Thursday, April 12, 2012

‘Terrorism’ and Islamophobia


By Mohammed Said "Hii inatoka katika "paper" nilotoa Chuo Kikuu Cha Ibada mwaka 2006 na baadae iliniponza nikajakamatwa Uwanja wa Ndege, Dar es Salaam nikitoka safari nje ya nchi. Kipande ni kirefu lakini kina mafunzo kwa wanaotaka kujua hali ya nchi yetu"
FanningFear and Hatred
Realising thedetermination of the terrorists in punishing the United States government andbeing encircled inside its own territory and overseas, the American governmenthad no alternative but to turn the problem of terrorism, which strictlyspeaking was an American predicament, into an international agenda. It was inthis way that Tanzania and its Muslim population was dragged into the waragainst terrorism. Through aid diplomacy Tanzania was made an ‘ally’ of theUnited States in its strategic plan on war against internationalterrorism. But the truth still remainsthat Tanzania was in reality an innocent bystander being dragged into aconflict, which was between the United States and enemies, which it had createdthrough its foreign policy, adversaries which only the United States governmentcan identify. Since terrorism was conveniently linked to Islam, the UnitedStates had to search for its enemies in whatever country where Muslims could befound. That is why althoughthe bombing in Kenya took place in Nairobi intensive investigations by the FBIwere mainly concentrated in Mombasa where Muslims are a majority, and inTanzania it had to be Dar es Salaam and Zanzibar for the same reason. Forreasons which ‘Insha Allah’ we shall discuss later the government in Tanzaniawas more than willing to cooperate with the United States in its war againstterrorism although hitherto the country due to its principled stand oninternational arena enjoyed good international relations with many countriesand could not easily be a target for any reprisal attack as experienced inKenya. There is nothing in Islam, which condones discriminate killings.[1]Killing of innocent people is a serious crime whether by terrorists or UnitedStates’ military machine.
 Muslims do not have to be apologetic simply because asuicide bomber carries a Muslim name or purports to carry out the attack in thename of Islam. In the same breath Muslims in the United States did not call forapology from Christians when Timothy McVeigh carried out the Oklahoma bombing in the UnitedStates. The world has not called for apology from Christianity or to bespecific from Protestants for the holocaust. Islamophobia hasalways existed in East Africa and nowhere in the region has it gained groundand lodged itself in the political system as in Tanzania. The rise ofIslamophobia in Tanzania therefore did not need the bombing of the UnitedStates Embassy or 9/11 to bring it to the surface. 
The bombing merely gave itmomentum and means to legitimise and justify government action against Muslimswho were agitating against Christian hegemony in the country. The political system in Tanzania is very muchskewed against Muslims although they form a majority; and it was the drive ofMuslim militancy during the struggle for independence, which drove the Britishout of Tanganyika.[2] After independence Muslims found themselvesholding a short a leash.


The Prevention of Terrorism Act of 2002
After9/11 the United States passed the Patriot Act of 2001. Soon after it had sailedthrough the Congress in record time the United States pressurised othergovernments to pass similar anti-terror legislation and join in its campaignagainst terrorism. Through diplomatic manoeuvres and veiled threats manyAfrican governments passed what came to be known as Anti -Terror Legislation.
Tanzania passed the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 2002, which in all intentand purpose replicated the United States Patriot Act of 2001. Due to underrepresentation of Muslims in parliament the Act sailed through without anydifficulties notwithstanding Muslim opposition outside the parliament. Whatconcerned Muslims more was the fact that the law was not only draconian butalso targeted Muslims. Muslimsrealised that with the Act in force any conflict between them and thegovernment could be tried under that legislation and this would have very direconsequences.
