Reactions in the Islamic World to the Plan to Build Islamic Center Near Ground Zero

The issue of the planned Islamic center near Ground Zero, which has sparked a political and media storm in the U.S., has not featured prominently in the Arab press. Nevertheless, a variety of reactions have been published, most of them opposed to it. Some writers called for the Cordoba Initiative, the NGO behind the project, to cancel it, on the grounds that it generates tension between Muslims and non-Muslims. Others pointed to the gap between the tolerance in the West, which allows Muslims to build a mosque even in such a sensitive location, and the lack of tolerance in Arab countries, where religious freedom is limited or nonexistent, and called upon Muslims to refrain from abusing the freedom available to them in the West. Still others argued that the opposition to the construction of the Islamic center reflects growing intolerance and racism in the U.S. towards foreigners in general and Muslims in particular.

The following are excerpts from some of the articles:

"Even More Important than the Location of the Project" is the Negative Impact It Will Have on "Muslim Americans' Ability to Attain Closer Relations with Their Fellow [Americans]"

Saudi journalist 'Adel Al-Tarifi stated that it is unwise to build an Islamic center near Ground Zero, because it is an affront to American sentiment and it generates tension between Muslims and non-Muslims in the U.S. He called upon Muslims living in the U.S. to shake off the hostility that their countries of origin bear towards the U.S.: "... According to the Constitution, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf[1] and his friends in the Cordoba Initiative, whose project this is, have the right to build a mosque and religious center anywhere in the U.S. – including where the Twin Towers collapsed. Even prominent figures, such as [New York Mayor] Michael Bloomberg and most legal experts and thinkers, support this right... So it is not a question of opposition to Islam per se, or of religious discrimination, because the [U.S.] Constitution and the law guarantee freedom of worship, including building the Ground Zero mosque.

"However, it becomes a question of wisdom... and social sensitivity. We must ask Imam Feisal [Abdul Rauf] and his friends: Why do you want to build an Islamic center that will cost $100 million if it hurts the feelings of the Americans?

"In truth, prayers have been held there [at the site of the proposed building] for over a year, and if it were not for the media circus sparked by the Cordoba Initiative, no one would have even noticed. Furthermore, a mosque, [built] before the 9/11 terror attacks, already exists only a few meters away... We must ask: Why build another mosque and center if there is already a mosque nearby?...

"I am not denigrating the efforts of the imam and his friends to correct the distorted image of Islam. But when the project creates tension in the relations between Muslims and non-Muslims in America, it is the opposite effect [that is achieved].

"Some have said that relinquishing the project would mean relinquishing constitutional rights; others have said that the battle wasn't about the location, but [is a matter of] defending ourselves against the intensifying sense of anti-Muslim discrimination [in the U.S.]. If we accept this [last] assessment, then reaching an agreement is the right thing to do. Even more important than the location of the project is the Muslim Americans' ability to attain closer relations with their fellow [Americans]... Muslim Americans are still impacted by the history of hostility and dispute between their mother countries and the U.S. [and this affects] the independence of their thinking. They have to rectify this. Changing the location [of the proposed Islamic center] will not change the message [that the center conveys]."[2]

"The Important Thing is For the Muslims Not to Act in Isolation from the Rest of the American People"

Dr. 'Abd Al-Mun'im Sa'id, board chairman of the Egyptian daily Al-Ahram and a member of Egypt's Shura Council, wrote: "There are plenty of good intentions behind the mosque project, but they were not made sufficiently clear before the project was presented to the political parties and to the forums and groups of civil society [in the U.S.]. Perhaps the idea of building a religious center at Ground Zero – like the one [the late Egyptian president Anwar] Sadat proposed to build at Saint Catherine [in Sinai] – would have [helped] build bridges between the followers of different religions. [But] the important thing is for the Muslims not to act in isolation from the rest of the American people, whom they want to approach wisely and by means of persuasion..."[3]

The Muslims in the West Speak in One Voice with Non-Muslims, and In Another with Their Fellow Muslims

