The news that a Ministry of Justice attempt to research the working of Sharia law in the UK has failed because those responsible for the ‘courts’ would not co-operate is disappointing. But it is perhaps hardly surprising if Sharia councillors are a little wary of having their activities probed too deeply. In recent months, plenty of disturbing evidence has come to light, often from Muslim women themselves, regarding how Sharia courts deny British Muslim women their basic rights as UK citizens.
What is also depressingly predictable is that the Ministry of Justice appears to have very little stomach for doing anything about the issue. Taking it upon itself almost to act as the apologist for the Sharia administrators, the MoJ explained that “the councils are generally run on a volunteer basis, were short staffed and very busy, so there were practical difficulties in speaking with respondents”. So that’s all right then.
Leaving aside the question of how, if they are so poorly resourced, Sharia courts can possibly deliver equitable justice on complex issues, I do wonder if, say, a small business failed to file its tax return on the basis that they were ‘short staffed’, or simply couldn’t be bothered, they would be treated with similar compassion by HM Revenue & Customs. Probably not.
More pertinent, as the MoJ helpfully added, was the fact that “ respondents were wary of the stereotypical ways in which their organizations were represented in the media.” Well, if Sharia courts really are as appropriate as their supporters would have us believe, they’ve missed a golden opportunity set the record straight, have they not?
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Pilgrimage to Karabakh
I’m just back from an 8 day, 75 mile walk through the magnificent mountain countryside of Nagorno-Karabakh in the southern Caucasus. I was with a group of more than 60 participants, including visitors from Burma, the US, Australia, France, South Africa and Germany, as well as from the UK.
Our pilgrimage took us across some strikingly beautiful countryside. ‘Nagorno’ means ‘mountainous’ and ‘Karabakh’ means ‘black garden’. There are upland meadows with masses of wild flowers, birds and other wildlife. The history of the country is equally rich. Armenia was the first nation in the world to formally adopt Christianity, and this is reflected in the wonderful churches and monasteries of the region, as well as in the ancient Armenian Apostolic Church itself. Our walk took us from Lachin in the west of Karabakh through to the famous 13th century Gandzasar monastery, which aptly means ‘hilltop treasure’ in Armenian.
It is always a great pleasure for me to visit this little country. My regular visits have two goals. The first is to visit the Rehabilitation Centre that HART supports in Stepanakert, the capital of Nagorno-Karabakh. Here, great work takes place in the fields of physiotherapy, rehabilitation and the management of physical disabilities. It’s a tribute to the progress made that the Stepanakert centre has become an internationally recognized centre of excellence taking the latest techniques beyond the borders of Karabakh to Georgia, Azerbaijan, Abkhazia, Ossetia and Chechnya.
The second reason for my visits is to make more widely known the facts of the Karabakh/Azerbaijan conflict. There is now a fragile ceasefire, but it was not always so. In the early 1990s a full-scale war erupted when Azerbaijan attempted to violently drive out the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh. The attempt failed, but Nagorno-Karabakh's future remains unresolved, with its independence unrecognized by the rest of the world. A solution to this injustice is long overdue.
Our pilgrimage took us across some strikingly beautiful countryside. ‘Nagorno’ means ‘mountainous’ and ‘Karabakh’ means ‘black garden’. There are upland meadows with masses of wild flowers, birds and other wildlife. The history of the country is equally rich. Armenia was the first nation in the world to formally adopt Christianity, and this is reflected in the wonderful churches and monasteries of the region, as well as in the ancient Armenian Apostolic Church itself. Our walk took us from Lachin in the west of Karabakh through to the famous 13th century Gandzasar monastery, which aptly means ‘hilltop treasure’ in Armenian.
The second reason for my visits is to make more widely known the facts of the Karabakh/Azerbaijan conflict. There is now a fragile ceasefire, but it was not always so. In the early 1990s a full-scale war erupted when Azerbaijan attempted to violently drive out the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh. The attempt failed, but Nagorno-Karabakh's future remains unresolved, with its independence unrecognized by the rest of the world. A solution to this injustice is long overdue.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Recognizing realities
Yesterday, South Sudan became the 193rd member of the United Nations. Where will the 194th be? One candidate must be Somaliland. It is surely absurd and iniquitous that the only area of the former Somalia that has a stable and reasonably free government is also the only part which does not have international recognition.
