“Many Icelanders don’t have a clue about religion”

This is a full transcript, in the original English, of my interview with Fr. Jakob Rolland, of the Catholic Church in Iceland and chairman of the Icelandic Interfaith Forum, in which capacity I spoke to him about recent attempts to forbid circumcision for religious reasons in that country.

UPDATE: Since publishing this transcript it was brought to my attention that the proposed bill has been scrapped. Although good news, this in no way makes the interview less interesting, especially in respect to growing ignorance of religion and its importance among Icelanders. The interview was, naturally, recorded months ago, before the proposal was scrapped.

Esta é uma transcrição integral, no inglês original, da minha entrevista com o Padre Jakob Rolland, da Igreja Católica na Islândia e secretário-geral do Fórum Inter-religioso islandês. Foi nesta capacidade que conversei com ele sobre a possibilidade de se proibir a circuncisão por motivos religiosos naquele país. A reportagem pode ser lida aqui.

What are the Jewish and Muslim communities in Iceland like? And how did they react to this proposal?

There is a very, very small Jewish community, we don't know exactly, because this community is not registered, there is no organised community of Jewish people, so the figures go from 35 to 200, we do not really know how many. But it is a very small community.

But they are expecting a rabbi to be nominated this year, and he will probably come to Iceland this Summer and constitute a community.

The Muslims are more numerous, maybe around 2000 in Iceland, and they are divided into five different communities. For them and for the Jews, this is a very serious issue, because for Jewish people circumcision is mandatory, they have to have the boys circumcised on their eighth day of life, and that is probably the only Jewish practice that all the Jewish people do. Other practices, like eating kosher, or keeping feast days like Yom Kippur, or Shabbat, and so on, some people follow them and others don't. But I think almost 100% have circumcision. For them it’s not an option.

For the Muslims it is not so important from a religious perspective. Almost all Muslims practice Circumcision, but it’s more cultural than religious. It has always been part of the Muslim religion, but they are not so strict regarding the age, for example, it is quite common for them to have children circumcised at five or six, or even later, but they also insist on continuing this tradition.

Have they spoken out on this issue?

There was no debate on it before. The debate started at the end of January, this year, before that one had never heard about this issue in Iceland.

But since the debate did begin, how have they reacted?

We have heard nothing from the Jewish community. Since they are not constituted as a community and they don't have any spokesman, so we didn't hear anything. But we heard a lot from the Jewish communities abroad, especially from the Northern countries, Denmark and Sweden and Finland. These are very concerned on behalf of the few Jewish people in Iceland.

And the Muslims community, three of them are members of the Interfaith Forum, that is an informal group of 18 religions in Iceland, for inter-religious dialogue and promoting religious freedom and human rights and issues which concern all the religions. And within the framework of this Interfaith Forum, they brought forward this issue at the beginning of February, to ask for a reaction. Their first intention was that the Forum should issue a statement, but it appeared that this would not be possible because most of the 18 religions represented in the Forum are against the ban, but some are in favour, or have no opinion, so there was no unanimity within the Forum, of which I am the chairman.

So we said we cannot make a statement, because some of the members are not in agreement. But then we came to the conclusion that we can organise a conference, where the Jewish and the Muslims can express their concern and publicly explain the Parliament in Iceland, and to the public, why this issue is so serious for them. And on that point we had unanimity, to organise this conference, without taking a formal position for or against, but giving them an opportunity to listen to the reasons for the bill and to express their own opinion.

When Parliament is passing a bill which concerns, first of all, the Jews and the Muslims, the least it can to is to listen to the Jews and to the Muslims.

O bispo da Islândia, David Tencer

So I take it for granted that the members of Parliament who presented this bill had not spoken to, or met with, the Muslim or Jewish community, before they presented it.

It seems not. I couldn't see any sign that they had any contact with the Muslim Community before presenting this bill, and none at all with the Jewish, we could see that when the person who presented the bill received news of the reaction of rabbis from all over Europe a few days later and said, publicly, in Parliament, that she didn't expect any reaction from the rabbis. That was a strange statement, because if anyone was going to react, it was the rabbis.

That brings up an interesting point. I have been following these debates in many countries in Europe and I have noticed that there seem to be two different cases. In some it seems to be open hostility to Muslims and Jews, disguised as care for children or for animal's rights. In other cases it seems to stem from pure ignorance or religious illiteracy. Is the latter the case here?

Absolutely, absolutely. I would say there is a lot of ignorance about religious issues.

Icelanders themselves, most of them are Christians, a third of the population belongs to the Lutheran State Church, but very few people have deep notion of their religion, and very few practice on a daily base. So for them religion is completely secondary and they have difficulty understanding that for other people religion is essential and an important part of their daily life.

Just before this conversation I was attending a meeting of the Interfaith Forum to evaluate the conference, and everybody agreed that it was a very good conference, but one of them said "I got many reactions from people who followed the conference on live stream and many of them, independently of one another, told me that they had never realised that religion can be so important for some people".

So that means that many Icelanders don't have a clue about religion, and that reflects the materialistic mentality in this country. Iceland is a very rich country, very materialistic, and unfortunately religion is not very visible and not very appreciated in the life of many Icelanders.

Could we describe it as a post-Christian country?

Exactly. You know Iceland was a Catholic country until the reformation, and then it became Lutheran by decision of the King of Denmark, and slowly afterwards, after the XIX Century, religion receded to the private sphere, at home, and nowadays has a very small impact on the public life.

Going back to the issue at hand, you mentioned that there was no reaction from the Interfaith Forum. But has the Catholic Church itself taken a position?

Yes. Our bishop wrote a letter which, right from the beginning, when the Muslims asked the Interfaith Forum to react to the bill, that same day our bishop wrote a letter to this Muslim leader, Salman Tamimi, to support his request and support the request of the Jewish and the Muslim community, that circumcision should not be banned in Iceland, by law.

He pointed out that we Christians insist more on the spiritual aspect of circumcision, like St. Paul says, first of all it is a question of conversion of hearts, and not of physical circumcision. Nevertheless, he says, it is a question of freedom of religion and we support the requests of these communities.

This is one specific threat... Are there other threats to religious liberty in Iceland? For example, freedom of conscience, issues with euthanasia and abortion?

I cannot say anything about freedom of conscience, I'm not sure what the law is. I have a friend who was working in a hospital and he was very much in the obstetrics and maternity section, and that is the same section where they have abortions, and he said this he would not do, it is against his conscience, and they respected that.

So I think there must be some law which protects freedom of conscience.

In fact we should investigate this a little bit more, because a bill on Euthanasia is also coming now. So it is important for us to know the legislative aspect.

There are other threats to religion... In the city of Reykjavik, in the schools run by the city, there is no teaching of religion anymore. It was the case until around five or ten years ago, but now it is no longer permitted. There are some classes of introduction to religion, where they talk a little bit about Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, in a very superficial manner, but there are no more religion classes in a proper sense. This leads to a generation, growing up now, which has no notion at all about religion. They would stand in front of the Pietá, in Rome, during their holidays, and ask “who is this lady, with this dead man in her hands?” They do not know anything about religion...

Are there any private schools owned by churches?

One, which belongs to the Adventist Church. And they have religious classes, but from the point of view of the Adventists, of course. But at least they teach some Bible stories, and I know that some Lutheran people send their kids to that school for that reason, because then at least they have some religious instruction and hear something about the Bible.

