Mainstreaming the Muslim presence in Britain through creative activism 
Whether it is extremism, immigration, integration or crime, Muslims are usually at the centre of discussion in Europe. Post 7/7 Britain is no exception with Islam and Muslims appearing in headlines almost daily and the focus on particularly young Muslims for mostly negative reasons continues unabated. Despite Britain being considerably better in integrating the Muslim community compared to its European neighbours, the scrutiny on them has become a normal part of life now. In <a href="https://edinburghuniversitypress.com/book-british-muslims.html">British Muslims: New Directions in Islamic Thought, Creativity and Activism</a>, Philip Lewis and Sadek Hamid have made painstaking efforts to show the complexity and dynamics of these exceptionally diverse Muslims as they craft their place in Britain. Both have written extensively on Islam and possess huge background knowledge on Muslim issues. 
The authors have pulled no punches in discussing sensitive Muslim issues within the context of 21st century, multi-faith Britain. They have highlighted the fact that British Muslims constitute the microcosm of the global Muslim ummah with numerous ethnicities and languages as well as religious and cultural traditions; making the idea of a monolithic Muslim community pointless. Most live in deprived inner city conurbations. With a higher proportion of youth in their midst, still less than half UK-born, more than two-thirds have their roots in south Asia. 
Philip Lewis and Sadek Hamid highlight the changing nature of British Muslims in recent decades, their educational progress, cultural gaps due to the intergenerational shift, disproportionate prison populations or engagement with the wider society are still fluid. They have been facing challenges, but their success in some sectors of life such as charity, health, business and entrepreneurship is significant. The authors have ably, and with some empathy, discussed the emerging dynamics within the communities – occasionally bringing in religious or theological points of view but without being explicitly judgmental. 
A book of this nature, especially after 7/7, cannot ignore discussing topical issues such as, Muslim leadership, radicalisation and extremism or youth lifestyles. The topics in the book are wide-ranging with some very topical themes such as women in the mosques; public life and youth activism; changing lifestyles from the perspectives of varying Islamic traditions have been highlighted prominently. 
Modern Britain has seen cultural trends that are bringing rapid changes in people’s values and lifestyles, due to influential external factors such as technology and social media. While organised religions, as a whole have taken a back seat in people’s personal and social life, the religion of Islam has still a big influence on the life of its followers – in their internal behaviour and external social engagement. To many Muslims, modernity and their faith are not exclusive or inimical. This is another area that confuses many people, including Muslims, with superficial knowledge of Islam. 
The presence and representation of <a href="https://mcb.org.uk/project/women-in-mosques/">women in mosques</a> is now being widely discussed within communities as essential to securing the future of the faith. Mosques are at the heart of not only Muslim religious and spiritual well-being, but also of their community life as historically, ‘people’ were always at the heart of the mosques. The first individual who embraced Islam was Prophet Muhammad’s (peace and blessings be upon him) own beloved wife and the first martyr was one of his prominent woman companions in Makkah. In the Prophet’s mosque in Madinah women used to pray in the same hall behind men’s rows without having any physical barrier between them. 
The authors have highlighted the changing dynamics of British Muslim communities, particularly the younger generations and examined good practices and innovative projects. This focus particularly on the younger generations strikes a special chord with me, as I have been working on this for over three decades. Young people, wherever they come from, are an asset of any society. However, they are generally driven by idealism and impatience in their passion to bring swift results. This will only happen if done within the core principles and universal but inclusive teachings of Islam. 
Continuous renewal of Islam and reform of the Muslim society has always been at the heart of Islam’s teachings. Scholars and social leaders since Islam’s early days have been advocating for this rejuvenation and advancement. British Muslims cannot be an exception, especially in an intellectually rigorous and socially challenging environment. They are still going through the teething problems and the slow progress may be frustrating to the younger generations, but the signs of changes are in sight. 
In writing this book, the authors have taken a significant step forward along this path. Readers will gain an understanding of how the Muslim community, particularly its younger section, is going through an internal introspection and trying to navigate its way into mainstreaming its presence in Britain. 
You can purchase a copy of British Muslims: New Directions in Islamic Thought, Creativity and Activism, Philip Lewis and Sadek Hamid, from <a href="https://edinburghuniversitypress.com/book-british-muslims.html">Edinburgh University Press</a>.<a href="http://www.the-platform.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/British-Muslims-Philip-Lewis-Sadek-Hamed-large.jpg"><img loading="lazy" class="aligncenter wp-image-13302" src="http://www.the-platform.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/British-Muslims-Philip-Lewis-Sadek-Hamed-large.jpg" alt="British Muslims Philip Lewis Sadek Hamed - large" width="350" height="525" /></a>

British-Muslims-Philip-Lewis-Sadek-Hamid

Exploring British Muslims through the Lens of Youth, Creativity and Activism

In a world increasingly troubled by greed and intolerance, the deep spiritual training of Ramadan can offer healing  
&nbsp; 
In this year&#8217;s month of Ramadan, which is only a few days away, Muslims in the northern hemisphere will have very long days of fasting. In London it is expected to be around 19 hours of voluntary &#8216;starvation&#8217; from food, drink and physical intimacy. This annual month-long fasting is one of the five pillars of Islam aimed to create &#8216;God-consciousness&#8217; (taqwa in Arabic) among believers. 
Taqwa has a deeper meaning of incessant introspection of one&#8217;s inner thoughts and behaviours; that is, to always be on the religious &#8216;middle way&#8217; and social &#8216;centre-ground&#8217;, away from extremism in all aspects. This 24/7 soul-searching has the potential to guide and propel believers towards living a morally upright life and developing key inner qualities, such as integrity and self-discipline as well as good manners. It has the ability to shape their lives and transform their character towards one with a positive drive for action, for the good of all. 
Behind the disciplining of natural thirst, hunger and base desires, fasting prepares believers to contemplate the mystery of our life &#8211; our fleeting existence on earth, connection with God, relationships with fellow human beings and obligation to the well-being of our environment. This has a direct impact on our behaviour &#8211; humility, patience, fortitude, care and love. Ramadan teaches Muslims the ethos of sharing and caring, extra generosity, respect and giving preference to fellow human beings; these are the values that are greatly needed now, more than ever, in our unequal society and fractured world. 
The physically challenging and spiritually intense fasting from dawn to dusk is thus a divine gift to Muslims so they can become harbingers of good to all mankind. 
The question is how real is this now? 
When it comes to the public expression of religious rituals, Muslims are one of the strongest among faith communities. Whether practicing or cultural, they have a special affinity for fasting during Ramadan; many thoroughly transform their attitude, behaviour and lifestyle for a whole month, in accordance to a Prophetic tradition that says &#8216;Whoever does not give up forged speech and evil actions, Allah is not in need of his leaving food and drink.&#8217; 
Ramadan also harvests a unique festivity in Muslim life. Many multiply their charity giving during Ramadan (British Muslims are known as the <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/faith/article3820522.ece">top charity givers</a>). Recitation and memorisation of the Qur&#8217;an are commonplace and some strive to gain an understanding of the text and context. 
Being true to Islam means being a good citizen and human being. In fact, the essence of Muslim morality is to be good to others, without being judgemental. It demands from them positive and ethical action, a unilateral undertaking to create a better society. 
While other Islamic rituals are noticeable to people around, fasting is not; it represents a unique self-surrender to God. Fasting &#8216;burns out&#8217; one&#8217;s desires and helps to conquer base instincts, such as self-gratification and arrogance. Apart from health and other benefits, it is the most effective way for one&#8217;s inner purification. 
In the unprecedented commercialisation and sexualisation of our world today, it is easier to fatten our egos, nurture our greed, increase our impatience and succumb to intolerance and hatred of others. The easy accessibility of social media that shrinks the world can enslave us to ever-new technological gadgets. We have very little time to think, reflect and relax, still less time to spend with our near and dear ones &#8211; even the treasured children and beloved elders in our own families. We live fast-paced lives; we want to be in life&#8217;s fastest lane and beat others, yet we do not foresee the possibility of a potential crash. 
Much of the modern way of life is eating away at our souls; we are involuntarily turning into human robots. We avoid discussing tough issues such as morality and ethics, lest we are seen as dogmatic or extremist by others. We have become too rights-based, but expect a higher level of responsibility from others &#8211; our elected representatives, governments, the police and public servants. 
Fasting is thus an antidote to selfishness and the extreme materialism in our lives. It is a &#8216;shield against evil&#8217; to survive and succeed in our highly asymmetric world. It reminds believers that real success is not just in our wealth, power and fame but in striving for a better world for all. 
A society needs people who strongly feel a sense of duty to all people, a natural civic responsibility &#8211; not just for political and social unity but to address our human cravings for peace. 
Every year Ramadan brings this unique opportunity to &#8216;train&#8217; Muslims to find their inner selves, recharge their energy, revitalise their lives and work for common good. Alas, many among them have big contradictions in real life. 
In these turbulent days of materialism and individual self gratification, with religious extremism and secular-irreligious backlash in our public life, we need a spiritual regeneration to make our world safer and more humane.
<pre>Image from: http://riyadhconnect.com/fasting-day-in-ramadan-around-14-hours-in-saudi/</pre>