Kuwaiti liberal Khalil 'Ali Haidar criticized the Muslims living in the West for their hostility to their host societies, for espousing ideological and political Islam, for saying one thing while believing another, and for speaking in two voices, saying one thing to the Westerners and another to their fellow Muslims – which causes the Westerners to fear the Cordoba House project and Islam in general:

"The Americans' apprehensions regarding Cordoba Mosque... stem from their reemerging fear of political, organized, jihadist, and takfiri Islam, which is still very strong in the Arab world. They fear that what the American Muslims are concealing in their hearts may be different from what they are saying out loud, especially considering that Muslim men and women in Europe, no less than their coreligionists in the Arab world, are sympathetic to ideological Islam and extremist sheikhs, [and tend towards] hostility to the West and anti-democratic notions.

"There are at least two salient problems. The first is that the Muslim world has not done much since September 11, 2001 to develop its religious practices and to inculcate a mature perception of the contemporary era, of human rights and of respect for other religions. After all, most Arab and Muslim countries lack a parliament and a democratic [regime], or else have a parliament but lack [true] democracy. Such countries cannot be serious about change, and they are unable to bring their education, media, religious discourse and national culture to the level [customary] in modern societies. [Moreover,] a country based on lack of many freedoms cannot be an enthusiastic advocate of pluralism, freedom of religion and belief, etc.

"The second problem is that in America and Europe, Islamic activity is in the hands of the local leaderships of the Muslim Brotherhood and of other Islamic parties based in Egypt, Syria, Palestine and Asia. In more general terms, [it is in the hands of] the supporters of political and ideological Islam, which is [known for] saying one thing and believing another, and for saying one thing to the Westerners and another to the Muslims. That is why the Muslims in the West are hostile to their host societies and to [the concept of] openness, and [espouse] values that are far removed from moderateness and maturity.

"It is rare to find even one American or European Muslim who engages in self-criticism or defends freedom of religion and thought in the Muslim and Arab world, who supports a persecuted author or intellectual facing trial in some Muslim country, or who defends a new and modern perception of Islam. The Arab preachers, writers and academics who [address the Western Muslims] in their writings, or visit the Western countries, [only] intensify the extremism of the Western and American Muslims, and speak of nothing but the 'Zionist lobby,' 'the Palestinian problem,' 'Neo-Christians,' and 'the American failure in Iraq and Afghanistan'!

"It's no wonder then that some Americans, Britons, and Germans [who convert to Islam] go straight from Christianity to takfiri jihad, and from oblivious libertinism to aggressive extremism, so that even the hills and mountains of Tora Bora are hardly enough for them!

"It is improper that Muslim life in America and Europe should be a replica of Muslim [life] in the Arab and Muslim world. It is improper to export [to the West] the Islamic schools, political parties and extremist [tendencies], so as to fit the [Western Muslims] into molds [exported from] Egypt, Pakistan or the Gulf, [transforming them into people] whose struggles focus on the hijab and the niqab, and whose main preoccupation is with party and sectarian affiliation.

"America, France, Germany, England, Russia, and China all share their concern about the Muslim [problem], while the Muslims speak about the collapse of the U.S. and of Western civilization!"[4]

"All the Americans Ask is to Respect Their Feelings, Their Wound that has Not Yet Healed, and the Memory of the Victims of the Depraved Massacre [of 9/11]"

Palestinian journalist Zainab Rashid wrote that Muslims abuse the democratic freedoms they enjoy in other countries, while their own countries are characterized by terrorism and oppression. She also stated that Muslims use mosques to provoke the followers of other religion and to assert the superiority of their own:

"Whenever the Muslims find an opportunity to build a mosque opposite a church or [some other non-Muslim] house of worship, they put every effort into doing so... They furnish its minaret with dozens of high-tech loudspeakers so that their voice... will be louder than that of the other [religions]. This is their way of excluding the other in places where they cannot do so directly. There is no other way of interpreting this act.

"This sort of thing has happened many times, and will happen again. There have been cases where Muslims spent a fortune to buy a [tiny] plot of land, the size of one square meter or slightly more, near churches located at historically or archeologically [significant] sites in Arab cities and capitals, in order to build a minaret – just a minaret – furnished with dozens of bothersome loudspeakers...