 The Prevention of TerrorismAct was a piece of legislation, which was imposed on Tanzania with theintention to open up the country for covert operations against enemies of theUnited States. Although the act does not say so in so many words but it isclear the legislation is meant to protect United States and provide it withpolitical and legal powers to expand its military hegemony in countries, whichit did not enjoy, such freedom before. On 17thMay 2003 with the anti terror legislation in place the police in collaborationwith the FBI (who were already in the country waiting for the president toassent the bill) arrested Muslims suspected to be ‘terrorists.’ But thosearrested had nothing to do with terrorism; they were Muslims leaders who thegovernment arrested for being ‘opponents’ of the government and ruling partythe Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM). Amongthose arrested were leaders of various Muslim charitable organisations -foreign oriented and local, who have distinguished themselves in providingsocial services to Muslims like building mosques, schools, orphanages etc.These were targeted for being ‘terrorist sympathisers’ or for being directlyinvolved in ‘terrorist activities’ or for ‘providing logistic support toterrorists;’ and bank account of one prominent Muslim school – Al Furqan wasfrozen for suspicion of being a conduit of funds from abroad to supportterrorism. In response tothese arrests Muslims staged a mass demonstration against the government andthe United States opposing the mass arrests of the Muslim leadership,harassment by the local police, the FBI and against the Anti – TerroristLegislation. The demonstration was the first of its kind, as never before hadMuslims shown such solidarity against a foreign power. 
Ignoring the feeling ofMuslims the then United States Ambassador to Tanzania Robert Royall addressedthe Tanzanian Parliament expressing his government’s satisfaction in Tanzania’ssupport in its war against terrorists and pledged USD 100m in aid to EastAfrican governments to help combat terrorism. Investigations revealed that noneof the arrested Muslims had any kind of military training whatsoever or had inanyway engaged in terrorist activities and they were quietly released withoutbeing charged. Investigations also failed to prove that the account of AlFurqan had at any one time used to transfer funds from abroad for illegal use.All this notwithstanding there was no apology from the government, the FBI orthe police.Probably unknown tothe United States, the government in Tanzania had other reasons for passing thelegislation completely unconnected with terrorism. The government was underpressure from Muslims to review the status quo. The government was and still isfunctioning as a Christian establishment completely marginalising Muslims.[3] TheChurch particularly the Catholic Church is in control of the government byproxy. It controls 75% of the seats inthe parliament. Among these seats Catholics hold 70% and the rest are dividedamong Muslims and Christian of other denominations. Muslims controls mere 6% ofthe total seats in parliament. Since independence in 1961 the Church was ableto manipulate the political system in such a way that, its influence permeatesthe state machinery, mass media, higher institutions of learning, employment,promotion to political office etc. etc. It also has influence in the Executive, the Judiciary and most importantit controls the Parliament the highest law making body in the country.[4]The government was engaged in its ownsilent war against Muslims who were opposing Christian hegemony over thecountry and several times the government had to use force, harassment andarrest of the Muslim leadership in trying to contain the agitation.[5]Corresponding to this awakening, Islam has gradually been gaining ground overChristianity in Tanzania. There is a noticeable number of Christians revertingback to Islam.[6]The Church is facing opposition on two fronts. It is facing Muslims on thepolitical front agitating against the status quo and on the second front thereis Islam as a doctrinaire attacking the very foundations of Christianity. TheCatholic Church is the most affected and naturally it is showing concern. Thegovernment saw in the Act an opportunity it could manipulate in its war againstMuslims and roll back the tide of Islam in Tanzania. The United States government in supportingthe Tanzanian government in its war against terrorism was in actual sensesupporting the Christian lobby in the government in its anti Islam stand. In sodoing was creating out of Muslims an unwilling adversary who had neverthreatened American interests. This state of affairs forced Muslims in Tanzaniato open up yet another line of defence against the United States fanning analready volatile state of affairs. Muslims had now two powerful adversaries towatch out. Muslims had to confront local adversaries as well as the UnitedStates. The Christian lobby in the government had found an unexpected ally.Muslims had to organise a line of defence against the United States’interference into what was previously purely an internal power struggle betweenMuslims and Christians vying for dominance in the local political arena. Theentry of the United States in the conflict on the side of the government gavethe conflict religious undertones, which were translated by Muslims as animpending American crusade hidden behind the façade of war against terrorism.What was worse is the fact that in the last ten years there had been a largeinflux of Pentecost churches into the country from the United States and thesechurches were not openly hostile towards Islam but were also very aggressivetowards other Christian sects. However with the passing of the anti-terroristlegislation it seemed all Christian churches in Tanzania where united incombating Islam under the banner of terrorism. TheAct was therefore seen by Muslims as yet another strategy by the government tokeep Muslims under perpetual bondage. The government of Tanzania had succeededto manipulate the Prevention of Terrorism