Speaking to Gamal Essam El-Din in Cairo before he left for the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Asia's most strident voice, Malaysian Prime Minister , described the United States as 'the man with the biggest club' What were the main aims of your sudden visit to Cairo? My visit to Cairo was a little sudden. Although it was planned a short time ago, it has been on my mind for quite some time. I wanted to visit Egypt for a number of reasons. First, the summit of the Non-Alignment Movement (NAM) is due to be held in Kuala Lumpur next February (22-25 February). Egypt is one of the founding members of this pioneering movement and it was, therefore, very important for me to come here to invite President Hosni Mubarak in person to attend the summit. The presence of President Mubarak and other leaders is essential in order to give NAM a desperately needed boost. It was also very important for me to come to Egypt at such a critical time in which the Muslim world is facing dangerous challenges and threats. Egypt is well known for its moderate Islam and the existence of its widely renowned Islamic University of Al-Azhar, which gives it a very special standing in the Islamic world. One of the main objectives of my visit to Egypt was to meet with Al-Azhar scholars and clerics to debate the post-11 September challenges facing Muslims in the world of today. I delivered a lecture at Al- Azhar University's Islamic Research Centre on "Muslim Unity in the Face of Challenges and Threats." A third objective of my visit was to promote trade and economic relations between our two countries. The volume of trade exchange between Egypt and Malaysia is very modest. It is true that the balance of trade is in favour of Malaysia, but we want the two countries to reinforce cooperation to fully tap into the huge economic potentials of their markets. Egypt is one of the most populous and Malaysia is one of the most technologically advanced countries in the Islamic world. I discussed with Prime Minister Atef Ebeid how to make use of these two facts in boosting trade and mutual investments between our two countries. Do you think NAM still has a role to play in a world almost dominated by one superpower? It is true that the NAM summit has become weak in recent times. But it is also the fact that the world has almost become dominated by one superpower that must prompt us to reactivate the role of NAM. In fact, we have to reactivate and reinforce all organisations like the NAM and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), whose summit will also be held in Kuala Lumpur next October. Most of the members of these organisations belong to the developing world, whose countries and peoples are suffering from the oppression of one superpower. They have to meet and discuss their problems frankly and forcefully if they are to have a say in world affairs. What were the main points of the controversial lecture you delivered at Al- Azhar University? First of all, I want to explain that I was prompted to write this lecture by the dramatic ramifications of the 11 September terrorist attacks in the US. It is an exercise in self- criticism that all Muslims worldwide should now undertake to solve their problems. I think the ramifications of the 11 September attacks could turn into advantages for the Muslim world if they began to correct the misconceptions that many interpreters of Islam have deplorably helped disseminate. Topping the list of misinterpretations mentioned in my lecture is that Muslims must suffer in silence and await their heaven in the afterlife. Many of the interpreters are telling Muslims that this world is not theirs and that a place in heaven has been reserved for Muslims. Now I want to ask: is this truly what Islam teaches us? Did Prophet Mohamed accept his persecution because his place in heaven was assured? Did he relish the fact that his Quraish persecutors would end up in hell? What would have happened to the spread of Islam if Prophet Mohamed had not struggled against his enemies, dispatched his early followers to safe havens, migrated to Madinah to build up the strength of the Muslims and increased their numbers in order to fight back? If he had retreated to await his reward after death, we would not be the Muslims of today. Could this view not be seen as bearing some resemblance to the language of jihad that the West so abhors? This is not the jihad the Islamist extremists and terrorists are calling for. Islam for these people is that life is not important and that this life on earth is only for the infidels. They fight and die, not in order to achieve any real objective; they just want to retaliate, take revenge and vent their anger. Back to my lecture, we all know that in the end, Prophet Mohamed defeated his enemies and was able to spread Islam throughout the world and to build the greatest empire and civilisation in history. Prophet Mohamed not only believed that Muslims must have a share of Allah's bounties on earth, but that Muslims must be prepared to fight for their earthly share. Allah could have said "Kun, Fayakun," [Be, and it shall be] but Allah