Another country where a sensible, internationally-brokered settlement could reasonably lead to independence is Nagorno-Karabakh. Having survived invasion and attempted ethnic cleansing by Azerbaijan in the early 1990s, this Armenian inhabited region has, like Somaliland, been effectively self-governing since the mid 1990s. But as long as Nagorno-Karabakh’s status remains in limbo, extremist elements in Azerbaijan – which has indulged in recent years in a massive arms spending spree – may be encouraged to believe that a military ‘solution’ is possible.
We should also recognize the plight of the many peoples around the world who are fighting for liberty behind closed borders. In Sudan, now that South Sudan has left, the regime has made clear, in deeds as well as words, that its goal is the imposition of an Arab/Islamic hegemony. They have already made a start with the bombing and attempted ethnic cleansing of the black African Nuba people of South Kordofan.
The situation in Sudan is paralleled in Burma, where the junta has waged a brutal war against non-Burmese ethnic groups – much like that Khartoum waged against South Sudan – for over fifty years.
Injustices on the scale of Burma and Sudan must be resisted wherever they occur. Whether as citizens of an independent country or autonomous regions within a larger state, all the peoples of the world have a right to enjoy freedom in their own homes.
Another country where a sensible, internationally-brokered settlement could reasonably lead to independence is Nagorno-Karabakh. Having survived invasion and attempted ethnic cleansing by Azerbaijan in the early 1990s, this Armenian inhabited region has, like Somaliland, been effectively self-governing since the mid 1990s. But as long as Nagorno-Karabakh’s status remains in limbo, extremist elements in Azerbaijan – which has indulged in recent years in a massive arms spending spree – may be encouraged to believe that a military ‘solution’ is possible.
We should also recognize the plight of the many peoples around the world who are fighting for liberty behind closed borders. In Sudan, now that South Sudan has left, the regime has made clear, in deeds as well as words, that its goal is the imposition of an Arab/Islamic hegemony. They have already made a start with the bombing and attempted ethnic cleansing of the black African Nuba people of South Kordofan.
The situation in Sudan is paralleled in Burma, where the junta has waged a brutal war against non-Burmese ethnic groups – much like that Khartoum waged against South Sudan – for over fifty years.
Injustices on the scale of Burma and Sudan must be resisted wherever they occur. Whether as citizens of an independent country or autonomous regions within a larger state, all the peoples of the world have a right to enjoy freedom in their own homes.
Sunday, July 10, 2011
A nation is born
It’s not every day that you enter a church for a service in one country and emerge an hour later in another. But this is what happened to me on the evening of 8 July at the Episcopal Cathedral in Juba, capital of what started the evening as southern Sudan. At midnight the church bells rang and a new nation – the Republic of South Sudan – was officially born.
Long before midnight, Juba, and the rest of South Sudan, had already erupted into exuberant celebration as car horns were honked and people danced in the streets. And the party then went on all through the night.
The people were rejoicing because, after nearly 50 years of struggle against the brutal Arab/Islamist regime in Khartoum, they had finally won their rights to freedom of religion and to their distinctively African culture in their own, sovereign, country.
Next day, with representatives of my NGO, Humanitarian Aid Relief Trust, from the UK and the US, I attended South Sudan’s inspirational independence celebrations
The new nation of South Sudan has many problems to overcome, and needs the world’s goodwill and practical support. It was disappointing therefore to hear the sour and partisan opinions of a few commentators - some giving us the benefit of their views from outside South Sudan – that the newly born country may be heading for disaster.
I don’t agree with setting up either an individual or a society to fail. In rebutting the claims of the doomsayers I can do no better than quote the inspiring words of South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir when he told the independence rally: “They say we will slip into civil war as soon as our flag is hoisted. They justify that by arguing that we are incapable of resolving our problems through dialogue. They charge that we are quick to revert to violence. They claim that our concept of democracy and freedom is faulty. It is incumbent on us to prove them all wrong!”
Having visited southern Sudan thirty times during the war and seeing the resilience, courage and resourcefulness of the people, I believe that they will certainly prove Salva Kiir right.
In the words of their new national anthem, God bless South Sudan!
Long before midnight, Juba, and the rest of South Sudan, had already erupted into exuberant celebration as car horns were honked and people danced in the streets. And the party then went on all through the night.
The people were rejoicing because, after nearly 50 years of struggle against the brutal Arab/Islamist regime in Khartoum, they had finally won their rights to freedom of religion and to their distinctively African culture in their own, sovereign, country.