Act for its own selfish ends. The government had shifted from its long standingprogressive policy of commitment to freedom, justice and equality overtimetransforming itself into an ‘ally’ of the United States whose oppressivepolicies it once lead other African nations to oppose. This change of policyand ideological stand unsettled the established political equilibrium. It isnow out of tune for Tanzania to identify itself with the people of Palestine,Afghanistan, Iraq, and Kashmir. The governmentwas able to kill three birds with one stone. First by passing the antiterrorism legislation it had found a partner in its efforts to weaken Islam andits influence in Tanzania. Second it managed to alienate Tanzanian Muslims fromthe rest of the Muslim world where Islam was under siege; and lastly thegovernment managed to position itself correctly as an ‘ally’ of the UnitedStates and hence be considered legible for aid,[7]the aid which will eventually strengthen the status quo.The Prevention of Terrorism Act is fraught with legal defects.[8] Itis beyond the scope of this paper to go into all the shortcomings. Suffice tosay that the act curbs democracy, free association, exchange of information,the right to own property, etc. There are also sections, which give theMinister of Home Affairs undue powers to declare any person a ‘terrorist’ onmere suspicion. In a country where the Church controls the government, one canonly imagine the dangers facing Islam. The law empowers the Minister to freezebank accounts of any suspected ‘terrorist organisation’ or individual. Nowhereis the law frightening than in part V 28 (6). This section deserves specialmention. It stipulates that:A police officer who uses suchforce as may be necessary for any purpose, in accordance with this Act, shallnot be liable, in any criminal or civil proceedings, for having, by the use offorce, caused injury or death to any person or damage to or loss of anyproperty.Muslims were concernedbecause the parliament was being manipulated by a foreign power in partnershipwith the Christian lobby to legitimise oppression against them. It was nowlegitimate to kill ‘Muslim fundamentalists’ or suspected‘terrorists’ on mere suspicion. There weremany good reasons for Muslims to register concern. There had been incidences in the past where stateorgans have used excessive force against Muslims resulting into deaths ofMuslims. The act in a multi racial society like Tanzania incites racial andreligious hatred against Muslims particularly those not of black African origin.The Act managed to fan fear and hatred against Muslims whipping up a frenzy ofIslamophobia in the country. The smoke bombing of mosques and mass arrests ofsheikhs over the years, were one of the means of intimidating Muslims andrescuing the Church from its predicament.[9]What was there to prevent state organs from applying the Act in subvertingIslam?


Manipulationof State Laws and Government Policies
Crusadeagainst ‘Radical Islam’
Tanzania being a‘secular’ state the government had no legal ground to intervene in matters ofreligion, which according to the constitution were outside its jurisdiction. Theanti terrorism legislation was seen by the government as a Godsend piece oflegislation which could be used to resolve what it perceived as ‘radical Islam’once and for all.[10] Butwhat important was the fact that no one could accuse the government ofpartisanship for passing the Act since the legislation was passed as a generalworld concern on terrorism. Soon after passing the Act, the government embarkedon plans to make amendments to the constitution because as it was, theconstitution had proved to be giving Islam unlimited freedom of propagation.This freedom provided a level ground, which favoured Islam but detriment toChristianity. Soon after passing the Prevention ofTerrorism Act of 2002 the government made amendments to the constitution.Before the amendment the constitution of theUnited Republic of Tanzania aptly stated that:Everyperson has the right to the freedom of thought or conscience, belief or faith,and choice in matters of religion, including the freedom to change his religionor faith. Without prejudice to the relevant laws of the United Republic theprofession of religion, worship and propagation of religion shall be free and privateaffair of an individual; and the affairs and management of religious bodiesshall not be part of the activities of the state authority.[11]The constitution as it were before the 14thamendment was giving Islam unhindered plane of propagation and Islam wasgaining ground over Christianity. Unlessthe constitution was amended there was no law, which could inhibit Islam. Thegovernment had to have a constitution, which could be used to protect theChurch. Without the amendment the government could not effectively apply theanti-terror legislation in confronting Muslims and in arresting the massconversions to Islam. The gist of the 14th Amendment of theConstitution of the United Republic of Tanzania 2004[12]prohibits the use of propagation of religion in such a way as to ‘endangerpeace and national unity’ or ‘scorn the teachings, belief or faith of anothersect.’ The law dictates what is to be and what is not to be professed orpropagated. The amendment affects Islam more than Christianity. DoctrinaireChristianity is far different from that which its adherents practise. It isthis philosophy propagated by Muslims preachers, which managed to attractChristians to Islam. Christianitydoes not condone homosexuality or paedophilia, which has of late become anembarrassment to the Church. If Muslims were to attack such a trend in societyin comparison to Islamic teachings this could be taken as ‘scorn to the beliefof another faith’ or ‘danger to peace and national unity.’ The amendmenttherefore stifles Islam while it provides a new lease of life to Christianityin Tanzania. Muslims protested against the amendment but the government ignoredtheir protests. The amended constitution provides the government with fullauthority to intervene in matters of religion and Islam was the target.