left His messenger to struggle and fight not only to spread Islam and seek heaven, but also to gain for the Muslims their earthly share in this world. So the idea that we must suffer in silence and await our heaven in the next world is not Islamic. In tandem with the above is the misinterpretation that science and technology are secular subjects, which will not earn us merit in the afterlife. By saying this, interpreters are discouraging Muslims and their societies from fulfilling the injunctions of Islam [that stipulate] being equipped with the means of defending themselves and deterring their enemies. During the glorious years of Islamic civilisation, we were not oppressed. Muslims were respected and feared. That was because Muslim countries were strong both militarily and economically and advanced in the sciences. They were concerned with gaining earthly wealth as much as they were concerned with enjoying heaven in the afterlife. Europeans had to learn from Muslims new knowledge, including those of the Greeks and others, which the Muslims had studied, translated into Arabic and enhanced. Now, our enemies will always attack us because we are weak. To defeat our enemies, we need to give our worldly life greater attention. We need to invent, design, produce and test our weapons of defence. To do this, we need to have scientific and technological knowledge and skills. Those who learn science and mathematics and acquire technological skills are therefore obeying and fulfilling the injunctions of Islam. Those who prevent us from studying these subjects by saying that only learning religion will earn us merit are in fact going against the teachings of Islam, for they weaken the Muslim Ummah [nation] and prevent us from instilling fear in the hearts of the enemies of Islam and becoming capable of defeating them. An important issue I spoke about in my lecture is that we all know that the Prophet brought to us only one Islam; that the Islam received from Allah is only one. Now, however, there are the Sunnis and the Shi'ites, each divided into numerous groups by the different Imams and tariqas [way of worshipping]. Had Allah wanted us to have all these religions, then Prophet Mohamed would have conveyed this to the first Muslims -- would have taught Sunni Islam or Shi'a Islam and so forth. All these divisions in Islam came only after he passed away. They are the results of differing interpretations of Islam by different scholars throughout the centuries. Some of these interpretations and teachings are so different from each other that their followers actually accuse each other of not being Muslims or, even, of being infidels. In Malaysia, one political party has convinced its followers that anyone not joining or supporting it is not a Muslim. Many Malay Muslims even believe that voting for this party in elections will guarantee them a place in heaven. Do you believe that religion and politics should be kept separate? Yes. This is so as not to give politicians the opportunity to abuse the teachings of Islam for their personal and political ambitions. It is sad to see that most of today's interpretations of Islam are meant only to serve political ends. Most of today's Muslims have missed the true content of the message of Allah, focussing on the form instead. For example, some Muslims adopt dress codes that they say are to differentiate them from other Muslims whom they condemn as being lesser Muslims. The Muslims of today have also divided themselves into different states and their loyalty to their states is more than to Islam. In pursuit of the interests of their respective countries, they are even prepared to fight their Muslim brothers. They have become pawns in the games that other people play. What do Muslims have to do to redeem the true Islam that has been hijacked by the numerous misinterpretations? There is a saying in Malaysia that when you lose your way, you must return to the beginning and start again. Since we are so confused and divided because of the multitude of interpretations and teachings of Islam, we should really return to the fundamentals of Islam, to the Qur'an and the original teachings of Prophet Mohamed and his verified hadiths [sayings], which are clear and indisputable. The most fundamental teaching of Islam we must now concentrate on is that Islam means peace and that all Muslims are brothers and united as members of one family. We must stop blaming others for our sad fate. We must blame ourselves in order to overcome our own faults and weaknesses. We have to reinforce such organisations as the OIC to mobilise our enormous resources in a fruitful way. We have to be more forgiving and more ready to open up to the outside world. To what extent have you been able to apply your enlightened view of Islam to Malaysia? Islam is a religion of peace and moderation. If it does not appear to be so today, it is not because of the teachings of Islam, but because the interpretations are made to suit certain vested interests. In Malaysia, the government that I lead is labelled secular and un- Islamic by the opposition Pan Malaysia Islamic Party, led by