Mohamed Sid-Ahmed discusses the case of a maverick Islamic personality The French daily Le Monde devoted the main story on the front page of its 23 December issue to Tariq Ramadan, the controversial Islamic activist and grandson, on his mother's side, of Muslim Brothers founder Hassan El-Banna. The Le Monde article leads with the question "Who is Tariq Ramadan?" and then goes on to identify him as the central figure of Islam in France today, even though he is a Swiss national. With a population of seven million, the Muslims in France have become the second largest religious community in the country, after the Catholics and before the Protestants. Ramadan was thrust into the limelight following his recent participation in a meeting organised by the European Social Forum (ESF) and his heated debate on television with French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy. Tariq Ramadan says he is not part of the Muslim Brothers. He has even said that he differed with his grandfather over a number of issues related to Islamic teachings. But whether he likes it or not, his importance lies in the fact that he belongs concomitantly to two discordant identities, an Islamic identity due to his family ties and a European identity due to his upbringing in Switzerland. In the context of the radical changes now underway in the entire world system, the potential for clashes between the two facets of his dual identity has never been higher. Indeed, Ramadan's thinking and behaviour are, to a considerable extent, a product of the constant tug of war between these two facets and the problematics this raises. Ramadan's father, Said, was a leading member of the Muslim Brothers. He was both El-Banna's son- in-law and his favourite disciple. Exiled by Nasser in 1954, the elder Ramadan lived for a few years in Saudi Arabia before moving with his family to Switzerland, where his sons Hani and Tariq were born and raised. They continued their studies there, and speak French like native speakers. Today Tariq Ramadan is in the eye of a political storm, villified by the French media as an anti- Semitic, sexist and reactionary Islamist. The campaign against him has acquired dangerous proportions reminiscent of the Inquisition. The question is why so much importance is being given to Tariq Ramadan. In 1961, Said Ramadan founded the Islamic Centre in Geneva. The following year, Tariq was born into a home environment marked by a sense of alienation coupled with the hope that integration was possible. The young Tariq first devoted his efforts to abstract studies. He studied philosophy, concentrating mainly on Nietzsche, then became a philosophy teacher at the Lycee of Saussure. On reaching adulthood, he visited Egypt with his wife and children in a quest for his roots. In Egypt, he discovered the other side of his identity. His personality developed beyond the traditional Islamic frameworks, and he became known for his independent views, forceful arguments and debating skills. He has been accused of cleverly using the Internet, particularly on the occasion of the ESF meeting, to emerge as a force to be reckoned with among Europe's growing Muslim population. Contrary to the Islamic movement in Europe taken as a whole, Tariq Ramadan adopted a stand against religious schools in France, which he described as a trap. He opposed them, he said, because they exposed the pupils to isolation and marginalisation, making them victims in a society that disliked both Arabs and Muslims. However, his views on the matter did not save him from the charges of anti-Semitism levelled against him by prominent French intellectuals who are proud to call themselves secular and claim to have a universalist outlook, such as Andre Glucksmann, Pascal Bruckner and Bernard Kouchner. This was in retaliation for Ramadan's criticism of their support for the American war in Iraq, which he said was to "serve Israeli interests". Ramadan also accused the writer Alexander Adler of analysing events "from the viewpoint of Israel", and attributed Bernard Henri Levy's description of Sharon's recent visit to India as "historic" to the fact that what brought India and Israel together was the enmity towards Pakistan. Actually, Ramadan is not anti-Semitic. The reason he has earned the enmity of these intellectuals is that his stands now enjoy the support of thinkers and intellectuals of the calibre of the late Edward Said, Naom Chomsky, Francois Bugart, Edgar Morin and Norman Finkelstein, some of whom are Jewish. Tariq Ramadan developed a constructive dialogue with Alain Gresh, editor-in-chief of Le Monde Diplomatique, and with Bernard Cassen, one of the leading figures of the world anti-globalisation movement. He also tried to find common ground with the French peasant leader Jose Bove, famous for destroying a MacDonald's to protest France's Americanisation in the globalisation process now underway. The youth in the "ghettos" that have developed in the suburbs around France's large cities listen to what Ramadan has to say with great interest. They feel he speaks in their name and expresses their aspirations. He is particularly popular among Muslim youth, even in the United States where he is often invited to deliver lectures. Ramadan is the author of a book entitled The Muslims in a Secular Environment, by which he means Europe. His problem is how to make European Muslims live their faith and citizenship in a coherent manner. He says, "Whatever does not oppose our values we should take up and add to our legacy." This has been the theme of countless lectures Ramadan has given in Europe, America, Asia and Africa. But despite the uproar over Tariq Ramadan in France and elsewhere in Europe. Egypt -- and indeed the whole Islamic world -- remains curiously silent in his regard. There has been no attempt to join the debate he has provoked, let alone to defend him. It is hard to explain why he is conspicuously absent from our public discourse, not only because the issues at stake touch on the future of the West's relations with Islam, but because of his relationship with the founder of the Muslim Brothers. Is it because his independent thinking does not operate only towards French society but also towards Arab and Muslim societies? Is his independence frowned upon because it has gone too far, raising the problematic of Islam in western societies, and to what extent accommodation is required to avoid confrontation and Huntington's "clash of civilisations" scenario? In fact, the issue goes beyond Ramadan as an individual. It has its origins in the undeniable duality between the Islam to which Ramadan attributes himself and the Western Judeo-Christian environment in which he was brought up and with which he is forced to interact. Ramadan's critics argue that he cannot be part of the European Social Forum as long as he subscribes to a philosophy that rejects the notion of progress and does not condemn the veil. In their televised debate, the French Interior minister tried to embarrass Ramadan by raising the issue of Islamic punishments such as stoning women who commit adultery and amputating the hands of thieves. Ramadan resorted to ijtihad (one of the four sources of Islam that is used to find the doctrinal solution to new problems) to come forward with alternatives to such practices. The Sarkozy/Ramadan debate was part of a series of televised debates between the interior minister and a number of key figures, including Christophe Aguiton, representative of the Porto Allegre "other globalisation", and Le Pen, leader of France's extreme right. Sarkozy is planning to present himself in France's next presidential elections, and these debates appear to be preparing the groundwork for his campaign. It seems Ramadan is playing a key role, albeit from the standpoint of an ever more significant Islamic opposition, in establishing the features of France's future policies. In such a context, can we continue to ignore Tariq Ramadan?