 Thisshould be perceived in the context that in a landmark judgement even before theamendment of the constitution, in 2000 the High Court of Tanzania ruled outthat it is a criminal offence to hold and to declare the Muslim belief thatAllah (God Almighty) is not Jesus son of Mary.[13] Thiswas tantamount to banning the Holy Qur’an and its teachings because most of itsteaching is contrary to Christian beliefs.Followingthe amendment of the constitution sheikhs were also quietly ‘advised’ toabstain from using the word ‘kafir’ in their ‘khutbas’ since the word offendsChristians and hence could jeopardise ‘national unity’ and ‘endanger peace’ andthey could be prosecuted in a court of law for breaching the peace. They werealso advised to go easy on their translations particularly on verses in theQur’an, which castigates Christians. There are Muslim radio stations which haveabided by the ‘advise’ as they are sheikhs who have abstained from quoting inpublic passages from the Qur’an in which the word ‘kafir’ appears, for fear ofbreaking the law. Through the Prevention ofTerrorism Act of 2002 and the 14th Constitution Amendment of 2005the government succeeded in adding yet another armament in its arsenal toweaken Islam. The Church through its agents in the political system managed tosafely perfect its strategy to undermine the message of Islam throughthe force of law.[14]Cardinal Otunga, Emeritus of Nairobi had once sounded a warning that unless theChurch takes drastic action Christianity was on the verge of dying a naturaldeath on the face of Muslim onslaught.[15]Having passed the anti terror legislationand after making amendments to the constitution what was now left was toabrogate the teaching of Islamic Knowledge in schools. Without warning theMinistry of Education issued a circular banning Islamic Knowledge and in itsplace introduced a new subject to be knownas ‘religion’, which was made compulsory to all students irrespective of faith.[16]Various reasons were advanced to explain the sudden and dramatic change. 
Thecircular postulated that students find it difficult to relate Islam orChristianity in today’s setting of globalisation. The government argued that itwas therefore obligated to fill the vacuum by initiating appropriatecurriculum, write textbooks and train qualified teachers to teach the subject.The circular further argued that, the new subject would help control the spreadof HIV Aids among the young. 
What was not stated in the circular was the factthat the government was implementing its last phase of atier system inconfronting Islam. First it began with anti-terror legislation, then it amendedthe constitution, the focus being the tenets on religion and now it wasabolishing the teaching of Islam in schools. The teaching of Islamic Knowledge in school hadregistered a remarkable success as it moulded both young men and women intoresponsible citizens. These young men and women are the ones forming thebackbone of the Muslims ‘umma’ in Tanzania spreading the message of Islamthroughout the country. 
Some are young ‘dais’ and scholars of very high reputespreading the message attracting Christians to Islam. The former students ofIslamic Knowledge are now members of powerful Muslim organisations like – MuslimWriters Workshop (WARSHA), Islamic Propagation Centre (IPC), JamaatuAnswar Sunna, Muslim Students Association of the University of Dar es Salaam(MSAUD) and Dar es Salaam University Trusteeship (DUMT). These organisationsovertime became the bedrock of Islam in Tanzania responding to the hostileenvironment through petitions to the government, mass rallies and organisingMuslims to become independent and self-reliant by building their owninstitutions. The government perceived this capacity building efforts byMuslims as divisive and banking on sectarianism – a danger and challenge toChristian hegemony.It is difficult not toconnect the banning of Islamic Knowledge in Tanzanian schools with the war on‘terrorism.’ 
