Union minister Smriti Irani on Monday led the first ever non-Muslim Indian delegation to Medina, one of Islam’s holiest cities in Saudi Arabia. During her visit, she interacted with Indian volunteers serving Haj pilgrims and Umrah pilgrims from India. She also took inputs to further improve the facilities for Indian pilgrims.

Meanwhile, in another much publicised pre-Vibrant Gujarat summit roadshow, PM Modi with UAE President, Mohamed Bin Zayed, held a roadshow in Ahmedabad

Both Modi and Irani were vocal on ‘X’ on the occasions.

PM Modi wrote on X on Tuesday, “Landed in Ahmedabad a short while ago. Over the next two days, will be taking part in the Vibrant Gujarat Summit and related programmes. It is a matter of immense joy that various world leaders will be joining us during this Summit. The coming of my brother, HH Mohamed Bin Zayed is very special. I have a very close association with the Vibrant Gujarat Summit and I am glad to see how this platform has contributed to Gujarat’s growth and created opportunities for several people.”

Popular on her social media handles, Smriti Irani posted,

“Undertook a historic journey to Madinah today, one of Islam’s holiest cities included a visit to the periphery of the revered Prophet’s Mosque, Al Masjid Al Nabwi, the mountain of Uhud, and periphery of the Quba Mosque—the first Mosque of Islam,” Irani posted on X on Monday. She said the visit was “significant” as it “underscores the depth of our cultural and spiritual engagement.” Irani, accompanied by junior minister V Muraleedharan and officials from the ministries of Minority Affairs and External Affairs, visited the perimeter of Masjid-e-Nabwi or the Prophet’s mosque in Medina, which also houses Prophet Muhammad’s tomb.

Weighing in on Modi’s visit, BJP leader Haider Azam is reported to have said, “The Saudi authorities have now relaxed the bar on visits of non-Muslims to the holy city of Medina. It is good news that Mrs Irani visited Medina and reached the periphery of the Prophet’s Mosque. This will go a long way to further improve India-Saudi relationship.”

The lifting of the restriction is part of crown prince Mohammed Bin Salman’s many reforms in the Kingdom. The visit was part of the diplomatic mission, which also saw signing of a bilateral agreement on January 7 between the two nations for Haj 2024. According to the agreement, India got a total quota of 1,75,025 pilgrims for Haj 2024.

Meanwhile, Modi is in Gujarat to revel in the Vibrant Gujarat summit, first launched by him during his second term as chief minister of the state. He is inaugurating the Vibrant Gujarat Global Summit 2024 at Mahatma Mandir, Gandhinagar. The summit will be held from January 10 to 12, 2024. This year’s theme for the summit is ‘Gateway to the Future.’

However, it was the roadshow before the summit that received significant media attention. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and UAE president Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan embarked on a roadshow in Ahmedabad Tuesday evening. Before their roadshow, Modi welcomed the United Arab Emirates president on the latter’s arrival at the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport here. After that, the two leaders began their roadshow on a three kilometre-long route starting from the airport.

Elections 2024 and the Muslim Vote

It is hardly likely that the beleaguered and targeted (physically and ideologically) Indian Muslim community will be significantly swayed by such symbolisms. The fact, however, that April May 2024 will see a highly contested electoral race, with the Modi-led Bharatiya Janata Party banking on a crude and aggressive majoritarian discourse –politicising religion in brazen displays –every vote does indeed count. And the Indian Muslim community, multi-layered and far from homogenised may well –a miniscule 7-10 per cent of them–who’s business and property interests dominate –shift or get swayed by these publicised shenanigans.

Powerful international symbolisms, unlikely as they are to overcome hate speech and violent targeted crimes, can generate confusing narratives to shift focus and resolve. No wonder then, that the dual symbolisms of both events –in the first week of January 2024, weeks before the grand show of majoritarian Indian politics –the inauguration of a partially completed temple structure at Ayodhya on January 22 –built on the remains of what is arguably one of India’s most violent campaigns, that cost minority lives and property, is significant. Whether these will at all work, time only will tell.