Next day, with representatives of my NGO, Humanitarian Aid Relief Trust, from the UK and the US, I attended South Sudan’s inspirational independence celebrations
The new nation of South Sudan has many problems to overcome, and needs the world’s goodwill and practical support. It was disappointing therefore to hear the sour and partisan opinions of a few commentators - some giving us the benefit of their views from outside South Sudan – that the newly born country may be heading for disaster.
I don’t agree with setting up either an individual or a society to fail. In rebutting the claims of the doomsayers I can do no better than quote the inspiring words of South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir when he told the independence rally: “They say we will slip into civil war as soon as our flag is hoisted. They justify that by arguing that we are incapable of resolving our problems through dialogue. They charge that we are quick to revert to violence. They claim that our concept of democracy and freedom is faulty. It is incumbent on us to prove them all wrong!”
Having visited southern Sudan thirty times during the war and seeing the resilience, courage and resourcefulness of the people, I believe that they will certainly prove Salva Kiir right.
In the words of their new national anthem, God bless South Sudan!
Reagan Remembered
I am in Nigeria seeing at first hand some of the damage inflicted on churches, homes, and individuals by Islamic extremists following Nigeria’s general election earlier this year. This saw the defeat of the northern, Muslim, candidate and triggered an eruption of violence from his supporters. We have just witnessed numerous recently burned churches and heard the harrowing stories of Christians murdered for their faith.
Nigeria, particularly the northern states where Islamic sharia law has been adopted, is one of the front lines in the modern world war between liberty and oppression. It is always a privilege to stand beside those whose courage and faith are undaunted by the terrible threats they daily face.
But one downside of being away from London was that I was unable to attend the commemoration on 4 July of one of the victors in a previous global conflict, President Ronald Reagan. The highlight of the day was the unveiling of a statue of Ronald Reagan in Grosvenor Square, outside the US embassy. Speakers, who included Condelezza Rice and William Hague, played fulsome tribute both to Reagan and to Margaret Thatcher for their role in setting millions of people free from Communism. By all accounts it was a most stirring occasion.
Yet those who attended report a certain wistfulness. The world is scarcely a safer place than it was during the Cold War. And we shall only triumph in the modern-day fight against slavery and intolerance if we find leaders of the vision and clarity of action of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.
Nigeria, particularly the northern states where Islamic sharia law has been adopted, is one of the front lines in the modern world war between liberty and oppression. It is always a privilege to stand beside those whose courage and faith are undaunted by the terrible threats they daily face.
But one downside of being away from London was that I was unable to attend the commemoration on 4 July of one of the victors in a previous global conflict, President Ronald Reagan. The highlight of the day was the unveiling of a statue of Ronald Reagan in Grosvenor Square, outside the US embassy. Speakers, who included Condelezza Rice and William Hague, played fulsome tribute both to Reagan and to Margaret Thatcher for their role in setting millions of people free from Communism. By all accounts it was a most stirring occasion.
Yet those who attended report a certain wistfulness. The world is scarcely a safer place than it was during the Cold War. And we shall only triumph in the modern-day fight against slavery and intolerance if we find leaders of the vision and clarity of action of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
The perplexing world of Mr Phillips
Mr. Trevor Phillips, head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, recently made some extraordinary comments about religious communities in Britain, alleging that it is often Christians who are out of step with the ‘mainstream’, while Muslims, in contrast, are “doing their damnest” – an odd choice of word – to achieve social integration.
Mr Phlllips produced little evidence to support his theory, beyond claiming that Christians are more likely to complain about discrimination. Maybe this is because there are more Christians, or perhaps more discrimination against them? Certainly, plenty of examples of prejudice against Christians can be found, ranging from petty ridicule and marginalization in the workplace, through to the arrest of street preachers and the banning of Christian symbols. The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, has gone so far as to say that Christians are being “bullied” out of public life in the UK.
One might have thought that this would be of concern to the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Yet far from condemning the problem of anti-Christian bias, Mr. Phillip’s remarks contribute to it, bolstering the widespread view that it is ‘open season’ on Christians.
Of course, what Mr. Philips actually meant is that there are many Christians who don’t agree with his own liberal interpretation of what is right and proper, particularly on the vexed issue of ‘gay rights.’ In an unpleasant undertone, he singles out the ‘black’ churches for particular censure.
In contrast, praising Muslims for their implicit tolerance seems a little bizarre; Islam not being exactly renowned for its support for gender or homosexual equality. Doubtless many Muslims are indeed fully integrated into Western society. But the existence of at least 85 sharia courts in the UK, with reports of their discriminatory policies with regards to women, suggests that not all are committed to our values of equality before the law and the abolition of gender discrimination. Setting up a parallel justice system that only applies to one community is about as far from integration as it is possible to imagine. That is why I have introduced the Arbitration and Mediation Services (Equality) Bill in the House of Lords to protect the rights of British Muslim women. Since women’s rights are presumably an issue close to Mr. Phillip’s heart, I look forward to his support.