I saw from your website that the majority of the priests working in Iceland do not seem to be Icelandic. I would say that is your case as well...

I am French.

Could you characterise the Church in Iceland?

The Church is a tiny minority in this country, we have about 13 thousand people registered, which is not very much. The reality is probably a little bit more, because there are many people who come for a shorter or longer period of time, to work in Iceland, but they do not register in the Church, so the real number is probably 20 thousand.

I think around 90% of our Catholic Community are foreigners. They do not know any Icelandic, they do not integrate, they come to work, they have no intention to stay here, and that means that the Catholic Community is mainly Polish, around 70% of Polish origin, and the others are from many different countries, and so for us it becomes very difficult to create a sense of community.

We do not have a common language, the priests are from different countries and the Icelanders from our Catholic Community are in a minority, and for them it is very difficult, firstly to be in minority among Icelanders and then, within the Catholic Church, to be a minority again. That makes it very difficult for Icelanders, and that is really a challenge for us, to try to create occasions to bring together all these different groups.

It also means that the Catholic Church has almost no voice in the Icelandic society, or very little, because we are almost all foreigners, so nobody listens very much to the Catholic Church here.

When you were mentioning that some of the member churches of the Interfaith Forum had no opinion and some agreed with the prohibition of circumcision, just out of curiosity, I imagine the majority church would be the Lutheran... What was their position?

There are divided opinions also within the Lutheran Church, but the bishop of the Lutheran Church had a very strong statement, that she cannot agree that circumcision should be forbidden, and especially with a punishment of six years of imprisonment.

In other countries where these issues have been discussed we have seen that they produce a side effect, in that they bring the different religious communities together. Has that happened in Iceland?

The Interfaith Forum has existed for almost 12 years, and interreligious dialogue has never come to such a deep level of friendship and dialogue. Today some people even used the word love. We have never experienced that as much as until now.

Inter-religious statement on euthanasia, in Portugal

Care, with compassion, until the end

Inter-religious statement on euthanasia

The debate currently underway in Portugal about what has been labelled “assisted death” invites all of us to reflect and offer their contribution to enrich a process of dialogue which requires the intervention of all social agents. The religious traditions bear a message about the life and death of man, as well as the model of society we build, and it is both legitimate and necessary that they present this message with freedom and humility.

At a time when Parliament debates and prepares to vote on proposals for a possible law on euthanasia, we, the undersigned religious communities present in Portugal, having gathered to discuss and reflect together, and aware that we are living moments of great importance for our time collective future, do declare:

1. The dignity of those who suffer

We believe that each human being is unique and, as such, irreplaceable and necessary to the society of which he or she is a part, bestowed with an intrinsic dignity which is prior to any criteria of quality of life or usefulness, until the time of natural death. Not only does life not lose its dignity as it draws to its end, but the vulnerability with which it is clothed in this stage is, rather, a badge of special dignity which requires proximity and care. We do believe that suffering should be avoided if possible and, therefore, we give thanks for the fact that medical and pharmacological sciences have developed to such an extent that they allow for an effective relief of pain and promotion of well-being. However, we do not ignore the dramatic nature of suffering and the difficulty in finding meaning in continued life. We are aware that religion offers the possibility of meaning to those who believe, but we also know, from experience in accompanying so many who are not religious, that belief is not a necessary condition to finding meaning in one’s own suffering. With these our brothers we learn, indeed, that this task represents one of the greatest achievements of personal dignity. One’s dignity does not depend on anything other than existence as a person and personal autonomy cannot be emptied of its social meaning.

2. For a merciful and compassionate society

The suffering at the end of life is a spiritual challenge for each individual and an ethical challenge for society as a whole. Principles such as mercy and compassion are common to the different religious traditions and, over the history of civilization, have given rise to social models capable of creating, in each period, precise ways of accompanying and caring for the most fragile members of society. Today, human death is one of the areas which challenges us. What is asked of us is not that we give up on those living their final stages of life, by offering them the legal possibility of death, which can be the result of suffering without adequate care. It is this suffering which is truly unbearable and which gives rise to the will to die. It is the fruit of a society which abandons, which loses its humanity and becomes indifferent. Our beliefs in this respect are confirmed by our experience that people who are properly accompanied neither despair nor ask to die. What is asked of us, therefore, is that we commit ourselves more deeply to those who are living through this stage, taking upon ourselves the necessity of offering them a humane and accompanied death.  

3. Palliative Care, a necessity which cannot be delayed

We believe that palliative care is the most complete expression of this service which the state is obliged to give, since it results from the highest technical and scientific skill and competence in compassion, both of which are needed when dealing with people in the final stage of life. True compassion does not insist on futile treatment in an attempt to prolong life, but helps people to experience their own death as humanely as possible, recognising that it is only natural. Palliative care values a person until their natural end, alleviating their suffering, fighting off loneliness through the presence of family and other loved ones. We ask Portuguese society to rise up to this challenge, which can no longer be postponed, of making palliative care available to all, and we take upon ourselves the task of doing all that we possibly can to participate in this national effort. We cannot help but to ask if this current debate, preceding as it does an investment in proper palliative care, does not betray a lack of truth.

Religious traditions profess that life is a precious gift, with Abrahamic religions stressing that it is a gift from God and, as such, sacred in nature; but this only confirms its natural dignity, from whence stem its inherent inviolability and unavailability which, therefore, do not rest on religious foundations. But religion does give life a meaning, a hope and other possibilities of transcendence. Societies need this vision of man to stand alongside all the others which exist.

We, the religious communities present in Portugal, believe that life is inviolable until natural death and we share the belief in a compassionate model of society. For this reason, in the name of humanity and the future of the human community, we feel called to take part in the current debate on assisted death, to express our opposition to its legalisation under any of its forms, be it assisted suicide or euthanasia. Therefore we put our names to this common statement.

Lisbon, May 16^th, 2018

Portuguese Evangelical Alliance -  Pastor Jorge Humberto, representing the president Pedro Calaim

Portuguese Hindu Community – Mr Kiritkumar Bachu

Islamic Community of Lisbon – Sheikh David Munir

Israeli Community of Lisbon – Rabbi Natan Peres

Catholic Church – Cardinal Patriarch D. Manuel Clemente

Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople – Archpriest Ivan Moody

Portuguese Buddhist Union – Diogo Lopes

Portuguese Union of Seventh Day Adventists – Pastor António Carvalho, representing the president, pastor António Amorim

“Before the street feared the leader, now the leader fears the street”

This is a full transcript, in the original English, of my interview with archbishop* Maroun Lahham, patriarchal-vicar for Jordan, about the situation in the Middle East, five years after the Arab Spring. His grace also speaks about conversion of Jews and whether Muslims and Christians worship the same God. The news item, in Portuguese, can be found here.

You were archbishop of Tunis at the time of the Arab Spring in Tunisia, were you not? What were your feelings at the time?

It was a big surprise for everybody. The regime of Ben Ali was so strict, nobody even dared to pronounce his name. All of a sudden there was this popular explosion and we lived it with much enthusiasm. It took almost 18 days until Ben Ali left for Saudi Arabia, and he is still there. 

Now I cannot say that Tunisia became a paradise after this, but at least one positive point is that they discovered democracy, and they live a democracy and if you have followed events in Tunisia, they have a very good Constitution, moderate, democratic, the only one in the Arab world which guarantees liberties of creed, of conscience for everybody.

Egypt went through much turmoil, but seems to have stabilized. Is democracy possible in a country like Egypt?