Related:

Breaking: Religion a personal matter, BJP politicising Ram Temple: Congress declines invite to inauguration

Babri demolition to Ram Temple: A trajectory of Indian politics

The post Dual Symbolisms: Smriti Irani visits Madinah, Saudi Arabia, PM Narendra Modi runs a road show with UAE President, Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in Ahmedabad appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Indian expatriates in the Middle East continue to be under the scanner and are still facing severe backlash, including job loss if found indulging in any form of hate speech, or when speaking against religion, or race, in violation of the laws of the country they work in. Three more such cases, that of a chef, a storekeeper and a cashier, have recently come to light in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Some right wing portals, and groups have presented it as action against Hindus working in the region. However, those who have been fired from their jobs, or are being investigated are said to be in violation of UAE laws that prohibit all religious or racial discrimination under a legislation passed in 2015. 

Some expats have continued to ignore reminders even from Pavan Kapoor, Indian Ambassador to the UAE, who had told Indians working in the region that any discrimination will not be tolerated. Kapoor had tweeted, “India and UAE share the value of non-discrimination on any grounds. Discrimination is against our moral fabric and the Rule of law. Indian nationals in the UAE should always remember this.” 

India and UAE share the value of non-discrimination on any grounds. Discrimination is against our moral fabric and the Rule of law. Indian nationals in the UAE should always remember this. https://t.co/8Ui6L9EKpc

— Amb Pavan Kapoor (@AmbKapoor) April 20, 2020

According to the UAE government portal, the Anti-discrimination/Anti-hatred law states: 

“In July 2015, H. H Sheikh Khalifa has issued Federal Decree Law No. 2 of 2015 on Combating Discrimination and Hatred, which aims to protect everyone in the UAE and thus bring the concept of social security to a new level.

The law is intended to provide a solid legislative ground for the environment of tolerance, co-existence and acceptance. It aims to fight discrimination against individuals or groups based on religion, caste, doctrine, race, colour or ethnic origin.

The law criminalises any acts that trigger religious hatred and/or insult religion through any form of expression, which covers speech and the written word, books, pamphlets or online media. The law prohibits any act that would be considered as insulting God, his prophets or apostles or holy books or houses of worship or graveyards.

The law prohibits any entity or group established specifically to provoke religious hatred and recommends stringent punishments for groups or supporters of any organisations or individuals that are associated with hate crimes.

It also bars any kind of events such as conferences and meetings within the UAE, which are organised with the sole purpose of sowing seeds of discrimination, discord or hatred against individuals or groups.

Receiving financial support for such activities is also punishable under the new law.

The law encourages anyone involved in any activity that violates the law to submit themselves voluntarily before the authorities and has provisions allowing the courts to waive penalties in such cases.”

Hate speech by Indian expatriates was also  called out by Sharjah Princess Hend Faisal Al Qassemi, who had warned: “You make your bread and butter from this land, which you scorn and your ridicule will not go unnoticed.” She had said that communal hate speech was in violation of the UAE laws and will be penalised.

Weeks after this warning, the a report in the Gulf News, stated that more Indian expats face action over their Islamophobic remarks on social media. 

Three more have now landed in trouble. According to news reports these include a chef, identified as Rohit Rawat, a storekeeper Sachin Kinnigoli and a cashier who has not been identified. Three others are said to have lost their jobs or been suspended due to their offensive online behaviors in the recent past.

The Gulf News quotes a spokesperson for Azadea Group that operates Eataly, a chain of high-end Italian restaurants in Dubai, where Rawat Rohit worked as a chef, saying that he was now under suspension and will have to face “a disciplinary probe.” As will storekeeper Sachin Kinnigoli who has been suspended until further notice by Sharjah-based Pneumics Automation. “We have withheld his salary and told him not to come to work. The matter is under investigation. We have a zero tolerance policy. Anyone found guilty of insulting or showing contempt for someone’s religion will have to bear the consequences,” Gulf news quoted  the firm’s owner.

Dubai-based Transguard Group is also investigating an employee who allegedly posted offensive messages on his Facebook page under a different name. “Following an internal investigation, the actual identity of this employee was verified and he was stripped of his security credentials, terminated from our employment and handed over to the relevant authorities as per company policy and UAE Cybercrime Law No. 5 of 2012. As of this statement, he is in the custody of Dubai Police,” Gulf News cited a Transguard statement on the issue.

