Islam, Political Islam and Women in the
Middle East.
By
Maryam Namazie
The situation of women living in Islam-stricken
societies and under Islamic laws is the outrage of the 21st century. Burqa-clad
and veiled women and girls, beheadings, stoning to death, floggings, child
sexual abuse in the name of marriage and sexual apartheid are only the
most brutal and visible aspects of women's rightlessness and third class
status in the Middle East.
This is Nothing but Islam
Apologists for Islam state that the situation of
women in Iran and in Islam-stricken countries is human folly; they say
that Islamic rules and laws practiced in the Middle East are not following
the true precepts of Islam. They state that we must separate Islam from
the practice of Islamic governments and movements. In fact, however, the
brutality and violence meted out against women and girls in nothing other
than Islam itself. According to the Koran, for example, the fornicatress
and the fornicator must be flogged a hundred stripes (The Light: 24.2).
Those who are guilty of an 'indecency' must be 'confined until death takes
them away or Allah opens some way for them.' (The Women, 4.15). 'Men are
the maintainers of women' and 'good' women are obedient. Those that men
fear 'desertion', can be
admonished, confined and beaten' (The Women, 4.34). Wives are 'a tilt for
you, so go into your tilt when you like' (The Cow, 2.223). Veiling is
promoted in the Koran: 'O Prophet! Say to your wives and your daughters
and the women of the believers that they let down upon them their
over-garments' (The Clans, 33.59).
Apologists for Islam say that these verses have been
misinterpreted. They go so far as to claim that there is gender equity in
Islam and Islam respects the rights of women! Regarding the verse in the
Koran sanctioning violence against women, they say that Islam only permits
violence after admonishment and confinement and as a last resort. They
say, since men would beat their wives mercilessly at that time, this is a
restriction on men to beat women more mercifully (Women Living Under
Muslim Laws, For
Ourselves Women Reading the Koran, 1997).
In a Web Site promoting Islam's gender-equity, this
verse is explained in this way: 'In extreme cases, and whenever greater
harm, such as divorce, is a likely option, it allows for a husband to
administer a gentle pat to his wife that causes no physical harm to the
body nor leaves any sort of mark. It may serve, in some cases, to bring to
the wife's attention the seriousness of her continued unreasonable
behavior.' On the verse that says women are men’s fields, they say the
Koran is encouraging sexuality (Women Living Under Muslim Laws, For
Ourselves, Women Reading the Koran, 1997), even though women are killed
for expressing theirs. Regarding the fact that women are not to judge or
consult, one mullah from Qom using a female pseudonym says: “Or, Let’s
suppose that in other planets, women are stronger and more learned than
men, do we accept their custom or do we reject it totally?” (Zanan 4 and
5).
On the Gender Equity in Islam Web Site it states that
Islam regards women's role in society as a mother and a wife as her most
sacred and essential one. This may explain why a married woman must secure
her husband's consent if she wishes to work. However, there is no decree
in Islam that forbids women from seeking employment whenever there is a
necessity for it, especially in positions which fit her nature best and in
which society needs her most.'
In reality, these 'Islamic feminist' interpretations
are an insult to our intellect and cannot be taken seriously. Islam has
wreaked more havoc, massacred more women, and committed more holocausts
than can be denied, excused, re-interpreted, or covered up with such
feeble defences. Misogyny cannot be interpreted to be pro-woman even if it
is turned on its head just as fascism, Zionism and racial apartheid cannot
be interpreted to be pro-human. These are mere justifications for
reactionary people who want to legitimise their beliefs and religion or
reactionary states and movements with a vested interest in maintaining
Islamic rules and laws. They apologize because even Islamists don't want
to associate with the outrages committed by Islam throughout the world.
Nothing can hide the fact that Islam, like other religions, is anti-woman
and misogynist and antithetical to women's rights and autonomy.
Political Islam is a Contemporary
Reactionary Movement
Of course there are always those who say that we
can't blame Islam for the status of women in Islam-stricken countries.
