Ever since the tiny gulf country, Qatar, won the rights to organize the football world cup, there has been a barrage of criticism, mostly emanating from Europeans. The criticism levelled at Qatar relate to its human rights abuses, its non-recognition of alternative sexual identities, the sexual segregation, etc. Some of this criticism seems valid, but some are the products of deep-seated anxiety with the Islamic faith. Certainly, Qatar is an Islamic country, and as such the religion informs much of its law related to life style, etc. But unlike other countries in the region, Qatar has quite a presence of women in the public sphere, with some of them occupying high offices.

It is also true that the country did not follow the laid down procedures of international labour laws; there were reports that it did not even compensate these workers properly. But the only people who should be complaining about this are the countries from which such workers were sourced: Nepal, India, Bangladesh, etc. There are reports that nearly 650 workers, mostly from these countries, died during the construction spree witnessed during the last decade. Europeans should be the last people to raise these issues, certainly not after incinerating millions in Iraq and other parts of the world. It would be much better if they just concentrated on their own appalling record of human devastation across the globe.

Qatar, and other countries in the region, are faced with an existential dilemma. And that has to do with the future holds for them after the oil has run out. It is for this reason that Saudi Arabia and the UAE are diversifying their economies, making them less dependent on oil revenues. The UAE has nearly transformed itself into a financial hub of the region; the Saudis are emulating them and are trying to open the economy. But the economy just does not operate in a vacuum; it needs an ideological infrastructure to flourish and thrive. Changes in economic policies are often accompanied by changes in social and religious mores. The organization of Halloween by the Saudis was designed to test whether the country is getting ready for such changes and one shouldn’t be surprised if they organize more such ‘un-Islamic’ events.

There were many reasons for Qatar bidding for the world cup and eventually winning it, but the economy was perhaps the foremost reason. Again, the country wanted to diversify and move away from its dependence on oil. But also, they were interested in it for geopolitical reasons. By becoming the center of footballing world, they have shown to the big brothers like Saudi Arabia that their blockade didn’t really work. Today, the whole of middle east is in Qatar, enjoying the world cup and perhaps ruing the day when they decided to financially encircle this tiny country. But then again, can a diverse economy remain immune to changes in cultural and the religious sphere? Qatar had a chance to show the world that their Islam was one which could adapt and change. But that opportunity is perhaps lost.

First by inviting a person like Zakir Naik to be an important guest (and reportedly to preach Islam to people assembled there), Qatar is unfortunately telling the world that it still believes in the supremacy of Islam to all other religions. After all, why call a man who made Islamic supremacism his creed, and has consistently argued that except Islam, all other religions are false. This preacher is wanted in India and in UK, primarily because he has inspired Muslims (though only a few) to take up terrorism in defence of their faith. By extending invitation to such a person, Qatar is basically endorsing the Islamist position of Zakir Naik. Moreover, Qatar should not forget that it was one of the first countries to censure India over the ‘hate speech’ of Nupur Sharma, the ex-BJP spokeswoman, when she had spoken uncharitable words about the prophet. Qatar then had preached India about the values of religious tolerance and pluralism. How should we then understand this invitation to Zakir Naik whose very presence is insulting to other religious traditions, including Hinduism. So, is Qatar telling the world that values of religious pluralism, etc. are to be respected only when Islam is at the receiving end?

Second, the decision to ban alcohol (primarily beer) by Qatari authorities has similarly generated much debate. Many Muslims have supported the decision by arguing that as a sovereign country, Qatar has the authority to follow its traditions; in this case keeping beer away from stadiums. However, these same Muslims have a huge issue when a country like France enforces its own secular tradition of banning burqas and head scarfs. Many would call his hypocrisy but again the point perhaps is something else. Muslims are basically arguing that while they should be free to enforce their own tradition, non-Muslim cultures do not have that choice. Again, this underlying supremacy of Islam needs to be questioned, but Qatar seems to have strengthened that notion through its action.

The football world cup is a global event and fans from very different cultural and religious traditions take part in it. Not making space for their point of view will only remind them about the insularity of Islam and Muslims. And there is historic precedence within the Muslim culture to make space for other traditions. Muslims in the Ottoman empire always made exceptions for Christians and their consumption of alcohol. The Ottomans always argued that the ban on drinking was only for Muslims; the Christian tradition allows for its consumption and hence we should not stop it. Why is it that this historical precedence was not invoked by Qatari authorities to make this mega event more inclusive and accepting of other ways of life? The less it is said about its Qatar’s treatment of LGBTQ+ rights, the better it will be. It is sad that hosts of football lovers who come from such communities decided against travelling to Qatar because of its strict laws against gays and lesbians.  

The opening show was equally a chance to showcase the variety of ways cultures and traditions that have built the country. Qataris are a minority in their own country, so it is the guest workers who have very nearly transformed the country into one of the richest in the world. Like most of the Arab world, they do not get citizenship status. The least they could have done was to pay respect and homage to these workers who come from very different religions and cultures.

The opening ceremony started with the passage of the Quran which celebrates plurality but alas, its deeper message was completely lost on the organizers.

——

Arshad Alam is a New Delhi based independent researcher.

