Registered user login:

Why I left Hizb ut-Tahrir

Umm Mustafa

Published 28 February 2008

For almost ten years Umm Mustafa affiliated herself with the controversial Islamic organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir. Last year, she quit. This is her story

In autumn 1998, I was 18 years old and a new student of management at Brunel University in Uxbridge, west London. I was becoming increasingly interested in my Islamic faith - and, like many people of that age, in challenging some of the injustices of the world. The Hizb ut-Tahrir stall at the freshers' fair offered me a way of doing just that.

Hizb ut-Tahrir ("The Liberation Party") aims to replace all existing governments with a global khilafah, or caliphate, subject to Islamic law and ruled by an elected male caliph. Founded in 1953 by Taqiuddin al-Nabhani, an Islamic scholar from Jerusalem, it now has about one million members spread through 40 countries, in some of which it has been banned. The party is secretive and hierarchical, with a network of national branches, each headed by an emir, or leader, who in turn is subject to an overall leader based in Palestine. Female members have their own parallel structure subject to the same leadership.

The party's arguments were persuasive. It offered a single, simple solution to all the political, social and economic problems of the world, from a religious perspective. Why should religion be left in the mosque? it asked. It should guide every aspect of our lives, particularly politics.

Hizb ut-Tahrir emphasised that it was not encouraging jihad - that it was a political and intellectual movement. Its rhe toric, however, was antagonistic, and often controversial. Its pamphlets argued that the west was out to destroy Islam, or that Jews must be removed from Israel for peace to come to the Middle East. It aimed to tap into a pre-existing anger felt by many young Muslims. It attracted a lot of hostility among the community - many of my friends disagreed with its aims and aggressive tactics. But to me, its ideas sounded new, fresh and exciting.

Cult-like structure

I became affiliated with the group, distributed its literature and, over the next few years, worked my way towards becoming a full member. In the strict hierarchy of the organisation, this was not a simple task. The new recruits aspired to become daris, or "students", who in turn aimed to take an oath of loyalty to Hizb ut-Tahrir and become full members. All the women were expected to use any social contact they had to recruit new members - mother-and-baby groups, student unions, even a chat with the neighbours. After proving their commitment to the party, they were assessed by a committee and allowed to attend the weekly "culturing circle". At 20, I joined them.

This circle was also known as a halaqa - a word other Muslims use for small groups that meet to study Islam or recite the Quran. But in the Hizb ut-Tahrir halaqa, we spent two hours listening to readings from books by the party founder, al-Nabhani. His book Nidham al-Islam ("the system of Islam") very briefly sketched the practicalities of setting up a new world order. But we did not even discuss the party's goal on that level. Everyone simply accepted that, through the hard work of party members, each country would embrace Hizb ut-Tahrir concepts and demand that its government make a peaceful transition to the khilafah, and then "we would know what to do when we got there". Originally, the holes in al-Nabhani's thinking did not trouble me. Later, however, I realised that the halaqa and the party philosophy made his writings synonymous with the Quran. In Hizb ut-Tahrir, religion and politics were truly confused.

But the cult-like structure of the organisation made this difficult to see. When I was 21, I became a full member - a prestigious position - and shortly afterwards was put in charge of the women's group's activities in west London. Suddenly, I was privy to information kept from non-members, such as the location of meetings and the details of organisational policy.

For young people - the vast majority of the members and the leadership were aged between 17 and 25 - the sense of power and community was intoxicating. We even had a very specific dress code that was chosen by the emir of HT. He had made it mandatory for all members to wear the jilbab (a loose dress), khimar (headscarf) and socks. Many Muslim women wear the jilbab and scarf, but for some reason I could always identify a fellow HT member; perhaps it was from their uniform-like style.

For a few years, I worked for the party in the Muslim community. I organised events, lectures and bazaars, renting venues and arranging marketing with the budget I was assigned from party donations. I was sometimes frustrated with these events - they were an inefficient way of recruiting members and rarely seemed to get the party message across. But, for a while, I put the doubts out of my mind.