Mr Phlllips produced little evidence to support his theory, beyond claiming that Christians are more likely to complain about discrimination. Maybe this is because there are more Christians, or perhaps more discrimination against them? Certainly, plenty of examples of prejudice against Christians can be found, ranging from petty ridicule and marginalization in the workplace, through to the arrest of street preachers and the banning of Christian symbols. The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, has gone so far as to say that Christians are being “bullied” out of public life in the UK.
One might have thought that this would be of concern to the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Yet far from condemning the problem of anti-Christian bias, Mr. Phillip’s remarks contribute to it, bolstering the widespread view that it is ‘open season’ on Christians.
Of course, what Mr. Philips actually meant is that there are many Christians who don’t agree with his own liberal interpretation of what is right and proper, particularly on the vexed issue of ‘gay rights.’ In an unpleasant undertone, he singles out the ‘black’ churches for particular censure.
In contrast, praising Muslims for their implicit tolerance seems a little bizarre; Islam not being exactly renowned for its support for gender or homosexual equality. Doubtless many Muslims are indeed fully integrated into Western society. But the existence of at least 85 sharia courts in the UK, with reports of their discriminatory policies with regards to women, suggests that not all are committed to our values of equality before the law and the abolition of gender discrimination. Setting up a parallel justice system that only applies to one community is about as far from integration as it is possible to imagine. That is why I have introduced the Arbitration and Mediation Services (Equality) Bill in the House of Lords to protect the rights of British Muslim women. Since women’s rights are presumably an issue close to Mr. Phillip’s heart, I look forward to his support.
Monday, June 27, 2011
The souring of the Arab Spring
Last week, in the House of Lords, I was able to raise concerns over the rising problem of attacks upon Christians in Egypt, and on the need for the promotion of the safety of all citizens of minority faiths in Egypt. Since the revolution ousted the Mubarak regime, we have seen increased sectarian violence by Islamic extremists directed not just against the Coptic Christian minority, who have long suffered marginalization and discrimination, but against the Sufi and Shia Muslim communities too.
The threat faced by minorities throughout the region is one reason why the gushing enthusiasm displayed by Western leaders for the ‘Arab Spring’ already appears naïve. While it is too early to say what forms of government will result from the Arab Spring protests, the portents are not encouraging. What is clear, too, is that the uprisings have resulted in very different outcomes in different countries. In Tunisia, where protests triggered the general Arab Spring phenomenon, the old regime quickly fell. In Syria and in Libya, government security forces fought back ferociously, resulting in terrible violence in the case of Syria, and full-scale civil war (and Western intervention) in Libya. In Yemen, protests have inflamed an already deeply confused and highly unstable situation.
In Bahrain, events followed a different pattern again. There, members of the Shia majority rose up against their Sunni rulers. When the Bahraini security forces proved inadequate to the task of suppressing the dissent, they were joined by Saudi forces who speedily finished the task. Some of the protesters have since received very harsh sentences, up to and including life imprisonment. The West, frightened of increased Iranian influence (Tehran has long harboured ambitions in Bahrain), has been conspicuous by its lack of criticism at the crushing of the Bahraini protests. Evidently, while the West talks big in its support for ‘democracy’, popular uprisings in Bahrain were the ‘wrong sort of democracy’.
Therein lies the problem. There is no evidence that revolutions in the Arab world will result in non-sectarian, pluralist democracies. On the contrary, opinion polling shows that in most Arab countries there exists strong popular support for destroying the state of Israel, enforcing Sharia law, and for making conversion from Islam punishable, even by death. Governments accurately reflecting these strands of public opinion would be disastrous for religious and ethnic minorities, let alone for broader regional security. At least in the short term, I’m afraid that the Arab Spring is in danger of turning into a long, hot, Arab Summer.
The threat faced by minorities throughout the region is one reason why the gushing enthusiasm displayed by Western leaders for the ‘Arab Spring’ already appears naïve. While it is too early to say what forms of government will result from the Arab Spring protests, the portents are not encouraging. What is clear, too, is that the uprisings have resulted in very different outcomes in different countries. In Tunisia, where protests triggered the general Arab Spring phenomenon, the old regime quickly fell. In Syria and in Libya, government security forces fought back ferociously, resulting in terrible violence in the case of Syria, and full-scale civil war (and Western intervention) in Libya. In Yemen, protests have inflamed an already deeply confused and highly unstable situation.