"It's a strange paradox. The Muslims speak of democracy, freedom, and laws honoring religious, ethnic, racial, and national pluralism, and wish to benefit from these [laws]. However, at the same time, many [Muslim] peoples suffer from killing, terrorism, oppression, and famine at the hands of Muslim parties and organizations that rose to power through elections and then completely [distorted] the concepts of democracy, freedom and humanism... The besieged Gaza is the best example of this...

"The Muslims demand to build a mosque [near Ground Zero], exploiting the highest principles of the U.S. constitution. But the Prophet of Islam was the first [person] who ordered to take down a mosque when divine inspiration told him it would harm him and his followers and bring war upon them...

"The Americans will not destroy the mosque that the Muslims are determined to build, nor do they wish to expel the Muslims [from their land] or to discriminate against them. This is impossible [for them to do], both legally and morally... All the Americans ask is to respect their feelings, their wound that has not yet healed, and the memory of the victims of the depraved massacre [of 9/11]. The perpetrators [of this massacre] were Muslims who were trained in mosques not so different from the one that is supposed to be built [near Ground Zero]...

"Perhaps the Americans and the other peoples of the world believe that the $100 million allocated to the construction of the mosque should be invested [instead] in [helping] the victims of the Pakistan floods, who need every cent of this money... Supporting the disaster victims in Pakistan is a much worthier cause than building another unnecessary mosque...

"I am not saying this mosque belongs to, or is funded by, the terrorist Al-Qaeda organization, the Kashmiri Lashkar-e-Taiba organization, the Palestinian Hamas movement, or its mother organization, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood... But I am saying that Koranic verses will be heard there, such as 'So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them... [Koran 9:5]'; 'Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection [Koran 9:29]'; and 'The Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away! [Koran 9:30].'"[5]

"The Muslims Do Not Take An Interest In this Mosque and Are Not Angered By the Opposition to Its Construction"

Wahid 'Abd Al-Magid, deputy director of the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, called on Muslim academics, leaders and religious scholars to address the American public and explain to it that the construction of the Islamic center near Ground Zero is not an issue of interest for Muslims around the world, and that the Muslims are not waging a religious or cultural war against the West. He added that the Muslims must stop supplying ammunition to Islamophobes in the West by promoting initiatives like Cordoba House.

"...It's understandable that building a mosque in this particular location hurts the feelings of some Americans, if not many Americans, and gives the extremists among them an excuse to renew the campaign against Islam and the Muslims, and to pour oil on the flames that have not subsided despite all of President Obama's efforts, over the past 20 months, to extinguish them. In addition to [claiming that the Muslims are] pressing on the wound that has not yet healed, and want to pray right over the victims' blood which they themselves spilled, [the American extremists] are also claiming that the purpose of the mosque is to continue the armed attack of nine years ago, only this time in the form of a 'culture war.' They make every effort to convince as many Americans as possible of this [claim], citing [the fact] that the promoters of this mosque refuse to consider any alternative location [for the project], in the same neighborhood or elsewhere.

"The promoters [of the mosque] have provided the advocates of the religious or cultural struggle [theory] with an opportunity to claim that the construction of the mosque is nothing but a continuation of the [9/11] attack and a part of the Muslims' war [against the non-Muslims]! They constantly help the extremists in America to spread their false incitement; they help them most of all by claiming that this mosque is a matter [that concerns all] the Muslims across the globe – just as bin Laden and Al-Qaeda claimed to carry out the 'Invasion of Manhattan' in the name of Islam and [all] Muslims.

"However, this claim is unfounded, just like all other claims of its kind, for it is impossible to speak for one billion Muslims. [As a matter of fact,] only a handful of websites and blogs have dealt with [the issue of Cordoba House], and the same is true for the printed and televised media. The Muslims do not take an interest in this mosque and are not angered by the opposition to its construction. But this fact does not reach [the ears of] many Americans, who are angered by the insistence of Muslim groups in their country to join this struggle – [a struggle] which results in nothing but losses for the Muslim world and its causes.