It is possible but it takes time.

Democracy is not a gift, you have to acquire it. 

The Tunisian people are much better educated than the Egyptian and certainly than the Lybians. I think that democracy might work in Syria, if things settle down in Syria. In Egypt I think they still need a hard hand, but even in Egypt, some sense of democracy exists. For instance, Mubarak left, but when the Muslim Brothers took power they were expelled by the people, which is a sign of democracy. 

So something positive occurred, even in Egypt, even though they have not reached a Democracy like they have in Tunisia.

And then, of course, we have Syria… Can you foresee an end to the war there?

Yes. I am optimistic by nature and also by faith. So I think that an end will come, but that depends also, and especially, on the Super powers, because in politics there are no values or ethics, there is only interests, so the USA has interests in Syria, Russia, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran. When these superpowers reach a solution, I hope...

Because the Syrian people are tired, Daesh is on the defensive, I think that a superpower would give a mortal coup to Daesh the moment they feel a threat in their own countries. You see the reaction of France after the bombings of the 13th of November, I hope not, but I think it could happen in Germany, England and France. I hope not in Portugal... But that will force them to act, because they fire will have come to their home.

The situation in Syria has made many more people aware of the split between Sunni and Shia. Is this the real conflict in the Middle East, more than a division between Islam and the West?
No. The real problem is not there. 

The real problem is that the superpowers do not want any Arab country to become strong and to have an effective role in the politics of the Middle East. 

In each Arab country there is a sensitive point you can't touch. In Syria its Sunni and Shiite. In other places its Christian against Muslim. In other places, palestinians and Jordanians. So this is the week point. The superpowers try to touch in order to create problems.

Sunnis and Shia lived together peacefully for centuries in Syria, in Iraq. They never reached the point of killing each other. It all depends on the big players. 

Jordan plays an important role in the refugee crisis, with close to 700 thousand refugees or asylum seekers. How difficult is the situation?

It is a real problem. The Jordanian population is up to 9 million people. Six million are Jordanians and three million are refugees. So imagine 30% of your population are refugees? 

First this is a human problem, second it is a social problem and third it is a moral problem.

A human problem because you are dealing with people who have lost everything, who suffered, who were persecuted for their political options or their creed, or their faith. So we have to work on that.

A social problem, because we have at least 1.5 million Syrians in Jordan. They are not allowed to work, but they work in the black market. And problem is that Syrians are much more practical at manual work than Jordanians, and though they are jobless, they accept to be paid much less than Jordanians. So they work better and they are paid less, this is very good for a business man. So that makes a social problem, with Jordanians who feel that their jobs are lost and stolen by Syrians.

Finally there is also a moral problem, because some of the Syrian families, pushed by poverty, accept to mary - I don't want to say sell - their young girls, 14 years old, to some millionaire of the Emirates for a hundred dollars for three months, so you imagine the trauma for the girl and the mother. This never occurred before in Jordan. And to talk about "closed houses" [brothels], these things never existed in Jordan, now with the arrival of Syrians we have many of these. We are not used to this but the human nature is what it is.

In Europe the influx of refugees has caused many debates and disagreements. What is your view, as a Christian from the Middle East? What message for the Europeans?

The message is the message proclaimed always by Pope Francis. We have to welcome people.

I understand, if I put myself on the side of the European countries, especially after what happened in Germany, in Cologne on new years, we have to be cautious. But if 95% are really poor people who need to work and to have a better future, it is enough to have 2% of infiltrators to cause problems, and that leaves you scandalized and shocked, and say who can oblige me to take people in where there is a percentage, even if a little one, of fanatics who come with ideological thoughts and choices. 

I understand both positions, but from a Human point of view I think we have to check who is coming in, but we can't close our borders.  

This crisis has earlier roots, but became much more serious after the so-called Arab Spring. Five years after the first signs of these revolutions, what do you make of them?

Initially the Arab Spring started very well. As you said, there is stability in Tunisia and Egypt. But when it arrived in Lybia, that was the end of the World, because Khadaffi never formed a state or a people, so there are tribes fighting each other and ruled them by force, while in Tunisia they were educated. 

I think one positive point of the Arab Spring, in all these countries, is that the street no longer fears the governments. Whereas before if the King or the President said 2+2 is 10, you say 10, if not 11. Now its the leaders who fear the street, and this is a positive point. 

Now democracy is also a process that may take one or two generations. But one thing is sure, Syria will not return to what it was before, nor will Iraq, or Egypt, nor Lybia, although Lybia may be the last to stabilise.

We know that conversion of Muslims to Christianity is a very difficult subject in the Middle East, and other Muslim countries. As Patriarchal-Vicar for Jordan, how do you deal with issues like this?

We are very cautious, first of all, to be sure of the good intentions of the people who come and say that they want to convert. Because sometimes they may be sent by security people to test our good will. That is why I told my priests, if any Muslim comes to you, saying that he wants to convert, you send him to the bishop and I will have the first conversation with him. Many of them, when they hear the name of the bishop, don't come anymore. 

Others come. So the first thing they do is ask some questions and I put before them the difficulties they will face if they become Christians, socially, as a family, in terms of religion, for the marriage, for the children who must be always Muslims. Some of them when they hear all of these dangers, they cease, and don't come anymore. 

Others continue, and when they continue and we are sure of their good intentions, I tell one priest or another to start with them a process of Cathechesis, which can take one or two years. Then I always tell them that if they want to be baptized and you want to stay in Jordan you have to live your faith as the early Christians, hidden. 

Others seek a visa for Germany or other European countries and go there, where they are free to practice. Others, if there are problems to be baptized in Jordan, we send them to Lebanon, where they are more free.

So it is not easy, but the principle is that you cannot say no to somebody who is sincere.

So there are people in Jordan at the moment living their faith in secret?

Yes.

In Tunisia, on the other hand, there is complete freedom to convert. But Tunisia and Algeria are the only countries where there is no problem for a Muslim, except from his family, but according to the Constitution he is free to convert.

Recently two issues have been widely debated. First, the issue of whether Christians and Muslims worship the same God. As a Christian who has lived all his life in Muslim dominated lands, what is your opinion on this?

Yes, it is the same God. In our liturgy we use Allah as well. It is a another way of seeing God, we see him as a family, as a trinity, while they see him as one, but basically it is the same. I am with Pope Francis.

Syrian refugees in Jordan

Also, the Pope’s recent visit to the Synagogue in Rome raised once more the issue of whether Christians should try to convert Jews or whether they already have a salvific covenant with God, and therefore there should not be specific missions to the Jews. What is your opinion, and what is the standard practice of the Latin Patriarchate in Jerusalem?

Firstly, we do not try to evangelize the Jews in Israel, it is very hard. Jesus himself tried, and he failed. Unless we evangelize by our witness, by our life.

Secondly, this famous document which was published on the 50th anniversary of Nostra Aetate, yes, they repeat more than 100 times that the covenant of God is irrevocable. The mere fact that they repeat it over 100 times means that they don't believe it.

When you have to insist on something so many times, there is something wrong. I understand that the west wants to repair the bad history with the Jews, but you cannot use the Bible as an instrument for political or historical issues.

If you go to the Bible, sure there is this sentence, but there are others which say the opposite.

It is a kind of Western theology, based on historical events and political events and psychological complexes, while theology, to be a true theology must be free, like the Holy Spirit, from any pressure here and there. So for me this is not really theology.

