une interview très intéréssante de tariq ramadan parlant notament de la contextualisation des textes
A confident, modern Islam must challenge the victim mentality of western Muslims and a crisis of authority across the faith, says Tariq Ramadan. But can you be a gay Muslim?
Ehsan Masood
David Goodhart
Adair Turner
Q Why do you think that after more than 40 years of significant Muslim immigration to Europe, no Islamic reform movement has emerged here?
A Well, there is nothing very visible yet. In a way that is not surprising, these things take time. But I believe a silent revolution is taking place—things are evolving very fast. Muslims are now talking about national citizenship in a more confident way. Women are much more involved in the process. There are pockets of resistance to change, especially among the elder generation, but this is not the only reality: there are new leaders, new understandings, new trends.
Q You often say in your lectures that liberal democracies like Britain are more Islamic than many undemocratic Islamic countries. What do you mean by that—that concepts like the rule of law and equal citizenship and democracy are strongly endorsed by Islam?
A Protection of religion, life, intellect, family, goods and dignity is much more a reality in the west than under the Arab Islamic countries. Nothing is ideal, but we have to acknowledge these facts.
Q You always stress to Muslim audiences the importance of feeling at home here. But there are many organisations, including the Muslim Council of Britain, that benefit from stressing a distinctive Islamic identity and pursue goals such as state funding for Muslim schools that can contribute to ghettoisation. Is that wrong?
A I would prefer social mixing and mutual contribution. I'm not against Islamic schools in principle, and I have seen some good ones here in Britain. I am also aware that even in the mainstream system you often get a lot of plain old segregation, with 80 to 95 per cent of pupils coming from one group, and this we have to fight against too. Muslims should, of course, have the same right to faith schools as Christians and Jews. But there is a danger that self-segregation could be the result. So, it's legally right, but Muslims should not necessarily take up the right.
Q What about the role of the Muslim councils that now exist all over Europe? Do they reinforce a sense of separateness? Should Muslim citizens take their political and social problems to councillors and MPs, rather than the local representative of the MCB?
A There is a contradiction here. European governments want to see the emergence of leaders who can speak in the name of Muslims. In France, they have even set up Muslim bodies. But at the same time, they do not want to encourage too much identity politics.
Q So you hope that in the future there will be less of a role for Europe's Muslim councils?
A Yes, it should just be a religious role. The state should deal with citizens.
Q In terms of representation you are calling for a recognition of the separation of religion and politics—something which most Muslims, perhaps even in Europe, see as fused together.
A I'm just saying that we must follow the rules in the countries in which we live. We should not confuse everything and Islamise social problems. Social problems are social problems and we have to deal with them as citizens claiming our rights, not as Muslims defending their religion. It is true that there are some special problems that Muslims face, certain kinds of discrimination or prejudice based on faith, that we call Islamophobia. But most problems that Muslims face are faced by other citizens too.
Q There is no agreed definition of Islamophobia. What does this word mean to you?
A At first I was cautious about using it. But we have to distinguish between two things. To criticise the religion and Muslims is not Islamophobia; a critical attitude towards religion must be accepted. But to criticise someone or discriminate against them only because they are Muslim—this is what we can call Islamophobia, this is a kind of racism.
Q You may accept the idea of criticism of religions but many devout Muslims will not (the film The Da Vinci Code has even been banned in many Muslim countries). Your distinction between legitimate criticism of a religion and condemnation of discrimination might put you in a minority among Muslims.
A I don't know if I am in a minority or a majority. But I think you are right that there is a great deal of confusion and some very emotional reactions in these difficult times. We need some intellectual critical distance.
Q How much of a problem is Islamophobia in Britain? Is there much evidence for it? Clearly after events like 7/7 there will be some backlash, but Britain has been reasonably calm.
A I agree it's not too bad, especially compared to some other European countries. The BNP has been doing well and they are overtly anti-Muslim, but mainstream politics is relatively immune. I think that British Muslims have a sense that they are quite privileged compared to Muslims in Europe.
Q It is often said that Muslims are more troubled about living in western societies than other religious minorities—Hindus, Sikhs and so on. People say that there is something in the history of Islam as a great world civilisation, and a proselytising religion, that makes it harder for Muslims to adapt, or perhaps gives them greater expectations about the degree of adaptation of the host society. Is that true?