Ramadan Spirit Can Heal Our Fractured World

Notwithstanding the flawless and beautiful production, Dara has helped to perpetuate the orientalist stereotype that orthodox Islam is antithetical to moral virtue 
&nbsp; 
As the play Dara draws to a close at the National Theatre, critics have praised the theatre’s bravery in widening their cultural scope. The play, originally written by Shahid Nadeem and adapted by Tanya Ronder, examines the battle between two Mughal Princes, Dara Shikoh and Aurangzeb in their quest to rule the Mughal Empire. But rather than uniformly praising the National Theatre for giving a platform to actors of colour and showcasing histories from the Global South, giving Dara’s problematic content a pass would be unwise. The play’s central theme construes history to fit a particular narrative. The insidiousness of this narrative is that it is part of an agenda to construct what and who ‘the Muslim’ is today. 
Before delving into the many issues with Dara, it would be a travesty not to point out that the production was magnificent. During the interval, Mast Qalandar rung out via the lungs of a supremacy talented Qawwali group, I wondered at the time if this magical moment could be somewhat seminal. As a second generation British Pakistani, my parents would play the heavenly vocal acrobatics of Qawwali’s chosen one: Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan. So to hear it at a theatre, somewhere white and middle class, somewhere that isn’t a packed hall full of South Asians in North London but in the heart of central London on the south bank, was brilliant. 
The actual term Mast Qalandar is attributed to the wandering soul who is utterly enveloped in the love for God and this love manifests a sense of deliriousness in this person. Dara ordains its main protagonist and namesake, Dara Shikoh, with these transcendental qualities; qualities which are associated with the great sages, scholars and poets of Islam.  A power struggle ensues with his infamous brother Aurangzeb who is portrayed as a religious zealot. Dara is tried for apostasy and is ultimately martyred. Gasps ring out as Aurangzeb becomes emperor of Mughal India. 
What is presented as a binary struggle between the values of the Sufi and the zealot is deeply problematic. We are introduced to Aurangzeb as he solemnly observes one of his five daily prayers. Aurangzeb then authoritatively states the importance of combating the desires of temptation in conquering the self. In contrast, Dara is described as the transient who spends most of his time writing mystical poetry. The audience is given these categorisations which rarely veer into any noticeable caveats &#8211; we are presented with Aurangzeb the puritanical and strict versus Dara the lover of high art. 
There is a prominent fakir or beggar in the play whose humble status has granted him the power of immense wisdom and foresight. The character was an Armenian Jew who viewed Islam’s mystical doctrines as key to attaining closeness to God without necessarily adopting Islamic law. Viewing faith in this kaleidoscopic lens was not uncommon in South Asia, with Hindus and Muslims alike often worshipping at burial sites of religious saints. The fakir was noticeably dressed in what could only be described as attire that resembles the dress of Mowgli from The Jungle Book. His nakedness was used to signal the ways in which religious jurists tend to focus on the outward whilst negating the inward. This is an important point to make regarding the nature of religiosity, but it’s a shame Dara did not identify the necessary symbiotic relationship of the inward and the outward, particularly in Islam. 
Moreover, the use of the fakir’s nakedness fit in perfectly with the central narrative of the play. Ultimately, Dara’s argument is that it does not matter what you wear for it’s the inward that matters. Of course the inward matters, but the conscious attempt to separate ‘Sufi Islam’ from ‘Orthodox Islam’ implied that outward appearance or actions meant nothing. This was no more exemplified than in the way the fakir mockingly exclaims that if outward appearance mattered than why aren’t animals wearing the hijab? The question the fakir posed inevitably had some pertinence with an audience made up of predominantly middle class white people who have probably privately expressed some befuddlement as to why Muslim women cover their hair. It certainly struck a chord; the audience responded with rapturous laughter. The subtext was self-evident: in today’s world there is a place for faith albeit in a form that suits the state. 
This battle of the two Islams comes to a dramatic crescendo in the court scene where Dara pleads his case against a prosecutor accusing him of apostasy. Dara continues to preach the values of ‘Sufi Islam’ constructed by the writers of the play. What makes a Muslim, Dara asks us, before arguing that perhaps even the Prophet Muhammad (May Peace Be Upon Him) missed a prayer or two. The most telling thing about the entire exchange was the ways in which Dara made reference to scriptures being read in context and in the here and now. It is implied that in today’s world, perhaps praying five times a day is asking too much of humanity. So just stop being so extreme, it’s the inward that matters. 
Without invalidating the inward, Dara is posing the British Muslim a challenge; that to live in the 21st century, to live in a liberal democracy and to live in the West, you have to make some concessions. With this in mind it is worth remembering when Dara’s being put on at the National Theatre &#8211; at a time when there are British Muslims leaving the UK to fight for ISIS in Syria, at a time when extremism is apparently rife. The danger with a play like Dara is that it perpetuates these categorising binaries of what Muslims are: moderate or extreme. The message Dara sends is that you cannot be a five times a day praying, hijab wearing Muslim who is fascinated by perennial philosophy and writes mystical poetry. 
To the outsider, Dara is an attempt at presenting the dangers of ‘fundamentalist Islam’ vis a vis the friendly face of ‘Sufi Islam.’ Rather than providing nuanced character profiles, Dara’s message is very much political. Its unfortunate implicit thesis is that the British Muslim has a choice to make, and that choice is between Dara and Aurangzeb.
<pre>Photo credits: Ellie Kurttz</pre>

