Registered user login:

What do we want? Clean streets

Shiraz Maher

Published 17 January 2008

Shiraz Maher on the Muslim vote in London

Several Muslim groups took the unprecedented step this month of endorsing Ken Livingstone's campaign for re-election as Mayor of London, publishing a statement on the Guardian's website. The signatories told Muslim voters that doing so serves their "best interests".

"His stands and policies have constantly championed justice in the Middle East and around the world, freedom for the Palestinians and withdrawal of occupying troops from Iraq, a rare trait of modern-day public figures," reads the letter.

Herein lies a problem. An investigation by the Centre for Social Cohesion found that just under half of the letter's signatories represented just two pressure groups: the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) and the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB).

Livingstone's association with both the MCB and the MAB has repeatedly caused controversy during his mayoralty because of the groups' focus on grievances abroad and their support for radical Islamist clerics. In 2004, he caused uproar by inviting to London the Egyptian-born imam Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a man who has opposed women's rights, encouraged the killing of homosexuals and supported suicide bombings in Israel.

Yet an Ipsos MORI poll released by Livingstone last November revealed that Muslims in the capital consider crime reduction, clean streets, education and affordable housing as their primary concerns - issues far removed from Palestine and Iraq.

And those are precisely the kinds of issues on which Livingstone has failed to engage ordinary Muslims. By pandering to the Arab-centric agendas of pressure groups, many of which are based outside London, he has consistently failed to represent the very constituency whose cause he claims to champion.

Livingstone's view that Muslims are more concerned with events abroad than with ordinary social issues is encouraged by the MCB and MAB, whose influence over the mayor's office remains strong.

The attempt to mobilise a Muslim vote in response to an Islamist agenda is not without precedent. In 2005, groups such as the Muslim Public Affairs Committee and the MAB tried to turn the entire general election into a referendum on Tony Blair's decision to invade Iraq.

When the results were announced, it was clear that the attempt to influence the Muslim vote had failed. In Blackburn, a constituency with a large Muslim population, Jack Straw was returned to parliament with ease. A similar pattern emerged nationally, George Galloway's victory in Bethnal Green and Bow being the only notable exception. Even there, it is too easy to suggest that Iraq was the sole reason behind Oona King's defeat.

As Livingstone's own polling has shown, London's Muslims are, like any other community, concerned mainly with the kinds of social issues that affect us all. And, given that so many of them live in some of the most deprived wards in Britain, why should they not be?

But while the mayor continues to have his views shaped by pressure groups, that is not something he is likely to appreciate any time soon.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

3 comments from readers

Iftikhar
18 January 2008 at 18:12

Honour Killing

Honour killing and female infanticide come from Pagan-Hindu-Judeo-Christian traditions. Hindus idolise women as Goddesses on one hand, while downgrading them on the sly at the same time. There is nothing in the Holy Quran and the Hadiths that may encourage people to kill their daughters. Infact, Islam came to abolish the dark ages of Pagan- Hindu –Judeo- Christian traditions. Islam is a matter of choice and there is no compulsion at all. It is a misconception that forced marriage and honour killing are part of Muslim culture. Forced marriage, honour killing and genital mutilation are rare practices among migrant communities. Muslim migrants are worried about institutional racism, binge drinking, drug addiction, incivility, gun and knife crimes, high rate of abortions and teen age pregnancies. An average of 20 English girls under the age of 16 falls pregnant every day. Muslim parents do not want their children to be integrated into such barbarity. Muslim women feel torn between two cultures, thanks to the British education system with non-Muslim monolingual teachers. It makes their lives very confusing.

The tragedy of forced marriage and honour killing could have been avoided if the poor girls were educated in a single sex state funded Muslim schools by female Muslim teachers. Educational attainment rises quite significantly if boys and girls are educated separately. The tragedies are an eye opener for all those Muslim parents who send their children to state schools where they are exposed to non-Muslim teachers who have no respect for Islamic faith and Muslim community and do not understand the needs and demands of the Muslim children. Muslim schools are crucial for Muslim children because western education makes a man/woman stupid. The hypocrisy of the Western society is clearly seen whereas an Australian Judge failed to jail nine males who admitted gang-raping a 10-year old aborigine girl in 2005, saying the victim probably agreed to have sex with them and a UNICEF Photo of the year shows, a bridegroom, 40, with his 11-year old bride in Afghanistan. In my opinion, a UNICEF photo of the year must show a nine year British girl having a baby and another photo showing a gang of teenage girls with anti-social behaviour and vomiting out side a pub, thanks to binge drinking. Muslim children need state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods. Muslim schools are the solutions and not a problem. They help to strengthen community cohesion, not undermine it. Muslim schools stand as shining beacons of light, serving as one of the most crucial factors which protect Muslim children from the onslaught of Eurocentricism, homosexuality, racism and secular values and traditions. They need to be well versed in Standard English to follow the National Curriculum and go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. At the same time they need to be well versed in Arabic, Urdu and other community languages to keep in touch with their cultural roots and enjoy the beauty of their literature and poetry. Muslim schools are not only faith schools but also bilingual schools. Infact, bilingualism is an asset and not a problem as perceived by the British education system. There is a positive co-relation between language and culture. English language is associated with western culture.

