Dominic Asquith

The damage of silence

Over the last days of 2009, the streets of Karachi, Muzaffarabad and Baghdad became the latest battle ground of suicide bombers blowing up other Muslims in the name of Islam.  Al Qa'ida in the Arabian Peninsula claimed as its own an attempt by a young, well educated, wealthy Nigerian to destroy the lives of nearly 300 passengers in the skies above the US at Christmas.  The young Nigerian had earlier posted on his blog that he imagined how “the great jihad will take place, how the Muslims will win (Allah willing) and will rule the whole world and establish the greatest empire once again.”
 
The early days of 2010 have witnessed the murder of Christians in upper Egypt on the steps of their Church as they celebrated the birth of Christ – whether sectarian or not, the choice of targets and timing was clearly designed to create effect. Some used the Swiss referendum on minarets as “evidence” of an unchangeable “Islamophobia” in the West.  In the same way, others are citing the recent attacks and their justification by those who carried them out as proof of an unbridgeable divide between Islam and non-Islam. 

We have to prove both sets of people wrong.  As in the Swiss context, the reaction from opinion formers is going to be decisive.  The West suffers from acts carried out by people claiming to be Western but which the great majority would disown as unrepresentative.  Denouncing these acts as wrong wherever they occur and credibly demonstrating that they are unrepresentative is a responsibility shared by all persons of reason.

The Head of the Civil Rights Congress in Kaduna (Nigeria) said that "for the past 30 years we have witnessed the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in this part of the country" with some groups funded by individuals and countries from the Middle East. Again in Nigeria, the secretary-general of the Islamic Network for Development said that for anyone to contemplate such an act was inhuman. The Muslim Public Affairs Centre based in Lagos said the attempted attack was a complete violation of the teachings of Islam.

What is essential is that those in positions of authority need to make the same points.  The life of a Shia killed celebrating Ashoura or a Christian celebrating Christmas is just as valuable as that of a passenger on Northwest Airlines flight 253.  There is no scope for saying one is more or less innocent. 

If the reaction is silence (particularly when the choice of dates for committing the crimes is clearly purposeful), some will assume that the argument of the extremists is justified: that it is permissible to kill someone just because he or she is a “Westerner” (or indeed just happens to be in a Western location) or is from a different sect or a different religion.  Since Muslim extremists are justifying their actions, the perception will be created that they speak for Islam – unless others  contradict them, Muslim and non-Muslim.  We all need to tell them – loudly: “You are wrong”. 

The effect of such extremism, if left unopposed, is to create a vicious circle.  Fear by non-Islam about Islam will mean less interaction, less understanding and greater prejudice – and greater fear … and so we go round again, but more destructively.  We need to support each other in breaking this vicious circle.  

Posted at 13:20 11 January 2010 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[6]

Do as you would be done by

The result of the Swiss referendum about whether those building mosques in Switzerland should be allowed to erect minarets has raised again the question in the minds of many whether this is "proof" of an inevitable conflict between the West and Islam.  Those who want to emphasise the differences between Islam and western civilisation have jumped on the result to argue that there can be no coexistence. What has struck me, however, is how thoughtful, in many cases self-critical, the commentary has been in the media. This is important, because how Muslims react - whether in the West or in countries where there is a majority of Muslims - will influence the future relationship.  
 
Fawzia al Ashmawy, the head of the Egyptian community in Switzerland and of the Euro-Muslim Institute, was clear in her advice to governments and religious establishments. Don't interfere or exaggerate, she said.  Muslims in Switzerland enjoyed their rights and wanted to be left to solve the problem without unhelpful demagogic statements.  It was the price of living in a "genuine democracy".   Muslims weren't being prevented from worshipping.  H A Hellyer (a professor of law at the American University of Cairo and an associate fellow at Warwick University), who is an expert on Muslim communities in Europe, commented that Muslim populations in the West "are in the heart of modernity and understand it far better than their Eastern counterparts."
 
Alaa al Aswany understandably argued that, while the referendum might be the result of a democratic process, it nevertheless contravened human rights principles.  Why in a democratic country did a majority of those who voted want to deny only to Muslims the right to build a visible symbol of their faith? Again understandably, he was worried about the reaction elsewhere in Europe, drawing attention to the apparent support of the French President for the referendum's result.
 
