iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Azeem Ibrahim

GET UPDATES FROM Azeem Ibrahim
 

Muslims and Government: Contrasting America and Britain

Posted: 10/28/2011 1:37 pm

In April, 2010 a New York Times article commented on President Obama's quiet approaches to the politically isolated Arab-American and Muslim communities. Without public fanfare, he has included Muslim leaders in policy discussions on a range of subjects including health care legislation, foreign policy, the economy, immigration and national security. These same leaders have said "they see no substantive changes on a variety of issues" but that they are "encouraged" by the extent of their consultation by the White House and other governmental agencies.

It is an unfortunate truth that in the post 9/11 era, Muslims in the U.S. have been seen as a political liability. This was demonstrated by the particularly crass action by Obama operatives at a rally, when they asked two Muslim women wearing headscarves to remove themselves from the TV camera line of sight. President Obama personally apologized to the women afterwards, but the incident was a telling commentary on perceptions at a time when public fear and ignorance were high.

Since then the administration's approach has been understated, and each publicly known outreach has resulted in orchestrated criticism from right-wing opinion-makers who complain that Obama is appeasing Islamists and extremists. White House appointments are scrutinized and criticized, including President Obama's appointment in February 2010 of Rashad Hussain as the United States Special Envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Mr. Hussain has the full confidence of the administration, in spite of adverse opinion, and is noted for this rebuttal to his critics. "The president realizes that you cannot engage one-fourth of the world's population based on the erroneous beliefs of a fringe few," he said.

This low-key approach to relations between Muslims and the U.S. government is in marked contrast to the way Muslims are acknowledged in the UK by the British government. The British have been engaged for 30 years with Muslim communities and their growing engagement in civic and public life. The Muslim population has grown rapidly, 10 times faster than the rest of society, and by 2010, the total had risen to 2.8 million or four per cent of the British population. While both countries' perceptions are marred by a hostile press and reductionist, populist media, relations in the UK are much more mature and established than in the US.

Britain's Pakistani population, for example, increasingly educated and middle-class, is actively engaged in political life, with currently over 200 Pakistani local councilors representing the major political parties. In the 2010 election, the number of British Muslim members of the House of Commons was doubled with eight Muslims being elected. The most influential Muslim woman in British politics, Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, also the Conservative Party chairperson, joined other Muslims in the House of Lords, such as Lord Ahmed, the most senior Labor peer and Baroness Kishwer Falkner, a Liberal Democrat.

New groups have recently been formed in Britain since the 9/11 attacks in response to the heightened security and counter-terrorism concerns that many feel discriminate against Muslims in Britain. The Muslim Parliament and the Muslim Council of Britain are two of the many organizations that actively represent Muslims in Britain, which include the Islamic Society of Britain, Young Muslims UK, British Muslim Forum, the Sufi Muslim Council and many others based on social, welfare, cultural, religious, women's and educational services and issues.

By contrast, since the 9/11 attacks, American Muslims have found themselves besieged by profiling, discrimination, negative media campaigns and hate crimes. American Muslims made history in the 2000 presidential election when they voted en bloc for George Bush, citing his outreach to the Muslim community. Since then, the seven-million-strong American Muslim community has adopted a more low key role in politics, changing allegiances to 27% Democrats, 25% Green party, 3% Republican and 44% saying that no party represents their interests. The American Muslim Political Coordination Council, an umbrella organization that includes four major groups in the U.S., has declared that civil rights are now its major concern and the single most important challenge for the American Muslim community.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, has made recommendations to the U.S. Congress and to the American Muslim community as a whole in its annual report about civil rights and combating bigotry. It is also offering training to improve civic engagement so an increased participation in local and national politics is to be hoped for.

Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota is the first African American elected to the House from Minnesota and also the first Muslim to be elected to the United States Congress. He is keynote speaker later this month at a conference hosted by Muslims for Progressive Values, to feature their program, Literary Zikr, which provides an alternative to the readily available fundamentalist interpretations that pervade the Internet. Literary Zikr will demonstrate, among other, things that Islamic values are consonant with values of liberty, freedom and democracy embraced by Americans. This is the sort of far-sighted program that will do much to counter the fear and ignorance that pervades public discourse, not only in the media but also in the U.S. Congress. Rep Peter King, a Republican from New York, has single-handedly done more than any other politician to damage Muslim-Western relations with his pointless and divisive hearings on Muslim extremism in the U.S.

It is a matter of grave disquiet that Congressman King, who has been a vocal supporter of the IRA in the past, should now have been invited to speak at a British parliamentary hearing on the roots of violent radicalization among British Muslims. It is a serious error of judgment on someone's part, and a distasteful departure from British standards of intellectual excellence and fair governance.

Let us hope that politicians on both sides of the Atlantic will heed the fundamentally British characteristics of equality, respect and fairness to prevail.

Dr. Azeem Ibrahim is a fellow and member of the Board of Directors at the Institute of Social Policy and Understanding and a former research scholar at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard and World Fellow at Yale.

More of Dr. Ibrahim's writings can be found here.


 
 
 

Follow Azeem Ibrahim on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@AzeemIbrahim

In April, 2010 a New York Times article commented on President Obama's quiet approaches to the politically isolated Arab-American and Muslim communities. Without public fanfare, he has included Muslim...
In April, 2010 a New York Times article commented on President Obama's quiet approaches to the politically isolated Arab-American and Muslim communities. Without public fanfare, he has included Muslim...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 14
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
10:16 PM on 10/31/2011
When Muslim women aren't required to veil themselves in public, walk three steps behind men, attend studies in mosques with men, freely gather in public ... none of which is prescribed in the Holy Quran; and when "jihad" is not viewed by Muslim men as "holy war;" but rather as the struggle of an individual in his or her faith, then perhaps people in this country will view Islam with more respect. And, incidentally, Shariah law is not binding to non-Muslims. Stop trying to insist on its enforcement in countries where the constitution is not written by Muslims for Muslims. It's an archaic system, anyway and is unjust to women.

Also, Muhammad refers to Christians and Jews as "People of the Book." Referring to their belief in the Gospel and Torah. When Muslims begin to honor these words of the Prophet, perhaps there would develop a more amicable relationship between the three religions.
01:18 AM on 11/02/2011
I don't know where you get your (mis)information, but I am a woman living in a conservative Muslim country, and none of the things you've mentioned about women is true; they're just silly. (Please don't pretend that you're defending us.) In fact, although Sharia is applied in cases of marriage, divorce, custody and inheritance, non-Muslims from other countries are judged in those cases according to the laws of their own country. So even in a Muslim country, Sharia is not applied to them, and this is true of many Muslim countries. Let me emphasize this: even if you were living here, Sharia would not be forced on you, so the idea of its being forced on you in your own non-Muslim country is just absurd.
09:22 PM on 10/29/2011
Also, let us hope that Christians get over their fear of other religious people, like Muslims, whose beliefs may differ, and will welcome all who pray for equality, respect and fairness. Of course, then there is Kansas. The notorious Baptist preacher Fred Phelps Sr. has a church in Topeka, Kansas, whose placards at funerals of gays and American soldiers are hate-messages. And in 2008, a Christian church sent a message to Americans high on a marquee sign in front of the church that said: "America we have a muslim president. This is sin against the Lord! Ex. 20:3." Ethic Soup has a good post of this at:

http://www.ethicsoup.com/2008/11/kansas-church-marquee-obama-muslim-president-a-sin.html#more
06:05 PM on 10/28/2011
As all countries the separation of state, country and religion is wasteful lines. A country is a country that stands for it's greatness not it's weakness of bickering or what individuals want only for theirselves and noone else. When these simple things are masterfully practiced the only ones that have a problem are the ones that can't stay out of other peoples lives. Which are the ones that don't take time to make their own. I have no compassion in these cases. Read between the lines, it's not my job to do it for them. Whats not understandable? Let the ignorance of the mighty ones begin a cycle of ignorance and surely a small insignificant country of people. Only whats allowed and nurtured! All walks of unlife.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
The Knocker
a mind is a terrible thing to waste
03:48 PM on 10/28/2011
Its a shame that Muslims who historical has has a better history in treating their minority well, are finding themselves increasingly single out and used as scape-goat by politician and some in the media.
photo
Semprini
Stamp out and abolish redundancy
06:58 PM on 10/28/2011
The way many Muslim majority countries tend to treat their minorities is currently a shame as well, yes?

I would wager Muslims in the West enjoy an infinitely better, albeit not perfect, life compared to religious minorities (including minority Muslim groups!) in places like Pakistan, Egypt and others.

Perspective is everything. Peter King is a vile person, but he isn't killing people and burning down churches and mosques. Don't ignore the good by dwelling on the bad.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/02/13/intolerant-indonesia.html

http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Anti-Copt-violence,-consequence-of-30-years-of-bad-policies,-said-Catholic-priest-22867.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/bahrain-escapes-censure-by-west-as-crackdown-on-protesters-intensifies-2269638.html
10:47 AM on 10/29/2011
"Treating their minority well"

You mean like excluding them from government, forcing them to pay special taxes, wearing special clothes to identify them as non-Muslim, not allowing them to live in certain places, banning them from entering certain places, forcibly converting their children, kidnapping their children to serve in armies, the occasional Pogrom.

People who try to act like Muslims have a good track record of treating minority groups are either hopelessly ill-informed or liars.
01:20 AM on 11/02/2011
Please give us some specifics as to where these things happen.
01:57 PM on 10/28/2011
This article fails to mention any of the following arguments:
How much of it is to attract more votes?
Are there any politically powerful groups like AIPAC or AEI active in the UK ?
Is an average American politically sophisticated and informed as an average British?
photo
ChiBloger
And the truth shall set us ALL free
01:37 PM on 10/28/2011
As a non Muslim I would say that it must be a hostile environment, due mostly to politics for Muslims in this country. I can not blame our current president for that. In fact he has reach out world wide to Muslims. Unfortunately this is interpreted both by right wingers in this country as “friend to Muslims enemy to Israel”. So there are some political constraints for the Whitehouse largely created and whipped up by our nation’s right wing.
I look at a gentleman like Congressman Keith Ellison and I see a light at the end of the tunnel. A just man, an American, a Muslim and a US congressman. I think we need to see more high profile Muslims or more Muslims just getting out there. Else all most Americans know of Muslims is what we see on the news or worst yet Right wing news.

It’s a two way street. I think Muslims must not disappear into their communities and must come out in to the larger communities and embrace some American dress and culture as well. Some make it too easy to paint Muslims as “them”. They do it to our president who is more all American in most.
photo
unitron
Reverse Chron Order never stays checked
01:29 PM on 10/28/2011
Perhaps one reason for the difference is the UK having previously occupied and/or run countries where a good sized chunk of the population were Muslim.

Sort of the same process where not only did the British have an influence on India, but India had an influence on the British.
04:26 PM on 10/28/2011
India is by far Hindu, not Muslim. Afraid of loosing India they caved into the Muslim League to created Pakistan right after WW2 precisely because they could not get an handle on them and nobody has since. The League of Nations' Palestine mandate the Brits had to enforce "puffed" them I think but the Suez blunder shows the mandate taught them little. At the Paris Peace talks in 1919 they turned their backs on the Middle East by setting up despots who bowed to their Imperial wishes thereafter by amongst other things, looking the other way when the UK made independent the Iraqui Province of Kuwait to the benefit of BP in the 30's. The Brits occupied cruely and did not govern anywhere in the Muslim world, they have few enlightened experiences.