In Bahrain, events followed a different pattern again. There, members of the Shia majority rose up against their Sunni rulers. When the Bahraini security forces proved inadequate to the task of suppressing the dissent, they were joined by Saudi forces who speedily finished the task. Some of the protesters have since received very harsh sentences, up to and including life imprisonment. The West, frightened of increased Iranian influence (Tehran has long harboured ambitions in Bahrain), has been conspicuous by its lack of criticism at the crushing of the Bahraini protests. Evidently, while the West talks big in its support for ‘democracy’, popular uprisings in Bahrain were the ‘wrong sort of democracy’.
Therein lies the problem. There is no evidence that revolutions in the Arab world will result in non-sectarian, pluralist democracies. On the contrary, opinion polling shows that in most Arab countries there exists strong popular support for destroying the state of Israel, enforcing Sharia law, and for making conversion from Islam punishable, even by death. Governments accurately reflecting these strands of public opinion would be disastrous for religious and ethnic minorities, let alone for broader regional security. At least in the short term, I’m afraid that the Arab Spring is in danger of turning into a long, hot, Arab Summer.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Shades of Srebrenica
For many of us, the arrest of Ratko Mladic brought back memories of the Balkans Wars in the 1990s. That was a ghastly episode in European history, one in which neighbour fought neighbour and community fought community, while Western governments for the most part just wrung their hands or shrugged their shoulders.
Few European leaders emerged with any credit from the conflict, but a nadir was reached in Srebrenica, where Dutch UN peacekeepers stood idly by as Mladic’s men committed one of the worst massacres in post-1945 Europe. The Dutch people shamed their government into resignation over that disgrace, and, not for the first time, the cry went up of ‘never again’.
Yet we are now seeing the same thing happening again. In Sudan, in the region of the Nuba Mountains where my charity Humanitarian Aid Relief Trust works, the Islamist regime based in Khartoum is engaged in full scale ethnic cleansing of the black African population. As I write this column, thousands are gathered outside the United Nations compound in the regional capital, without food, water or hope. Under the eyes of UN ‘peacekeepers’, Sudanese soldiers are reported to be going door-to-door killing anyone who looks ‘too black’. Over 100,000 people have been expelled from their homes – and they are arguably the lucky ones.
Above: Civilians come under air attack under the noses of the UN
With a few honourable exceptions, the media, sated with conflict in Libya and Syria, has little time or space for yet another African conflict. And thanks to ill-informed defence cuts, it’s arguable that there’s little enough we can do anyway.
But that is no excuse for the fact that the British government – one of the three guarantors of the peace deal that was supposed to end over 50 years of fighting in Sudan – continues to wine and dine Khartoum’s Foreign Minister.
After the Rwanda genocide, we again said ‘never again’. Then, we possibly had the excuse of “we didn’t know.”
We have no such excuse this time.
Few European leaders emerged with any credit from the conflict, but a nadir was reached in Srebrenica, where Dutch UN peacekeepers stood idly by as Mladic’s men committed one of the worst massacres in post-1945 Europe. The Dutch people shamed their government into resignation over that disgrace, and, not for the first time, the cry went up of ‘never again’.
Yet we are now seeing the same thing happening again. In Sudan, in the region of the Nuba Mountains where my charity Humanitarian Aid Relief Trust works, the Islamist regime based in Khartoum is engaged in full scale ethnic cleansing of the black African population. As I write this column, thousands are gathered outside the United Nations compound in the regional capital, without food, water or hope. Under the eyes of UN ‘peacekeepers’, Sudanese soldiers are reported to be going door-to-door killing anyone who looks ‘too black’. Over 100,000 people have been expelled from their homes – and they are arguably the lucky ones.
Above: Civilians come under air attack under the noses of the UN
With a few honourable exceptions, the media, sated with conflict in Libya and Syria, has little time or space for yet another African conflict. And thanks to ill-informed defence cuts, it’s arguable that there’s little enough we can do anyway.
But that is no excuse for the fact that the British government – one of the three guarantors of the peace deal that was supposed to end over 50 years of fighting in Sudan – continues to wine and dine Khartoum’s Foreign Minister.
After the Rwanda genocide, we again said ‘never again’. Then, we possibly had the excuse of “we didn’t know.”
We have no such excuse this time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)