However, he went on to pose the key question: why did the Swiss vote as they did? His answer was that it reflected a fear of Islam in Swiss society and that Muslims were to a great extent responsible for that fear. "Some terrorist criminals, such as Usama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri, have distorted the image of Islam in the minds of millions of westerners."
 
This was a theme developed by Mustafa Kamel el Sayed, who had spent ten years in Switzerland so can be assumed to understand the culture.  "We must admit," he said, "that the conduct of some political Islam currents has contributed to portraying a negative picture of Islam." He listed as examples: bombings in Paris, Madrid and London; 40,000 women punished for wearing trousers in Sudan; depriving women of their civil rights in most Gulf countries.
 
 Almost four hundred years ago, the British poet Milton wrote of hypocrisy that it was "the only evil that walks invisible, except to God alone".  One of the outcomes of this debate has been to expose some of the hypocrisy that exists in communities, in Europe and outside.  Hypocrisy and the failure to apply standards consistently is the most prominent common feature of those who have adopted extreme views in this debate.  Personally I believe it is the main barrier to understanding in what has been called the intercultural dialogue. We are all vulnerable to the accusation.   It makes no sense to criticise intolerance in some majority Muslim countries of religious freedom, and then undermine those principles at home.  But I also believe that hypocrisy is a fault less common in the young than the old.  Which is why I agree with those who have argued that continuing that dialogue just between clerics and intellectuals on both sides, while necessary, is insufficient.  We need to expand it by including a much greater variety of society.
 
I have given examples of some of the thoughtful comments I have read.   All of them were from people who have first hand experience of a society outside the one they were born into.  There needs to be a thoughtful response from Europe also.   And there has been.   The Presidency of the European Union, the European Commission against Racism, the Vatican, Amnesty International have all criticised the referendum.
 
However, it is not enough just to condemn the referendum result; we have to try and understand the reasons for it.  Many have identified a "crisis of identity" there, as Europeans see their own traditions and culture having to make room for others'.   In a recent opinion poll carried out by a French newspaper, 54% of French people think Islam is incompatible with their society.  But the implications don't just affect those living in France.  They affect us all.  Assertion of rights by either party to a dispute requires extraordinary sensitivity.  Maintaining the balance between respect for a culture you are entering and acceptance of those who come and make their lives in your society is a challenge that confronts each one of us every day -  whether we are among those who move around the world to make a living, or those who remain in their country of birth throughout their life.   The principle that must guide us is the title of this piece.
 
I can't pretend Britain is perfect  in this respect, but it seems to be making progress.  An opinion poll just published, which the Soros foundation has spent the past two years compiling, reports that 78% of British Muslims identified themselves as British, a figure which rose to 94% among those who were born in the UK.  The equivalent figure for France was 49% and for Germany 23%. 

Posted at 11:13 17 December 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[3]

Darwin: Origin Day

I attended last week part of an international conference which the British Council, with the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, organised on the legacy of Charles Darwin, to mark 150 years since the Origin of Species was published.  This was the biggest of a number of events the British Council organised around the world to celebrate the anniversary.  Most of the audience were young and students, about the same age Darwin had been when he began his voyage on the Beagle: he was only 23 years old at the time.   

The big banner outside the Bibliotheca advertising the conference beforehand had already prompted questions from passers-by whether belief in evolution threatened belief in God.  Darwin was not the first to put forward the theory of evolution, but his work established it as a verifiable scientific theory.  He never claimed mankind was descended from the ape.  What he argued was that both shared a common ancestor.  He pointed to the scientific evidence that animals and plants evolved over a period of thousands of years. 
 
We learned that those societies who accepted the theory generally did so because the scientists who promoted it believed in God.  In other words, there was seen to be no contradiction between the theory and a belief in God. Those who rejected it generally did so because the scientists who promoted it in their societies were regarded as atheists.  This was so in Turkey. In addition, atheist scientists who aggressively promoted the argument that science replaced God and religion merely provoked a reaction of religious extremism.

The speakers, most of whom were Muslim, referred to the tradition of Muslim scientists, from Ibn Haythem onwards, who believed in the importance of searching for the truth rather than for what would just support their opinions. This reflected a tradition of open-mindedness. It underlines the importance for us today of teaching students philosophy and the history of science, not just the science of the laboratory. 
 
Of course the way science is taught needs to be sensitive to the cultural context in which you are living.  Those who believed the world was flat or that the sun revolved around the earth found it difficult to be told their beliefs were untrue.  Believing things which are untrue sometimes does not matter.  The damage comes when untrue beliefs make us treat fellow human beings badly.  
 