Dara: A Magnificent Production of False Binaries

Knee-jerk bombing of ISIL is not a long term solution to their atrocities; a more human politics is needed 
&nbsp; 
The beheading of British aid worker David Haines on September 13 was the latest monstrosity carried out by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). For British Muslims, it was doubly distressing that this evil act was carried out, apparently, by a British Muslim. The Muslim community here unanimously condemned this barbarism. 
From a moral and theological point of view, an entire community or religion should not be blamed for the actions of a crazy few. But all too often, when people see evil emanating from some Muslims, the potential is there to unfairly put the whole community in the dock. 
There are now fears that ISIL&#8217;s extremism is <a class="InternalLink" href="http://rt.com/uk/188672-isis-right-extremism-uk/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">fuelling Islamophobia and a far-right backlash </a>in the UK. While others have denied there is a growth in the actual number of far-right activists, most observers seem to agree that there is a rise in anti-Muslim sentiment across the UK. This is a big worry for Muslims and a huge burden on our social and political leadership. And of course ISIL&#8217;s rise also re-emphasises the danger of sectarian tensions within the Muslim community. Thankfully, David Haines&#8217; brother, Mike Haines, quoted verses from the Quran and made it clear by saying: &#8220;The <a class="InternalLink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11095810/The-Muslim-faith-is-not-to-blame-for-Islamic-States-brutal-murder-of-my-brother-says-Mike-Haines.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Muslim faith is not to blame for ISIL</a>, nor is it the fault of people of Middle Eastern descent.&#8221; 
Global crisis 
ISIL has, in fact, created a global crisis and presented world leaders with a challenge they cannot afford to ignore: They must hold their nerve and the civilised world needs to find creative, political, and more importantly, human ways of solving this problem of nihilism in our midst. For that is what ISIL is: a nihilistic movement that is the enemy of hope and togetherness. 
How the global community handles this barbarity is a big question. Certainly Muslims worldwide have unanimously rejected ISIL&#8217;s publicity-seeking terror antics, endlessly repeating that it is a million miles away from Islam&#8217;s teachings. 
The easiest option for some trigger-happy leaders would be to bomb ISIL into the stone age. This may temporarily halt or reduce its power, but it will come back again or re-emerge in another name. 
Violence in the Middle East will not simply go away without ethical politics in the region. We must not forget how al-Qaeda emerged in the 1990s, due in part to a political vacuum in Afghanistan; the result was the Taliban regime that gave shelter to the terrorist group. 
It is now clear that the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a recipe for the influx of al-Qaeda into Iraq that has now morphed into the more vicious ISIL. With swaths of land in Iraq and Syria under its control, it has plunged the Middle East into an even more serious predicament than before &#8211; one in which the viciousness of al-Qaeda and the Assad regime is all too easy to forget. 
Common sense 
Common sense and natural wisdom suggest that a replay of the post-9/11 knee-jerk reactions, and another display of &#8220;shock and awe&#8221; firepower by the US and its allies, would be the worst step: This will give ISIL the propaganda coup it needs and deepen the crisis for all involved. 
US President Barack Obama has at least grasped that reality and said that <a class="InternalLink" href="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/09/obama-us-will-not-fight-ground-war-iraq-2014917152136499184.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">US forces will not fight another ground war </a>in Iraq. This is a welcome declaration, but there are big holes in the US-led strategy in the current crisis. With the United States&#8217; resumption of &#8220;the long war&#8221; in Iraq and possibly in Syria, a new open-ended &#8220;war on terror&#8221; (WoT) appears to have started. 
By waging this endless war, the US appears to be digging its heels in the Middle East sand. Gone are the days when the world sighed with relief at Obama&#8217;s declaration in 2010 that the<a class="InternalLink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/7772598/Barack-Obama-declares-the-War-on-Terror-is-over.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> &#8220;war on terror&#8221; was over</a>. Very few people now believe him. 
The Middle East needs some respite from violence. The US can be a catalyst for this if it decides to become a fair player in the region, with a consistent people-friendly policy. By siding with authoritarian regimes depending on military might alone, the US has so far made things worse in this region. It is an irony that western democracies have one rule, a robust democracy, for their own people but different ones for others. 
You can kill terrorists through fire power, but slaying the demons of terrorism needs something more &#8211; a human dimension in politics, as well as accountability, and allowing local citizens a stake in their public affairs. 
Limitless injustice 
When citizens see only limitless injustice orchestrated by their corrupt and incompetent leaders, sustained by foreign players, the result is a vicious circle of despotism and violence. In an inter-connected global village with instant communication, no country can remain insulated from another. By ignoring others&#8217; peril, we sow the seeds of our own peril at a future stage. 
There are positive examples of global cooperation. Powerful and rich countries &#8211; governments and private citizens alike &#8211; have dug deep to help fellow human beings in developing countries. Britain leads in this area, devoting up to 0.7 percent of its GDP to foreign aid. 
Why can&#8217;t this happen in the political field of weaker countries? Why do the powerful nations often go &#8220;fishing in the muddy waters&#8221; in other parts of the world? The rise of ISIL could have been thwarted if the US had insisted earlier on a non-sectarian inclusive government in Iraq and if mainstream political opposition to Syria&#8217;s brutal regime had received timely support. No wonder some cynics and conspiracy theorists can feel free to accuse the US and its allies of giving ISIL a free hand, so that the terror group can then be used as a bogeyman to continue a long war in the Middle East. 
The emergence of violent extremism and nihilism in some parts of the Muslim world is primarily due to the failure of politics, exacerbated by the harmful influence of foreign powers. Although al-Qaeda, al-Shabab, Boko Haram and ISIL speak in the language of Islam, they have emerged in an authoritarian, corrupt, and incompetent political system. 
We are in the midst of a generational and geopolitical crisis in the Middle East. Until the Arab world can institute minimum democratic accountability and establish basic rights for its people, the region will remain unstable and a breeding ground for violence. As it stands, this will not happen until the US and its close allies stop supporting or propping up brutal regimes. 
Image: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/10892898/Iraq-crisis-Q-and-A-Who-or-what-is-ISIS-Is-it-part-of-al-Qaeda.html