The Gulf News has also shared a list of Indian expats “who have landed in trouble” after posting such social media content this year.

April 18: Prominent Sharjah-based Keralite businessman and filmmaker Sohan Roy is forced to apologise for a video which depicted Islamic clerics leading blindfolded men in skull caps in an adaptation of his poem on religious bigotry.

April 6-15: Technician Rakesh B. Kitturmath, chief accountant Bala Krishna Nakka and finance analyst Mitesh Udeshi are fired for derogatory social media posts that violated the UAE law while a police complaint is filed against Sameer Bhandari, CEO of Future Vision Events & Weddings’ after he asked an Indian Muslim job seeker to “Go back to Pakistan” in text message

March 2020: Indian chef Trilok Singh who worked at a restaurant in Dubai is fired for making an online threat to rape Delhi-based law student Swati Khanna over her views on the controversial Citizen Amendment Act.

January 2020: Indian expat Jayant Gokhale draws flak for asking Keralite job seeker Abdulla SS to join protestors in Shaheen Bagh in New Delhi.

Incidentally action against Islamophobia is not limited to Muslim nations. One Ravi Hooda, of Indian origin who identifies himself on social media as a “Registered Certified Immigration Consultant” allegedly made Islamophobic posts when  Brampton allowed mosques to announce azaan, the call to prayer. He was removed  from his role as School Council Chair by  the authorities. “The Principal has begun an investigation. The individual is being removed from their role as School Council Chair and won’t be able to participate on council in any other capacity. Islamophobia is not acceptable and a clear violation of our Safe and Accepting Schools Policy.”

.@REMAXca agent and Registered Certified Immigration Consultant Ravi Hooda is upset that Brampton is giving mosques the same noise by-law exemptions as churches. In Mississauga, a nightly call to prayer during Ramadan has become a focal point for anti-Muslim hatred. 1/ pic.twitter.com/exzFIzSC6B

— Canadian Anti-Hate Network (@antihateca) May 2, 2020

The post More Indian expats in UAE face action over Islamophobic social media posts appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In an initiative for both tourists and residents, the Islamic Information Centre (IIC) has launched a free-for-all ‘mosque experience’ where they are inviting people of all faiths and nationalities to attend their weekly tours of one of the most beautiful mosques in Dubai. The aim of the tour is to demystify any misconceptions they may be having about Islamic and Arabic culture.

The free mosque tour is conducted at the Masjid Mohammad Bin Ahmed Al Mulla in Dubai Marina every Monday from 10am to 11am. Tuesdays are set for bookings from schools, giving students a chance to learn and know more about the Islamic culture, prayers and mosque etiquettes. Visitors can book their slot for the tour simply by registering for free on www.islamicic.com/mosque.

The post Free mosque tours to teach more about Islamic culture appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Sarma has been a stringent critique of some of the policies of the Modi regime, sharply criticising even the manner in which the FCRA was amended (without debate) to allow political parties access to funds. The Modi regime’s crackdown on human rights organisations etc over the issue of FCRA has been widely condemned, including by the United Nations. The letter has also been copied to union finance minister, Arun Jaitley.
 
The text of the Open letter may be read here:
 
To,
Hon Prime Minister,
Shri Narendra Modi,
 
I refer to my letter dated March 21, 2018 (copy included below) on the questionable manner in which your government had gone to the extreme extent of amending Foreign Contributions Regulation Act (FCRA) retrospectively to pave the way for political parties such as BJP and INC to receive donations from foreign companies. In other words, your government had no hesitation whatsoever in going out of the way to clear legislative hurdles so as to enable you to open the floodgates to foreign donations to fund your electioneering activity.
 
What surprises me is that, in the same breath, your government should deny Kerala government to accept foreign donations, not for political purposes, but for providing relief to millions of those who are reeling under the recent flood deluge. I understand that UAE has offered around Rs 700 crores to Kerala by way of relief but, as reported, your government has raised objections to allowing Kerala government accepting that offer.
 