Darwin's theory affects the way we today view the beings that share our world, setting them in the right context.   Like all scientific theories that challenge accepted ways of thinking, some people still find the Origin of Species difficult  - indeed there was some strong criticism of it voiced in the conference hall.  At the same time, there were very many, male and female, who found the debate helpful.   

This reaction was similar to a discussion about Darwin with Muslim and Christian scholars before the conference.   They admitted that they had entered the discussion opposed and prejudiced to the theory of evolution without knowing a lot about the science behind the theory.  By the end of the discussion one of the Muslim scholars from Al-Azhar wondered why science had a bad reputation even though faith encouraged science, an opinion he supported with several verses from the Quran.  A Christian scholar argued that faith was largely based on strong belief while science was based on uncertainty and scepticism. Hence they should be regarded as separate subjects that could operate in parallel without contradicting each other.  The survey at the end of the session agreed that ‘’cultural dialogue renews the vitality of the mind, polishes the soul and re-organises culture values’’.

As the world's problems become more complicated, we need to learn from and with each other. It also brought home to me how long it takes to overcome misperceptions - but how important it is to go on trying.   Education is essential in finding an answer to the new solutions we need for the new problems we face.  That is why we at the Embassy, in partnership with the British Council, have put education at the top of our priorities. 

A very blessed 'Eid to all who read this.
 

Posted at 10:43 24 November 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[3]

West and Islam: understanding each other

The attack by Major Nidal Malik Hassan, the US Army psychiatrist, on his fellow soldiers in Fort Hood has been used by some to raise questions about the relationship between Islam and "the West".

Egypt's Grand Mufti wrote that Major Hassan is representative neither of Muslims nor Islam.  He went on to state that it served no purpose to blame an entire religion because of the acts of what he called a "non-well" individual.

I completely agree.  There is a deeply important debate we need to have about how the West and Islam view each other.  But we have to be careful how we use the case of Major Hassan in that debate.  We don't even know clearly what his motive or state of mind was.  It may be tempting for some to use a particular case to prove an argument they are trying to make.  But I'm suspicious of the motives of those who do so.  They usually want to cause trouble, specifically to set societies against each other or to argue that a clash between them is inevitable.  They also usually have a closed mind - they have made up their minds and won't be persuaded to think differently.

An single act in itself does not prove a thesis or signal a general attitude.    The tragic murder of Marwa Sherbini shocked us all.  However, I argued at the time that it was not helpful to charge the whole of Germany or Europe or the West with the crime.  The reaction to an individual act, however, may be revealing about attitudes.  Brutal acts of violence require us not just to condemn them, but also to review how our reaction has been perceived by others. That requires understanding.  

This week and last I have been very aware of groups here in Egypt who are trying to develop that understanding.  A group of the brightest students from Al Azhar, who are learning English at a centre which the British Council has helped to set up, came to interview me today.  They were interested in whether Islam and the West were heading for a collision.  They did not think so - nor do I.  Indeed, they saw it as part of their duty to help explain the two cultures to each other so that the trouble-makers could not exploit people's fears and ignorance.  

Next week, a group of six, young Egyptian journalists are going over for a week to Britain to talk to Muslims there and to hear about their experiences.  As a result, they will better understand how a Muslim community in a majority non-Muslim country view themselves and their surroundings - and foreign Muslim countries.  I will be really interested to hear what their impressions are when they return.  

Modern technology allows people to share their views with a wide audience.  Views that are shaped by distrust and prejudice have greater power to damage than ever before.  However, the same technology allows people with real understanding to communicate more effectively.  Creating open minds and building up capabilities to project intelligent debate is what we must promote. Now more than ever we need people with the courage and sensitivity to interpret between societies. The importance of what those young students and journalists are doing cannot be exaggerated.

Posted at 15:33 11 November 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[0]

In response to comments on 'The Niqab'

I have found the many comments on the niqab very rewarding - including from those who thought that, as a Catholic and a British Ambassador (it was not quite clear to me which was worse in their eyes!), I was unqualified to voice an opinion.

I was not seeking to compare religions. Even less was I attempting to comment on the dogma or core beliefs of religious faiths. Even as a Catholic I would not consider myself qualified to comment on Catholic doctrine. I would never dream of doing so on Islam.