"What they want to build [in Lower Manhattan] is not a mosque, but a new wall of hatred and hostility that some American Muslims insist on constructing. The heavy price will be paid by their fellow [Muslims] in Palestine and elsewhere, because [the mosque affair] increases the sympathy of the American public for those who steal the [Muslims'] rights and attack them...

"When the percentage of those who hate Muslims in the U.S. rises from 40% to over 70% in the wake of the 'Ground Zero mosque' crisis, we have no choice but to say that the 9/11 tragedy is recurring nine years later. Yet nobody in the Muslim world – neither countries, nor governments, nor institutions, nor NGOs – is trying to challenge the claim that the mosque is an issue that preoccupies [all] Muslims worldwide...

"Why don't prominent Muslim academics, politicians, and religious scholars around the world convene in order to draft a document or a communiqué addressed to the American public, explaining that the Ground Zero mosque does not interest anyone but those who are promoting it, and very few others beside them? Why don't they say something along the lines of what was said by the mother of Zacarias Moussaoui, who was convicted of [involvement in] the 9/11 attacks: 'My son was brainwashed in London by imams who preached hatred and violence in the name of a false Islam that has nothing to do with the real faith?' And why don't they tell the Americans that the Muslims around the world are not waging a war, with either weapons, culture or religion, but are [only] asking [the Americans to take] a fair stance towards those who are not just stealing [the Muslims'] lands but are also perpetrating war crimes against them? And why don't they explain to the Americans that the struggles between the Muslim and non-Muslim peoples are not religious in nature, even if there are those who claim otherwise? [Proof of this is the fact] that Christians are an integral part of the Palestinian liberation movement...

"If we must convey this [message] to the Americans, then we must also say the same thing to ourselves, regarding how we see [the Americans] and the West in general. The prevailing image that we have of them in the Muslim world is a narrow-minded and naïve one, based on [the concept of] historic struggle, and composed of monochromatic pictures, with a tendency towards [over-simplification] and conspiracy [theories]. We must look ourselves in a true mirror and tell ourselves honestly that we are the greatest extremists [in our perception of] the other, whoever he may be, even within our own countries. This is only one of the many things we must tell ourselves at this opportunity, which compels us to contemplate our responsibility for the rise in Islamophobia, in Europe as well [as in America], which results from the insistence of a few [Muslims] to impose upon their [host] countries certain symbols they regard as Islamic..."[6]

Religious Tolerance in America vs. Lack of Tolerance in Saudi Arabia, Egypt

Dr. 'Omar Al-Zant, a columnist for the Egyptian daily Al-Masri Al-Yawm, compared the religious tolerance in New York to the intolerance in Saudi Arabia, where immigrants live in isolated communities and feel no sense of belonging:

"The [New York City] Council has unanimously approved the construction of the mosque, thereby proving that New York is indeed the capital of pluralism and tolerance... It is the city that hosts the largest number of people of various nationalities, religions, sects and creeds, who live together in relative harmony and accord... The pluralism and openness that prevail there generate a state of creative chaos: views meet, merge, and interact, the ultimate result being original and creative thinking.

"The importance of such interaction becomes clearer when you compare [the situation in New York] to the situation in the country that was the origin of most of the 9/11 terrorists, namely Saudi Arabia. This country [too] has a large population [of foreigners] from all over the world, but unlike many of the immigrants in the U.S., [the members of] this population can never see themselves as a part of their host country. They never develop a sense of belonging to the society in which they work, because the communities of exiles live in almost complete isolation. Pluralistic thinking is all but forbidden by law, whereas religious pluralism is nonexistent. It is impossible to build a church anywhere, let alone a synagogue or a Buddhist or Hindu temple... Moreover, much of the country's own Islamic heritage has been destroyed under the pretext of preventing paganism. This explains why a pluralistic and open society benefits from immigration, whereas a closed society hardly benefits at all from an infusion of foreign workers..."[7]

Despite Repeated Attempted Attacks by Muslims, the U.S. Defends Their Rights

Coptic liberal Magdi Khalil, founder of the Middle East Freedom Forum, compared the freedom to build mosques in the U.S. with the lack of freedom to build churches in Egypt. He wrote that, despite the attempts of Islamist elements to perpetrate terror in central New York locations, including Times Square, Kennedy Airport, and the Brooklyn Bridge, the U.S. safeguards the Muslim's religious freedom. Conversely, in the Egyptian town of Maghagha, the authorities are preventing the Copts from building a new church on the site of an old one.