Apologists like Jackie Ballard, an ex-MP from the UK who is now living in
Iran says blaming religion for the denial of women's rights in countries
like Iran 'disguised as concern for human rights' is tantamount to
'blaming Protestantism in Britain or Catholicism in Mexico for endemic
domestic violence' and to
seeing
'pedophilia as a symptom of a Christian or western culture'. This is
nonsense. Islam is in political power in Iran and many countries of the
Middle East and North Africa and cannot be compared to Protestantism in
Britain. The Bible is not the law of the land in Britain, while the Koran
is in Iran; it is not in the constitution and penal code nor enforced in
the courts and by morality police in Britain, while it is in Iran.
And that is exactly why Islam, and not Christianity
for example, is at the forefront of the debate on women's rights in the
21st century. Islam in political power (political Islam) which is as much
a political ideology as it is a religion aims to establish Islamic states
and rules and needs political power to do so; this political power has
enabled it to maim, gag and kill women on a mass scale.
Political Islam is a reactionary contemporary movement that was the Right's alternative during
the Cold War and also the
result of Arab nationalism's failure. In Iran, in particular,
political Islam was brought to the fore of the 1979 revolution vis-à-vis
the Left and as a Cold war tool and because of an anti
'westernization' and Islam-ridden tradition dominant in a majority of the
intellectual and cultural sections of society.
It was
in Iran that the Islamic movement became
a notable political force vying for power. This meant that the misogyny in Islam was given a state, laws, courts, the
military and herds of police,
Pasdars, Baseej, sisters of Zeinab, and Hezbollahs at its
disposal
to carry out its laws. In Iran, women were slashed with razors and had acid thrown in their faces, many were killed and
imprisoned until the Islamic
regime in Iran was able to enforce compulsory veiling and establish its
rule.
It is Racist not to Condemn Islam and
Political Islam
This vile political Islam - which has sentenced women
who have been raped to death for 'adultery', and has blamed mothers for
not satisfying husbands as the cause of child sexual abuse - also has its
defenders. Some of them say that women in England, like in Iran and
Afghanistan, also face violence. Of course women face violence everywhere
but surely the situation of women in Afghanistan and Iran are incomparable
to situation of
women
living in France and England. And since when do we excuse violations
because they happen elsewhere? When speaking of the status of women in
Iran, they compare it with Afghanistan and state it is better. As if
that's all those born in the region can expect. They even go so far as to
state that women in Iran have 'freedoms denied to many in the west',
including that a friend can breastfeed in restaurants, or that Iranian
women 'keep their own names after marriage' (Jackie Ballard). According to
these racist cultural relativists, it is as if women living in Iran cannot
expect more freedoms or don't want them. They say Iran is an Islamic
society and are incensed when we say it is not Islamic but Islam-stricken.
They choose one of the many complex characteristics of a number of people
living in Iran and label the entire society with it. Did they call it
Islamic during the Shah's rule? They say it's the people's culture and
religion. They ignore the fact that Islam imposed its rule in Iran through
violence and terror. They say Iran is Islamic so that they
can more
easily ignore the violations committed against women by implying it is
people's choice to live the way they are forced to. In fact, there is an
immense anti-Islamic backlash in Iran with people resisting Islam and its
state despite the repression. They call Iran Islamic so they can prevent
us from condemning Islam and political Islam by implying that any
condemnation is an insult to people's beliefs. They call it Islamic in
order to
make it so. Though it’s untrue, even if every person living in Iran had
reactionary beliefs, it still wouldn’t be acceptable. If everyone
believes in the superiority of their race, does that make it okay?
Respecting people's freedom of expression, belief and
religion or atheism is one thing; that doesn't mean that we must respect
any belief, however heinous. Of course human beings must be respected, but
that doesn't mean that all beliefs must also be respected. Should we
respect fascism, racism, nationalism, and ethnocentrism - they are all
beliefs after all. And when we raise these realities, condemn Islam and
political Islam and defend women's rights, they say we are racists and are
promoting abuse against Muslims.