However, I do think it is legitimate to ask questions about the practices which people adopt when they worship. Do they define their religion itself or are they signals that merely identify people as followers of a certain religion?  Because the two are different. Most religions have distinguishing marks. One can recognise an orthodox Jew from the way he dresses. One should be free to exhibit those symbols and for some believers it is important to do so. But other believers might choose in certain circumstances not to adopt practices or symbols traditionally associated with their religion. If they choose not to do so, I can't believe that makes them less devout or less religious persons.

We cannot presume to know the mind of God and whether God attaches importance to the symbols we have adopted. But I think it is reasonable to ask whether adopting symbols and practices increases one's understanding of God. I accept that it may make one feel more devout, but that is different. It goes to the heart of what is ritual in religion and what is dogma, between the external and the internal. That becomes an important question if ritual assumes greater importance or attention than dogma.

But there is another theme that emerges from the comments on my blog which I think is also important. It is about excluding people from voicing opinions. Exclusion is a deep fear that everyone knows from childhood. To be excluded from a group can be one of the cruellest forms of punishment. We have all been guilty of it or have suffered from it at some time in our lives. To exclude people shows lack of imagination. More seriously, it shows lack of humanity.

It remains for me one of the deepest puzzles of history that those who believe in God who oversees and cares for all humanity should seek to exclude - whether from debate or any other human activity - a fellow human being. Exclusion is an indication of intolerance. And intolerance invariably results in injustice. I remain passionately attached to the notion of tolerance and deeply fearful of any exhibition of intolerance.

I'm not surprised by the emotional response of some bloggers to what I wrote. It was emotionally understandable for some to dismiss my remarks as cultural imperialism from the days of the old British High Commissioner. However, such an approach does not help develop a rational debate or one which is open to the opinions of others. Emotion can stand in the way of really understanding one surroundings and can make one deaf to listening what others are trying to say.

Posted at 17:03 28 October 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[2]

The Niqab

The debate that has erupted following Shaikh Al Azhar's comments on the niqab has reminded me of a debate that erupted in another religion 50 years ago.
 
In 1959, the Roman Catholic Pope at that time, John XXIII, took an important step in opening up the Catholic church.  His successor carried this forward in what was called the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II).  The role of those who were not clerics but "ordinary" devout worshippers had until then sometimes been described as being to pray, fast and obey.  With the changes, they became participants in the religious celebrations, rather than followers from a distance.  During the religious service, the priest faced towards them, rather than turn his back on them.  The religious service was conducted in the language they used every day and understood, rather than in Latin. Some have used a sporting term to describe the effect, which was to turn the lay worshippers from spectators into players.  

As a Catholic child at the time, one of the things I also noticed was that my mother no longer entered church with a veil on her head. My aunt, whose devotion was legendary in my family and whose rosary, given to her by the Pope, I still possess, did the same.

No one is arguing that wearing the niqab is unIslamic, just whether Islam dictates that it should be worn; whether wearing it is central to faith or is a tradition.   I'm not surprised that views are strong on either side of the debate.   Just recently in France and in Britain when leaders debated publicly wearing the niqab, our Muslim communities had mixed reactions.  Some even resented that the question was raised, imagining another attack on Islam.  I remember how difficult it was for some Catholics fifty years ago to accept the changes - to the symbols and the traditions. 

The changes brought in by Vatican II broke with long tradition.   Some Catholics embraced the changes.  Some were sceptical.  Others were shocked, thought the changes were heretical and rejected them.  In the case of the veil in church, we ended up realising that it had been a mixture of tradition and culture.  That is all now in the past.  The arguments have moved on  - well beyond the veil.  But the consequences were profound.  The effect of Vatican II was to reach out to Catholics - and I believe to non-Catholics.  The Catholic church seemed to become less severe.
 
Quite rightly, however, what never changed were our central religious beliefs.
 
Emotion has an important role in religion.  It can be a powerful force for good.  I suspect there will be some who read this who will reject any attempt to draw lessons between religions.  But there are some brief conclusions I think can be drawn.  It is not impious to suggest a reasoned debate about religious matters, which focuses on the essence of our religion, not its symbols.  Anything which increases one's ability to reach out, whether to those of our own religion or to those from other religions, must be good.  However, symbols will remain important for some because of tradition and culture.  It will take time for them to come to terms with the changes.  Change is always difficult.  But above all, once again, the debate must be reasoned  as the Qu'ran so repeatedly encourages.