Khalil added: "What happened in New York was the pinnacle of religious tolerance... The mayor and other senior officials acted responsibly, despite the protests [over the plans to build the mosque], and guarded the religious rights and freedoms, including those of immigrants and visitors to the city. On the other hand, the events in Maghagha reflect religious extremism and lack of tolerance, and show clearly that the rage in the streets is directed from above, not from below. Throughout the history of Muslim-Copt relations, it was the tolerance or intolerance of the leaders that determined [whether or not there were] civil wars, violence and religious persecution of the Copts."[8]

Opposition to the Islamic Center is a Racist Right-Wing Campaign against Muslims and Foreigners

Egyptian journalist Nabil Zaki, who supports the construction of the Islamic center, stated that the opposition to the Islamic center is part of a vicious campaign by the American right against the Muslims and foreigners in the country, and that Obama's outreach to the Muslims, which was short-lived, was only meant to facilitate the U.S.'s ongoing military activity in Iraq and Afghanistan. He added that those opposed to the Cordoba House do not seem to mind that there are strip joints and pornography stores near Ground Zero, while they do object to a religious center containing culture and welfare facilities.

"On the evening of August 13, during the traditional Ramadan dinner at the White House, President Barack Obama gave an address in which he emphasized that 'Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country, and that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable.' Less than 24 hours later, following a storm of vicious criticism from the Republican right and from some leaders and figures in the Democratic party [itself], Obama's commitment proved to be quite shakable. He clarified to journalists that he had not been commenting on the wisdom of deciding to put a mosque... near the rubble of the World Trade Center... but on the right people have that dates back to America's founding! In other words, Obama's address at the Ramadan dinner had been nothing but a formal recognition of constitutional rights that he had sworn to defend and uphold in principle, while [in practice] he refuses to lift a finger to defend these rights against those who [wish to] deny them...

"Some analysts believe... that the Islamic center [near Ground Zero] has become the main issue in the mid-term Congressional [elections], and that right-wing elements in the Democratic and Republican parties are doing their utmost to incite the American public... against the Islamic center, whose construction has already been approved by the local authorities. The fascist forces that are condemning the project repeatedly say that it 'violates the sanctity of the site,' and 'defiles the sacred ground on which 2,700 people were killed by Al-Qaeda in 9/11'!

"By the way, the proposed Islamic center is a culture center called Cordoba House, which is to include a swimming pool, gym, arts center, and a memorial to the 9/11 victims, in addition to the mosque. A very short distance from that 'sacred ground' there are infamous strip clubs and a shop selling pornographic videos, as well as gambling halls and dance clubs! These places, it seems, do not offend the sensibilities of the national defenders of the wide pit that marks the former site of the World Trade Center. [Moreover,] this pit does not include any monument to the victims. No building has been build there, because the real estate companies and the local authorities have failed to agree on the financial terms. The proposed Islamic center, on the other hand, is to be built on the site of an old warehouse that used to belong to the Burlington Coat Factory.

"The chances of building the Islamic center seem to be receding, in the wake of the campaign waged against it... The debate is no longer about religious freedom, about tolerance and openness towards the other in American society, or about the degree to which [this society] accepts Islam and the Muslims. The leaders of the Muslim diaspora believe that the mosque could provide an opportunity to improve and strengthen interfaith relations. However, the [issue] has rapidly turned into a struggle that is political, rather than religious or social, and which could determine the fate of Obama and his Democratic administration.