You yourself perhaps visited UAE in February this year and signed several MOUs including one on immigrant Indian workers in that country. I am sure you have seen how Kerala immigrants are employed in large numbers by various UAE agencies in different walks of life, contributing their might to that country’s development. That was the reason why UAE has offered aid to Kerala.
 
If political parties are empowered through legislative instruments to seek and receive donations from foreign agencies. would it be appropriate for your government to raise objections to Kerala receiving aid from UAE merely for providing relief to its flood victims?
 
There cannot be double standards in foreign donations being received, one for political parties and another for State governments facing the onslaught of natural calamities.
 
I hope you will ponder over what I have stated above and allow as much of relief as possible to reach Kerala on time, from whatever source it comes. This is a time when technicalities should be relegated to the background and humanity pushed to the front.
 
Regards,
 
Yours sincerely,
 
E A S Sarma
Former Secretary to GOI
August 22, 2018
 
Text of March 2018 Letter to PM and FM may be read here:
 
To
Shri Narendra D Modi
Prime Minister
Shri Arun Jaitley
Union Fiance Minister
 
Dear Shri Modi and Shri Jaitley,
I write this letter in anguish, in continuation of my earlier letter dated 3-2-2018, on NDA government’s ill advised but persistent move to amend Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), 1976 retrospectively, merely to escape the penal provisions of that Act with specific reference to the violations committed by BJP and the other political parties who accepted donations from foreign multi-national companies (MNCs) illegally.
 
What I feared has since become a harsh reality, when the Finance Bill, 2018, along with its egregious and highly objectionable provision to amend 1976 FCRA, was hurriedly got enacted in the Parliament a few days ago, without any semblance of a discussion and a debate. The most distressing aspect of it is that FCRA 1976 had already lapsed in 2010, when UPA introduced a successor legislation in the avatar of FCRA 2010. To revive a dead law only to amend it represents the height of innovative legal jugglery!
 
One can understand a law being amended retrospecively to safeguard the national interest, or to ensure national security, or to protect the disadvantaged sections of the society. A law being altered, to efface the statutory sins committed by the political parties in the past and allow them to fill their coffers with the bounty provided by the foreign MNCs in the future, is not only unethical but also having far reaching adverse implications for the integrity of India’s democracy and preservation of the security of the nation. Soon, I would not be surprised if the elections in India are orchestrated by foreign MNCs with their money power and the national policies are dictated by them to suit their interests. Perhaps, it has already started happening.
 
I had earlier pointed out how some mining companies, involved in under-invoicing of the indigenously extracted iron ore exported outside the country, are reported to be holding illicit foreign accounts and apparently round-tripping funds from those accounts to their subsidies in India and providing donations to political parties who in turn have been allowing those very same companies to violate the law of the land and commit serious human rights violations. The successive Finance Acts during the last three years have unabashedly “legalised” this dubious cycle of sleeze and corruption. You should read Justice Shah Committee’s report on illegal iron ore mining in Goa to appreciate wht I have said. I have filed a formal complaint before the Central investigation agencies to investigate this but I am not sure whether they will ever be allowed to act.
 
While India’s Finance Ministry is busy amending FCRA to enable the political parties to receive bounties from foreign MNCs so that those political parties may splurge funds on extravagent electioneering that makes a mockery of the ideals of Dr B R Ambedkar and the other elders who gave us a unique Constitution, Finance Minsitries in the other countries, who are accountable to the public in their respective countries, have been watching the conduct of those very same MNCs and avoiding any financial transactions with them, lest their voters should question their motives. I enclose here an extract from the website of the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund managed by that country’s Finance Ministry which has made the following observation.
 
“On the 13th of September 2013, the Ministry of Finance received a recommendation from the Council of Ethics to exclude the company Sesa Sterlite from the GPFG. The recommendation builds on an earlier recommendation to exclude the company Vedanta Resources Ltd. (Vedanta ) and two of its subsidiaries, which operate in India. The Ministry followed the Council’s recommendation to exclude Vedanta and its two subsidiaries in 2007…………………..Sesa Sterlite is a newly established subsidiary of Vedanta. The Council’s assessment is that the relevant operations in India, which are currently run through the company Sesa Sterlite, present an unacceptable risk of environmental damage and serious violations of human rights. The Council has regularly updated its assessment of Vedanta and the basis for exclusion is still considered to be present. The Ministry of Finance, in accordance with the Council’s recommendation, has decided to exclude Sesa Sterlite from the Fund’s investment universe, as well as to maintain the exclusion of Vedanta.”
 
