U.S. Congressional Briefing (Open)
Human Rights Caucus
Subject: The Persecution of Christians Worldwide
Guest Speakers:
Bat Ye'or
The Baroness Cox
The Revd. Canon Patrick Augustine
1st Event: Tuesday, 29 April 1997 (2:00-4:00pm)
Opening Statement
Bat Ye'or
PAST IS PROLOGUE
The Challenge of Islamism Today
Basic text used by Bat Ye'or for the above event, and also for a Briefing
Seminar Freedom House (30 April). With her oral statement at a Congressional
Hearing Ceremony on Capitol Hill, this written text was incorporated into
the Congressional Record of that day, Thursday, 1 May.
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
Headline: TESTIMONY: BAT YE'OR. Author (Geneva, SWITZERLAND)
Thursday, 1 May 1997, 10:00 AM SD-419
BODY: SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE; SUBCOMMITTEE ON NEAR EASTERN AND
SOUTH ASIAN AFFAIRS; HEARING ON RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION IN THE MIDDLE EAST
Witnesses:
Panel 1: The Honorable Frank Wolf (R-VA). U.S. House of Representatives
Panel 2: Mr. Steven Coffey (Principal Deputy of State, Bureau of Democracy,
Human Rights and Labor)
Panel 3: Bat Ye'or; Ms. Nina Shea (Freedom House); Dr. Walid Phares, (Prof.
International Relations, Florida Atlantic University, Miami, FL.)
Mr. Chairman, Members of Congress, Ladies and Gentlemen:
PAST IS PROLOGUE. These words are engraved on the pediment of the Archives
building in Washington. The English source is probably Shakespeare's The
Tempest, and the original perhaps Ecclesiastes (1:9). I have chosen this
motto for my Statement today and shall first give
An Historical Overview of the Persecution of Christians under Islam.
To fully understand the present tragic situation of Christians in Muslim
lands, one must comprehend the ideological and historical pattern that is
conducive to violations of human rights, even though this pattern does not
seem to be a deliberate, monolithical, anti-Christian policy. However, as
this structure is integrated into the corpus of Islamic law (the shari'a),
it functions in those countries that either apply the shari'a in full, or
whose laws are inspired by it.
The historical pattern of Muslim-Christian encounters developed soon after
the Prophet Muhammad's death in 632. Muslim-Christian relations were then
regulated by two legal-theological systems: one based on jihad, the other on
the shari'a. A Jihad should not be compared to a Crusade - or to any other
war. The strategy and tactics of jihad are minutely fixed by theological
rules, which the calif or ruler, wielding both spiritual and political
power, must obey. The jihad practiced now in Sudan is conducted according to
its traditional rules. One could affirm that all "jihad" groups today
conform to these decrees.
It is an historical fact that all the Muslims countries around the southern
and eastern Mediterranean were Christian lands before being conquered,
during a millenium of jihad under the banner of Islam. Those vanquished
populations - here I am referring only to Christians and Jews - were then
"protected," providing they submitted to the Muslim ruler's conditions.
Therefore, "protection" in the context of a conquest is the consequence of a
war, and this is a very important notion.
In April 1992, for instance, religious leaders in Sudan's Southern
Kordofan region - who were "publicly supported at the highest government
level" - issued a fatwa, which stated: "An insurgent who was previously a
Muslim is now an apostate; and a non-Muslim is a non-believer standing as a
bulwark against the spread of Islam, and Islam has granted the freedom of
killing both of them." This fatwa appears in a 1995 Report to the United
Nations Commission on Human Rights by the U.N.'s Special Rapporteur on
Sudan, Dr. Gaspar Biro. (ECOSOC, E/CN.4/1996/62, para.97a) This religious
text gives the traditional definition of a harbi (someone living in the Dar
al-harb, the "region of war"), an infidel who has not been subjected by
jihad, and therefore whose life and property -according to classical texts
of Islamic jurists - is thus forfeited to any Muslim. (It also gives a
definition of an apostate who can be killed - the cases of Salman Rushdie in
1989, Farag Foda in 1992, and Taslima
Nasreen in 1994 are other examples where the death sentence was decreed)
Non-Muslims are protected only if they submit to Islamic domination by a
"Pact" - or Dhimma - which imposes degrading and discriminatory regulations.