Countering the Demon of Terrorism

The UNHRC Sri Lanka war crimes investigation may be welcome, but peace and reconciliation requires more 
&nbsp; 
The recently passed UNHRC resolution on Sri Lanka marks a high point in terms of the country’s road towards peace. The US backed UNHRC resolution paves the way for an international investigation into the war crimes allegedly committed by the Sri Lankan government (GOSL) during the final military battles of the war. According to the Office for the Commissioner for Human Rights, the resolution asks that Sri Lanka “conduct an independent investigation into allegations of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law; and extended the mandates of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism and of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food.”  An important step, yes, and in many ways a loss in terms of political capital for the GOSL, in both national and international terms. 
Those campaigning on the ground for greater attention to be paid to the war crimes allegations can take this event as the first real headway towards justice and accountability, whilst members of the diaspora that have been pushing for the international community to make a ‘real stand’, will see such progress as nothing short of momentous. Indeed, this resolution separates itself from the two that have come before by being definitively stronger in terms of what it asks the GOSL to do. It has also forced many countries to truly show their hand regarding their willingness to push the GOSL on its human rights agenda. The votes, from 47 member countries were 25 in favour, 13 against and eight abstentions. 
One of the abstentions comes from regional power player India, which is home to many Tamil persons, a noteworthy departure from their support of two previous ‘tamer’ decrees issued by the UNHRC.  This, of course, reinforces the strength of the resolution in question. The drive for the GOSL to prove its accountability and transparency in terms of human rights is gathering more impetus. As Navi Pillay, Special UN Rapporteur for Human Rights, suggested when discussing the situation in North Korea, we can now challenge the international community and the GOSL to a true test of action. 
A small problem remains in terms of historical response and also, the power blocs that the Sri Lankan government has managed to consolidate. In the past, the GOSL has always responded to international interventions with anti-imperialistic rhetoric and personal attacks on named officials, claiming that any policy making from outside the country was an extensive act of Western neo-colonialism. The Sri Lankan government also enjoys solid support from the Chinese government, and seemingly, some silent support from Manmohan Singh’s government. These last two points seriously complicate the ability of local civil society groups and the international community to strong-arm the GOSL into conducting a war crimes inquiry, at least in terms of the near future.  What this situation does reinforce is that attention must be paid to those solutions and changes that can be made from below, from within Sri Lankan society itself. 
A war crimes inquiry, thoroughly and independently conducted, may confirm much of the allegations that have been made against the Sri Lankan government and its Armed Forces. At the same time, the process that takes us towards the implementation of the inquiry, and its aftermath will create further cleavages in an already deeply conflicted and divided country. At present, tensions prevail not only in terms of ethnic divisions but also between the different religions that co-exist in Sri Lanka, with significant hostility having been demonstrated between Buddhist fundamental groups and Muslim and Christian communities. The sanctity of non-Buddhist religious practices has been subsumed to a fundamentalist nationalist ethic, so much so that there have been incidents where pork was thrown into a city mosque, or where a tabernacle in a Catholic church was desecrated. The GOSL has also undertaken an extensive militarization and Sinhalisation of the Northern part of the country, imposing a kind of cultural colonisation in these areas. 
During the recent Commonwealth summit, the despair and difficulties still being experienced by minority communities in Sri Lanka was made especially evident, particularly during the visits that British Prime Minister David Cameron made to the North of the country. The situation of women in Sri Lanka’s post-war situation is also grim, with many war widows turning to prostitution in order to finance single parent households. The GOSL also recently branded all Tamil diaspora groups as belonging to ‘terrorist’ factions. Despite these tensions, in a recent speech to the National Unity Conference, President Mahinda Rajapaksa claimed that no minorities exist in the Sri Lankan state, using the image of Sinhala King Dutugemunu to suggest that any racist claims levelled against the government are simply the voices of those who misunderstand or wish to undermine the Government-led post-war reconciliation project. 
It is important to uncover what truly occurred in the last days of the war. Yet, an investigation that focuses so fully on the GOSL itself will alienate those who wish to point out, quite fairly, the role of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in perpetrating certain atrocities. More than this, a constant focus on top-down approaches such as policing action from the international community moves the conversation away from how local groups can work together to heal the divides and conflicts prevailing in Sri Lanka. An inquiry will largely answer only to legal, formalised planes of justice and institutional remedy.  Any movement through transitional justice that has as its end goal in unitive reconciliation, must tackle both crimes made against humanity and also the deep wounds existing in, and being amplified in, the society concerned. 
What is certainly missing in much of the political discourse surrounding the Sri Lankan problem is how and in what ways the country and its extremely divided communities can move towards reconciliation and healing.  Indeed, what we have seen in the post-war years has only been further levels of inter-communal estrangement and aggression. There has been little sustained dialogue as to how healing will occur, or what needs to be in place in terms of formal apologies, witness statements or reparations, actions from religious leaders and so on, before the country can reconcile itself. Without a focus on radical reconciliation, Sri Lanka will not be able to progress from conflict to peace, rendering even a successful war crimes investigation, completely null and void.
<pre>Image from: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/07/world/asia/07lanka.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0</pre>

Sri Lanka: Reconciliation After War

Amid imbalanced pressures of integration in France, controversial Muslim figures enter the discourse for a French Islam 
&nbsp; 
It is widely accepted that, in France, imagining space for Islam in the public arena evokes a no-man’s land. Much ink has flown internationally on the burqa ban and debates on national identity. Francois Hollande was not spared controversy when he walked into the main Mosque of Paris on 18th February to inaugurate a memorial dedicated to the “Muslim soldier.” While on the far right Marine Le Pen qualified the initiative as ‘nauseating’ in her idiosyncratically crude idiom. The UMP accused the socialist party of electoral manipulation. Feelings were equally mitigated amongst the Muslim community, where some talked about a sound effort for national reconciliation while others reprehended the President for hiding the memorial in a citadel where only Muslims would see it. 
There is nothing particularly new about this atmosphere of discomfort. Discussing the role Muslims have or ought to have in France has become an emotionally charged political exercise. Reminiscent of the larger enterprise of western societies’ attempts to deal with the Muslim ‘other’, it has taken on a French twist in a country which still nostalgically cultivates cultural exceptionalism. Tariq Ramadan, France’s black beast, evokes the invention of a new type of citizenship, a kind of psychological status where the citizen still has to prove his integration. Different from legal obligations or language requirements, it imposes supplementary demands, falling under what recent sociologists term ‘moral citizenship’. Although the contours of this new citizenship resist precise definition, they are driven by dynamics of mistrust: loyalty, patriotism, integration and secularism are the terms which form the new textbook for the French moral citizen – probably best captured in Sarkozy’s “France: love it or leave it”.  The current socialist government’s proposal of a headscarf ban from university campuses and its treatment of the Romani issue has proven that the popularized slogan has by far crossed the boundaries of the conservative right. 
These demands of true “French-ness” are very much integrated amongst Muslims who are &#8211; not without divisions &#8211; increasingly attempting to respond to them. The French media has become flooded by features on these new movements of ‘Republican Islam’ or ‘French Islam’, in which the foundations for this new moral citizenship are being set.  Through a confused rhetoric, these groups strangely oscillate between a communitarian ‘guilt trip’ and the nostalgia of a ‘lost France’, and their Muslim counterparts are not spared. 
This trend came under the spotlight in 2011, when Hassen Chalghoumi, an Imam in a sensitive town of the Parisian outskirts, founded a conference with other Muslim representatives to promote what he termed a ‘double mission’. Firmly supporting the ban on the burqa, he exposed French Muslims’ duty to bear not only their religious identity but also their republican heritage. Portrayed as the perfect Muslim who shakes women’s hands, hyperbolically called the emissary of an “Islam of the Enlightenment” and praised by both Left and Right as a model of integration, Chalghoumi quickly became a favourite icon for both the media and the political class. 
Certainly encouraged by the sudden fame, his positions went beyond defending secularism. His speeches often echo some of the most virulent caricatures about young French-born Muslims as he goes into racially offensive alleys where only a Le Pen would be expected to walk. This is the same man who presented himself as the initiator of national reconciliation: he did not hesitate to opt for racist comments in his book where he relates his shock upon seeing his daughter’s primary class picture, asking rhetorically: “Arab, Black, Arab, Black, where are we &#8211; in Timbuktu?&#8221; 
More surprisingly, the past months have seen a resurgence of this phenomenon within the unrelated context of demonstrations against homosexual marriage, as anti-gay marriage right-wing groups did not hesitate to recruit outside mosques to join the protest. This is how Islamic associations ended up marching alongside the same groups who for years have tried to deny their communal rights and space. Themes of integration and vehement reactions about a banner in Arabic quickly came to hijack what was initially a family law-related protest. 
Camel Bechikh, president of ‘Fils de France’ (an organisation promoting a republican Islam) and member of the Union of Islamic Organizations of France, was the main spokesman during these demonstrations &#8211; a perfect platform to advocate for an acultural Islam free from ‘foreign’ attributes. 
In an interview with Rue89 after his participation in a rally organised by the Front National (France’s far-right political party) he refused to be associated with the party. However, his discourse reiterates the FN rhetoric as he highlighted the dangers of mass immigration and the need for moulding young people from immigrant descent into ‘good patriots’. For Bechikh, this would consist not in rejecting one’s origins but appeasing them &#8211; he goes as far as suggesting that Islamic skullcaps could become berets and headscarves replaced by bandanas. 
Although these groups have been under vivid criticism, they continue to federate – even if one may argue that they remain mere instruments of political calculus for diverse parties. Above all, they contribute to showing that the conflict on the national level, highlighted by events such as the inauguration of the memorial of the Muslim soldier, has now very much expanded to the communities themselves. Beyond unilateral discourses of national reconciliation between the French state and its Muslims citizens, it is among the divided Muslims themselves that a dialogue needs to be established. Under the burden of integration, temptations to ‘fit in’ have led some of them to paradoxically become leaders of France’s disturbing normalised Islamophobia.
<pre>Image from: http://mideastposts.com/middle-east-society/religion-in-the-middle-east/common-ground-in-the-doha-debate-on-the-burqa-ban/</pre>