You may recall that the order dated 28-2-2014 pronounced by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in WP (C) No 131/2013, in which I was a petitioner, referred to this very same group of companies and the FCRA violations committed by them.
 
NDA government’s FCRA amendments have the effect of regularising the violations committed in the past and legalising foreign bounties in the future. I request you to ponder over what you have done vis-a-vis how the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund manager, namely, the Norwegian Finance Ministry has dealt with the very same MNC. The Norwegians must be wondering at the intricacies of our democracy!
 
Apart from the morality and the ethics underlying the damage you have wrought on FCRA, do you consider what you have done to be legally permissible? It may not be.
 
I have enclosed here a copy of a judgement pronounced by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 15-3-2018 in Civil Appeal No 5793/2008 (State Of Karnataka vs Karnataka Pawn Brokers Assn. . on) in which the apex court has made the following observation.
 
“On analysis of the aforesaid judgments it can be said that the Legislature has the power to enact validating laws including the power to amend laws with retrospective effect. However, this can be done to remove causes of invalidity. When such a law is passed the Legislature basically corrects the errors which have been pointed out in a judicial pronouncement. Resultantly, it amends the law, by removing the mistakes committed in the earlier legislation, the effect of which is to remove the basis and foundation of the judgment. If this is done, the same does not amount to statutory
overruling……However, the Legislature cannot set at naught the judgments which have been pronounced by amending the law not for the of making corrections or removing anomalies but to bring in new provisions which did not exist earlier. The Legislature may have the power to remove the basis or foundation of the judicial pronouncement but the Legislature cannot overturn or set aside the judgment,that too retrospectively by introducing a new provision. The legislature is bound by the mandamus issued by the Court. A judicial pronouncement is always binding unless the very fundamentals on which it is based are altered and the decision could not have been given in the altered circumstances. The Legislature cannot, by way of introducing an amendment, overturn a judicial pronouncement and declare it to be wrong or a nullity. What the Legislature can do is to amend the provisions of the statute to remove the basis of the judgment”
 
Apparently, the decisions to amend FCRAs of 1976 and 2010 ware not based on a sound legal premise. Perhaps, your government was in too much of a haste to wait, pause and look into the ethics and the legality of the decisions. Perhaps, the sole objective of these decisions was to somehow obliterate the past statutory violations and create scope for receiving foreign contributions through the subsudiaries of the MNCs.
 
Latest studies have shown that BJP has been the largest recepient of such donations, which corroborates what I have said. Political donations are not given by private companies out of their love for democracy. They know where they can seek policy tweaks to furher their own interests.
 
I request you to consider carefully what I have stated in the previous paragraphs and the earlier correspondence and, for the sake of electoral ethics and morality, immediately revoke all amendments to FCRA and the corresponding amendments to the Companies Act, failing which I will no other alternative than to seek judicial intervention.
 
I am sure that both of you, being fully committed to maintaining the integrity of the electoral system and safeguarding the national interest, will revisit these amendments and revoke them to uphold the democratic processes.
 
I am circulating this letter widely among all political parties and the public at large in order to generate a comprehensive debate on the issues I have raised.
 
Regards,
 
Yours sincerely,
 
E A S Sarma
Former Secretary to GOI
 
March 21, 2018
 
Related Articles:
 

1. Dear Shri Modiji, please call an immediate halt to Rath Yatra: former top bureaucrat

2. EX-IAS Officer Sharma’s Letter to the Enforcement Directorate
3. Address Issues that Create Black Money: Former Bureaucrat to PM Modi
 

The post Allow Foreign Donations for Kerala Flood Relief: Senior Retd Bureaucrat to Modi appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Dr Mohammad Matar Al Ka’abi, chairman of the Abu Dhabi’s General Authority of Islamic Affairs and Endowments, said that UAE Fatwa Council will ensure alignment of fatwas (Islamic rulings) in the country and ensures preaching of moderate Islam.