Posted at 13:22 16 October 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[0]

Ramadhan Kareem and 'Eid Mubarak

Though I am not a Muslim, I have been struck by how included I and my family have been made to feel during Ramadhan.  We have been absorbed into families or welcomed into broader communities. Whether it has been the three iftars at my house or the many I have been invited to, each occasion has been full of humour. My worst mistake was to offer turshi to one of my guests without letting her first quench her thirst with some water.  She was generous enough to laugh, not criticise.  

Beneath the humour, however, I have noted during the iftars something deeper. It is as if people are more relaxed and more forgiving and therefore, perhaps unconsciously, are better able to communicate.  I have had some of the most honest and open conversations over these past weeks.   

This week we had in our garden about 120 former graduates of British universities.  These are people who had the courage to leave the comfort of their familiar surroundings and venture into the unknown abroad.  I know how unsettling it is because one of my daughters has just done the same.  They have also had the sense of responsibility to come back to Egypt and give back to their own society some of their experience.  They are more than bridges between cultures.  Bridges are static, while these people are very active.  Like traders and explorers of the past, they help shape perceptions of one community about the other.  

At the end of this month, some of these former graduates who have, over the past 25 years, won Chevening scholarships will once again team up with us at the Embassy and with researchers from Chatham House, possibly our most prestigious think tank.  Over two days, we will discuss topics that affect both Europe and the southern Mediterranean.  We won't change the world, but I do hope that each one of us, having had the time to think and exchange views about important subjects, will affect in some way for the good the people around us.   

I certainly feel that my experience of meeting people over Ramadhan has affected me for the better,  for which I thank all those with whom I came into contact.

I take this opportunity to wish you blessings, happiness and peace over this 'eid.  

Posted at 12:13 16 September 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[0]

Help us to make our blogs better

A request from the FCO blogs team: tell us what you think about our blogs so that we can improve them.

We want to know what you like and dislike about our blogs, what you’d like to see our bloggers writing about, and how you feel about the style of our articles.

To get your feedback we’ve created a short survey. It should only take a few minutes to complete and it will really help us to understand your thoughts and feelings.

Please help us to make this blog better and take the survey

FCO blogs team

Posted at 19:15 01 September 2009 by e-Media Global  |  Comments[0]

The courage to debate

Thank you all for your comments on my previous blog about the murder of Marwa El Sherbini - especially those who are posting comments for the first time on a blog.
 
There are some common themes.  For example the role of the news media, which are at fault both for ignoring the case of Marwa, but also for stirring up rage.  Some have referred to the role of the internet as a forum where freedom of speech is abused and insulting language is promoted.  These channels have allowed troublemakers to argue that a whole community (Germany - even the whole “West”) is guilty of what was an individual act. 
 
Others asked whether the religious institutions, mosque and church, should not be playing a greater role in moderating reactions.  Similarly the NGOs.  We should also be targeting youth, particularly at schools, to educate them in what we call the “soft skills” - how to communicate in a way that respects the position of the other person.

There is a further theme that emerges from the blog comments: it is not hate that Muslims feel for the West, but anger.  And the anger comes from a strong feeling that Muslims are victims and are insecure living in a non-Muslim society.  Only by making a great noise will those who ignore them feel their pain.  The “West” does not really care: indeed, focusing on the specific case of Marwa just proves that the much bigger picture of Muslims suffering (Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine etc) is blurred and ignored.  What made me saddest was the comment: “I would really love to see some of us smile again.”
 
All those comments are true.  News media will make more money selling stories of hate and violence than friendship and peace - so don’t count on them being allies of moderation.  Those who want to use mass communication to promote a message of peace will have to compete with those who want to misuse the internet to promote violence.  And insecurity on one side breeds insecurity on the other. Look no further than Israel and Palestine.  As Kissinger once said, “the desire of one power for absolute security means absolute insecurity for all others”. 
 
Hypocrisy is part of the problem.  It is dishonest, betrays a closed mind and is often an excuse for cowardice - not daring to face the reality.   I was therefore genuinely excited by a conversation with the Rector of Al Azhar this week.  He’s just returned from a visit to Britain.  He is conscious of Al Azhar’s role as the manarat al ilm, as the beacon of scholarship.  He met many in Britain, in the best universities, among the NGOs, in the mosques who wanted to collaborate in building understanding, particularly among young people, to counter those who seem determined to promote intolerance. 
 