About the same time when Islam was being abrogated in schools inTanzania, Pakistan, which is an important ally of the US on terrorism, wasreviewing the teachings in its ‘madras’ to prevent what was perceived as thespread of ‘radical Islam.’ It is again not difficult to see the relationship betweenTanzania and Pakistan on the issue of ‘radical Islam.’ It is obvious that thegovernment in Tanzania reviewed the teaching of Islamic Knowledge in schoolsfor the same purpose. 
What is not very obvious is how deep is the United Statesinfluence in this new development of abrogating the teaching of IslamicKnowledge in schools. (This should be perceived with the knowledge that thereis an American Qur’an in circulation at the moment, which has distorted thetrue teaching of Islam).[17] It was easy for Pakistan to link it’s‘madrasas’ with terrorism, but it was difficult for the authority to take sucha bold step and publicly assume such a stand taking into consideration of thehostilities between Muslims and the government simmering under the surface. 

  • [1] See ‘The Hijacked Caravan’ ihsanic-intelligence.com which is the first and only Islamic legal ruling which unequivocally condemns suicide bombing in all circumstances.
  • Suicide terrorism has no precedent in fourteen centuries of Sunni Islamic tradition
  • Islamist terrorist groups like al-Qa’eda have adopted the use of suicide bombings from the Hindu-Marxist terrorist groups like the Tamil Tigers and kamikaze pilots from Japan
  • Islamist terrorists killing Muslims are considered to be in the tradition of the khawarij, an ancient Islamic heretical sect which also assassinated Prophet Muhammad’s cousin, Imam Ali
  • Suicide bombings invoked under the rubric of Islamist terrorism, outside Israel and the Palestinian Territories, grew three-fold within the space of three years after 9/11, killing twice as many people as had been killed over two decades.
  • Within the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, a case often given global exception by some scholars for using this tactic, suicide bombings doubled as did the number of people killed in the three years after 9/11 compared to the previous seven years of suicide terrorism. Worldwide, in merely three years after 9/11, the number of suicide bombings had increased three-fold than it had over two decades, whilst the number of people killed had doubled.
  • Worldwide, for every person who undertook a suicide bombing prior to 9/11, 18 people were likely to be killed. After 9/11, this figure fell to killing of 14 people on average, which was only as a result of the disproportionate rise in the “export” of this practice to groups worldwide.
  • Suicide bombing in the name of Islam has occurred in more than 20 countries: Lebanon [1981], Kuwait [1983], Argentina [1992], Panama, Israel and Occupied Palestinian Territories [1994], Pakistan, Croatia [1995], Saudi Arabia [1996], Tanzania, Kenya [1998], Yemen, Chechnya [2000], USA, Kashmir, Afghanistan [2001], Tunisia, Indonesia, Algeria [2002], Morocco, Russia, India, Iraq, Turkey [2003], Uzbekistan and Spain [2004] - and possibly United Kingdom [2005].

[2]AmongAfrican countries with sizable population of Muslims and Christians, like Tanzania and Nigeria, theinquiry as to which faith commands a leading majority, is a source of potentialconflict and controversy. Tanzaniais of no exception. Different sources provide different Muslim-Christianreligious distribution figures. These conflicting figures are as a result ofsensitivity of the subject. The 1967 Population Census, the first census sinceindependence, probed Tanzanians’ religious adherence (Muslim, Christian, Other(e.g. Hindu, Buddhist etc.) or traditional, e.g. Pagan. Results showed thatMuslim constituted 63% of the population. It is believed that in early 1970sthe Statistical Department was ordered to destroy all the 1967 census resultsimply because they showed Muslims in Tanzania to be in majority. Thegovernment position is that Muslims do not form a majority. Tanzania NationalDemographic Survey figures for 1973 put Muslims slightly above Christians at40%, Christians 38.9% and local belief 21.1%. According to Africa south of the Sahara, Muslims in Tanzania are a leading majority at60%. This figure has remained constant in all its publications since 1982.