In 2006, however, my feelings began to change. I noticed that whenever I had concerns, I was told to raise them through "the structure", but the answers to my questions and challenges were not satisfactory. The senior members seemed to be on autopilot, speaking only in party jargon, unable to participate in debate or look at the other side of an argument. It was certainly frowned upon for anyone to air their views freely or to make challenging statements. I began to question the leaders' claim that it was a God-given obligation for every Muslim to work with the group. How could this possibly be the case when these people were so far removed from society and normal life? I was fast losing confidence. But, surrounded by other members, I felt guilty about such sentiments. I stuck with it for a year, selling tickets for the same old talks and events, attending pointless meetings, and boring myself and others with "Hizbi" banter.

Finally, I was reported to the leadership as a "breakaway" member - party code for anyone who questions the party's principles. The women's emir travelled from east London to my home, bringing her small children with her. She could not answer my questions about the party any better than the local leadership.

"If we're supposed to be promoting peace, then let's do so," I told her. She replied that I had strayed from the party's principles and that I could not think in those terms. Eventually, I had to tell her that I was resigning my membership. Since then I have had almost no contact with Hizb ut-Tahrir.

After leaving, I realised that my aspirations had changed. I wanted to live as a normal member of society, and practise Islam as best I could in that context. Suddenly, I became aware of a chorus of moderate voices who supported me. I took off the party-approved jilbab, though I still wear modest dress. It was an enormous relief.

I realised that Hizb ut-Tahrir has devised a set of political ideas and goals which are in fact separate from Islam. Its tactic of convincing young people that its political goals are synonymous with Islam is its most dangerous and deceptive trick. In reality, its aims come from one man's socialist ideals, mixed with his own interpretation of Islamic scripture. So it is not "sacrifice in the way of Allah" to aid the overthrow of a government or to work with such a group.

It is my desire to witness security, safety and peace in the Muslim world. But will this come about through the forceful removal of all current Muslim governments? This is a point that Hizb ut-Tahrir leaders refuse to discuss with the naive recruits or to think about for themselves. The leaders claim to believe that the blood of a Muslim is sacred, but would be happy to spill it themselves if anyone were to oppose their khi lafah regime.

A party text by Abdul Qadeem Zallum, the second leader of HT, states that if necessary millions of Muslims and non-Muslims will be killed. How would this fact make the party different from the tyrannical rulers it continuously curses and defames?

I no longer agree with the politics and principles of Hizb ut-Tahrir, and I urge other members to reconsider their affiliation with this potentially dangerous group. They should seek a wider knowledge of Islam and open themselves to more tolerant opinions.

Umm Mustafa is a pseudonym

Post this article to

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

24 comments from readers

RoyalDoulton
28 February 2008 at 12:46

looks like the Quillam Foundation has a new recruit, offering 'sincere' advice in the western press...

Averroes
28 February 2008 at 13:10

Brave Lady! I hope that God gives her the courage to continue speaking out.

Michael Evan-Jones
28 February 2008 at 13:34

The overall narrative of all of these "defectors" is a deeply flawed account of their lives from people who were unable to accept that the core of their problems were themselves, and the poor choices that they have made. They now present themselves as another of Islam's self-styled liberal reformers. Although the product has changed, their earnestness and enthusiasm for their newfound ideology (much like that of the nighttime TV shopping channel spruiker) has not.

I know that several ex-HuT wallas have come out of the woodwork to denounce Islam recently, when really they should be denouncing themselves. Whilst they seem to offer the truth of the ex disciple turned whistle-blower, I have not seen or read anything that encourages me to believe that their personal megalomania and narcissism has in any way diminished.

Whilst all of these authors may offer some insights, with varying degrees of faithfulness, the uselessness of this genre in literature is equivalent to the "I was ravished by an Arab, ravish me again" school of writing. They offer the easy conformation of our pre-existing beliefs, but as an instrument to navigating the wider encounter with the Muslim world, they are as irrelevant.

Ali Eteraz has written an excellent piece on the media reliance on former terrorists and radicals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-eteraz/media-reliance-on-f...

Umm Salamah
28 February 2008 at 13:48

It is hard to verify the claims made by the author given that she hides behind the cloak of anonymity. My experience of previous Islamists has been that they have exaggerated their importance in their various organisations. e.g. Sheraz Mair who has claimed that he was a "regional director" or Ed Husain who claimed he was a member of a group - the group denied that he was ever a member.