In my books, I have provided documents from Islamic sources and from the
vanquished peoples, establishing a sort of classification so that the
origins, development and aims of these regulations can be recognized when
they are revived nowadays. I am only referring to Christians and Jews,
because they share the same Islamic theological and legal category, referred
to in the Koran as "People of the Book" - the word "people" is in the
singular. If they accept to submit to a Muslim ruler, they then become
"protected dhimmi peoples" - tributaries, since their protection is linked
to an obligatory payment of a koranic poll-tax (the jizya) to the Islamic
community (the umma).
This protection is abolished: - if the dhimmis should rebel against Islamic
law; give allegiance to non-Muslim power; refuse to pay the koranic jizya;
entice a Muslim from his faith; harm a Muslim or his property; commit
blasphemy. Blasphemy includes denigration of the Prophet Muhammad, the
Koran, the Muslim faith, the shari'a by suggesting that it has a defect, and
by refusing the decision of the ijma - which is the consensus of the Islamic
community or umma (Koran III: 106). The moment the "pact of protection" is
abolished, the jihad resumes, which means that the lives of the dhimmis and
their property are forfeited. Those Islamists in Egypt who kill and pillage
Copts consider that these Christians - or dhimmis - have forfeited their
"protection" because they do not pay the jizya.
In other words, this "protector-protected" relationship is typical of a
war-treaty between the conqueror and the vanquished, and this situation
remains valid for Islamists because it is fixed in theological texts. But it
should be emphasized that other texts in the Koran stress religious
tolerance and peaceful relations, which frequently existed. Nonetheless,
early jurists and theologians - invoking the koranic principle of the
"abrogation" of an earlier text by a later one - have established an
extremist doctrine of jihad, which is a collective duty.
The protection system presents both positive and negative aspects: it
provide security and a mesure of religious autonomy. On the other hand,
dhimmis suffered many legal disabilities intended to reduce them to a
condition of humiliation and segregation. Those rules were established as
early as the 8th and 9th centuries by the founders of the four schools of
Islamic law: Hanafi, Malaki, Shafi'i and Hanbali.
The shari'a is a complete compendium of laws based on theological sources,
principally the Koran and hadiths - that is, the sayings and acts of the
Prophet. The shari'a comprises the legal status of the dhimmis: what is
permitted and what is forbidden to them. It sets the pattern of the Muslims'
social and political behavior toward dhimmis and explains its theological,
legal, and political motivations.
It is this comprehensive system, which lasted for up to thirteen centuries,
that I have analysed in my last book, The Decline of Eastern Christianity
under Islam, as the "civilization of dhimmitude." Its archetype - the
dehumanized dhimmi - has permeated Islamic civilization, culture and thought
and is being revived through the Islamist resurgence and the return of the
shari'a.
The main principles of "dhimmitude" are:
1) the inequality of rights in all domains between Muslims and dhimmis;
2) the social and economic discrimination of the dhimmis;
3) the humiliation and vulnerability of the dhimmis.
Numerous laws were enacted over the centuries in order to implement these
principles which remained in practice throughout the 19th century, and in
some regions into the 20th century.
Arab-Islamic civilization developed in conquered Christian lands, among
Christian majorities which were eventually reduced to minorities. The
process of the Islamization of Christian societies appears at all levels. It
is part and parcel of the Christian suffering embodied in laws, customs,
behavior patterns, and prejudices that were perpetuated during many
centuries. Christianity could survive in some countries like Egypt and the
Balkans where their situation was tolerable, but in other places they were
wiped out physically, expelled or forced to emigrate.
During the whole of the 19th century, European governments tried to
convince Muslim rulers - from Constantinople to North Africa - to abolish
the discriminations against dhimmis. This policy led to reforms in the
Ottoman Empire from 1839 - known as the Tanzimat - but it was only in Egypt,
under the strong rule of Mohammed Ali, that real progress was made.
Improvements in the Ottoman Empire and Persia, imposed by Europe, were
bitterly resented by the populace and religious leaders.
European laws were introduced in the process of Turkish modernization, and
in some Arab countries, but it was only under colonial rule that Christian
and Jewish minorities were truly liberated from centuries of opprobrium.
Traditionalists however resented the Westernization of their countries, the
emancipation of the dhimmis and the laws imported from infidel lands. The
fight for decolonization was also a struggle by the Islamists to
re-establish strict Islamic law.
Why is this persecution ignored by the Churches, governments and media?
