Islam, Political Islam and Women in the Middle East

Hambastegi English Number 121, March 18, 2002 
Paper of the International Federation of Iranian Refugees (IFIR) 
Editor: Maryam Namazie; Assistant Editor: Javad Aslani 
http://www.hambastegi.org 

In This Issue: 
* Islam, Political Islam and Women in the Middle East, Maryam Namazie 
*Another Asylum Seeker Commits Suicide 
* Sign Petition against UNHCR's Violations of Refugees Rights in 
Turkey 
**********************************************************************
************ 
* Islam, Political Islam and Women in the Middle East 
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 citizen 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 practised 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 are nothing 
other than Islam itself.  According to the Koran, for example, 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 'tilth' for men, 
which they can go into their 'tilth' when they 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 Gender Equity in Islam Web Site, 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 
behaviour.' On the verse that says women are men's tilth, they say 
the Koran is encouraging sexuality, even though women are killed for 
expressing theirs (Women Living Under Muslim Laws, For Ourselves, 
Women Reading the Koran, 1997). 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.' 
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 
they 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 

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 'paedophilia 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, or as a movement targeting 
political power (political Islam), is as much a political ideology as 
it is a religion; it 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 'westernisation' 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.  
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 go on to 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. In fact, 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, must we respect and accept their beliefs? 
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.  Criticising 
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 we criticise child labour, does it mean we are 
promoting abuse against children who are forced to work? This is the 
pathetic whining of reactionaries who want to silence defenders of 
women's rights and 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. This is nonsense.  
Xenophobia and homophobia, for example, are the hatred of people: 
foreigners and homosexuals.  You cannot have a phobia against an 
idea.  If we are opposed to racial or sexual apartheid, does that 
make us 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 the Islamic 
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 are sub-humans who actually enjoy being segregated, 
veiled, stoned, flogged and dehumanised.  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, but also completely eliminating political Islam and Islamic 
states and its movement (as was done with Christianity).  Well-
meaning people assert that we need to separate Islam from political 
Islam in order to defend rights.  In fact, to defend universal 
rights, we must have the courage to confront both. Any compromise 
with Islam is a compromise on 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 moved beyond its control and the West 
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 the region.  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 which are 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 in New York, it is unacceptable for them to be 
slaughtered 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 will get rid 
of the primary grounds for political Islam's recruitment.  The 
overthrow of the Islamic regime in Iran will also weaken political 
Islam considerably.  The Islamic Republic of Iran is a pillar of 
political Islam; its overthrow is being delayed by Western government 
support.  Those who truly support women's rights must demand secular 
societies in the Middle East.  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. They 
must also defend the right to asylum for all women fleeing Islam-
stricken societies.  It is our task to move public opinion towards 
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. 

The above is Maryam Namazie's speech at a March 8 conference 
entitled 'Islam, Secularism and Women in the Middle East', organised 
by the Middle East Centre for Women's Studies and Medusa on 9 March 
2002 in London. 

*Another Asylum Seeker Commits Suicide 

On Tuesday 12 March 2002, 27 year old Iranian asylum seeker, Mohsen 
Amri, committed suicide in his room in Handsworth, Birmingham.  Amri 
had come to the UK two years ago from Iran. Though he had made 
several requests for employment authorisation, he had been refused 
permission to work.  His asylum application had also been refused by 
the UK Home Office on a technicality. 

This was the third such incident in less than a two-year period. It 
remains no mystery as to why asylum seekers resort to such desperate 
measures. Why is it that people prefer death to life in the Islamic 
Republic of Iran?  Mohsen Amri fled a society where representatives 
of the almighty have turned the lives of over sixty million people 
into a living hell over the past 23 years. The Islamic regime in Iran 
has denied the citizens of that society any glimpse of hope for a 
near normal existence. People in Iran have the right to seek a way 
out of this miserable life. The response of Western governments to 
this human tragedy has been to close borders, deny asylum and instead 
offer generous support to the brutal regime in Iran so that it may 
maintain its grip over people's lives. 

Undoubtedly, the UK government bears the responsibility for Amri's 
death. With every refusal, Immigration authorities sign another death 
certificate for an asylum seeker. 

The International Federation of Iranian Refugees extends its sincere 
condolences to the family and friends of Mohsen Amri and reaffirms 
its pledge to defend the rights of asylum seekers. The UK government 
must grant asylum to all those fleeing the Islamic regime.  Once 
again we call on all asylum seekers to refrain from self-inflicting 
harm and heed our plea for organised and positive action to attain 
asylum rights. 

* Sign Petition against UNHCR's Violations of Refugees Rights in 
Turkey 

UNHCR Ankara 
Sancak Mah. 
12. Cadde 212 Sokak   No.3 
06550 Cankaya 
Ankara, Turkey 
Tel: +90 312-4411696 
Fax: +90 312-4412173 
E-mail: Turan@xxxxxxxx 

We, the undersigned, condemn the inhuman situation and rightlessness 
of Iranian, Iraqi and Afghan refugees and refugee claimants in Turkey 
and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees' (UNHCR) treatment and 
performance vis-à-vis thousands of refugees and claimants in Turkey. 
We demand that the UNHCR 1. Recognise the right to asylum for all 
those fleeing Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan, especially women and 
children; 2. Recognise Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan as unsafe 
countries; 3. Immediately re-open and review all closed case files; 
4. Improve the determination procedures, including the disclosure of 
the reasons for rejection, increasing the number of appeals and 
interviews and expediting reviews; 5. Provide basic living and health 
needs for refugees and refugee claimants and their residence in 
cities away from the border areas and outside the reach of terrorist 
agents; 6. Intervene resolutely against deportations.  The UNHCR is 
responsible for the threats to the lives and safety of deportees; 7. 
Immediately resettle those recognised as refugees to a safe third 
country, including those Iranians who have fled Iraqi Kurdistan for 
fear of their lives and the inactivity of the UNHCR offices in 
Northern Iraq; and 8. Recognise the rights of refugees and claimants 
to protest. 

Name 
Organisation 
Country 

Copies of letters can be sent to: 
UNHCR Geneva 
UNHCR, HQPRO 2, Case Postale 2500 
CH-1211 Geneva 2 Depot, Switzerland 
Fax: 011-41-22-739-7353 
Tel: 011-41-22-739-8643 
E-mail: Hqpr00@xxxxxxxx 

International Federation of Iranian Refugees (IFIR) 
P. O. Box 27236, London N11 27F 
Tel: +44 (0) 7730 107 337 
ifir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
http://www.hambastegi.org 

Next Issue: Monday 25 March 2002 

To unsubscribe, please reply to this e-mail and write unsubscribe in 
the subject. 


Maryam Namazie 
Executive Director 
International Federation of Iranian Refugees (IFIR) 
P. O. Box 27236, London N11 27F 
Tel: +44 (0) 7730 107 337 
ifir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
http://www.hambastegi.org



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
FREE COLLEGE MONEY
CLICK HERE to search
600,000 scholarships!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/iZp8OC/4m7CAA/ySSFAA/B140lB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

"[C]apital comes dripping from head to foot, from every pore, with blood and 
dirt."
--Marx, Capital, Vol. 1, Chapter 31

Community email addresses:
  Post message: marxist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Subscribe:    marxist-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Unsubscribe:  marxist-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  List owner:   jplst15+@xxxxxxxx

Shortcut URL to this page:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/marxist

Also take our one-question survey at
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/marxist/polls 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/