A I think it's a fact. Things are harder for Muslims in secular societies. The whole intellectual and religious apparatus of Islam perceived itself as not of the west, and tended to see the west as a monolithic entity. Also, the experience of colonisation is something we cannot forget. In north Africa, India and Pakistan, it runs deep. Then on the western side there is the feeling that Muslims are especially difficult to integrate because of the indivisibility of religion and politics; that Islam is monolithic. We have to try to deconstruct these perceptions on both sides, perceptions that can be self-segregating. It's not easy.
Q The French banned headscarves in schools. But they also banned crucifixes. The ban is on overt religious symbols of all kinds. Surely Muslims should respect France's tradition of laicite, according to which all religious beliefs should be put aside in public places. Do you have any sympathy with that sort of strong French left-wing secular tradition?
A In theory you are right. But the practice of laicite dates back to a law of 1905. If a law already exists, why a new law in 2004? This is because crucifixes were accepted under the old law. The new law was passed because of France's Muslim presence. The reality is that France's secular tradition is being adapted to target a specific group. French society is going through something of an identity crisis. I have told all French girls that, if they have to make a choice between going to school and wearing the headscarf, they must choose school. Just go. This is the law. But at the same time, being a democrat means that you continue to discuss the merits of the law and call for change.
Q Would you say that what is happening in France with the headscarf ban is Islamophobia?
A No, I would say it is a kind of discrimination.
Q Strictly speaking, Islamophobia means fear of Islam, but in common parlance it is taken to mean animus against Muslims, which is slightly different. Many leading British Muslims do believe that we live in an Islamophobic world. You would disagree?
A It is dangerous to nurture this feeling. Very dangerous. It is nurturing a victim-mentality, the idea that everyone is against us.
Q You say that any woman ought to be able to wear a headscarf if she wants to. Would you also agree that a country such as Iran ought to allow any woman not to wear a headscarf?
A To force a woman to wear a headscarf is against Islamic principles and human rights. That's it.
A confident, modern Islam must challenge the victim mentality of western Muslims and a crisis of authority across the faith, says Tariq Ramadan. But can you be a gay Muslim?
Ehsan Masood
David Goodhart
Adair Turner
Q Why do you think that after more than 40 years of significant Muslim immigration to Europe, no Islamic reform movement has emerged here?
A Well, there is nothing very visible yet. In a way that is not surprising, these things take time. But I believe a silent revolution is taking place—things are evolving very fast. Muslims are now talking about national citizenship in a more confident way. Women are much more involved in the process. There are pockets of resistance to change, especially among the elder generation, but this is not the only reality: there are new leaders, new understandings, new trends.
Q You often say in your lectures that liberal democracies like Britain are more Islamic than many undemocratic Islamic countries. What do you mean by that—that concepts like the rule of law and equal citizenship and democracy are strongly endorsed by Islam?
A Protection of religion, life, intellect, family, goods and dignity is much more a reality in the west than under the Arab Islamic countries. Nothing is ideal, but we have to acknowledge these facts.
Q You always stress to Muslim audiences the importance of feeling at home here. But there are many organisations, including the Muslim Council of Britain, that benefit from stressing a distinctive Islamic identity and pursue goals such as state funding for Muslim schools that can contribute to ghettoisation. Is that wrong?
A I would prefer social mixing and mutual contribution. I'm not against Islamic schools in principle, and I have seen some good ones here in Britain. I am also aware that even in the mainstream system you often get a lot of plain old segregation, with 80 to 95 per cent of pupils coming from one group, and this we have to fight against too. Muslims should, of course, have the same right to faith schools as Christians and Jews. But there is a danger that self-segregation could be the result. So, it's legally right, but Muslims should not necessarily take up the right.
Q What about the role of the Muslim councils that now exist all over Europe? Do they reinforce a sense of separateness? Should Muslim citizens take their political and social problems to councillors and MPs, rather than the local representative of the MCB?