*His grace was previously archbishop of Tunis, and retains the references of archbishop.  

"Asia Bibi's imprisonment is a political and not a legal issue"

Archbishop Joseph Coutts. Foto: Edgar Sousa/Renascença

This is a full transcript of my interview with Archbishop Joseph Coutts, of Karachi, Pakistan, about the situation of Christians in Pakistan, the Blasphemy laws and Asia Bibi.
The news story, in Portuguese, can be found here.

Transcrição integral da entrevista ao Arcebispo Joseph Coutts, de Karachi, sobre a situação dos cristãos no Paquistão, a lei da blasfémia e Asia Bibi. A reportagem pode ser vista aqui.

Occasionally we hear stories of persecution coming out of Pakistan, bombings, killings and so on. But what is life like for Christians on a daily basis in your country?

Unfortunately the news that gets out is all the negative news.

When you use the word persecution, I'd just like to clarify that, if you mean persecution by the State or the government is persecuting the Christians, that is not the case.

Of course, as a small religious minority in Pakistan, we have always faced discrimination and are trying to fight against it, things like that were always there, there were always difficulties. But what we are experiencing now, that you are hearing about, the bombing of churches and attacking of Christians, that is a new phenomenon; it’s a new experience for us.

It was a traumatic experience when it happened the first time, in 2001, just after the Americans began bombing Afghanistan, after 9/11, in October. Shortly after that the reaction was very strong, because thousands of Afghan refugees started arriving in Pakistan and all the pictures of women and children crying... Two angry young men, Muslims, entered a church and just started shooting on a Sunday morning, they killed 14 Christians and injured many others.

That was the first time really that Muslims came and attacked a church! We never had that before. Since then we have had even worse experiences. Just this year two more churches were bombed. So this is not coming from the government, it is coming from those extremist groups who have their own agenda and who are a threat even to our Government and other moderate Muslims.

Do you feel that the Government does all it can to protect you?

The Government itself is not in a strong position.

Finally, last year in June 2014 the Government took the decision and the army launched a very big offensive involving about 30 thousand soldiers, with air support, in the mountains bordering Afghanistan, where many of these extremists have found a very good refuge. It's a very difficult terrain, very difficult to control, and this is where they had their factories, producing their homemade bombs, the suicide jackets and things like that. The army action is still ongoing, and we hear reports that there has been some success, but it’s a very slippery adversary, they can very easily slip across the border into Afghanistan, until the heat is off, regroup and start again. So it is a very tricky, difficult and dangerous situation we are in.

Take the current time, Ramadan. Does it affect Christians at all? Are they still free to eat in public during the day, for example?

We see that overall society in Pakistan is becoming more and more Islamised. In this sense, and this is a good example, during Ramadan we see a gradual increasing in the position of Islamic rules that eating houses should be closed and nobody should be found eating during the time of Ramadan, whether Christian or Muslim, and a few years ago it was not so. So there is hardly an option left.

Of course, being Pakistani Christians we are aware of this and we wouldn't want to desecrate or show disrespect for this very deeply religious activity of fasting.

Is there a difference between the city and the countryside? Or from region to region?

I think there are certain areas where there is more prejudice. I am in the large city of Karachi, in the South, which is our largest city, with a population which is easily twice that of Portugal, a big commercial and industrial city, very cosmopolitan, with people of different ethnic groups, many Hindus there - unlike other parts of Pakistan. Things had always been more tolerant in Karachi, while in other areas, specially the rural areas, where the imam still a strong religious and leadership role, with the use of the mosque loudspeaker, if the imam happens to be a fanatic it becomes very easy for him to use the loudspeaker to rouse the sentiments of the people, and this is what has happened not only in villages but also in cities where a false blasphemy accusation.

If the imam takes it up and announces it over the city or the village mosque, then even the Muslims who are sitting neutral, if they hear that the holy book has been desecrated, or the name of the holy prophet has been maligned there is an emotional reaction.

If you were approached by a Muslim seeking conversion and baptism, how would you handle the situation?

Nowadays we would handle it very carefully, with great caution, because it could also well be a trap, and that has also happened, people coming just to try and get us into trouble.

But basically our task, as Christians is not to convert people, but to be witnesses to our faith, to show what it means for us to be Christian, and to be Christian in that particular milieu, and I think much of what we do and say is reflected in all the institutions we have. The Church is very strong in the field of education, we have hundreds of schools, we are generally highly respected and there are many Muslims in our school, many of our teachers, together with Christians, the staff is common. For example, in Karachi we have only one Catholic doctor. The medical advisor is a Hindu and nearly all the other doctors are Muslims. It is known as the Holy Family hospital and it is well known.

In this respect, in terms of conversions and baptisms, for example, do you find that the more informal Protestant churches have more freedom? And does that present difficulties for you?

The freedom is there, but if you misuse it you get into trouble.

Let's be very clear... Muslims are very sensitive about this idea of conversion. When the blasphemy law was passed they wanted to pass another law that if a Muslim changes his religion, he should be declared an apostate and killed. It was not made into law, but it shows you that the thinking is already there.

Are Christians the most oppressed religious minority in Pakistan, or do other groups have it worse than you?

There is a group called the Ahmadis, or Mirzais. The Ahmadis say they are Muslims, but officially they were declared non-Muslims in the 70s, and they say that is not fair. So this is really an internal theological problem there, which makes it very difficult for us to interfere in any way, not being Muslims. They say they are Muslims, but Pakistan is the only country, I guess, where they have officially been declared non-Muslims, they are really being persecuted.

  

The fact the Pakistan is such a homogenously Sunni Muslim country, does that bring you closer to Hindus, Shiites, etc? 

I don't know whether you would call it a homogenous Sunni country... We have a very large minority of Shiites. I don't know the exact figures, but certainly not less than 20%, which is not a small minority. Then there are also other branches of the Shiite movement.

Where the problem is coming from, from the religious point of view, is not from all the Sunnis, it is from some branches. For example, we have the Wahhabis, the Deobandis, these are all Sunni groups. But Wahhabi Islam is the kind of Islam you find in Saudi Arabia, and it is a very narrow and restricted form of Islam. It is the Wahhabis, usually, who are very intolerant and do not easily accept the Shiites and other small groups, like the Ismailis within the Shiites.

Would you say that Wahabbiism is a relatively new phenomenon in Pakistan? Is this a different form of Islam than your father would have recognized in Muslim communities?

This kind of Islam has grown in the last couple of decades. We never had this before. It has come up... There are a number of factors, but this form of Jihadi Islam, promotion of the idea of Jihad, this happened when the Soviet Union entered Afghanistan in 1979 and then that threw a lot of fear into the Western world. 

Remember that is 79/80 the Soviet Union was still a superpower; in Europe you still had the Berlin Wall. So what it meant was that Afghanistan had fallen to communism, and Pakistan might be next. “So stop the communists!” Because if Pakistan fell, it meant an opening to the Gulf and to the source of the Western world's oil, so the USA, with Saudi Arabia and with our government said they better stop the communists right there, and they found the people to do the fighting, the extremist groups. 

The idea of Jihad was officially promoted. Jihad in the sense of taking up weapons and fighting the enemy. The enemy were the atheists, the communists who had entered Afghanistan, a country that is 100% Muslim. So it really appealed to any believing Muslim: Stop atheism, and you are protecting your brother Muslims. So hundreds of young men were trained, with American and Saudi help, to go and fight in Afghanistan.