Fighting for French Islam: Integration to Islamophobia?

A united voice of protest must emerge loud and clear from the Sinhalese community to condemn the new wave of attacks on Muslims in Sri Lanka 
&nbsp; 
There is that scene from <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108052/">Schindler’s List</a> which had a profound impact on me. I had forgotten about it, I never knew it existed, except that it has lain somewhere in the fibre of my brain, dormant, latent, waiting for the opportune moment for it to be of use. The state of Muslims in Sri Lanka is changing, it is perilous, getting graver with each rising of the sun, and suddenly this scene makes a lot of sense. It draws lessons from the attitudes of races and ethnicities and the chemistry between religious communities in Sri Lanka, a chemistry which is at threat of losing its equilibrium. 
In the film Ralph Fiennes, playing the character of Amon Goeth, an SS officer, is in his bedroom with a girl. He rises to use the bathroom from where he sees an inmate in the concentration camp taking a break from the heavy painful labour he is being subjected to. As Goeth sees it, he is wasting time, being disobedient. So with the girl still teasing him in the background, he picks up the rifle and shoots him. He then surveys the working landscape from the balcony and walks the few feet back to the room where he and the girl continue to laugh and argue, as if they never had an interlude in which misery was wreaked on another. 
For all the details in this scene, it is the image of the girl that recurs &#8211; she didn’t kill anyone, she was only an onlooker. 
Except she wasn’t. There are no mere onlookers or observers under such circumstances. Inadvertently or not, you are a participant. You contribute to a crime, to someone else’s suffering by inaction, by a silence that spells out consent. 
Were the Nazis, the Serbs, the Hutus or Tutsis, the <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/08/us-myanmar-violence-specialreport-idUSBRE9370AP20130408">monk</a>-led <a href="http://www.the-platform.org.uk/2012/07/12/burma%E2%80%99s-rohingya-a-denial-of-citizenship-and-human-rights/">groups in Myanmar</a> or ironically the Israelis, who are largely descendants of those killed in concentration camps, able to go on the rampage with their killings because of Ralph’s character? No, it was because of people like the girl, the silent majority, who in their silence precipitated the suffering of others. 
What then of the situations that we aren’t privy to? That we aren’t as contiguous to, like the girl was contiguous to in that crime? 
As a human being, and as a Muslim, my conscience prickles to the murder waiting to happen, of the girl denied her hijab or sari, her jeans or her skirt, being calculated and honed-in for an imminent rape. Of a father fearing for the security of his daughters, bereft of his sons who in distant places toil away for the collective comforts of themselves, their families and their communities. Of the mothers who have lost their sons when they were incarcerated, tortured or killed. Of the numerous wives widowed &#8211; or worse, not knowing if they are widowed or not, some only daring to hope. 
But do I heed my pricking conscience? Do I do something? No, I choose to be an onlooker, a bystander. Why? In doing something, there is a risk, a risk that my interests may be harmed. I am shackled in a world that entraps me in a suffocating embrace, seducing me with a culture that I cannot liberate myself from, a participant of a club I have to be a member of, spending needlessly and forcing upon me vacations that I justify as mandatory. 
I too am aiding to a crime, I let it happen. 
There is a fine line here &#8211; this is not a call to arms or a veiled threat, nor is it a subscription to the vile Bush-esque dictum “you’re either with us or with the terrorists”. But this is a conscience call, to me, as much as it is to you. 
This history of <a href="http://www.the-platform.org.uk/2012/04/23/not-just-a-minority-community-in-sri-lanka/">Muslims in Sri Lanka</a> is not just another story of a minority community. Sadly and very inaccurately, the term ‘minority’ is used to describe Sri Lankan Muslims in the same vein as European Muslims are described as minorities. This history of Muslims in Sri Lanka is as old as Islam itself. 
Geographically, Sri Lanka previously held a central location in ancient trade routes, and was the traditional resting spot of sailors and merchants who were travelling from the east to the west. Therefore, Arab merchants had been frequenting Sri Lanka long before the advent of Islam in Arabia. With the ideological transformation of Arabia, the same Arabs coming to Sri Lanka were now Muslims, and in addition to marrying local Sinhalese and Tamil women, helped create the Sri Lankan Muslim population on the island. 
Unlike their other Muslim ‘minority’ counterparts, the Sri Lankan Muslims bear the exact same physical resemblance to the rest of the Sri Lankan communities and speak the same local tongue. Traditionally, Muslims in Sri Lanka have had the best of relationships with the two other communities in Sri Lanka – the Sinhalese and the Tamils – and have a history spanning well over a millennium. 
The Muslims in Sri Lanka are now in a perilous state, a state which they aren’t used to being in following their long history in Sri Lanka. Their <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21973292">shops are being attacked</a> or looted; girls have been harassed on account of wearing the hijab. <a href="http://www.the-platform.org.uk/2012/10/04/of-a-sustained-buddhist-extremism-in-sri-lanka/">Racist Buddhist monks</a> in their religious garb, with no regard to the pristine beauty of the teachings of the Gautama Buddha, yawp in derogatory terms, hurling abuse and damaging Muslim-owned properties as the police stand by doing nothing to uphold law and order. The rancid inaction of the police has been attributed by many commentators to be in deference to orders from the highest echelons of the state.  A state contaminated by politicians of the most nefarious ilk, who would<a href="http://www.the-platform.org.uk/2013/02/25/pilgrim%E2%80%99s-regress-on-the-%E2%80%98usefulness%E2%80%99-of-racism-in-sri-lanka/"> benefit from ethnic disturbances </a>just right now to conceal their misgivings, corruption, extra judicial killings, daylight robberies of the state coffers, mass unemployment and the rising costs of living. 
The Sinhalese in Sri Lanka are suffering the traumas of a corrupt government and an insipid and emasculated opposition. But the Sinhalese are a cultured people, armed by the virtues of Buddhism, a proud people with a celebrated history of close to three millennia, except that in their midst, like almost every other nation on earth, they have a <a href="http://www.the-platform.org.uk/2013/02/13/anti-muslim-extremism-and-dilemmas-of-diversity-in-sri-lanka/">minority of extremists</a> who would kill, rape and steal, like they did to the Sri Lankan <a href="http://www.opendemocracy.net/opensecurity/lilani-jayatilaka/remembering-july-1983-holocaust-started-for-me-with-death-of-my-fathe">Tamils in July 1983</a>. 
Should the situation of the Muslims in Sri Lanka deteriorate, like that of the girl in Schindler’s List, it will be the nonchalance and silence of the decent majority of Sinhalese, imbibed by the salience of Buddhism, be it religious or cultural, that will scream the loudest. By their silence, and by virtue of their inaction, they will incontestably be contributing to a crime. They have a power, a power greater than that of the racist monks that feed the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21840600">Bodu Bala Sena</a> or the Sihala Ravaya. They must use it, and they must use it now. 
A peaceful vigil conducted <a href="http://abdulhalik.wordpress.com/2013/04/12/the-disruption-of-sri-lankas-first-anti-bbs-protest/">a few days ago</a> was hijacked by the Bodu Bala Sena with the connivance of the police. The collective voice of the Sinhalese majority, aided by like-minded Muslims and Tamils, has to make itself heard. Until then, there will be a deathly and eerie silence in which Sri Lanka will be engulfed, much to its peril.
<pre>Image from: http://www.authintmail.com/news/asia/sri-lanka-blocks-anti-hate-protest-capital</pre>