Criticizing beliefs is not racism. Is it racist to
condemn fascism, nationalism, capitalism, sexism, religion? Does a
critique of fascism, nationalism or racism promote abuse against fascists,
nationalists, and racists? If I criticize child labour, does it mean I am
promoting abuse against children? This is the pathetic whining of
reactionaries who want to silence defenders of women's rights, frighten
them into inactivity and submission. Racism, rooted in capitalism, exists
in society and has nothing to do with a critique of Islam. Don't
non-Muslims
also face racism? These apologists go so far as to call it Islamophobia.
Rubbish! Xenophobia and homophobia, for example, are the hatred of people
- foreigners and homosexuals. You cannot have a phobia against an idea. If
I am opposed to racial or sexual apartheid, does it make me an
apartheid-phobic! If we are opposed to racism and fascism does that mean
we are racist-phobic and fascism-phobic? Come on. Opposing
violations
of women's rights in Islam-stricken countries does not serve racism - just
like opposing Zionism does not make one an anti-Semite. In fact, it is
racist to assume that all those living or born in the Middle East are
supporters of Islam and political Islam and that these vile governments
and movement represent women when in fact women are their first victims.
Labelling women's rights activists as racists is a
dim-witted ploy to justify and excuse women's status under Islam and
political Islam, and deny women and people living in the Middle East and
Iran universal rights and freedoms. Those who say these things do so
because they want to maintain Islam. They want to justify it. Excuse it.
They have an interest in safeguarding religion and political Islam. Or at
best, they believe women in Iran and the Middle East to be such sub-humans
that they actually enjoy being segregated, veiled, stoned, flogged and
dehumanized.
Like Islam, political Islam is antithetical to
women's rights. It is not just a matter of consciousness-raising and
creating a renaissance that pushes religion out of the public sphere and
eliminating its role in people's social lives (as was done with
Christianity), but also completely eliminating political Islam and Islamic
states and its movement. Well-meaning people assert that we need to
separate Islam from political Islam in order to succeed. In fact, to
succeed, we must have the courage to confront both. Any compromise with
Islam is a compromise for women's rights. There can be no compromise on
people's rights and dignity.
September 11: The True Face of Political
Islam
On September 11, the world came to know political
Islam as never before. What happened in New York is happening everyday to
women and people living under the sword of Islam. On September 11, the
monster created by Western governments left its control and it is now
moving to contain it. The USA and Western governments want to contain only
aspects of it - those aspects of it that are moving outside of its
territory. It
has no
problem leaving it contained in the region to continue its reign of
terror. That is where 'fundamentalism' comes into good use. It
distinguished between the Islamists acceptable to the West and those not.
This is an important moment for those of us who have
struggled against Islam and political Islam. For us, though none is
acceptable. Just as it not acceptable for women, men and children to be
massacred it New York, it is unacceptable for them to be massacred in
Iran, Afghanistan and Northern Iraq. Getting rid of political Islam is a
precondition to any improvements in the status of women and people in the
Middle East. The establishment of a Palestinian state and an end to
sanctions against Iraq are essential. An end to these injustices will get
rid of the grounds for political Islam's recruitment. The separation of
religion from the state, education, and a citizen's identity, relegating
religion to the private affair of people is not only realizable but a
necessity after the experience in Iran, Afghanistan and the Middle East.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a pillar of political
Islam; its overthrow is being delayed by Western government support. The
overthrow of the Islamic regime in Iran will weaken political Islam
considerably. It is our task to get public opinion behind people's
movements in Iran and the Middle East for secularism, freedom and equality
and universal rights and away from both poles of USA and Islamic
terrorism.
The 21st Century must be the century that rids itself
of political Islam. This will begin in Iran.
=======================================
Cross- posted from Muktomona E-group.
|