So what happened to the arms that came in? Given it’s a country with so much corruption, a good percentage went into the black market, into the hands of criminals, drug dealers, into the hands of political parties, and others. With the result that nowadays Pakistan is afloat with small arms, it is very easy to obtain even hand grenades, submachine guns and things like that.

Some of these groups are better armed than our police force. So it is really a big challenge for our government. Our police was not trained in this kind of warfare, using suicide bombings, which most Muslims say is Haram, forbidden, just like in Christianity. But they justify it.

So there are strange things happening within Islam, and what is dangerous is that these groups which were quite isolated and had different agendas, such as Boko Haram, Isis, and here you had the Afghan Taliban, now you also have the Pakistani Taliban, you have Al-Qaeda, it seems they are spreading a new kind of Islam that was not there.  

Has there been an attempt by the more traditional Islamic forces of the Indian subcontinent to try and counter the influence of this Jihadi Islam, and is there any chance they will succeed?

They may be few in number, but they are well armed and well supported. From where exactly, I wouldn't know, and that is what our government would like to know. 

You see the Madrassa, which has been an Islamic institution for centuries, was just a school where you studied the Koran, but when 9/11 came and we had these issues, many madrassas were used as breeding grounds for the selection of young men to be brainwashed, religiously, to go and fight.

And up to now we don't know how many new madrassas just sprang up during those days. Our present government is trying to control that, and to see what is being taught in these madrassas, because many of the problems arise from there. They are fertile ground to recruit young men with the idea of Jihad. 

Are there any high ranking Christians in the Armed forces, police forces, judiciary, for example?

The highest army officer we have is a two star general, just one, but we do have others up to the rank of colonel, a few brigadiers, many majors.

So you would not say that Christians are kept out of the armed forces...

No, but I would say it is impossible to have the Chief of Staff as a Christian... And officially our Constitution says that the President and the Prime minister have to be Muslim. 

Of course you have Christian politicians...

We have a minister now, a federal minister for ports and shipping. 

So there is some participation in the Public, military and political life, for example.

Yes, there is, there is. 

We have heard so much about the blasphemy laws, for so many years now, has anything at all been done to at least reduce their harm?

Ever since this law was introduced, we as Christians have been protesting.

Of course it brings an immediate emotional reaction. The point that has finally got across to the Muslims who did not want this law abolished is not just the abolition of the law but the way the law is framed, that we need safeguards to prevent the misuse of this law, which is what has been happening all along.

I think there is more awareness now in the country. Earlier it was just not accepted that what was happening was that the law was being misused to settle personal enmities, jealousy and other things, not just to get people into trouble, but even to get them killed. And there is talk, more and more, of putting in some safeguards to prevent this from happening.

Which you would consider a success?

It’s something, definitely! Because things are bad, the way it is being misused.

Do you have any idea how many people in general are in prison at the moment because of the blasphemy laws?

There are statistics, but I don't want to give the wrong figures at the moment. There are many Christians, but many Muslims as well.

But are we talking about dozens or hundreds?

Not hundreds, but certainly dozens.

Because this affects not only Christians...

The law is for everybody! And at the moment, statistically, there are more Muslims in jail for blasphemy than Christians.

The Government has now passed a law stating that the first thing to do is to have the person examined for his mental state of mind, because some of the cases have happened with people who were not mentally sound. It is very easy to want to kill such a person, so the person first has to undergo a psychological test.

Nobody has ever been executed because of a blasphemy law, but it is still life threatening just to be accused, is it not?

Yes, that is right. The law has not yet executed anybody for Blasphemy, but all the killings have been extra-judicial and they have been like lynchings. The emotions take over and before the person has a chance to clear his name, it is too late.

Sometimes even after acquittal...

That has also happened. A few years ago there was a case of a 13 or 14 year old boy accused of Blasphemy, of having written very bad words on the wall of a mosque. Finally, when the case came up in the high court it was proved that the boy was hardly literate and that it was impossible for him to have written those kinds of words. He was rightly acquitted by the high court, but the fanatics kept screaming for his life. There was an attempt to kill him. With him were his two uncles, who were also accused. They killed one, in a drive-by shooting by two Muslims on a motorcycle, and the boy and the other uncle were slightly injured. They had to be hidden and were finally given asylum in Germany, I don't know where they are now. This was over 10 years ago. They were Christians.

Of course the most famous victim of the blasphemy laws has been Asia Bibi, what news is there of her? Is she ill?

I wouldn't be able to give you up to date condition of Asia Bibi, I am right down in Karachi and she is up North, about 1300 km away, our Justice and Peace Commission is handling the case, with a number of NGO's supporting, but I don't have the latest information, so it would not be fair to say anything right now.

When Western governments and influential figures speak about her case and put pressure on the Pakistani government, might this be counterproductive?

Yes, because you should understand that it is not just the government. The Government is not strong. This kind of extremist fanaticism is very strong, in the sense that if you are the judge you will be threatened, and you will be very careful before going against an existing decision of the court for the death penalty.

A few years back we had a parliamentarian, a very fine lady, a Muslim, who had said she would put in a petition in Parliament to review the blasphemy law. The intention was, ultimately, to abolish it. When some fanatics came to know this they started threatening her, and the threats were taken seriously.

She being a very capable lady, a parliamentarian and otherwise very knowledgeable, was appointed an ambassador to another country, to protect her. She is back now after a few years.

So that is how it is. It is not the government alone that has the power to take the decision. They have the power, but if they make the decision they also fear the reaction.

Why is she even still in jail? Is it a legal issue, or a political issue?

It is more political, and it is fear of the extremists.

I'll give you another example. Shortly after Asia Bibi was condemned to death, by the lower court and not yet by the higher court, it was none other than the governor of the most powerful province of Pakistan who, being a very fair minded person, a Muslim, went to the jail to visit Asia Bibi and suggested she write an appeal to the President of the Republic of Pakistan, because the President has the power to commute a death sentence. And he told her not to worry, because he would take her appeal personally and present it to the president. 

When that appeared in the press the next day, the fanatics went mad! Who was the President of the Republic to grant pardon to somebody who has insulted the prophet? The best remedy is death!

So when you are up against this kind of thinking, and these extremists are not only ready to kill, they are ready to die. And that is where you have this whole thing of suicide bombing.

Do you believe she will be freed, eventually?

That would only be a guess. The efforts continue, and that won't stop.

You were born before partition...

As many people were!

And is your family originally from Amritsar, where you were born?

No, my parents are originally from further South, from a place called Goa.

(Edgar Sousa/Renascença)

When there was partition and your family found themselves in Pakistan, a new country formed especially for the Muslim community, did it ever occur to them or to any Christians who found themselves in that situation, to move away? Did it occur to them that things might reach this situation?

No. Because nearly all the Christians in Pakistan were already where they are. My father had an option, because he was working in a multinational company and if he had wanted to stay in India he could have asked to be transferred to Delhi, or somewhere else, but he just continued in Lahore. So there was no question there, and I think most of the Christians were quite happy.

Remember that at that time the founder of Pakistan, Mohammed Ali Jinnah had made a beautiful speech, where he said to the Parliament: “You are free to go to the mosque, to the temple or to any place of worship. What you believe has nothing to do with the State. We must all now learn to be Pakistanis first”, which was very reassuring. So the stress was not on being Muslim or non-Muslim, but on being Pakistanis in the new country.