Does the Silence of the Sinhalese Signal Complicity?

Evolution has always been a contentious theory to the vast majority of religious communities, Of late &#8211; Muslims have been revisiting the arguments about Islam and its stance on the theory 
&nbsp; 
Early last month, a conference was held in London, entitled &#8220;Have Muslims Misunderstood Evolution?&#8221; under the auspices of <a href="http://www.thedeeninstitute.com/" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Deen Institute</a>, an organization which <a href="http://www.thedeeninstitute.com/about-us" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">aims at</a> promoting engagement between the Islamic tradition and modernity. The event sparked off a debate on social media and op-ed columns regarding the place of evolution in the Islamic worldview. 
The conference, whose lectures were recently<a href="http://www.thedeeninstitute.com/evolution-conference" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">published online</a>, brought together scientists like<a href="http://biology.mcgill.ca/faculty/abouheif/members.html" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">Prof. Ehab Abouheif</a> and <a href="http://uncnews.unc.edu/content/view/2715/138/" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">Prof. Fatimah Jackson</a> with theologians like <a href="http://www.mdx.ac.uk/aboutus/staffdirectory/Usama_Hasan.aspx" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">Dr Usama Hasan</a> and the prominent <a href="https://www.facebook.com/yasir.qadhi" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">Shaykh Yasir Qadhi</a>. Also invited was <a href="http://www.thedeeninstitute.com/evolution-conference/itemlist/tag/oktar%20babuna" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">Dr. Oktar Babuna</a>, representing the hardcore creationist ideas of Harun Yahya, who is deemed by many Muslim scholars to be a charlatan. Sadly, by the end of the day, Babuna was reduced to such a laughing stock that even Qadhi distanced himself from him. 
Abouheif and Jackson made their case for evolution in a style reminiscent of the bestselling and quite compelling book, &#8220;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Language_of_God:_A_Scientist_Presents_Evidence_for_Belief" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Language of God</a>,&#8221; by devout Christian geneticist Francis Collins. Babuna&#8217;s creationist ideas were roundly rejected by all the other panellists. What I found most interesting, however, was the theological discussion. 
Although Qadhi, who is more of a specialist in theology than Hasan, soundly rebutted Hasan&#8217;s apparent suggestion that Muslim scholars had discovered and believed in modern evolutionary theory centuries ago, his response that scientific evolution and Islamic theology are at loggerheads is considerably overstated. For one, Hasan pointed out that preeminent center for Sunni Islamic learning, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Azhar_University" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">al-Azhar University</a>, holds that the theory of evolution does not fundamentally contradict Islamic belief. In addition, the influential, if controversial, Egyptian scholar, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, stated three years ago on a special Arabic Al Jazeera <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIaL99uXukU" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">show</a> dedicated to this subject that even if evolution were true, there is no reason for it to conflict with Islamic theology. Some conservative Muslims have <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqTwKyujcos" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">attacked</a> (in Arabic) al-Qaradawi for his statements. 
My own suggestion to Muslims grappling with such an issue is to recognize that when it comes to what we believe, science and religion address two kinds of truth: empirical and revealed. Empirical (observation-based) truth is the stuff of science. It&#8217;s contingent on our sense perception, and humanity&#8217;s current state of knowledge. It&#8217;s truth with a lower-case t. It&#8217;s relative to what the human senses can access at a given point in time, and makes no claims to being absolute. This is not to belittle it, as most empirical truths are what we consider facts, like the fact that the spherical earth goes around the sun. 
Revealed truth, by contrast, is based upon revelation which, if you believe it, is Truth with a capital T. For the believer, it is absolute, not relative. Our knowledge of empirical truth can and has improved over time; just as the once held &#8216;fact&#8217; that the sun goes around the earth has been corrected with the passage of time. No reasonable person believes this &#8216;fact&#8217; today; though the ancients may have been justified in thinking it was genuinely scientific. Revealed truth, on the other hand, claims to be constant, absolute, and unchangeable. 
Problems of this kind are nothing new for Muslim theologians. An example is the statement of the Prophet that: after the sun sets, it goes to the Throne of God and prostrates, before rising again from the East. This statement is recorded in multiple collections of Prophetic statements including the respected Sunni collections of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahih_al-Bukhari" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">Bukhari</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahih_Muslim" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">Muslim</a>. Muslims additionally believe that such statements from the Prophet constitute revealed truth. The reality is that virtually no Muslim theologian has ever taken such revealed truths to be statements of empirical truth. In such an instance, a Muslim will believe in the revealed truth, but not think this means that the empirical truth is wrong. Rather, the two kinds of truth address different domains, the moral and the empirical (what is observable through the senses). The first addresses what Muslims should believe as a matter of faith, and how they should behave; and the other is whatever a reasonable person believes about the observable world based on the current state of human knowledge. 
How does this relate to the theory of evolution for Muslims? 
I&#8217;m not arguing for the truth of evolution in this piece, for that I recommend Collins&#8217; book mentioned above. I&#8217;m only presenting how, if it were deemed empirically true, as it nearly unanimously is in the scientific community, it should cause Muslims no trouble with respect to their traditional Islamic beliefs. If the Qur&#8217;an appears to be making empirical statements about creation, like the Prophetic statement above, it doesn&#8217;t need to be understood in an everyday literal sense, even if we hold it to be True in an metaphysical sense. Many Muslims will be familiar with the fact that same logic applies to the many seemingly anthropomorphic descriptions of God in the Qur&#8217;an. 
Some commentators have described this conference as marking <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2013/jan/11/muslim-thought-on-evolution-debate" target="_hplink" rel="noopener noreferrer">a Galileo moment</a> for Muslims. I would argue that this isn&#8217;t quite the case, as Islamic religious authority is decentralized, and there is no formal &#8216;religious establishment&#8217; that has binding authority over Muslims. With even the historic center for Sunni learning, al-Azhar University, and influential scholars like al-Qaradawi accepting that Muslims could believe in evolution&#8211;though neither seems to&#8211;it doesn&#8217;t seem like this is a serious issue in theology. Rather it seems to be so only in the popular Muslim consciousness. As Muslims continue in the path of learning, as encouraged by the Prophet, I hope that a more nuanced attitude to this issue will emerge at a popular level, and then we can focus on more important discussions like that of climate change or alleviating poverty. This conference was an important step in that direction. 
&nbsp;
<pre>Image from : http://frankyvanherreweghe.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/lamrabatevolution.jpg</pre>