It made me proud to read how bloggers who had studied in Britain had been welcomed.  But how can one ever protect against an individual act of wickedness?  Well, the best answer is what you suggested - build the experience from a young age of open but respectful debate, without insisting that you are right and the other wrong.  I think that is what could come from this recent visit by the Rector.  I also felt I had something to smile about.

Posted at 12:52 22 July 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[3]

Marwa el Sherbini

The brutal murder of Marwa el Sherbini in a German court has brought moving messages of condolence for her family and real anger at an act of pure evil.  The murderer was consumed by violent intolerance.  The debate over whether to define the act as one of racism or religious hate or an assault on human rights seems to me to disregard the human tragedy.  The murder was unspeakable, the personal grief unbearable.  Quite rightly, German leaders have made clear there is no place for xenophobia or Islamophobia in Germany.  

The way that some have reacted to the murder, however, deeply troubles me because it is (perhaps unintentionally) creating conditions for a more vicious cycle of distrust between Muslims and non-Muslims. To conclude from Marwa’s death that the whole West is Islamophobic cannot be right.  I know from personal dealings with my own political leaders how untrue that is.  They continually try to find ways to create the conditions for building trust.  They sincerely and passionately believe it.  To call for dialogue between the faiths to be closed down cannot be right either.  Now more than ever there needs to be trust and respect – and that can only come from understanding and therefore contact.  

I spent most of last night with an extraordinary group of people engaged in humanitarian work around the world.  They came from different faiths and were extremely devout. But what chiefly motivated them was to reinforce the point that the concept of humanitarian assistance was not a “western” but a common principle. One of them told me how he had succeeded over the past decade in ensuring, for example, that Christian Aid, Caritas and Islamic Relief had been contributing funds to each other’s projects – madrasas in Asia or schools in Central America.

At the heart of this lies the requirement to change mindsets.  It is not easy to get rid of personal prejudices or to be honest about one’s own faults.  My question to you who read this is: how do we best do this in a way that builds trust? Please send me your ideas.

Posted at 11:48 15 July 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[10]

Chevening Scholarship scheme

This week we celebrated - and not because my country was described by Iran's Supreme Leader as "the most evil and treacherous" in the world (who feeds him these ideas?).  No, we celebrated because we welcomed back almost 40 young Egyptian men and women who had been doing Masters and further studies at British universities under our Chevening Scholarship scheme.  And we said good luck to almost 20 more going off to do the same this year.  This is a programme that the Foreign Office funds, with generous co-sponsorship from mainly British companies operating in Egypt, and managed by the British Council.  It is a real collaboration between those who want to make a practical difference to people's lives here in Egypt.  

We all met at my house.  Every one of the guests was bright and enthusiastic and doing something really important - from making buildings more energy efficient to trying to establish the equivalent of the European Convention on Human Rights for the Arab World. Some came with their husband or wife or mother or father or sister.  A band of dufuf drummers insisted on involving some of us in their dancing.

We listened to an inspirational short speech from a former Chevening scholar: she now runs two of her own companies.  One of her most important messages to this year's scholars was that, to benefit from the year in Britain, they needed to be willing to operate outside their comfort zone.  Indeed they should push themselves to do so.  This comfort zone was both intellectual and social.  They had to explore the subject they were working on and challenge the assumptions. But they also needed to throw themselves into their surroundings, even though they would meet situations they were not used to.  Throwing themselves into the local culture did not mean losing hold of their own values.  Indeed, the combination merely made the British respect them even more deeply.  "I still came back a good Muslim", she said.  

Her comments clearly echoed the experience of the returning scholars.  We had asked them each to exhibit one photograph that best described their experience of the past year in Britain - and the winner was invited to dinner with me and my family at my house, and bring with them five other friends.   One photograph showed the student with a group of friends at Warwick University, clearly at ease and happy in each other's company.  Underneath he had written "with the best friends I have made since childhood".  What more could one ask for?

It also made me think that the results of a recent Gallup Coexist Index opinion poll of British Muslims were probably right. The poll showed that British Muslims felt less isolated than the average British citizen and appreciated the freedom and respect they enjoyed in Britain.  

Posted at 10:00 25 June 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[3]

Obama’s speech

Much has already been written, Twittered and spoken about “the speech”.  There’s no denying it was a good one and an important one. It is significant for what it says and the clarity with which it sets out the difficulties we face.