At that time, I can only imagine, because I was a couple of years old, everybody must have been very happy with that. But what we have been seeing, as things have been developing, the idea of Pakistan as a homeland for Muslims, as a modern democratic state… Now we hear the extremists saying they don't want democracy, it is a Western concept, they want a Caliphate, an Islamic State, which is something completely different from what the founding fathers of Pakistan had in mind. 

And that is where the real clash is. It is not Muslim-Christian, it is a whole new ideology, and these extremists are basically against the State. When they attack us it is to embarrass the state. 

If things don't improve within the next few years, if they get worse, as is happening in many Middle Eastern countries, for example, is there a future for Christians in Pakistan?

Some already think that there is no future. 

A number of Christians, a few hundred perhaps, have already found refuge in Sri Lanka, because visas are not too difficult to obtain, a few hundred fled to Thailand, precisely because they see no future. But for me, personally, we should not give up hope.

If there is a young couple who tell you they are thinking of leaving, do you discourage them from going?

Yes I would. Because I think they also have very simple ideas, just as you have these migrants coming to Europe, crossing the Mediterranean. They have an idea that things will be very easy once they go abroad. I would never advise anybody to do that. There have been extreme cases, where people have been threatened for various reasons, where we have supported them, as individuals to seek refuge. There are other examples of enlightened Muslims, who have spoken against extremism... 

I remember when Osama Bin Laden was still alive and was considered a hero, and he declared a Jihad against all the Americans, and all non-Muslims, and there was a good imam who gave a very good speech, a very good talk, explaining what Jihad really means, and he said this is not Jihad, only a legitimate authority can declare Jihad and you have to be very clear who the enemy is, and he gave very good, logical reasons. Within a week he was killed by a suicide bomber. So it is not just a question of being threatened. Most sensible people, moderate people, who want to live peaceful lives, regardless of their religion, at the moment, are under threat in Pakistan.

Is moving to India an option?

A number of Hindus have considered that option, they would feel more welcome there, especially with the present government in India.

So your family is from Goa, do you trace your history to the presence of the Portuguese in Goa? Were your ancestors converted by the Portuguese?

I wouldn't know exactly. They say that when the Portuguese arrived the Franciscans were already in Goa. So it is not as simple as that. Because Christianity was, for sure, already there since the second century, lower down in Kerala.

They say they found a cross identical to the St. Thomas cross in Goa recently. There is no historical evidence, but they say that St. Thomas and St. Bartholomew went to that coastal area. The whole area was a port, and a port brings all sorts of people together. There were Armenian Christians who were traders, Christians from Persia, and other parts, who travelled this coastal area. And usually in a coastal area you get a mixture of different kinds of people. 

So it is not very clear at what point Christianity arrived. It certainly developed much more when the Portuguese arrived, it became much stronger. 

Is there a memory of the first conversion in your family?

Because we were away from Goa, and even for me Goa is nothing more than a tourist spot, although I do have first cousins there, much of my family is in different parts of the World. Canada, a brother settled in Sweden, so really I have been away from my roots since birth.

We hear so many appeals from the Middle East, Iraq, Syria, from Patriarchs, Archbishops, for help. But what exactly can we do, for example, to help the Pakistani Christians?

If you are talking about financial help, I would say you are already doing it, through Aid to the Church in Need. I am not here to collect funds, but to create awareness, at the invitation of ACN. 

You are on the ground, you see how the money is spent and the effects of donations made here...

Definitely, in Pakistan, Aid to the Church in Need has been a very good benefactor for many years, building churches, convents, the education of seminarians for the priesthood. Any other pastoral needs, ACN has been there to help us and they still help us! 

As for the really big needs in Syria and Iraq, we pray to God that we don't reach a situation like that.

When you hear, in Pakistan, that people are praying for you. Does that help?

Yes. I was very moved yesterday when I went to Guimarães. The faith of the people, a living faith, and also the concern, the special prayers, with banners which depicted persecution. I recognized the scenes in two of them, and there were others from Iraq, Syria, Nigeria as well.

So the prayers and the sincerity of the people who assured us that they would continue praying, is something very moving, which I take back with me, to our people. 

The Archbishop and yours truly  (Edgar Sousa/Renascença)

#Muslims4Lent: “If anything this is strengthening our faith”

Full transcript, in the original English, of my interview with Bassel Riche, founder of the #Muslims4Lent campaign. The news piece and video, in Portuguese, are here.

Transcrição integral, no inglês original, da entrevista a Bassel Riche, fundador da campanha #Muslims4Lent. A reportagem e video estão aqui.

How did #Muslims4Lent start?

I was in the University of Houston and as part of the Muslim Student Association, every Ramadan, which is like the “Muslim Lent”, we would have a drive which would basically encourage non-Muslims to sign up to join us for one day in fasting and, at the end of the day, we would have a big meal together and talk about interfaith dialogue, share commonalities and stuff like that.

It was a very nice experience and a few years later I decided, on a personal level, that there seemed to be a good amount of people who did things to try and understand the Muslim community and reach out to the Muslim community, and so I felt that t was right for us to reach out to the Christian community and show them that we in turn also have very high respect for them.

On a personal level I would do it, I'd put up a Facebook status, saying what I was giving up. Then this year was a little different, I created a group, I took a picture of myself with the sign, and encouraged others to do the same, and it caught on.

How many people have joined this campaign?

I wish I knew. I wish I could see how many times it has been tweeted and retweeted.

Honestly it is easily in the thousands, but I'm not sure. To go through and count all the pictures on twitter and on Instagram would be quite a task. But it’s definitely enough that we feel we have made a big impact and created lots of conversations around the world.

Is the current climate, with issues such as the Islamic State and fundamentalist Muslim violence, a factor as well?

Absolutely. Because people can be so caught up in their routine, understandably so, we are all busy with work and with our family, and people get into these routines, sometimes when something is foreign to them it can be perceived as scary.

Right now, particularly in America, there is a sentiment amongst some that the Muslim community is that scary variable, nobody really knows much about them, and that is one of the goals, to put ourselves out there in everyday life, and encourage the people who might have these opinions to talk to us.

The shootings that happened in Chapel Hill, a few weeks ago, when they studied the person that shot those people they said that he clearly had racial and religious prejudice against the victims. Hopefully when you reach out to these people and engage in dialogue respectfully, it helps curb us away from that sort of extremist and “us versus them” mentality.

Then we begin to realise that we have a lot more in common than we will ever have different, and if we spend the time talking about our similarities, we probably won't even have time to talk about our differences.

You have also received a fair amount of criticism, correct?

We have criticism on both sides.

On the Christian side we have had people saying that “This isn't actually what Lent is about, so you guys are missing the whole point of what Lent is”, and they will explain that giving something up has nothing to do with Lent. And my response to them would be, that's a good thing to bring up from a knowledge and understanding point of view, but it still means a lot to a lot of people.

If Lent has changed in the way it has been practiced over two thousand years, I don't know, but present day, 2015, this sacrifice of something, is a meaningful gesture and it means a lot to a lot of people, and the tweets on the hashtag #Muslims4Lent proves that. So maybe we can do a better job of understanding what it’s all about, but even something small like this seems to have resonated with quite a lot more people and it seems that it’s the minority of people who are against it.

On the Muslim side there is a similar idea, there are people saying we shouldn't partake in the religious actions of other religions, we should stick to our own, and for that I would say that if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem.