The silent majority of Muslim parents would like to send their children to Muslim schools but there are not enough schools to go by. The only alternative left is either British Government should introduce voucher system for parents to choose the school of their choice or designate all those state schools as Muslim community schools where Muslim pupils are in majority. There are hundreds of state schools where Muslims are in majority. Such schools may be handed over to Muslim educational Trusts or charities for their management. They are in a better position to educate Muslim children in accordance with their needs and demands. This demand is in accordance with the law of the land because there are state schools already managed by private companies. Muslim community is not asking for a favour. It is their legal right.

Iftikhar Ahmad

www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk

inayat
19 January 2008 at 23:33

I blogged about this piece for the Guardian's Comment is Free website:

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/inayat_bunglawala/2008/0...

Shiraz Maher's piece criticised the open letter signed by over 60 British Muslims (including me), supporting Ken's bid for re-election. Maher writes:

"An investigation by the Centre for Social Cohesion found that just under half of the letter's signatories represented just two pressure groups: the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) and the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB)."

The MCB happens to be the UK's largest Muslim umbrella body, with over 400 affiliated organisations made up of mosques, youth organisations, charities etc, and they come from various different schools of Islamic thought. It is hardly a surprise that in any list of signatories of people from different Islamic organisations, many of them will have some kind of link with the MCB.

The plain fact that Maher can't quite get his head around is that Livingstone is a genuinely popular figure in London, including among the capital's 700,000+ Muslims. The mayor of London has a long and proud record of opposing racism and prejudice against minorities. And frankly, who can blame them for being a bit wary of a Tory opponent like Boris Johnson with his public references to black people as "piccaninnies" with "watermelon smiles"? And Johnson's tenure as the editor of the Spectator magazine was hardly noted for its celebration of the multicultural reality of life in modern-day London.

Maher also fails to appreciate why Livingstone's forthright opposition to the Iraq war would enhance his electoral appeal among London's Muslims. He says, quite bizarrely, that "it is too easy" to suggest that Oona King's support for the Iraq war was a major reason why her constituents - including many Muslims - in Bethnal Green deserted her and voted instead for George Galloway in such huge numbers in the 2005 election. Maher does not elaborate on what his alternative thesis is.

In last week's Sunday Times, Maher wrote another ludicrous column, this time in defence of the Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, who was roundly criticised by all our political parties - barring the far right - for alleging that Muslims had set up "no-go" zones in the UK. Nazir-Ali, of course, went uncharacteristically silent when he was publicly called upon to substantiate his remarks with actual evidence. For his part, Maher wrote in the Sunday Times that "Nazir-Ali's observations not only are valid, but don't go far enough".

Nazir-Ali doesn't go "far enough"! Maher, like his soulmate and fellow opportunist Ed Husain, appears to be playing the dangerous game of trying to ride the tiger of Islamophobic prejudice that is so prevalent in much of the UK media.

By the way, Nazir-Ali happens to be on the board of advisors for Douglas Murray's Centre for Social Cohesion (an Orwellian name if ever there was one - just look at composition of the rest of their board of advisors), whom Maher quoted approvingly in the beginning of his New Statesman article.

yawnketia
20 January 2008 at 19:47

Mahir's article makes interesting and thought-provoking reading. Yes, we want cleaner streets, crime free, education etc. but as a black man (not a moslem) and having read what Boris Johnson has written about me, I have no choice but to vote for Ken. As I said earlier we want cleaner street but we (as minorities) need racism free society to enjoy those streets. And Boris Johnson has shown openly that he doesn't give a damn about me.

Mr. johnson is a clever and educated man, but I fail to understand why he should insult a whole race, majority of whom he has never met and relate, and may never do so on his own volition. He has so far not even shown the least regret for what he has said.

I may be a 'picannini with watermelon smiles' but i know which one of the candidates will serve my best interest.

james

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

You may enter up to 2000 characters (about 300-350 words)

Characters left:

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

Read More

Vote!

Does Hillary Clinton deserve to be secretary of state?