On June 23, 2005, Sir Derek Plumbly, the British ambassador to Egypt, wrote to the UK Foreign Office's political director, John Sawers, about his colleagues' determination to "engage" with the radical Islamists in the Muslim Brotherhood.
Its motto is: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Koran is our constitution. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."
Hassan al-Banna, its founder, was an admirer of European fascism and its most terrible ideologist, Syed Qutb, inspired the Sunni terror that is sweeping the world.
Given that the brotherhood's leaders came from the far right and upheld an explicit far-right program, Sir Derek wondered if these were the kind of chaps the Foreign Office should be doing business with.
In a letter leaked to the New Statesman magazine, he said that he detected a "tendency for us to be drawn towards engagement for its own sake; to confuse `engaging with the Islamic world' with `engaging with Islamism'; and to play down the very real downsides for us in terms of the Islamists' likely foreign and social policies, should they actually achieve power in countries such as Egypt."
What was Britain hoping to achieve?
How did a country under a left-of-center government expect to influence religious rightists? Did it hope that a conversation with Foreign Office ministers would persuade them to repent and become converts to the noble cause of the emancipation of women? Would an invitation to tea with a high commissioner be enough to shake them out of their hatred of homosexuals, Jews, free thinkers, liberals and secularists?
Get real, said Sir Derek: "I suspect that there will be relatively few contexts in which we are able significantly to influence the Islamists' agenda."
Plumbly lost the power struggle against the pro-brotherhood faction in the Foreign Office, but the questions he raised then remain pertinent now, as the disgraceful reaction to Salman Rushdie's knighthood shows.
Across the political spectrum, the ignorant and the terrified are arguing that if only Britain didn't provoke the zealots in Pakistan and Iran -- and, indeed, in parts of the UK -- by defending liberal values and honoring a great writer, their fury would pass and we would be safe.
APPEASEMENT
In theory, they may have a case. Neville Chamberlain gave appeasement a bad name, but we all appease in our daily lives and make concessions in order to get concessions in return. In practice, the Labour government has tested appeasement to destruction and, thankfully, turned back to principled politics.
If you haven't read The Islamist, Ed Husain's memoir of his life on the religious right, it is worth getting a hold of a copy because he uses his inside knowledge to describe how the Labour party in the UK placated reactionaries who hated every progressive principle the center-left holds.
To take one of many examples, Husain tells how his journey into the wilds began when he joined the east London mosque, which was controlled by Jamat-e-Islami, the Muslim Brotherhood's south Asian sister organization.
After his disillusionment with far-right politics, he returned to the mosque bookshop and found Qutb's work on sale: "... with chapter headings such as `The virtues of killing a non-believer' and ideas such as `attacking the non-believers in their territories is a collective and individual duty.' Just as I had done as a 16-year-old, hundreds of young Muslims are buying these books from Islamist mosques in Britain and imbibing the idea that killing non-believers is not only acceptable but the duty of a good Muslim."
For all that, the mosque had received public subsidies and an apparent endorsement from Prince Charles. Labour ministers flattered Jamat and Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers from the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), invited them into Downing Street and put them on policy commissions, even though in Bangladesh, Jamat thugs terrorize Bengali leftists who have every right to expect the support of their European comrades.
The British Labour party's indulging of Jamat and the Muslim Brotherhood is over for a reason Plumbly might have predicted. Engagement for engagement's sake led nowhere and ministers got nothing in return for going along with the Islamists.
The MCB made no serious attempts to oppose terrorism after the 7/7 bombings in London, while its refusal to participate in Holocaust Memorial Day showed that it had no commitment to either multiculturalism or anti-fascism. In the end, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and other members of his Cabinet shrugged their shoulders and walked away.
POLICY
Government policy is now to support British Muslims who uphold liberal values and oppose those who do not. Rushdie's knighthood was a sign of the changing mood. Labour politicians might have tried to impose a veto a few years ago; instead, they said: "Are we going to allow British policy to be decided by dictatorial bigots, who want to inflame religious passion to divert attention from their own corruption?"
There is only one possible answer to that question and it remains astonishing how many people who profess liberal sympathies refuse to grasp it. I know I keep saying that leftish opinion in the UK has taken a reactionary turn, but if you think I'm overdoing it, watch the discussion about Rushdie on the June 21 Question Time panel discussion program on the BBC Web site.
There you will see Shirley Williams, the representative of the UK's Liberal Democrats and member of the great and the good, fail to offer a word of protest against men who would burn books and murder their authors.
All she does is condemn the British government for honoring a novelist, until Peter Hitchens, a rightwing columnist usually dismissed as a spittle-flecked loon by respectable society, reminds her that she needs to clear her throat with a few words of criticism for his would-be assassins, if only for form's sake.
The British Labour party should stop worrying about the baroness and her kind and relax. If a liberal intelligentsia that is neither liberal nor noticeably intelligent and a Liberal Democrat party that can't stand up for liberalism and democracy want to attack the government, let them. They will pay a price for their moral cowardice.
A series of strong earthquakes in Hualien County not only caused severe damage in Taiwan, but also revealed that China’s power has permeated everywhere. A Taiwanese woman posted on the Internet that she found clips of the earthquake — which were recorded by the security camera in her home — on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu. It is spine-chilling that the problem might be because the security camera was manufactured in China. China has widely collected information, infringed upon public privacy and raised information security threats through various social media platforms, as well as telecommunication and security equipment. Several former TikTok employees revealed
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past