The 19th century - and even after World War I - was a traumatizing period
of genocidal slaughter of Christians, spreading from the Balkans (Greece,
Serbia, Bulgaria) to Armenia, and to the Middle East. In this context of
death, the doctrine of an Islamic-Christian symbiosis was conceived toward
the end of the 19th century by Eastern Christians as a desperate shield
against terror and slavery. This doctrine - which also inluded anti-Zionism
- had many facets, both political and religious. In the long term, its
results were mostly negative.
It is this doctrine - still professed today - that is responsible for the
general silence about the ongoing tragedy of Eastern Christians. Any mention
of jihad and of the persecutions of Christians by Muslims was a taboo
subject, because one could not denounce persecution and simultaneously
proclaim that an Islamic-Christian symbiosis has always existed in the past
and the present. It is in this cocoon of lies and of a deliberatly imposed
silence, solidly supported by the Churches, governments and the medias -
each for its own reasons - that persecution of Christians could develop
freely, during this century, even until now, with little hindrance.
Moreover, this doctrine also blocked the memory of dhimmitude, leaving a
vacuum of thirteen centuries whose emptiness was filled with a myth that was
useless as a means to prevent the return of old prejudices and persecutions.
For this reason, dhimmitude - which covers several centuries of Christian
and Jewish history, and which is a comprehensive civilization englobing
legislation, customs, social behavior, and prejudices - has never been
analysed, nor publicly discussed. It is this silence - for which academia in
Europe and America bear much responsibility - that allows the perpetuation
of religious discrimination and persecution today. There are many factors
that explain this silence of governements, Churches, acedemia, and the media
on such a tragic issue concerning persecuted Christians in the Muslim world;
they are interrelated and, although their motivations are different, they
have solidly cemented a wall of silence that has buried the historical
reality.
Proposals for redressing these violations of fundamental human rights:
I. To define the ways and means to end this tragedy:
1) Not to foster an anti-Islamic current which would be wrong, as the vast
majority of Muslims are themselves victims of Islamists in Iran, Pakistan,
Afghanistan, Sudan, Egypt, Turkey, Algeria, etc.
2) Christians must continue to live in their historical lands because it is
their right, and only they can transform traditional Muslim mentalities.
These dwindling communities should be encouraged to stay, as their presence
will signify that Muslims have accepted that Jews and Christians also
possess the right to life and dignity in their ancient homelands - and not
under a dhimmi protection, but with human rights equal to those of Muslims.
If they fail, it will be our loss in the West too. Islamic countries that
once had a Judeo-Christian culture should not become monolithically Islamic
- that is, Christianrein, as they have become virtually Judenrein - through
a policy of ethnic cleansing that followed a long historical period of
discrimination.
3) If the human rights - and the minority rights - of Christians are not
respected in those countries that formerly had Christian majorities, then
the rights of all non-Muslims will be challenged by the Islamists'
resurgence. It is for Christians worldwide - particularly in America and
Europe, and for the international community also - to assure that the human
rights for all religious minorities are respected worldwide.
II. We should realize that those populations are in grave danger and that
even Muslim governments cannot protect them from mob violence - sometimes
they pretend to be unable to do so, in order to stop foreign pressure or
public campaigns. We should also remember that, from the late 1940s, the
Jewish communities in the Arab-Muslim world - then more than a million, now
less than 1% of that number, under 10,000 and fast dwindling - were the
victims of persecution, terrorism, pillage, and religious hatred that forced
them to flee or emigrate. Christians were left as the only non-Muslims on
whom religious fanaticism and hatred could be focused. Each Christian
community tried to resist the return of the old order, following the path of
secularism or communism.
The Islamists reproach Christians in their countries of:
1) being against the implementation of the shari'a;
2) demanding equal rights, basing themselves on International Covenants;
3) seeking foreign help to achieve equality with fellow Muslim citizens.
For the Islamists, these three accusations alone are tantamount to
rebellion. It was these same motives that had justified the first great
massacres of the Armenians a century ago in 1894-96, punished for having
rebelled and for claiming the reforms that were promised.
This is why dhimmis communities were always careful to proclaim their
enmity to Europe. An outward oppositon to Christian countries being their
life-saving shield against threats from their environment, they have
interiorized this animosity to the point that they often strive for the
triumph of Islam, some of them even becoming the best and most perfect tools
of Islamic propaganda and interests in Europe and America. (The late Father
Yoakim Moubarac and Georges Corm in France, and Edward Said in America, are
but three examples out of many.)