people who claim to be ulemas [scholars]. In multi-racial and multi- religious Malaysia, we have tried to practice the fundamentals of Islam. But the extremist deviants are always sniping at us. Still, Malay Muslims have largely refused to deviate from the fundamentals of Islam and to give power to self-appointed ulemas incompetent in administration and development. Malaysia is a reasonably developed modern nation not in spite of Islam, but because of Islam and because it tries to adhere to the fundamentals of Islam in a sound way. Islam is not just a religion. It is a way of life that can bring greatness to its followers as it once did. This is how most Malaysians understand Islam. Malaysia is comfortable with Islam and we can become a modern developed country at the same time. When you visited America after the 11 September attacks you were hailed as a staunch ally of the US in its war against terrorism. Meanwhile, you attacked American foreign policy, saying it helps recruit more terrorists. Is this not a paradoxical position? It is not a paradoxical position. I visited America in February and May. In New York [in February] I was asked about Malaysia's response to terrorist attacks. I said that terrorism was not an Islamic monopoly. In Malaysia, we fought terrorist communist guerrillas for 42 years, not just through military action, but by winning the hearts and minds of people who supported them. One can say the same of terrorists anywhere, including those who are Muslim by religion. Islam does not promote terrorism. Islam is a religion of peace. But when Muslims feel they are oppressed, they begin to react very much like the ethnic Chinese in Malaysia did. America must know that its foreign policies have led it to losing the minds and hearts of Muslims and non-Muslims throughout the world. What is Malaysia's position on America's threats of war against Iraq and the cycle of violence between the Palestinians and Israelis? You asked me this question before in Kuala Lumpur and the answer is very clear. We reject any war against Iraq because it will weaken America's war against terrorism. On the contrary, it will lead to the recruitment of many anti- American terrorists. We also insist that the oppression of the Palestinians at the hands of Israel does harm to America. The Palestinians resorted to terrorist attacks after they lost hope that Israel and America will recognise their legitimate rights. Although committing suicide is strongly forbidden by Islam, we have a people [the Palestinians] who have lost hope in life and have found it better to seek heaven in the afterlife. President George Bush said that the Palestinians must stop violence and reform their government. Okay, but is there any guarantee that America will help them have their own land and independent state in the face of a man like Sharon? Malaysia is being accused in the Western media of human rights abuses, the verdict against your former deputy, Anwar Ibrahim, and the use of the internal security act (ISA) that allows detention without trial being cited. What are your thoughts on this? We do not abuse human rights in Malaysia because all trials are conducted under the due process of law. If I wanted to abuse the human rights of this person [Anwar Ibrahim], there is a law that enables me to detain him without trial. But I chose not to do this. I left it to independent judges and courts. Those who accused us of abusing human rights are now abusing these rights themselves. How is the Malaysian economy faring? The country has staged a remarkable recovery since the 1997 Asian financial crisis. At the time, I was severely attacked for rejecting the advice of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) by fixing the ringgit [the Malaysian currency] to the US dollar at a rate of 3.8:1. I totally refused to surrender the management of the economy to the IMF. This is despite the fact that many in Malaysia, including the then finance minister [Anwar Ibrahim], believed in the IMF's intervention and wanted me to bow to it. I refused because I strongly believed in the sound foundations of the Malaysian economy. We recovered from the crisis so swiftly that, after the country's economy contracted sharply to 7.4 per cent in 1998, it expanded by 8.3 per cent in 2000 as confidence was restored [it declined to 6.7 per cent in 2003]. Between 1997 and 2001, Malaysia attracted $20.3 billion of foreign direct investments (FDIs) and it had currency reserves of $34 billion in the central bank. But, the greatest achievement is that the IMF does not have a say in my country's economic affairs. Is it true that you accused the Jews of causing the 1997 financial meltdown in Southeast Asia? George Soros [the international speculator involved in Southeast Asia's 1997 crisis] is a Jew. I attacked him for his disastrous speculative opinions, not because he is a Jew. Do you still intend to resign from office at the end of this year? You asked me this question before in Kuala Lumpur. My answer is still very clear. Yes, I will resign after the summit of the Organisation of Islamic Conference concludes next October.