Muslims and Evolution in the 21st Century: A Galileo Moment?

Racism against Sri Lankan Muslims has increased significantly and very suddenly, creating a bogeyman out of the Muslims helps to conceal the political bankruptcy of the Sri Lankan government 
&nbsp; 
Purely for the sake of amusement, I encourage you to follow the Twitter account of the<a href="https://twitter.com/BoduBalaSena"> Bodu Bala Sena</a> (BBS).  Claiming to be the revival of ‘real Buddhism’, the BBS will ask you to ‘rise up’ <a href="http://dbsjeyaraj.com/dbsj/archives/16268">against the issuing of Halal Certificates</a>, and inform you that they are enlightening Buddhists of the threats from the ‘dark forces’ of the minority. And just when you think you have them pegged as insufferably extremist, they will retweet a quote from the Dalai Lama espousing the need to have tolerance and love for all beings.  It’s a masterclass in farce, and one wishes they were so easily dismissible.  It is when their rhetoric becomes racist that you will perhaps need to block the BBS. Case in point- just a couple of days ago they responded to a Tweeter by calling him a ‘thambiya’- a terribly crude way of referring to a Muslim person.  Whether Muslim or not, it was difficult not to be appalled. 
Such twittering from the Bodu Bala Sena, and their own campaigns in Sri Lanka to combat the issuing of Halal Certificates, or to ‘drive out’ Muslim and Christian interlopers from the country is unfortunately not isolated to this particular group. A strange tide of racism sweeps over the country, still recovering from 30 years of civil war, and it seems to be pushing us onward to another confrontation between the Sinhalese and another minority group:  Sri Lankan Muslims.  It’s not uncommon nowadays to receive emails warning you of the dangers of purchasing goods made by Muslim manufacturers or for a Facebook status to be attacked simply because you took a stand that didn’t reflect a Sinhalese viewpoint.  Here is the first query that arises:  When did a Sinhalese viewpoint come to mean one that was completely against the idea of anything non-Sinhala and non-Buddhist?  One answer I’ve received is this, “I have no problem with anyone, I just hate terrorism. Colombo is a safe place to live in now, and that’s a fact.” 
Colombo, indeed Sri Lanka, is a safe place to live in if you are Sinhalese, Buddhist and you keep your mouth shut; not simply modifying your dissent, but suppressing it entirely and giving in to the hegemony of the Rajapaksa government and the Buddhist fundamentalism that keeps it afloat. If you are Sinhalese and you disagree with the Government you probably fall into one of  four groups: A) Joiners:  not being able to beat the metaphorical dogs, have joined them, B) Leavers: Terrified and angry, have fled the country to begin new lives or join an irate and polemicised  Sinhala diaspora, C) The Mute: Stay, because they have no other option, but keep their voices silent or D) The Few: Angry and still resisting the regime, but lacking cohesion and plebeian pull.  Dissent against the Government by Sinhalese needs to be more vocal, far reaching and more effective in its organisation. 
Let us inspect this charge that by presenting a view that is anti-Muslim, one is not being intolerant but protecting one’s country against a ‘terrorist’ scourge.  The idea is as absurd suggesting that every Muslim person is a jihadi, and this in turn is also a misrepresentation of jihad itself. If we think of the LTTE, from the standpoint that post-independence Sri Lankan Tamils faced years of discrimination and abuse at the hands of the Sinhala majority, the LTTE stop being terrorists, and become activists resisting an oppressive establishment.  The label of ‘terrorist’ comes later, (<a href="http://groundviews.org/2011/06/22/thoughts-on-a-documentary-we-are-complicit-in-sri-lankas-killing-fields/">as I’ve argued here on Groundviews)</a> as part of the narratives inscribed by the modern.  There too, I argued that the narratives created post-conflict are dangerous and must be interrupted. The racism inherent in the anti-Muslim rhetoric is not an interruption of this, but a rather sinister continuation of the same. Furthermore, it is an inflation of the concept of terrorism. That the LTTE used violent means to make their point is not one I am purporting we ‘get behind’, but can we really play the terrorism card against the LTTE or Muslim people because of this? 
The Rajapaksa administration <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20308610">wiped out tens of thousands of civilians</a> in their military offensive against the LTTE; <a href="http://www.humanrights.asia/news/ahrc-news/AHRC-ART-054-2012">they kidnap and torture</a> journalists and activists on a frighteningly regular basis; <a href="http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20121207080534402">they license violence against, and detainment of, students</a> engaged in peaceful protest; they allow <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19680426">for random raids</a>; censorship and surveillance are ubiquitous; <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21022854">A Chief Justice was impeached for making a stand</a> and the government and its forces function with absolute impunity.  The recent passing of <a href="http://dbsjeyaraj.com/dbsj/archives/16275">the Convention on the Suppression of Terrorist Financing (Amendment</a>) is alarming in its  open ended definition of  what counts as terrorism. It gives the Government carte blanche to detain, harass and abuse citizens at will. Benjamin’s Critique of Violence reminds us of a self-contradictory understanding of violence; that it is neither good nor bad, but ultimately law-making or law-preserving. What we must be aware of are the paralyses in the dominant trends of the narrative. Violence itself justifies violent ends, or what is allowed to be legal/illegal, and as both sides (government and dissenter) share the same axiomatic desires, the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) is as much of a terrorist as the LTTE were, or the Muslims are now being portrayed as.  What makes it sinister is that, under the guise of working for the good of the people and the betterment of Sri Lanka, the GOSL operates as legalised terrorism. 
Why have we not seen any serious dismissal of the Bodu Bala Sena by the Rajapaksa administration?  Why do they allow this spate of anti –Muslim feeling, easily spurred on by the view of Islam that is mainstream globally, to go unchecked? Aside from a rather wry slap-on-the–wrist that involved the <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=&amp;esrc=s&amp;source=web&amp;cd=1&amp;ved=0CDQQFjAA&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ceylontoday.lk%2F16-23024-news-detail-bodu-bala-sena-meets-president-mahinda-rajapaksa.html&amp;ei=IasbUc3HOKjK0QWn2ICQCw&amp;usg=AFQjCNEDtnG_pDEAyvfuG2JK8vuTmQj6n">President meeting with the BBS to discuss religious tolerance</a>, there is no concentrated effort to quell this racist feeling. The answer is encapsulated in the missive I received that ‘hated terrorism’.  With the war having ended in 2009, Sri Lanka should be working not only towards reconciliation and rebuilding but should have recognition of what happened during the civil war, and what led up to it. Instead, in this spate of anti-Muslimness, one sees deliberate antagonistic strategy that, prima facie, intends to embroil the Sinhalese and the Muslims in another 30 years of civil war.  The government’s indifference to stop this progress, however, may have little to do with its own feelings toward minority populations or a reflection on the complexity of multiculturalism. The sad thing is that the GoSL may simply not care what the eventual fallout from such racism is. Why is the Rajapaksa administration allowed by the Sinhalese to function in the way that it does? Because they ‘hate terrorism’, and yes, Sinhala fears are, to them, real ones.  By allowing simplistic narratives of the terrorist, the hateful ‘other’ and the interloper to now be cast against the Muslim community, the GOSL is able to keep riding upon the wave of popularity that has allowed them overwhelming support in elections: this is buoyed by the simple face that the Rajapaksas ‘ended’ the LTTE. In order for them to stay in power, and for the violence they wield through the state to remain unchecked, they must constantly allow for the monster to be re-imagined, for the fallacy of the narrative to remain alive.  Even sadder is that the Bodu Bala Sena with its ridiculous extremism is playing, so very willingly, the part of patsy. 
&nbsp;
<pre>Image by Raashid Riza</pre>