“Unifying and regulating fatwa practices in the UAE will prevent personal or improvised Fatwas and rebut extremist and terrorist Fatwas, in keeping with the leading role played by the UAE in combating terrorism and radicalisation,” said Dr Al Ka’abi.

The UAE Cabinet on Sunday set up the UAE Fatwa Council — a single authority — to regulate fatwas and ensure preaching of the true moderate values of Islam.

Read full story here: https://gulfnews.com/news/uae/government/uae-fatwa-council-to-preach-islam-s-moderate-values-1.2242138

The post UAE Fatwa Council to Preach Islam’s Moderate Values appeared first on SabrangIndia.

"We do not promote the idea of press freedom. What we talk about is responsibility in speech": UAE Ambassador to Moscow

Mohamed bin Zayed: reportedly asked General Tommy Franks to bomb TV station

Of the 13 demands made by Saudi Arabia and the UEA in their ultimatum to Qatar, the one causing most consternation internationally is the call for al-Jazeera to be shut down. On Wednesday, the BBC's renowned World Affairs Editor, John Simpson, and David Kaye, the UN's Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, were the latest to object.

Simpson said closure of Qatar-based broadcaster would be "serious step backwards for the whole world" and Kaye said it would be a "major blow against media pluralism".
For the Saudis and Emiratis, though, its closure would be a step towards more "responsible" journalism.  “We do not claim to have press freedom," Omar Ghobash, the UAE's ambassador to Moscow told the Guardian. "We do not promote the idea of press freedom. What we talk about is responsibility in speech."

The Emiratis – as a leaked diplomatic cable shows – have had al-Jazeera in their sights for years, and shutting it down is not the most drastic solution they have ever contemplated.
In 2001, shortly before the start of the Afghan war, Qatar's emir complained to Sheikh Zayed, the UAE's president, about Mohammed bin Zayed, one of the sheikh's sons.

According to the emir, Mohammed bin Zayed – who at the time was chief of staff of the Emirati armed forces – had asked Tommy Franks, the American general in charge of CENTCOM, to bomb al-Jazeera.

Sheikh Zayed is said to have responded to the emir's complaint with the derisive reply: "Do you blame him?" 

Mohammed bin Zayed's desire to bomb al-Jazeera – or rather, to have the Americans bomb it for him – doesn't seem to have harmed his career. Today, MBZ (as he is widely known) is Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAE's armed forces. Along with the Saudi Crown Prince, he is also seen as one of the key figures leading the current feud with Qatar.

The story of the Qatari emir's complaint was recounted by MBZ himself during a meeting in January 2003 with the State Department's Director of Policy Planning, Richard Haass. Describing other parts of their conversation, the leaked diplomatic cable says:

"MBZ noted that public opinion in the Arab world would be containable provided military action [the invasion of Iraq] was short and decisive.  Keeping Israeli PM Ariel Sharon in his box was also important.  

"Returning to a common theme in his discussions with visiting US officials, MBZ emphasised the importance of reining in the Doha-based al-Jazeera satellite network prior to any military action.  He recommended against sending in journalists with war fighters – at least in the beginning – as the prospect of televising scenes of civilian casualties was just too risky.  

"MBZ said it was a mystery to him why the Qataris continued to inflame public opinion via JSC [Jazeera Satellite Channel] and suggested that the US use its weight to pressure Doha." 

Whether at the behest of MBZ or not, the Americans did subsequently bomb al-Jazeera (twice) – though not its Doha headquarters. In 2001, during the Afghan war, an American missile destroyed the station's office in Kabul. In 2003, during the Iraq war, another American missile hit al-Jazeera's office in Baghdad, killing reporter Tareq Ayyoub.

Courtesy: al-bab.com

The post When the UAE leader “asked US to bomb al-Jazeera” appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Freedom of thought needs an atmosphere of tolerance where people can speak their mind and no one is forced to accept the beliefs of others. In the Middle East, though, tolerance is in short supply and ideas that don't fit the expectations of society and governments are viewed as a threat.