This article was first published on https://www.newageislam.com

The post How Qatar Lost the Chance to Showcase Islamic Pluralism appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Zakir Naik, controversial cleric to preach during FIFA World Cup? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The teams in question, Beitar Givat Ze’ev, Beitar Ironi Ariel, Beitar Ironi Maale Adumim, Ironi Yehuda and Hapoel Bik’at Hayarden are all based in illegal settlements in the West Bank.

The regions are in territory that is being disputed by the Palestinian Football Association (PFA). The PFA argues that by playing teams in those regions, the IFA is violating FIFA rules that state that one member may not play games in the territory of another affiliated member without their approval. The PFA insists it does not want any matches played on Palestinian land. They point out that the IFA is using sport to legitimize the occupation and illegal settlements.

Sari Bashi, the Palestine/Israel Director at Human Rights Watch told me via email that this issue is crucial to regional politics and to sport. President Gianni Infantino is the leader of the world’s governing body of football and ought to resolve this as quickly as possible. “As part of his stated commitment to transparency and human rights, President Infantino should provide the public with a detailed update of the Council discussion,” she writes. “And a timeline for deciding whether FIFA will stop sponsoring matches on land that has been illegally seized from Palestinians.”

With findings collected by a monitoring committee that was assembled in 2015 and lead by South African FIFA member Tokyo Sexwale, FIFA was expected to render a decision whether to suspend or expel the six Israeli teams at at an executive meeting earlier this week. Following a decision, viable solutions would have been presented at the 2017 FIFA world congress to be held in Manama, Bahrain.

But in true FIFA form, the executive committee fouled and postponed their decision despite suggestions from special committee members, open letters from UN officials, and from academics and activists, an Avaaz.org petition that garnered over 150,000 signatures, the HRW report, and an on-going digital campaign that calls for justice in sport.

The oppression of Palestinian football by Israel is a hot-button issue for FIFA- which makes a profit from the matches and sponsorships of the IFA teams. While Israeli teams flourish, Palestinian football is hardly thriving due to a lack of resources, crumbling infrastructure, and unjust mobility restrictions on teams which Mondoweiss has previously reported.

Footballers are routinely the targets of detentions, arrests and shootings despite assurances from FIFA that they support the world’s game.

After FIFA dropped the ball on a decision, it is hard not to recall deposed ex-President Sepp Blatter’s inane remark that “football should never be used for political messages.”

Not so ironically, FIFA has consistently used football for political messages. Blatter was an avid supporter of an ill-conceived ‘peace-match’ to help ease tensions in the region between the two federations. FIFA may deny that sport can be a vehicle towards ensuring justice and uplifting the values it is supposed protect by claiming that football isn’t political.

But Bashi sees it differently. She doesn’t believe that FIFA is being asked to solve a political problem. It is being asked to fulfill the commitments it reaffirmed when it agreed to implement the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights throughout its activities, which are substantially commercial.

“The football industry is valued at approximately $33 billion annually. FIFA has a responsibility to ensure that its activities do not contribute to or benefit from serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law (IHL). By sponsoring games on land that has been unlawfully seized from Palestinians and holding those games under conditions of discrimination, FIFA is violating its human rights responsibilities.” HRW maintains that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are inherently responsible for serious human rights violations, including restrictions on the freedom of movement of Palestinians, purportedly to protect them, discrimination against Palestinian construction and business activity to prop up the settlement industry and unlawful and discriminatory use of natural resources such as water, land and stone. FIFA is not being asked to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is being asked to stop holding matches on stolen land while benefitting from the activity.

Moving forward, FIFA has assured that they will compile a report next month despite being unable to come to a decision because all members of the special committee were unable to meet. Both IFA and PFA have reacted to the news. During a press conference in Ramallah, PFA President Jibril Rajoub stated that if FIFA is not able to come to a decision quickly and help ease the “suffering of Palestinian sports”, PFA would approach the Court of Arbitration of Sport.

There is a precedent to sanction the IFA teams since European football’s governing body, Uefa, barred teams playing in Crimea from participating in Russia’s top football league after it annexed the country in 2014.

The IFA is strident and insists that it’s sole objective is to elevate the sport. Israel’s football executives often echo Blatter’s sentiments of not politicizing the sport.

The solution is to not prevent the IFA from playing the beautiful game, but to play within the legal borders of their country and not to use illegal settlements as a backdrop to elevate the sport. Legitimizing oppression by way of FIFA-sanctioned matches is unacceptable to players, officials and blemishes the sport itself.

Players, coaches and supporters should enjoy the world’s most popular sport while not being complicit in Human Rights or Football Law violations.

(Shireen Ahmed is a sports activist, a freelance writer and a public speaker who focuses on Muslim women, and the intersections of racism and misogyny in sports. When she isn't watching soccer, she drinks coffee as tool of resistance. She is currently working on her first book and lives in Toronto, Canada with her family. Twitter: @_shireenahmed_ Website www.shireenahmed.com.)

(Republished with permission from Mondoweiss.net).

The post FIFA Dodges Decision on Sanctioning Israeli Teams in the Occupied Territories appeared first on SabrangIndia.