim and deriding others while at it. Universal concepts and values such as justice and trustworthiness better fit for the idea ”˜PAS for all’. These universal values are present in Islam and PAS can capitalize on it.

PAS already has a working formula. The liberal element in PAS — liberal in a sense more liberal than the rest in PAS and not liberal in classical terms — for instance has focused on the concept of justice rather than harp on the divisive controversial issue of Islamic state. They realised that the idea of Islamic state is only a mean with non-exclusive and non-exhaustive form, while equality and justice is an end and a substance.

That, as some would argue, is the essence of ”˜PAS for all’.

PAS should consult its liberal element on that.

It should not be confused between means and ends. To confuse the two is to confuse between form and substance, and doing so, engaging in exclusive and plastic politics that is all about appearance.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

First published in The Malaysian Insider on August 24 2009.

Categories
Liberty

[2046] Of my position on Islamic headscarf, burqa, etc and France

A person asked me what do I think of Sarkozy’s hostility to burqa and why I have not written against it.

I have not written against it because I generally dislike repeating myself.

It is an old issue and I have made myself clear with respect to Turkey (back in 2008) and the Netherlands (2006).

But for the benefit of that person, banning or forcing the wearing of burqa, Islamic headscarf, etc, is a transgression of liberty.

Now, I have work to do. Bugger off.

And really, try to read my old stuff before any of you insinuate anything.

Categories
Conflict & disaster Liberty Politics & government Society

[2001] Of Obama in Cairo:best parts

I am watching President Obama’s speech in Cairo live right now, with his prepared text on screen. This is the best part so far for me:

For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers — for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel’s founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security. [Obama’s Speech in Cairo. Barack Obama. Washington Wire. June 4 2009]

Great to be able to watch the speech online, live:

Public domain

Another great part:

There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments — provided they govern with respect for all their people.

This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.

Next:

I know there are many — Muslim and non-Muslim — who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn’t worth the effort — that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country — you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world.

Near the end:

It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion — that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples — a belief that isn’t new; that isn’t black or white or brown; that isn’t Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It’s a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It’s a faith in other people, and it’s what brought me here today

Categories
Activism Liberty Society

[1949] Of MP Khalid Samad at Northeast Malaysia Forum 2009

Knowing that this might be my last opportunity to attend an edition of the Northeast Malaysia Forum in Kuala Lumpur, I decided to be there. Although the KL site was not be as big as main site — as true for two previous editions organized in 2005 and 2008 — I saw great improvement this time around for KL compared.

Unlike previous editions, the KL site was hosted in a proper studio this year. On top of that, the site accommodated audience. There were probably more or less 20 people there, including the studio crew, volunteers, panelists and audience. That was not possible in the past.

This edition was larger in its reach too. Apart from Yale and KL, there were a host of following from other cities, namely Chicago, Singapore, London and Sydney. This is a proof that the alumni of Malaysia Forum are spreading their wing wider.

Now, the most interesting statement that came out from the KL site to me is the one from MP Khalid Samad.

He was touching about freedom of religion. In response to a question relating to Lina Joy, he said that if God had willed it, he would have made everybody a Muslim. But God does not do that and that says a lot about the freedom of religion that Islam grants.

I am not quite sure if he is saying simply because the audience was primarily a liberal group but given his track record, I am willing to give him the benefit of doubt. He is after all one of the more reasonable PAS members, probably in the same vein of the PAS MP from Kuala Selangor, Dr. Dzulkifli Ahmad. When I said reasonable, that definitely means better than a majority of BN MPs.

While appealing to freedom of religion, it is unclear what he thinks of Muslims having the same liberty. He did say in the same evening in front of the same audience that Muslims have their own laws and their should abide to it.

For further material on what was discussed by Khalid Samad, as well as MP Yusmadi Yusoff, friend Yeoh Chen Chow did a good job at summarizing it.[1] You may evaluate Khalid Samad’s words yourself there.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — [Live Blogging of NMF – YB Yusmadi Yusoff & YB Khalid Samad. Yeoh Chen Chow. April 11 2009]

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p/s — MP Yusmadi Yusoff, just before leaving the premise, invites members of Northeast Malaysia Forum to visit the Parliament during one of the sittings over the summer. All the more reason why YOU PEOPLE should come back.

He is also looking for individuals to participate in the Asian Renaissance Conference to be held in Manila, the Philippines later in December 2009. What is that? I leave their website to do the explaining.

Interested?

Contact him. Or contact me (I have nothing to do with the Conference. Just doing him a favor).