People have compared it and said that doing something like this is compromising our faith, but how? If anything, this is something which is strengthening our faith, because we are reconnecting and putting ourselves in a position to receive questions from other people and hopefully that will drive us to research more and understand our religion better, so we can in turn present it correctly.

So on both sides it seems to come from a place of not really understanding what we're all about, and it seems that you can't please everybody, and most people are just going to dismiss something that is outside their box of comfort, without trying to understand it.

Were you born in the USA?

American born and raised to Lebanese-Syrian parents.

Have you ever been to Syria?

It’s been a while, but I have, yes.

So it must be particularly painful for you to see what is happening there…

It’s painful every day, whenever I talk to my cousins, because of everything going on... Some of them are my age and they feel that they have been robbed of their future.

When they were younger they had hopes, but one of my cousins has been doing her PHD in Belgium and is set to return to Syria to be a teacher, and even when I talk to her it’s truly sad, because she had high hopes. She wanted to go and change the education system, and advance it in Syria, and then all this happened and now she feels like, who knows? So it is truly sad.

Do you identify as Sunni or Shia?

I don't identify. I prefer just to identify as Muslim. I think that the sectarian division in Islam is one of the dark spots in our religion.

There was no mention of sect in the Koran and Mohammed wasn't sectarian, so I think it is one of the things, internally in the Muslim community, that I try to push on and hope that people start following suit and stop putting labels on ourselves that only serve to divide our own community. 

“Islamism is rooted in insecurity about relationship with God”

This is a full transcript of my interview with Maajid Nawaz, head of the Quilliam Foundation and author of “Radical”. Mr. Nawaz is a former leading member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, an Islamist organization with a presence all over the world. The news report, in Portuguese, can be found here.

Transcrição integral, no inglês original, da entrevista com Maajid Nawaz, autor do livro “Radical” (Texto Editores) e ex-membro do grupo Hizb ut-Tahrir, um movimento fundamentalista islâmico com presença em todo o mundo. A reportagem encontra-seaqui.

In the course of your life as a fundamentalist, and subsequently through the work you have been doing to track and fight extremism, have Portugal or Portuguese elements ever come up?

Of course they have come up. Almost every country in Europe has come up, over the last seven or eight years that we have been doing this work.

Frankly, the situation in Europe is that wherever there are Muslims, unfortunately a faction of them, today, will subscribe to the sort of ideologies that feed into recruitment into groups such as Al-Qaeda or ISIL or any other type of extremist group.

There will be a faction of these within most communities in Europe. I emphasize it is a minority faction, but our work is an attempt to galvanize the silent majority against them and that is where the real difficulty lies.

For a young Muslim to embrace fundamentalism is one thing, but are you surprised by the amount of Western converts to fundamentalist Islam who have been carrying out attacks or travelling to do Jihad?

That is not really a surprise to me, it has been consistent for a long time, even when I was a member of the Islamist organization. And the way that I explain this is that whereas in the past, 30 or 40 years ago, the Zeitgeist for angry young people who were anti-establishment could have been Stalinist communism, today its Islamism, its islamist extremism. Because it has come to symbolize the peak of anti-establishment ideology, it even attracts people who don't come from a Muslim background.

Diagnosing it this way, our challenge is to make this current Zeitgeist of islamist extremism as unattractive or as unappealing as Soviet Communism has become for many young people across Europe.

How is that done?

If we analyse the make-up of social movements, and what makes them popular, I've narrowed it down to five core factors, and those are what I call the ideas, or the basic ideology.

The Islamists want to enforce a version of Islam over society, that's their idea. Their narratives, or propaganda, that's the second thing they have. The third, after ideas and narratives, they have leaders, charismatic leaders who are able to recruit people through their powers of persuasion. They also have iconography, or symbolism. If we look at ISIL the black flags and other kind of iconography come to mind immediately. The fifth element is that they have a vision, or a dream. And in ISIL's case it is the creation of a Caliphate, with the analogy I drew previously with soviet communism it was the creation of the utopian communist state.

So what we need to be able to do is, through civil society activism, discredit the ideas, narratives, leaders, symbols and dream of Islamist extremism, and we need to be able to capture the imagination of young people with alternative ideas, narratives, symbols, leaders and dreams.

Now that is a very difficult task, and it is actually a task for a couple of generations, it’s not something that is going to happen over ten years.

Governments of Western countries such as Portugal are now discussing ways to try and fight this problem. What pointers would you give them?

I would suggest that they focus on prevention, rather than on de-radicalization, what I mean is that it is a lot easier to try and stop people joining extremist organizations than it is to try and pull them out once they've joined. So the first thing I say is to focus on the prevention element.

The second thing I'd say is that what we mustn't try and do, or States and governments mustn't try and do, is to predefine a correct version of Islam, versus an incorrect one, and then sponsor this predefined correct version.

By doing that the State gets locked into sectarian debates about what real theology is, and the State really has no business interfering in religion in that way, nor vice versa.

A better approach, I feel, and this is the advice I have been giving the British Government and others across the World, is that the State should work within communities to reinforce the core values of the social contract. These would be secularism, respect for human rights and democratic process, a respect for individual autonomy and liberty. And those values, regardless of one's religious affiliation, need to be reinforced and religious communities need to be aware that it is their responsibility to reconcile their respective sects and religious interpretations with the values of the social contract.

It's not the state's problem that they are unable to do that, it's the community's responsibility to do that, and that is where we are very far behind, currently, in this debate, in that the communities across the spectrum, Muslim and non-Muslim, all need to step up to the plate and start reinforcing these core values which make our societies stable and peaceful.

Are you in hiding?

No. I am not in hiding, I am actually running for an election to Parliament, so I am very public. But I take precautions, because as you can imagine some of the things I say are not very popular with extremists.

You abandoned Islamism, but you remain Muslim?

That is correct.

Some people say that these terrorist acts have nothing to do with real Islam. Do you agree?

No I don't. I think it is unhelpful. I was doing an interview with the US media last night and I drew an analogy with the Harry Potter books.

The bad guy in Harry Potter is called Voldemort and the author uses the phrase: "He who must not be named", because people are so scared of this figure, that they are scared of even naming it. That leads to a climate of even more paranoia and more fear. So I think it is unhelpful if we don't name the Islamist ideology. Because what it will do is lead to a climate of even more fear and, invariably, people will start blaming all and every Muslim.

So to avoid all Muslims being blamed, let’s pinpoint exactly what we are talking about, so that we know what it is we need to refute and critique. We are talking about Islamism. Islamism is the desire to impose any version of the religion of Islam over society. That distinction is what makes the difference between a Religious Muslim [and an islamist].

And by the way I am not a religious leader nor do I claim to speak in representation of Muslims, I speak based on my principles and my thoughts.

But however one wants to follow one's own religion: Conservative, liberal, reform, moderate, strict, traditional, however these denominations or differences exist in Catholicism, or any form of religion, that is very different from wanting to impose your view on other people through law, or by infiltrating governments and then enforcing that over society. That is what we refer to as Islamism.

Jihadism is the use of force to spread Islamism. I have a problem with both Islamism in principle and, of course, Jihadism as a method to spread it.

When we talk about jihadism and Islamism, are we talking about mainly a political or a religious problem?

It’s a combination of both, which is why I said earlier that the statement that this has nothing to do with Islam is incorrect, it has something to do with Islam, it may not be what the vast majority of Muslims subscribe to, but it certainly has something to do with Islam, that is undeniable.