Where religion is concerned, the "threat" can come from almost anyone with unorthodox ideas but especially from those who reject religion entirely.

Increasingly, atheists in Arab countries are characterised as dangerous extremists – to be feared no less than violent jihadists.

Persecuting atheists is the inevitable result of governments setting themselves up as guardians of faith. Among the 22 Arab League countries, Islam is "the religion of the state" in 16 of them: Algeria, Bahrain, Comoros, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, the UAE and Yemen. 

For most of them, this is more than just a token gesture; it also serves political purposes. Embracing religion and posing as guardians of morality is one way for regimes to acquire some legitimacy, and claiming a mandate from God can be useful if they don't have a mandate from the public.

State religions, in their most innocuous form, signal an official preference for one particular kind of faith and, by implication, a lesser status for others. But the effects become far more obtrusive when governments rely on state religion as an aid to legitimacy – in which case the state religion has to be actively supported and policed. That, in turn, de-legitimises other belief systems and legitimises intolerance and discrimination directed against them. 

The policing of religion in Arab countries takes many forms, from governments appointing clerics and setting the theme for weekly sermons to the enforcement of fasting during Ramadan. 

To shield the government-approved version of religion from criticism, a variety of mechanisms can be deployed. These include laws against "defaming" religion and proselytising by non-Muslims but general laws regarding public order, telecommunications and the media may also apply.

In Algeria, for instance, the law forbids making, storing, or distributing printed or audiovisual materials with the intention of "shaking the faith" of a Muslim. In Oman, using the internet in ways that "might prejudice public order or religious values" is an imprisonable offence.

For Muslims who publicly abandon Islam the problem is even worse. In Mauritania, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen anyone convicted of apostasy faces the threat – at least in theory – of execution.

Using a state religion as an aid to legitimacy turns the personal beliefs of individuals into a political issue, because disagreeing with the state's theological position also implies disloyalty to the state. Those who happen to disagree must either conform or risk becoming not only a religious dissident but a political one too.

Equating religious conformity with loyalty to the state allows Arab governments to label non-conformists not merely as dissidents but extremists. This in turn provides an excuse for suppressing them, as has been seen in Egypt with the Sisi regime's campaign against atheism and in Saudi Arabia where "promotion of atheist thought" became officially classified as terrorism.

Although Saudi Arabia's war on atheists stems from fundamentalist theology, in Egypt it's the opposite: the Sisi regime presents itself as a beacon of religious moderation. To describe the Sisi brand of Islam as moderate, though, is rather misleading. "Militantly mainstream" might be a better term. Theologically speaking it is middle-of the-road and relatively bland but also illiberal and authoritarian in character.

The result in Egypt is a kind of enforced centrism. While allowing some scope for tolerance – of other monotheistic religions, for example – the regime sets limits on discourse about religion in order to confine it to the middle ground. The main intention, obviously, was to place Islamist theology beyond the bounds of acceptability but at the other end of the spectrum it also means that atheism, scepticism and liberal interpretations of Islam have become forms of extremism.

Defining 'extremism'

Absurd as it might seem to place atheists in the same category as extremists such as terrorists and jihadists, the issue hinges on how "extremism" is defined: extreme in relation to what? Violent and intolerant extremism is a global phenomenon but confusion arises when governments try to define it by reference to national or culture-specific values.

Arab states are not the only offenders in this respect, though. They have been assisted by western governments defining "extremism" in a similar way – as rejection of a specific national culture rather than rejection of universal rights and international norms.

In its effort to prevent radicalisation of students, for example, the British government defined extremism as "vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values". Also in the context of eradicating extremism, the education minister talked about actively promoting "British values" in schools.

Approaching the problem in this way invites other countries to do likewise – even if their own national and cultural values would be considered extreme in relation to universal rights and international norms. Thus, Saudis can justifiably claim that atheism is contrary to fundamental Saudi values. Furthermore, the British minister's idea of instilling British values into British schoolchildren is not very different in principle from "instilling the Islamic faith" in young Saudis – which the kingdom's Basic Law stipulates as one of the main goals of education.

This article was first published on al-Bab.
 

The post Arab world: Where atheism is equated with extremism appeared first on SabrangIndia.