But perhaps more importantly, it gives real prominence (because of who Obama is and where he said what he said) to the fact that there is a group of forward-thinking western leaders trying to grapple with one of the most complex problems we face.  How do we overcome the misperceptions between the West and Islam which foment or are cynically used to foment such inhuman violence? 

These leaders are sincere in their effort and are working on a shared agenda.  But they can’t make the running alone.  Gestures need responses.  In everyday life, gesture and response contain the risk of embarrassment and rejection. But if you sit on your hands or never open your mouth but to say “not interested, don’t believe you”, think how mad you’d go.  Moreover, it’s not natural.

Obama’s speech did not come from a blue sky.  His team have been building up to it.   On the British side,  the Prince of Wales in 2006 (at Al Azhar of course) and David Miliband over the past months have been talking very openly about it. David Miliband even advanced the revolutionary idea that we should get away from seeing Muslims as Muslims, but rather as people who are occupied in a variety of activities.  My first thought about someone is not to say “Oh, she’s a Muslim” and then “she’s also a journalist”. My first thought is “she’s a journalist”.  My second thought may be  “I’d better be careful what I say!”  I genuinely do not think what religion she is.  That’s not lessening the importance of religion in any way.  It’s merely refusing to let a set of preconceptions affect how you respond to someone.

What was odd about the day of the speech was the contrast between the event itself – an extraordinary example of mass communication thanks to modern technology and the draw that Obama manages to have for so many millions of people – taking place in a city that was eerily silent. What happened to 17million Cairenes?  As one Egyptian said to me that day, “What will Obama think? It’s as if Cairo is under siege.”

But there was another really peculiar feature that day.  Why were the only protesters I saw a dozen foreigners outside the gates of the University, who sounded American?  They appeared rather tired and bored.  I didn’t get the sense their heart was in it.  One message of the speech was to face tensions squarely and with candour.  To speak clearly and plainly.  It is certainly an extraordinary day when the presence of the President of the US, however charismatic and popular he may be, draws no crowd protesting enthusiastically.  

Posted at 15:20 11 June 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[4]

A view from Cairo: Forging coalitions with the Muslim world

David Miliband, the British Foreign Secretary, raised some really important questions in a speech he gave last week at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies. 

How do you hold fast to your values when at the same time practical politics – actually achieving something, not just preaching – means you have to build coalitions with people who have different belief systems?

He said we need to build consent by showing we are consistent in applying our values, while sharing a commitment to politics and the renunciation of violence.  We must make it clear that argument is our weapon of choice.  If we can assure people of that, we can then debate ideological differences.  Every continent provides examples of how engaging in politics softens extreme views, once a statesman or woman realises that progress requires the building of coalitions and consent.

Political liberties, freedom of speech and a fair judicial system are what opinion polls repeatedly show a majority admires most about the West.   Where doubt creeps into people’s minds is whether the West is sincere, since it appears inconsistent in applying those values. Making progress in applying these values also means building up and working with representatives of civil society. 

I was reminded of this when I sat with our visiting Minister, Mr Rammell, talking to a group of NGO leaders last week. They were calm, rational and committed to that majority view shared around the world and demonstrated in opinion polls.  They  were keen that their space be protected so they could promote those views.

Among their many insights, two particularly struck me.  Firstly, for many people, including students around the country, the language of human rights was less easy to understand than the language of religion.  This got me thinking to another point Mr Miliband made in his speech.  The rising importance of the individual and the increasing modernisation of technology are making people think more deeply about how to accommodate modern lifestyles to the demands of their religious identity.

But secondly, our guests said, when space was made available for civil society organisations to operate, human rights movements were more effective at filling it than religious ones.  

I hope you will read the speech.  Then please let me know what you think about it – what did you like about it, what did you not like?  

Posted at 15:47 28 May 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[0]

A busy week

This promises to be an interesting week.  First we have Jack McConnell, Prime Minister Brown’s Special Envoy on Conflict Resolution, over here for a conference which the Egyptian government is organising on post-conflict peacebuilding.  The subject is a priority for all governments and civil society, working with the UN.

One in three countries falls back into conflict within five years of a peace deal.  The human suffering is immense.  The effect on regional stability is severe.  The demands that this places on peace-keeping will become unsustainable.  The UN Secretary General will shortly issue a report on peacebuilding.  To turn his vision into a reality, international and regional organisations, individual states and people with experience need to work together.  Egypt has something to offer, because it runs a regional centre for training, peace-keeping and conflict resolution in Africa.  

