How Hard Will Be the Rain That’s Surely A-Gonna Fall?
Civitas, 13 July 2006
According to a report in today’s Times, the weekend before last a two-day conference took place at Istanbul’s Ceylan Intercontinental Hotel on the challenges and opportunities facing the Muslims of Europe.
Judged by the £500 per night prices that hotel charges, the fact the £300,000 conference bill was met entirely by the British tax-payer clearly suggests it was more the opportunities facing Europe’s Muslims than their challenges that the conference was designed to highlight.
Moreover, given that the organisers saw fit to invite to it the Qatar-based cleric Sheikh Yusif at-Qaradawi and his wife, with their travel and subsistence expenses being met in full by the British tax-payer and all apparently with the full knowledge and blessing of the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, it seems it has been the opportunities of not only Muslims of Europe that the conference has been intent on showcasing.
Since, however, as well as having defended in his time suicide bombers in Iraq and Israel, the Sheikh has also advocated the execution of homosexuals and wife-beating by their dissatisfied husbands, perhaps the purpose of his being invited to speak was to exhibit some of the challenges some of Europe’s Muslims face as well as the opportunities of others.
Meanwhile, the situation in the Middle East continues to deteriorate by the day, with western governments seemingly unable or unwilling to accept the scale or nature of the threat posed by militant Islamism in that region.
The kidnapping a few ago of an Israeli corporal by Hamas, which initially seemed no more than a troublesome but containable incident, now threatens to escalate into a full-scale conflagration in that region between Israel and its more militant neighbours, especially those funded by Iran.
How sad the Foreign Office thinks this country’s interests are best served, as well as those of the wider international community, by feting the likes of Sheikh Qaradawi, rather than helping poor beleaguered Israel which hold out so much promise for that part of the world , and especially its poor, if only given half the chance to live in peace. The Israeli Foreign Ministry has recently reported that, together with researchers from Belgium and the US, researchers at Israel’s Negev-based Ben Gurion University stand on the threshold of developing technology that will enable rainfall to be produced at will in sub-tropical desert regions.
While Israel seeks to bring only life and promise to its neighbours willing to live at peace with it, its neighbours seem intent only on bringing death and destruction to it and all who stand with her.
Will it be the much needed nourishing rain Israel is on the verge of bringing to that region of the world, or the more deadly variety of which Bob Dylan once prophetically sang, that will be the first to fall? Thanks to the pusillanimity of the British Foreign Office and their like, it seems it will be only time and Israeli fire-power and resolve that will tell.
Hotel and conference bills aside, the conference referred to at least provided a forum for debate on Islamic thought. Despite the presence of figures such as Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the participants in fact agreed on a statement urging European Muslims to be loyal and law-abiding citizens and condemned terrorism ‘in all its forms’. It would perhaps be more constructive that this message be publicised, particularly given that surveys have shown Muslims living in the UK express the most sympathy with Islamic terrorist actions (out of Muslims living in Europe). The Economist for one describes the final statement as ‘a hard-won achievement’.
I would also be interested to hear the author’s views on the following. Israel has a right to defend itself, this much should not be disputed. Israeli strikes at Gaza and Lebanon were provoked; the first by the kidnapping of the Israeli soldier, Cpl Shalit, and the second by Hizbullah attacking an Israeli patrol on Israel’s northern border. I would also tend to agree with the comment article in today’s edition of the Times that Israel’s response has, at least so far, been ‘balanced’ and ‘proportional’ in that it has tried to inflict ‘individual’ punishment directed at Islamic extremist posts rather than ‘collective’ punishment.
But the fact is innocent civilians are being killed at a rate five times those in Israel and whole populations are being displaced. Lebanon is also a fledgling democracy, which has condemned the terrorist actions of Hizbullah and cannot be said to control it. Two points emerge here: If there is one lesson that should have been learnt from the recent conflict in Iraq, it is that ordinary Lebanese citizens, seeing bombs raining down on their country, are likely to become increasingly radicalised and sympathetic to the cause of Hizbullah and Hamas. This is surely the last thing Israel wants. And secondly, each act of violence by the Israeli military has so far been met by an equal response. Sayed Nasrallah, leader of Hizbullah, yesterday told the Israelis ‘if you do not want to play by the rules, we can do the same’ (with regard to civilian casualties). The conflict only seems likely to escalate. Is force really the best answer?