Some time ago, I visited Britain on the invitation of a number of Muslim associations. We were given a two-pronged program: one part included lectures and meetings with the leaders of the Muslim community in London and other cities. The second part of our trip involved meeting with British officials, including Britain’s attorney general and the Minister of State for Middle East and Commonwealth Affairs.
I also held a symposium with senior officials in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, followed by a meeting at the headquarters of the British police (Scotland Yard). I was not brought there for being accused of a charge! (These were my words to Sir Ian Blair, the then head of the aforementioned body.) Upon meeting Sir Blair – not to be confused with Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister – I was left with the impression that he was quite a gentleman.
I must emphasize here to the reader that I was not carrying intelligence information. I was in fact asked to lecture in a room in the House of Lords on the drafting of laws under Islamic law. A discussion followed on some of the legal opinions surrounding such laws, the issue of security and the covenant of Islam. I then visited an Anglican Church where we exchanged thoughts and came to an agreement on various issues.
Just a few days after my trip to the UK, I was at a conference in Kuwait organized by the Ministry of Justice and Endowments, under the title “We and the Other”. The subject on which I was asked to submit a paper was the “Parameters and Mechanisms of Communication”. I provided valuable research in this regard, which highlighted the desire to find a formula of communication. On the occasion of the conference I, along with a group of scientists and intellectuals, met with His Highness the Amir of Kuwait and the Prime Minister. I have heard from many sources of the sincere desire to find mechanisms for communication, which ultimately means understanding and harmony between civilizations, to put an end to misunderstanding and its causes.
So, what is the relationship between my tour in Britain and the trip to Kuwait? It is the desire to communicate. I realized that all the individuals I met, at various levels of society, have the same desire to find ways for communication. I say this about Kuwaitis without reservation. As for the British, it is well known that they are the example of wisdom and that their accumulative experience about the Islamic world does not need to be proven. Yet, I think that they have desire to explore other ways to communicate with the Islamic civilization. They deal with their fellow Muslims in a very civilized manner, in comparison to the treatment of other countries.
The question now begs, why is it necessary to search for communication? Communication means the interaction between two or more persons; that is to establish a material or spiritual link. Its first meaning in the dictionary is to establish a relationship with someone. In his bookThe Other Globalization, issued in February 2004, the French writer Dominique Walton draws attention to the fact that the media, for example, does not stand for communication. He states: “There is a difference between the verbs ‘tell and inform’ on the one part, and the verb ‘communicate’ on the other part. This is because the globalization of the media came to inform people of news; but did not make them communicate to understand each other better.”
Communication has become an inevitable necessity and a sacred duty. If seeking to communicate presupposes the existence of problems, obstacles to be overcome, or a misunderstanding that should be removed, then our response must be positive. Communication is necessary in this day and age to avoid the misinterpretation of history. Some of those who falsely construct history include culprits who supposedly belong to Islam, who create false constructs without consultation from the vast majority of Muslims.
Thus, these incidents have accumulated in an historical hatred between civilizations, resulting in grave incidents. The clash of cultures predicted by fortunetellers has come true, and soothsaying has turned into disaster with wars breaking out in more than one country. What is the origin of this misunderstanding or mistrust? First, let us say: friction is natural between neighbors. This friction can turn into battles, as it has done around the Mediterranean Sea. Neighbors have travelled through this water barrier, or connector, to bring rise to approximately 3000 major battles over the years, as estimated by some researchers.
The advent of Islam came about in the seventh century as a powerful empire, both culturally and spiritually, between Europe, Africa and the borders of Asia. Verily, this and subsequent events that spread across the centuries (beginning with Islam entering the Levant to truncate the southern Mediterranean from the Roman Empire, the seizure of Andalusia and Islam entering Constantinople) made Islam the greatest enemy of the West. This ‘arch-enemy’ needed to be eradicated by all means: military, cultural, and by the use of weapons of insult or defamation.
These obscene words and abhorrent characteristics appealed to the so-called ‘Enlightened Writers’, such as Dante, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Voltaire, and others who drew a bad image for Islam and Muslims. This led to the breaking of the Crusades and Restoration Wars after the call of Pope Urban in 1059 A.C. The fall of Andalusia at the end of the 15th century and the retreat of the Turkish army at the walls of Vienna in 1683 A.C. marked the beginning of Western colonialism. The rest of the story is well-known. It concluded with the establishment of the State of Israel in the heart of the Arab world, and subsequent events that continue to this day.
Another reason for this mistrust and breakdown in communication has been highlighted by some western writers, namely Marcel Bouzar. He calls it “the knot of relatives”, as our relatives are often the most difficult to understand.