In addition, from an Islamic perspective these wild accusations and arguments have been comprehensively refuted - see http://abu-ibrahim.blogspot.com/

I assume this article is probably trying to generate publicity for the April 1st launch of the Quilliam Foundation, which is widely believed to have received generous funding from the Kuwaiti Government.

JamesBate
28 February 2008 at 14:01

I am no expert in politics or Islamic politics but I have seen this group in the national press in the last two years. What I fail to understand the kind of publicity this group gets when an odd member leaves this group.

A quick search on Google says that this group have over 1 million members’ world wide and their work is primarily in the Muslim world for representative rule and have a romance with Caliphate.

Now either British government consider this group to be a serious threat to their foreign and internal policy or these people who are leaving are unless as important as Tony Blair don’t think they deserve this much space.

Another thing that comes out is that, they are all bundled up by the government to make a shadowy organization called Quillam Foundation.

I think one of the ways to defeat an argument is not to give it publicity. These defectors are doing a service to Hizb Tahrir by popularising them in the community. Young people love this and they may be contributing in their rise.

One thing is clear whether they are really speaking the truth or are part of the strategy by their former organization to release these kinds of people to intentionally or unintentionally promote their cause – that they are dysfunctional to the society.

I encourage everyone to make an effort to contact this organization and find out what they really believe in as I have done. I am happy to share my email conversation in which they explain their viewpoint.

Whig
28 February 2008 at 14:40

Michael Evan-Jones -

You really should do more than cut and paste the same comments (these from the BBC, Sept 2007) you make about these brave individuals who have left the flock and want to live as individuals with their own beliefs - as you, presumably aspire to.

Given the derision you have for these individuals, it is good to wonder what agenda you have in attacking them.

janawzal
28 February 2008 at 16:54

Hizb ut Tahrir do not promote violence as such, but their intensions are to unite all moslem countries under a comprehensive pan-Islamic state, spanning accross the world and to run the economic, political, and social ascpetcs of life according to Sharia. Though this is primarily in the muslims countries, its plans at a later stage will be to annex other countries (ie, europe, America the rest of the world) and bring it under its domain of control. This is so, because moslems believe that Islamic ideology (sharia) is the only systems that has the right to control the entire worlds affairs.

JamesBate
28 February 2008 at 22:41

Jonathan Edwards: If what you are saying is correct then I personally don’t see a problem. If our ideology is so robust and our values are so superior then surely they will die their own death without us having to do anything. Based on this I would rather convince people based on the strength of the argument rather than intimidation or force.

And isn’t it what we are trying to do at the moment? Exporting our values at the barrel of the gun in Iraq? I guess for Iraqis anything will be better than a neo-con agenda.

On the other hand government is stoking fear using these this ex-islamist who are a confused bunch - trying to somehow give us an 'insight' into these organization. Using this fear government is in the process of and has passed legislations that are undermining our freedoms. Just quickly look at history first there were Jews then Communists then IRA and now the Muslims. At the turn of every decade we will find another evil we need to deal with but the laws wont change- they will remain.

I am more concerned about day to day problems such as rising level of taxation, drugs, crime on street, wars(occupation of foreign lands) etc. Than these shadowy ‘eds’ and ‘jids’

NewStatesman need to do a better job than just bring anonymous writer on the website.

Here is my version.

I am a former Labour Party member, I found the decision making with in the party extremely dictorial and in cabinet meetings party leader alone took all the decisions and took us to war. I felt blah blah and I left the party. Sorry I can’t tell you my name blah blah

Mohammed Ahmed
28 February 2008 at 23:30

Great New Revelations...NOT

Is this a copy and paste from ED, Mr Maher or Mr Nawaz. It could well be!

It's the same old government mantra - which seems fixated on having a go at the HT.

Give it a rest, please!

designer
29 February 2008 at 10:47

I understand your frustrations sister but there is no need to go public. If you have sour grapes then keep it to yourself. Some advice, Muslims are already divided so please avoid articles that add fuel to the fire. If you have nothing positive to say then sometimes is best to say nothing at all, something Muhammad (PBUH) practiced.