Pilgrim’s Regress: On the ‘Usefulness’ of Racism in Sri Lanka

As women are encouraged to wear a head covering for 24 hours on World Hijab Day, we should find ourselves asking, what is the true significance of the hijab to Muslim women? 
&nbsp; 
February 1st, the world’s biggest cover up. 
Nothing to do with September 11th, nothing to do with GM crops, nothing to do with Diana. Nope. February 1st is <a href="http://worldhijabday.com">World Hijab Day</a>! 
Hijab is possibly one of the most perplexing topics on the face of the earth, up there with jihad, who killed JFK, and how George W Bush was elected President twice. World Hijab Day attempts to demystify the issue of hijab: to promote better awareness and a greater understanding, according to the website. Rather than marches, scholarly articles and campaigns, World Hijab Day is taking a novel approach and has issued an invitation to women across the world to don a head covering for a day, under the tag-line:  ‘Before you judge, cover up… for a day.’ 
I’m excited about this, and I salute any woman taking up the challenge. Stepping into a covering Muslim woman’s shoes for 24 hours, I’m predicting, will be an eye opener for many. I sincerely hope it will help clarify the reasons behind the hijab, for it seems that an aura of confusion exists around this particular mode of dress. 
Ask about the reasons for wearing hijab and you’ll probably hear something to do with modesty. There are indeed verses in the Qur’an regarding this, and it is an intrinsic part of the Islamic faith for both men and women. But modesty as an Islamic concept does not refer only to a way of dressing. Modesty involves attitude, behaviour and speech, and whilst it is enhanced, and some might add completed, by modest attire, clothing alone is not enough. 
Modesty might be an answer, but since it’s not confined to dress, for me it’s not the answer. 
Another common response is that the hijab is worn so as not to attract attention to one’s self. I argue that I’m probably the first person people notice when they walk into a room, sat there in hijab, particularly if I’m the only person in a head-covering. 
I came across a refreshing take on the idea of ‘attracting attention’ in the work of Yasmina Mogahed recently. The hijab is meant to conceal what could be seen as the (sexually) ‘attractive’ features of a woman, for indeed the hijab does not refer only to a head covering, but garments which do not reveal the figure (which, by the way, men are instructed to adopt also). This is not because a woman is not worthy of being noticed, or is only ever a seen as a sexual object. Rather she wears the hijab so as to ‘draw attention to what is important’. In a world saturated with images of the ‘perfect’ female body, in which women’s faces and figures are used to sell even airline tickets (tell me that’s not what Virgin is doing in its most recent adverts) it’s refreshing to divert attention to what’s more important, that is, what women have to say. 
So, perhaps diverting attention would be more apt a reason? I’d go for useful side-effect instead. It would be naïve to say that only covered women are heard in society, and that the reason Muslim women choose to cover is only to prevent unwanted looks and leers. 
So what is the reason for hijab then? 
I believe the answer lies in one of the main verses in the Qur’an pertaining to this topic is found in Chapter 33, verse 59, where believing women are instructed to cover: ‘O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.’ 
‘That they will be known.’ Not inconspicuous, not hidden, certainly not silent. Known. Hijab, to me, is a uniform. Perhaps not in the school-uniform sense (shudder), but in the professional sense: an outfit or style of dress worn to identify members according to their role. My role on this earth is as a servant of God. And my hijab should tell you that. It should also tell me that. When I put it on, it’s a statement, and a reminder of who I am and what I stand for and what I’m here to do. It’s a reminder to smile. It’s a reminder to hold my tongue, or my hand from the horn. That doesn’t mean when I’m at home and not wearing it (because yes, we can take it off at home, and in the shower) that I forget, or that I don’t do these things. Just like a policeman would still endeavour to uphold the law even when they’re out of uniform. It just means when I’m out and about, it puts my actions into context. It dresses the words I say and the way I act in the uniform of my faith (so they better fit the bill!) 
Sadly, this is not the picture of hijab that is painted around the world. Hijab is abused. The concept has been twisted, and manipulated, and it makes me angry that it has been presented as a way to isolate women from society and to exhibit man’s control over his female counterparts. This is wrong and neither the Qur’an, nor the life and actions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) support this. In fact, when the verses regarding the hijab were revealed, women immediately adopted it of their own free will. 
I do not, and I repeat this strongly, do not wear my hijab for men or because of men. I chose to wear my hijab, and would wear it even if there were no men on the face of the earth. Because it would still be my uniform, the context in which I live my life, a reminder of who I am, what I stand for and what I’m here to do. And it would still tell society that too. 
Seen in this light, hijab is not a covering. It is the uncovering of a woman’s beliefs. It’s a big thing to do, making that statement. Living and dressing up to your ideals. And I salute any woman who unfurls the colours of her head-covering, and any who wears it for a day, standing in solidarity with women who, in a world that is fast turning against faith, are telling the world it still matters to them.
<pre>Image credits: http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/522043_478245778865836_692088536_n.jpg</pre>