A There is a contradiction here. European governments want to see the emergence of leaders who can speak in the name of Muslims. In France, they have even set up Muslim bodies. But at the same time, they do not want to encourage too much identity politics.
Q So you hope that in the future there will be less of a role for Europe's Muslim councils?
A Yes, it should just be a religious role. The state should deal with citizens.
Q In terms of representation you are calling for a recognition of the separation of religion and politics—something which most Muslims, perhaps even in Europe, see as fused together.
A I'm just saying that we must follow the rules in the countries in which we live. We should not confuse everything and Islamise social problems. Social problems are social problems and we have to deal with them as citizens claiming our rights, not as Muslims defending their religion. It is true that there are some special problems that Muslims face, certain kinds of discrimination or prejudice based on faith, that we call Islamophobia. But most problems that Muslims face are faced by other citizens too.
Q There is no agreed definition of Islamophobia. What does this word mean to you?
A At first I was cautious about using it. But we have to distinguish between two things. To criticise the religion and Muslims is not Islamophobia; a critical attitude towards religion must be accepted. But to criticise someone or discriminate against them only because they are Muslim—this is what we can call Islamophobia, this is a kind of racism.
Q You may accept the idea of criticism of religions but many devout Muslims will not (the film The Da Vinci Code has even been banned in many Muslim countries). Your distinction between legitimate criticism of a religion and condemnation of discrimination might put you in a minority among Muslims.
A I don't know if I am in a minority or a majority. But I think you are right that there is a great deal of confusion and some very emotional reactions in these difficult times. We need some intellectual critical distance.
Q How much of a problem is Islamophobia in Britain? Is there much evidence for it? Clearly after events like 7/7 there will be some backlash, but Britain has been reasonably calm.
A I agree it's not too bad, especially compared to some other European countries. The BNP has been doing well and they are overtly anti-Muslim, but mainstream politics is relatively immune. I think that British Muslims have a sense that they are quite privileged compared to Muslims in Europe.
Q It is often said that Muslims are more troubled about living in western societies than other religious minorities—Hindus, Sikhs and so on. People say that there is something in the history of Islam as a great world civilisation, and a proselytising religion, that makes it harder for Muslims to adapt, or perhaps gives them greater expectations about the degree of adaptation of the host society. Is that true?
A I think it's a fact. Things are harder for Muslims in secular societies. The whole intellectual and religious apparatus of Islam perceived itself as not of the west, and tended to see the west as a monolithic entity. Also, the experience of colonisation is something we cannot forget. In north Africa, India and Pakistan, it runs deep. Then on the western side there is the feeling that Muslims are especially difficult to integrate because of the indivisibility of religion and politics; that Islam is monolithic. We have to try to deconstruct these perceptions on both sides, perceptions that can be self-segregating. It's not easy.
Q The French banned headscarves in schools. But they also banned crucifixes. The ban is on overt religious symbols of all kinds. Surely Muslims should respect France's tradition of laicite, according to which all religious beliefs should be put aside in public places. Do you have any sympathy with that sort of strong French left-wing secular tradition?
A In theory you are right. But the practice of laicite dates back to a law of 1905. If a law already exists, why a new law in 2004? This is because crucifixes were accepted under the old law. The new law was passed because of France's Muslim presence. The reality is that France's secular tradition is being adapted to target a specific group. French society is going through something of an identity crisis. I have told all French girls that, if they have to make a choice between going to school and wearing the headscarf, they must choose school. Just go. This is the law. But at the same time, being a democrat means that you continue to discuss the merits of the law and call for change.
Q Would you say that what is happening in France with the headscarf ban is Islamophobia?
A No, I would say it is a kind of discrimination.
Q Strictly speaking, Islamophobia means fear of Islam, but in common parlance it is taken to mean animus against Muslims, which is slightly different. Many leading British Muslims do believe that we live in an Islamophobic world. You would disagree?
A It is dangerous to nurture this feeling. Very dangerous. It is nurturing a victim-mentality, the idea that everyone is against us.
Q You say that any woman ought to be able to wear a headscarf if she wants to. Would you also agree that a country such as Iran ought to allow any woman not to wear a headscarf?
A To force a woman to wear a headscarf is against Islamic principles and human rights. That's it.
Commentaire