The Party’s Not Over

Does Islamist party Hizb-ut-Tahrir pose a threat to Western society? The answer may well be yes -- but that doesn't mean it should be banned.

BY CHRISTIAN CARYL | DECEMBER 22, 2009

In recent weeks, Britain's Labour government and the Conservative opposition have been embroiled in a feud about, of all things, Islam -- or, more precisely, an Islamist organization called Hizb-ut-Tahrir (Arabic for "The Party of Liberation"). Tory leader David Cameron has been assailing Gordon Brown's government for allegedly funneling taxpayer money to two Hizb-supported schools where students are being exposed to Islamist ideology. The education minister insists that the schools in question have nothing to do with the group. The issue is particularly tricky because many Britons, within government and out, have repeatedly called for Hizb-ut-Tahrir to be banned altogether. Their ranks included, at one point a few years ago, then-Prime Minister Tony Blair. It hasn't happened yet, though, for reasons that will be touched upon below.

One thing is for sure: We can all expect to hear more about Hizb-ut-Tahrir (HT) in the years to come. Founded 56 years ago in Jordanian-controlled Jerusalem, the party is estimated by some experts to have 1 million members around the world. A lot of them are now in jail. HT is banned outright in a number of countries, ranging from harsh dictatorships like Uzbekistan and Syria through countries like Pakistan, Syria, Jordan, Turkey, and Bangladesh, to Western European democracies including Germany and Denmark. Yet the group persists, and in some respects -- judging by the vast amount of literature it continues to produce, on paper, and myriad websites -- it seems to be thriving. The party recently made headlines in the United States when it was revealed that one of President Barack Obama's religious advisors, Muslim polling expert Dalia Mogahed, had participated in a Hizb-ut-Tahrir-sponsored TV broadcast. (She subsequently said that she'd been unaware of the show's affiliation.)

The party has undoubtedly been helped, over the years, by the clarity of its ultimate aim: the creation of a modern-day caliphate, an Islamic state that would bring together all the countries of the Islamic world. Unlike al Qaeda, though, which professes comparable goals, Hizb-ut-Tahrir emphasizes political action rather than force, arguing that Muslims have to be "enlightened" through education, propaganda, and political agitation until they fully understand the need to seize the reins of power in their own countries and unite the ummah, the global community of believers. According to one of the group's myriad pamphlets: "[I]f the Islamic Ummah were to rise as an Islamic Ummah, she would be more than capable of rescuing the world from the evil forces that control it, suppress it, and make it experience all kinds of misery, humiliation, and slavery."

It's this openly revolutionary aim that has gotten the party into trouble in many of the more authoritarian countries where it has run afoul of officialdom. Yet even though it claims to profess non violent means, the party has still managed to get into trouble in more liberal societies for the extreme intolerance of some of its views. The party became verboten in Germany, for example, after it shared a platform with neo-Nazis. HT officials insist that they are anti-Zionist rather than anti-Semitic -- though several studies of the group's literature have shown that the distinction doesn't always hold up. The group was proscribed in Denmark after, among other things, distributing pamphlets urging Muslims to "kill [Jews] wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out." When I first came across the group's pamphlets in Central Asia in 2001, for example, I was struck by their references to the dictator of Uzbekistan, Islam Karimov, whom they ritually denounced as "the Jew Karimov." (He has no Jewish background whatsoever, as it happens.) One of the party's pamphlets stresses that Muslims who elect to leave the faith automatically face the death penalty -- a stricture that would be hard to reconcile with democratic freedoms if they dared to put it into practice.

Another source of concern is the group's role as a "conveyor belt," radicalizing members who then go on to participate in overtly violent actions. Its prominent members in Britain have included Omar Bakri Muhammad, founder of the group Al Muhajiroun, which gained notoriety for praising the 9/11 hijackers and harbored adherents who would later be implemented in terrorist attacks. When British intelligence officials searched the home of Omar Sharif, the Briton who attempted to blow himself up in a Tel Aviv bar in 2003, they found a cache of Hizb-ut-Tahrir literature. British journalist Shiv Malik claims that at least two major al Qaeda figures, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, originally had ties with the group.