[3] Thethrust and vision of the Church in East Africawas to turn Kenya,Ugandaand Tanganyikainto Catholic states through control of indigenous governments.[3]The Church therefore established ‘The Islam in Africa Project’ with itsheadquarters in Kenyaof which its specific aim was to convert Muslims to Christianity. This projectwas under Rev. James Ritchie advisor to the National Christian Council of Kenya. TheWhite Fathers are in Tanzaniaand are still involved in the work, which brought them to the country more thana hundred years ago. The position of missionaries in Tanzania has not changed asdetailed above. 
[4] Fora detailed account see Mohamed Said, TheLife and Times of Abdulwahid Sykes (1924 – 1968) The Untold Story of the MuslimStruggle against British Colonialism in Tanzania, Minerva, London, 1998.
[5]This has to be seen with this background - Muslims have clashed with riotpolice in Zanzibar(1988), Morogoro (1992), Mwanza (1983) and several times in Dar es Salaam. In these clashes Muslims havebeen killed and maimed. However not a single policemen has been prosecuted in acourt of law. The most saddening miscarriage of justice was in 1998 when riotpolice smoke bombed the Mwembechai Mosque in Dar es Salaam in which four Muslims werekilled. Following the Mwembechai crisis many sheikhs were arrested and putunder custody without trail. In 2001riot police attacked a mosque in Zanzibarduring ‘salat fajr’ and the imam was killed. No investigation was carried outand therefore no one was prosecuted for the killing.In parliament debate on theMwembechai crisis the parliament congratulated state organs in the way they hadeffectively and decisively handled ‘Muslim fundamentalist. The governmentstatement went further it stated that in future such operations to deal with‘Muslim fundamentalists’ would be carried out by Tanzania Peoples DefenceForce.[5]Few months later all the officers who took part in the Mwembechai operationwere promoted and transferred to other areas for fear of Muslim reprisals.
[6]Christian converts have formed an association – Tanzania Revertees Association.

[7] 50%of Tanzania’sexpenditure and recurrent budget is donor funded.
[8]There is opposition in United States to the renewal of the anti-terrorPatriot Act unless changes are made to provide greater protections of civilliberties.
[9]InSumbawanga a predominant Catholic area at one time 2000 Christians converted toIslam and in Kagera 3000. In Kagera Yusuf Makaka a pastor from the Lutheran Church reverted to Islam and converted3000 of his followers back to Islam and built a mosque. See Mizani, 21 December 1990-January, 1991.
[10] Inaspecial synod in Romeon Islam the Catholic Church singled out ‘Muslim fundamentalism as its greatestchallenge. See Kiongozi, 16 – 31 May 1990. While visiting Tanzania thethen Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. George Leonard Carey stated that in Tanzania‘Muslim fundamentalists’ were a danger to peace.
[11]Right to Freedom of Religion Act No. 15 of 1984 s.6 Act 4 of 1992 s.9.
[12] TheEnglish version of the 14th Amended of the Constitution of 2004 isnot available at the time of writing this paper.
[13]Republic Versus Hamisi Rajabu Dibagula, Criminal Case No. 197 of 2000.

[14]There is sufficient and undisputable evidence that the government in Tanzania sinceindependence in 1961 has been carrying out a conceited and calculated strategyto subvert Islam. Dr John C. Sivalon in his expose, Kanisa Katoliki na Siasa ya Tanzania Bara 1953 Hadi 1985,unmasks a conspiracy in the government to subvert Islam. Sivalon revealed thatthe Catholic Church as far back as 1961 was worried by two prospects. First,was the unity between the Muslimmadhheb(sect) of Sunni, Bohora, Ismailiaand Ithnasheri in Tanganyika;and the second, was the economic strength of the East African Muslim WelfareSociety. The Church was worried that the resources in the hands of rich AsianMuslim community in East Africa, coupled withthe political power of African Muslims, particularly in Tanganyika,would endanger Christian interests in the region. The Church therefore declaredIslam as its enemy in the country and plotted to thwart its progress.
[15] The Standard (Nairobi), 13 January 1993.
[16]Education Circular No. 9 of 21st September 2004.
[17] AlSaffee, The True Furqan, Omega &Wine Press, USA.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Twitter Bird Gadget