And what it has to do with Islam is that you have a bunch of people out there who are so fundamentally insecure in their own relationship with God, that they want to force everyone else to follow the way they think God wants them to follow their religion. That fundamental insecurity is the birth of Islamism.

You suffered terribly at the hands of the military regime in Egypt. How did you feel when Mubarak fell?

It was a cathartic moment for me. Mubarak was eventually held in the same row of prison cells, in the very same prison in which he held me. So in that sense it was very cathartic. I was optimistic at the time about the prospect of a democratic, albeit imperfect future for Egypt. I am slightly less optimistic now, because things moved one step forward but then they moved ten steps backwards, since.

Meanwhile there were elections and the Islamists took charge, only to be ousted by the military one year later. What went wrong? Is this proof that countries like Egypt and Syria are better off without democracy?

I would dispute that, because Tunisia, for example, demonstrated where it can work. Tunisia had a peaceful uprising and a peaceful changeover of government. They went from their post-Islamist "Ennahda" party led by Rashid Ghannouchi to a largely secular government, so Tunisia can demonstrate, or does demonstrate, that Arab countries can handle democracy.

What went wrong in Egypt was that the young democratic activists who rose up against Mubarak weren't organized, they fell into infighting and bickering, it left the way open for the most organized faction in society which happened to be the Islamist faction, the Muslim brotherhood. They came to power, made an absolute dogs mess of the situation and that led to Egypt's largest ever protests in the country's history, against the Muslim Brotherhood's government.

It was a popular uprising against Islamism, which again demonstrates that Muslims are not intrinsically or somehow inherently attracted to Islamism. More people protested the Muslim Brotherhood government than they first did against Mubarak's regime. That, unfortunately, precipitated another military coup and Sisi came to power.

What should have happened at that point was a new election, but unfortunately it led to another coup and since then the situation has gone downhill.

Your journey into fundamentalism was through the Hizb ut-Tahrir party. The goal of this party is to create a new Caliphate. When you were active in the movement, would you have embraced a group like ISIS?

No. I think Hizb Ut-Tahrir is still an organization which works across the World, and their stance on groups like Al-Qaeda, which did exist when I was a member, and ISIS, which didn't, has been that they don't condemn them, but they don't agree with their methodology. It is worth pointing out that my former organization was the first group to popularize this idea of creating this Islamic utopia, or the dystopia we now see in the so-called Caliphate that ISIS declared. Hiz ut-Tahrir was founded in 1953 with that sole mission statement, to resurrect the so called caliphate.

I think ISIL's failed experiment should be sufficient, ideally, to demonstrate to every Islamist, exactly what happens when you try to create Heaven on Earth. These theocratic utopian states are inevitably going to fail. 

Did you ever take up arms?

No. Hizb ut-Tahrir's method of power was twofold. One was to prepare public opinion, which was my role, to work with societies in Pakistan, in Egypt, and here in Britain, to prepare public opinion for the return of the Caliphate. The second thing would be to work diligently to recruit army officers with a view to inciting military coups in Muslim majority countries so that they could take power.

The difference between that form of revolutionary Islamism and Jihadism, i.e. the use of force to spread Islamism, is the difference that socialists have between the whole notion of direct action versus what they call dialectical materialism, allowing society to evolve, itself, as means of production change over time, or the evolution of society versus direct action. Socialists had that split, which led to militant socialists taking direct action, likewise Islamists have had that split.

Hizb ut-Tahrir was of the view that terrorist actions would actually hinder progress in the creation of the Caliphate, so I did have a role in attempting to convince army officers, in Pakistan for instance, to join the organization and to plan a coup, and I had a role in preparing public opinion. But up until this day, though the group has certainly contributed to the atmosphere that lends itself to Jihadism, it isn't in itself a Jihadist organization.

In your book you talk about the institutional racism of the police force, when you were growing up. Has that changed?

Racism and the climate of racism in institutions has changed incredibly in the United Kingdom. If you had told me, when I was fifteen years old, that one day the USA would have an African American president, I would have laughed you out of the room.

It’s an indication of a lot of the progress which has been made. That doesn't mean everything is perfect, there are still societies and countries in Europe [with problems]. Like Greece, for example, which doesn't grant citizenship to people who are not ethnically Greek, even though they might have been born and raised for their entire lives, in that country. So there are challenges when it comes to Europe in itself coming to terms with what being European means, in this day and age. So things, though they have improved, still have a lot further to go.

You also talk about the role of the Palestinian problem. How important is this in the radicalization of young Muslims?

I'd say it’s important, but it’s not the be all and end all.

ISIL demonstrate, as do the Taliban, that extremism can have very local contributing factors. In the case of ISIL the failure of the Iraqi government in dealing with the Sunni situation there, post Saddam Hussein, in the case of the Taliban, of course, it is Afghanistan, in the case of Lashkar e-Taiba, in Pakistan, its Kashmir.

So solving the Palestinian problem is important in and of itself, as an issue, though some people present it as the main cause of extremism, which if solved, would end extremism across the world. I would dispute that assumption.

What exactly happened that you should have a change of heart?

Well I'd suggest they read the book, that's what this interview is about.

But in short, I'll give you a sentence, because it was a long five year process, but when I was imprisoned in Egypt, Amnesty International adopted me as a prisoner of conscience and I say in the book: “Where the heart leads, the mind can follow”. And that touched my heart and it allowed me, for the next four years, to spend my time studying in prison.

I re-read George Orwell's Animal Farm and I came to the conclusion, among many other things that I read, including traditional Islamic literature, that if my comrades in prison ever came to power, they would create the Islamist version of Orwell's parody of Communist Utopia.

And I realised that actually these people would be far worse than what we were trying to overthrow. I think ISIL coming to power in Iraq and Syria has demonstrated that. I am happy that I came to that view, and managed to pull out, before I had anything to do with any project related to recreating a theocratic clerical fascist state in the world.

What is the nature of the work you do nowadays?

We primarily work with challenging public perceptions around the subject of Islamism and extremism, in building civil society resilience, in challenging the ideology of Islamism head on, discrediting the five things I mentioned earlier, attempting to promote an alternative to those five.

We advise governments on policy, we work with media, we publish reports that expose, just today wepublished a report on the ISIS issued guidance on how women should behave in their organization, we translated it from Arabic and published it.

So generally our work through civil society is to build resilience and awareness around the Islamist ideology and the understanding of their operational methodologies.

Member of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Pakistan

The conflict in the Middle East is presented at times as being a conflict between Islamism and the West. Is it more useful to see it as a conflict between Sunni and Shiite Islam?

I'd say that even more important than both those, is the conflict, generally, for civilization, within the Islamic faith and within the rest of the world.

I think the world currently is divided between those who stand for liberty, democratic values, pluralism, tolerance, respect, and the rule of law; and those who stand for any form of fascism, whether clerical fascism, in the form of a theocratic state, or totalitarian states, such as North Korea.

Iran and North Korea are allies, and as is the case with fascists, they have infighting, so the Iranian clerical fascists are fighting Sunni clerical fascists in Iraq and Syria, but the rest of the world is united against all forms of clerical fascism. And in both these general camps, in the camps that stand for liberty and democratic values, are Muslims and non-Muslims; and in the camp which stands for Clerical Fascism are also Muslims and non-Muslims.

So I think that is a more accurate way of looking at the world. As I say, this is a clash within Islamic civilization, not between Islam and the West.