Serosch
29 February 2008 at 13:05

Israel was created by the theft of Palestinian land, mass murder, rape, and torture of Palestinians. The Jewish extremists deliberately targeted women and children to speed up the ethnic cleansing. More than half a century later the Palestinians are still suffering.

Jewish extremists such are Ariel Sharon who lead most of the attacks on the Palestinians is an Israeli hero. Eight out of the twelve Prime Ministers Israel has had are guilty of War Crimes.

So can you explain why you find it antagonistic for people to suggest that only by the removal of Jews from Palestine can there be peace in the Middle East.

Averroes
29 February 2008 at 15:50

I think the piece is an interesting account. It is also quite a valuable inside perspective on actually what HT are like, as opposed to their exterior image. As for people cynically attacking the Muslim lady, and her being anonymous, it's understandable when you know what these movements and their fringe supporters are like, and I didn't realize people had such an alacrity to randomly attacking other people.

an interesting and enlightening piece that shows exactly how deranged, bloodthirsty and rigid these parties are.

janawzal
29 February 2008 at 17:59

From the research I have personally done myself into this organization, they appear to have what they call an intellectual leadership upon which they unanimously unite. This means that every member of the group is rationally convinced of the ideas as opposed to in a cult mentality. I'm afraid, I must be fair, their rationele upon which their ideas are built appear superior and unchallengeable. This is because their concepts, however unusual they seem to us actually reflect the teachings of Islam. Then its no surpsise to find so much appeal for them, especially from the younger generation who are more receptive to a variety of ideas. Further more, it is not only this group, but over a billion moslems around the world who are collectively and individually working to undermine the values of freedom and democracy against the Western world which they hope will culminate in the wider world embracing the ideology of Islam with the termination of the Western ideology, (ie, Capitalism) and the birth of a Caliphate. This is more or less the same as the cold war between Russia and America where there was a battle for hearts and minds, communism vs american capitalism and communism was destroyed when its people abandoned their belief. The same thing is hapening now albeit with no Government for the moslems.

radius
29 February 2008 at 20:39

"This is so, because moslems believe that Islamic ideology (sharia) is the only systems that has the right to control the entire worlds affairs."

This bears no relation to reality. A handful of Muslims believe this.

Johnathan
29 February 2008 at 21:55

i am now waiting for this lady to appear on newsnight and talk about the way she had to prove her loyalty (to this dangerous organisation) by attempting to mug Mr Paxmen on his way to the studio but changed her mind as she saw the handsome lad reflected on her inner concious.

Mr Paxman then bfriended her and gave her an advice to write a book on her journey out of HT so she could make millions.

The Qulium foundation will then get hold of her and make her the Head of their femal branch.

blah blah blah.

asilentworld
29 February 2008 at 23:32

Just because you now believe in occupation of soverigen lands, dictators & support the Palistinian suffering does not make you right. Nor does the FACT that you now eat at gay bars and support new Labour.

From the traits of some of your new Quillium SHEIKHS you must be in lots of debt toooooo!!! And you forgot to mention how you were one of the TOP women in HT in the world as many of your COLLEGUES claim.

The intelligent will never fall for you, the ummah despises you and your own aulaad will abodon you.

Aakira awaits you.

outsider
01 March 2008 at 07:11

'Umm Mustafa' seems to need glasses; she has somehow missed the 'elephants in the room', the facts that most 'Muslim' Govts. are corrupt, US-serving criminals, repressing their citizens, and the fact that 9/11, the 'World-Changing Event' that was blamed on Muslims and opened the floodgates to the wholesale removal of Constitutional rights enshrined in the US Constitution, Gitmo, 'Extraordinary Rendition', invasion of pipeline routes and oilfields, etc.

Check out the BBC trilogy 'Power of Nightmares' (good, but it does fall for the 'Osama done it' Bushco line), and the BBC trilogy on 'Gladio', by Francovitch (who suffered an unfortunate 'heart attack' at Houston Airport, lucky for some - shades of John Smith, Pope John Paul I, Pol Pot, Milosevic etc.), which clearly documents the CIA-inspired terrorism (blamed on the 'communists') over Western Europe and the coups in Turkey and Greece, and the 'silent' coup (operation 'Piano Solo') in Italy. Wake up, Umm Mustafa,and the rest of you. If you believe this stuff can be dismissed as 'conspiracy theory', make a name for yourselves! Meet 9/11 (or 7/7) 'Truthers' in a public debate, anywhere, anytime.

soozie
01 March 2008 at 11:17

The Quilliam Foundation website has Michael Gove down an advisor. Why not go the whole hog and have Melanie Phillips?