Following immediately on Mr McConnell, is the Foreign Office Minister, Bill Rammell.  He will want to discuss with the Egyptian government three of the most important challenges we face together – confronting the terrorist threat, how we can coordinate more effectively handling the risk of nuclear proliferation and the contribution Britian can make to Egyptian efforts to increase the skills of the workforce here.  

While he is here, I hope he will have time to attend a seminar we are organising with a British company CQL on deveoping skills to increase people’s employability.  This is a subject close to his heart, in his current job, and in his former role as Minister for Lifelong Learning. Investing in the skills of the workforce empowers people, supports national prosperity, and improves lives for generations to come. People’s life chances are transformed by education, and so are those of their children.  As the biggest foreign investor in Egypt, Britain is a natural partner when it comes to investing in the skills of the workforce.

He has also asked to meet some of the nearly 1000 Chevening scholars we have sent over the years to universities in Britain, to hear from them direct about their experiences, how that period of study has helped them in their careers and in their role in explaining both Egypt to people in Britain and Britain to Egyptians.

However well one knows a country or a region of the world, you have to keep coming back to meet the people who live and listen to what they are saying.  Our visitors always leave Egypt with a more subtle understanding of the problems and a clearer idea of how the two countries can work together – but even more importantly, why it is important they should.

Posted at 08:58 20 May 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[1]

Where children grow up young

I went out for the morning to visit a school in Saqqara, about 45 minutes south of Cairo. It was one of nearly 80 in the Governorate run under the Girls Education Initiative, and over 1000 in the whole of Egypt. Coming off the road that runs beside the Mariotiya canal, we passed a smart Country Club with bougainvillea cascading over its clean white walls. The tarmac abruptly ended and we turned down a dusty road, a smaller, dirtier canal on one side and humble houses and small grocery shops on the other. We arrived at a small building. It was neat, well built, brightly painted and well maintained. I sensed that those who worked and studied there were proud of it.

Inside, there was just one classroom. This is the pattern for all the schools under this intiative, with the community donating land and needing to be involved in maintaining and sustaining the school. About 30 girls aged between 6 and 13 were studying under the care of two teachers. Not every girl manages to turn up for the whole school day every day. The reality is that they have jobs to do also. This is the point of the school - to provide educational opportunities to girls who don't get the chance, for whatever reason, to attend the state school, which in this case was just the other side of a wall.

Meeting school children in Saqqara, 

Ehsan, the class leader for the day, organised her classmates, some older than her, into a circle to greet me. Her face was shining with excitement but also a calm authority and a determination to get the welcome word perfect. Better than I could have managed at that age, I thought.

The girls then went to work in their "classes", at tables arranged in each of the four corners of the room: reading, science, mathematics and art. They followed the national curriculum, but this wasn't education drilled in by a teacher standing in front of them. The pupils themselves were active in learning the skills of each discipline, absorbed in games they had helped make which taught them the letters and words or made them use the mathematical rules of multiplication. There was a busy concentration from her classmates as one child from each class explained to me the rules. At the beginning of the day, the girls had sat down in the middle of the room with the teachers and agreed what they were going to study that day. A couple of the girls wanted to show me how they used the internet on the computer to help with their work. But the connection was proving uncooperative that day.

I told them they were rightly proud of what they had achieved. Education opened the mind and an open mind was the key to the world. Those who were sponsoring them also should be proud. The sponsors included dedicated Egyptians who were determined that these girls must have the opportunity to learn, a foreign company and the Maadi British International School, of which I am a proud Patron. Four pupils from the British school were also there for the day. Sometimes the Saqqara girls went to Maadi in exchange. There was a strong sense of a community at work, trying to build a relationship between a local community and government. I heard how a boy, at another school under similar initiative, had gone home one day and succeeded in persuading his father not to make his sister go through Female Genital Mutilation. Brave lad, I thought, to tackle such a sensitive issue, and what persuasive powers he must have. Must be a budding diplomat.

As we drove back to the main road, I watched very young children hanging around the groceries, ready to run errands, and cleaning up rubbish along the street, putting it into sacks. I thought back to Ehsan's calm authority in the classroom. Children grow up so young here.

Posted at 13:58 14 May 2009 by Dominic Asquith  |  Comments[1]