REBECCA REID/AFP/Getty Images

 

Christian Caryl is a contributing editor to Foreign Policy. His column, Reality Check, appears weekly on ForeignPolicy.com.

Facebook|Twitter|Reddit

SMCI60652

11:47 AM ET

December 24, 2009

To clear things up...

The Hizb at-Tahrir I grew up witnessing was an extremely intolerant and belligerent organization, that at some points would force Muslims with differing views out of Mosques by physical violence.

This doesn't necessesarily mean that they haven't tolerated their views or ways of expressing them, or that they aren't capable of doing so in the future.

As for the issue of the restoration of the Caliphate. It does not (and ought not) indicate, ipso facto, an espousal of "extreme" views.

Many a Muslim, even moderate Liberal-Democratic Muslims believe, as a tenet of faith, in the absolute necessity of a Hashimite Caliphate to preside over the global community of Sunni Muslims in SOME capacity. We may differ about just how extensive a legal or political role it should play.

But this is an internal debate. The sect of Sunni Islam that is most often associated with a lot of the extremist cancer that plagues us today is Wahabbism. And it is this sect that not only ideologically opposes a Caliphate, but actively worked to undermine it during the Great War.

And with all the resultant chaos that's ensued, having a uniting and universally respected spiritual figurehead to function as arbitrator of petty conflicts may not be such a bad idea.

 

UZBEKPOLICY

4:13 PM ET

December 24, 2009

Isn't it insane, people!?

Global Caliphate? Koran has no mentioning of Caliphate, nor does Islamic prophet Muhammad, SAV, had ever spoken about it -- one thing that all reputable Islamic scholars agree on. Caliphate is a political order while Islam is a religion which is meant to bring "peace and prosperity" to one's individual soul.

This so-called "Liberation Party" is nothing but a scam. Its teachings are misleading and ideology is utopian. If you take a look at other terrorist militant groups, they all call themselves as "liberation party", "freedom force" etc., when in fact they all are a bunch of barbarians who have no morals or good values but destruction. Hizb-ut-Tahrir is just one of those.

In the situation of Uzbekistan, regrettably, totalitarian regime of Islam Karimov made it now impossible for a secular opposition to form and operate (because virtually all of its members are in exile). That's why people are turning to this kind of dubious organizations -- because there are no alternatives left, not because its ideology is especially attractive. Another reason is, of course, poverty created by the Karimov rule -- people are turning to dubious organizations like Hizb-ut-tahrir, whith huge funding from somewhere, just to make ends meet.

Karimov is now over 70 and (excuse me for the phrase, but) will die soon or late. It is just my hope that his fascist regime won't be succeeded by another fascist regime -- one ruled by religious fanatics, who can barely read, much less create a prosperous society. Example -- Afghanistan under Taliban.

With all this being said, what is really striking though is that Hizb-ut-Tahrir is headquartered in Israel and legally functions there without any problems. Isn't it strange for an organization that claims to oppose the very notion of a Jewish state to legally register in it? This only fact shows how controversial and dubious this organization is.

 

USAMA2

11:49 AM ET

December 25, 2009

Preposterous Propaganda Piece from CFR

What an outrageous, fearmongering, propaganda piece by Christian Caryl.
What exactly is there to fear: that Muslim people would throw off their corrupt, greedy dictatorships and therefore no longer be under the boot heel of the West?
Americans are happy that Mubarak, and the king Abdullahs and Bashar Asad torture and execute and rape their people, but a caliphate is to be feared?
what moral standard is this?
Hizb Tahrir is nonviolent. Its a political and religious Islamic party. It is NOT a Nazi or fascist party.
Its antiJewish rhetoric may become heated because many of its members are Palestinians and have sufferd under Israeli usurpation and tyranny. But there are also Hizb members who are very enlightened about Israel and know that many Jewish Israelis are being misled by their government.
Again, Israeli tyranny, now including harvesting human organs from dead Palestinians, is acceptable and fun, but any anger or scorn is scary?