Ed Francis
01 March 2008 at 13:15

I think James Bate has hit the nail on the head with his last comment. In summary, this lady joined a political party and eventually came to disagree with its ideas. In her opinion the leadership was ineffective and in the end she left. How is this news?

soozie
01 March 2008 at 14:07

From the QF website: "The Quilliam Foundation openly challenges Islamist groups to public debates. Our first challenge is to Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), the group that influenced Syed Qutb in prison and is thus the ideological inspiration to al-Qaeda. While HT may disagree with Osama bin Laden's methods, they both aspire to the same end: the creation of a theocratic, expansionist dictatorship."

Is this analysis, tracing a direct link from HuT to Al-Qaeda, via Qutb, and claiming HuT is the ideoglogical inspiration to Al-Qaeda correct, or a distortion? Surely other strands - Wahabi, Salafi - were equally, if not more, important in the genesis of Al-Q and in moulding of Osama Bin Laden. The guys (and guyesses) involved in QF seem to have a blinkered obsession with HuT and are not giving the wider picture. There may be a danger that by focusing exclusively on HuT - ideogologically dangerous though that group may be - other dangers are being overlooked.

jack
01 March 2008 at 17:55

I have a revelation to make. I too was a member of a very dangerous political party and used to attend secretive party meetings and talk about many party philosophies. But when i discovered that this party would and eventually supported the killing of millions of innocent people around the world in order to promote their ideology i had to leave. I then had to decide how i could give back to society what is owed to them i decided to join the conservative party. But i have heared that Mr Cameroon was a raving loony and was no different from my ex-party; and often make crazy remarks just like the facist BNP, so i decided that conservative party was not for me. My ex party leader, Mr Blair and now Mr Brown wants to shut me up by censoring me. They claim that i am an extreemist because i do not support them in their dangerous mission to take over the world by any means necessary. They want me to insult other people's prophets, force then to give up their values, and not allow them to decide their political destiny. They claim that this is democracy. Yes, i had to leave Labour party and their cult like structure.,.

nawawimohamad
03 March 2008 at 09:12

This is what I call "washing dirty linen in public". I would worry more on how to maintain Islam within the Muslims themselves rather than thinking on how to rule the world. The world is nothing compared to one good deed!

Abdullah
03 March 2008 at 10:50

The attire known as Jilbab is not any groups monopoly. It is an Islamic, respected, opinion. This lady is scoring points by associating this clothing (because she knows the west's dislike for Islamic closthing) with this so called dangerous group. I am disgusted how story such as this could appear in this so called 'respected' reading. Muslims know very well the notion of devide and rule; this is only the continuation of such legacy. Sure there are misdoings in every community, but making mountain out of mole hill seems to be a very quick way of making money when it comes to bashing Islam and Muslims. One group of Muslims today and another tomorrow.

Averroes
03 March 2008 at 13:00

Excellent piece!

Excellent set of comments!

In case anyone had any doubts, the cult like nature of the organization shines through in the comments.

Deranged World conspiratorial world view.

Intolerance to criticism.

Cult-like take on their own religious/political interpretations, and CULT LIKE BEHAVIOR to someone leaving their organization!

Condemnation in the 'akhirah'! Looks like God speaks to others as well as Tony Blair!

Fantastic demonstration of why, if anyone had any doubts, it was so difficult for this lady to get out, and what type of sectarian "structure" it was.

Great reading!

I do not see any Islam bashing in this piece - in fact I see the opposite - someone saying that Islam is free from this groups politics and ideology. So whilst they may wish to super-impose a totalitarian ideology it does not mean that Islam does. Isn't that one of the core thesis of the piece.

Read More

Vote!

Are women equal now?

Win Manu Chao
Albums!

Plus limited edition shirts and vinyl

Enter online