III. In order to avoid mistakes and be more effective, one has to realize
the difference of contexts between the campaign for Soviet Jewry in the
1970s and 1980s, and the promotion of human rights for Christians in Islamic
lands today. The main difficulty arises because the discrimination or
persecution in some countries cannot be ascribed to a deliberate government
policy. It is rather a fact of civilization: the traditional contempt for
dhimmis - not so different from that of African Americans in the past - and
irritation because they are outstepping their rights and must be obliged to
return to their former status.
Sometimes, however, it is imposed by the Islamists, and a weak government
doesn't dare to protect the Christians, fearing to become even more
unpopular, because anti-Western and anti-Christian prejudices have imbued
Muslim culture and society for centuries.
1) There are many ways to persecute Christians; some are by legal means,
like the laws concerning the building or the repair of churches; others, by
terror. A Christian can be killed, not because he committed a crime, but
simply because he belongs to a group of infidels, who, allegedly, are in
rebellion. Or for reasons of "spectacle-terrorism" that can serve as a
deterrent policy to fulfill the terrorists' aims.
2) Another point concerns the use of a fatwa. If a fatwa is decreed against
an individual, any Muslim is authorized to kill him, and by so doing he is
the executor of what is considered the sentence of Allah.
IV. The problem is multifarious; it is not only religious but also cultural.
This aspect is more acute with Christian, than with Jewish, communities
because Muslims conquered Christian lands and civilization that were then
subjected to a deliberate policy of Arabization and Islamization. Take, as
an example, Christian pre-Islamic Coptic history: language and culture are a
neglected, if not a forbidden, domain because it would imply that Muslim
history had been imperialistic. But culture and history are important
elements of a group's identity and there are many Muslims intellectuals who
are proud of Egypt's Pharaonic and Coptic past. It is the Islamists who
reject this past, as an infidel culture -a part of the jahaliyah, what
existed before Islam, considered taboo.
Therefore, I would also suggest further goals, such as:
1) Recovering "Memory," the long history of the dhimmi peoples, of
dhimmitude - the collective cultural patrimony of Jews and Christians -for
without their memory, and their history, peoples fade away and die.
2) Preventing the destruction of Christians historical monuments, either by
local governments, or by UNESCO, as was done with Abu Simbel, and other
sites that now belong to the World's cultural legacy.
V. Discussing "dhimmitude" in academia and elsewhere. This is a
Judeo-Christian historical patrimony and those whose heritage it is are
entitled to know about it. The discussion of dhimmitude with Muslims,
however, is fraught with difficulties. In the eyes of Islamists, any
criticism of Islamic law and history is assimilated to a blasphemy. For a
dhimmi, it is forbidden to imply that Islamic law has a default, or to
contradict the ijma, the consensus. Moreover, the court testimony of a
dhimmi against a Muslim is not accepted. Therefore, as dhimmitude is the
testimony of dhimmi history - of Christians and Jews - under Islamic
oppression, it would not be considered valid in traditionalist circles.
Besides, the unification of religious and political power transfers the
political domain into the religious one, and therefore any criticism of
Islamic civilization may become, for Islamists and others, a blasphemy.
The case of Farag Foda, an Egyptian Muslim intellectual, who defended the
Copts and strongly criticized some Muslim religious authorities was
exemplary: he was assassinated in June 1992 after a fatwa. In giving his
testimony in an Egyptian court of law, the late Sheikh Muhammad El-Ghazali
implicitly justified his assassination on the grounds of apostasy; he stated
that anyone opposing the shari'a was an apostate, and thus deserved death.
VI. Encourage Muslim intellectuals to strive in their own countries, and in
the West, for the defense of equal human rights for Christians and others.
The 1981 UNESCO Declaration on Islamic Human Rights and that of Cairo in
1990, both conditional on the shari'a, are insufficient.
VII. Creation of a team of experts and lawyers - and not apologists - in
order to discuss the problem, always stressing that the aim is not to foster
anti-Muslim or anti-Islamic feelings, but to create peace and reconciliation
between religions and peoples, without which the next century will become a
bloodbath and a clash of civilizations. (END)
_________
Bat Ye'or is the author of The Dhimmi: Jews and Christians under Islam
(1985/1996) and The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam. From Jihad
to Dhimmitude: 7th to 20th Century (1996) Both books published by Fairleigh
Dickinson University Press/Associated University Presses.
C Bat Ye'or 2001
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list,
[email protected].
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[email protected]
http://www.intellnet.org
Post message: [email protected]
Subscribe: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods,
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,'
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