"The real objectives of the campaign against the Islamic center are not to protect the 'sanctity' of [Ground Zero] or the feelings of the families of the 9/11 victims. It is a depraved attempt to arouse blind racist fanaticism, which can be exploited to incite hatred against anyone who is not American and to espouse an openly racist approach in order to push American policy more and more to the right. The real objectives are to assault the First Amendment, which guarantees the freedom of worship and the freedom of speech, and which prevents the government from establishing a religious state, from preferring the followers of one faith other the followers of another, and from forbidding some minority to practice its religion... This campaign against the Islamic center is consciously aimed at rallying the religious right, which opposes this constitutional principle. It goes hand in hand with the attempt to create public hysteria over the [issue] of immigration to the U.S., and the attempt to portray the Muslims as criminals who are taking [American] jobs... The leaders of this campaign are demanding, with insolence that is growing from day to day, to revoke the 14^th Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees U.S. citizenship to anyone born in the country – as a preliminary step towards deporting millions of children who were born in America to illegal immigrants. The strident and hostile cries against immigrants and ethnic minorities in the U.S. are meant to incite violence against the 'foreigners'...

"The question is, why did Obama bother to make a speech at the Ramadan dinner if he was willing to back down from it so quickly? Clearly, his motivation was not to defend rights, democracy, and freedom of religion. Michael Gerson wrote in his column in The Washington Post that Obama had to give this speech, because 'he leads a coalition that includes Iraqi and Afghan Muslims who risk death each day fighting Islamic radicalism...' The conclusion is that Obama's statements were made with the encouragement of the Pentagon and the State Department, which fear that the anti-Muslim campaign waged by the Republican right may sabotage the U.S. military activity in Iraq and Afghanistan – [activity] meant to impose American rule over the Middle East and Central Asia, the world's greatest sources of oil and gas...

"America is in a bind. On the one hand it wants to recruit Muslim allies and followers, in order to continue its wars in the Middle East and in Afghanistan, and in order to maintain the [Muslim] support for a military strike against Iran. At the same time, it nurtures anti-Muslim sentiments among its citizens and soldiers in order to create a basis for these very same wars. So far it has found no way out of this bind."[9]

The Issue is Brought Up to Detract Attention from President Obama for the Iraq Withdrawal

Saudi journalist 'Ali bin Hassan Al-Tawati wrote that President Obama's political opponents want to draw attention away from his achievement of withdrawing the U.S. troops from Iraq, and that is why they politicized the Cordoba House affair. He added: "...In their eagerness and short-sightedness, President Obama's opponents failed to realize that he was not the only party harmed by their reprehensible politization of this affair... The biggest loser was American society... because [the affair] upset the balance among its variegated ethnic and cultural components, to the extent that, for the fist time in history, demonstrations broke out in some American cities calling to expel the Muslims from the country, or to force them to renounce their faith as a condition for their staying..."[10]

Opposing the Islamic Center near Ground Zero is Like Calling for Burning the Koran

Dr. 'Abd Al-'Aziz bin 'Othman Al-Twaijiri, director-general of the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO) in Saudi Arabia, equated the opposition to the mosque with the acts of American pastor Terry Jones, who called to burn copies of the Koran on September 11. He also stressed it is necessary to disseminate correct information about Islam in order to counter the trend of hatred and racism against Muslims:

"...Addressing the issue of the [Islamic center near Ground Zero] seems like meddling in the internal affairs of [another] country. However, this case is different, because it violates the constitutional rights of [all] Muslims, regardless of where they live... The objection to the construction of this social-religious [center] in New York is a position directed against all Muslims, not just those living in America. In many ways, it resembles the extremist and racist terrorist [act] of the American pastor Terry Jones, who called to burn the book of Allah the Beloved [i.e., the Koran], out of a deep contempt for the Muslims worldwide, and in order to ignite flames of religious hatred...

"It is time to work on several levels in order to spread in the West the [true] facts about Islam, Islamic culture, and the Islamic world, using the full range of legal means, which are numerous. Last spring I visited the U.S. and became more and more convinced that the Islamic world is absent from it, and that there is an urgent need to correct the views [of its people] about Islam and the Muslims... so as to counter the trends of hatred and racism."[11]

Endnotes: