THE JERUSALEM POST
April 18, 2004
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull%26cid=1082260232467
A few years back [RB:
"March, 2001"], Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi,
the secretary-general of the Italian Muslim Association, imam at [RB:
"of"]
the Shafi School of Islamic Jurisprudence, and the co-chair of Islam-Israel
Fellowship at the Root and Branch Association, addressed a group of
conservative-leaning Jews in Manhattan.
After hearing him cite a
Koranic passage endorsing Zionism (The
Night Journey, 17:104), deriding terror groups for misinterpreting
religious
texts to advance their "pseudo-Islamic radicalist" agenda, and endorsing
a
"Jordan is Palestine" solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, the invited
guests were taken aback. Was the bearded sheikh really a hawkish
rabbi?
One participant asked Palazzi
if he received death threats, to which
he shook his head. On the way out, the participant sighed, and
said: "If
the terrorists don't want to kill him, he's probably not that important".
Today, Palazzi, 43, is emerging
as an unlikely voice of moderation
in a religion whose leaders are viewed by many as apathetic, if not
sympathetic, to terror abroad and oppression at home. A student
of Sheikh
Muhammad Shaarawi (an Egyptian cleric who promoted Jewish-Muslim relations
and backed Anwar Sadat's decision to make peace with Israel), Palazzi
is a
harsh critic of the anti-Semitism that has come to pervade Islam.
A proponent of Israeli Tourism
Minister Benny Elon's voluntary
transfer plan, Palazzi opposes the U.S.-backed road map on the grounds
that
it rewards Palestinian terror. His most vocal criticism, however,
is
reserved for the Saudis, whom he sees as the main force behind the
rise of
extremism in Islam.
Whether one agrees with his
views or not, Palazzi's voice is a sign
that pluralism may finally be returning to Islam.
MELISSA RADLER ASKS:
How did anti-Semitism enter mainstream Islam?
************
SHEIKH PROFESSOR PALAZZI ANSWERS:
It's a consequence of Britain's foreign policy immediately
after World War I. The original Weizmann-Feisal agreement was
one of
friendship and cooperation between the Zionist movement and the leaders
of
the Hashemite family, and the acceptance of the creation of two states
-- a
Jewish state and an Arab kingdom, with the Jordan River as the natural
border. Had that agreement been respected by the British, the
Jewish state
would have been born 30 years earlier, and the Arab and Zionist movements
would have cooperated.
Unfortunately, the [RB: "British"] Foreign Office empowered
the House of Saud, which promotes cultural Wahhabism, a belief that
has
anti-Semitism as one of its defining features. Until today, Saudis
are
using their oil money to promote anti-Semitism in the Arab world and
beyond.
************
MELISSA RADLER ASKS:
Can you really reduce Muslim anti-Semitism to Saudi
influence?
************
SHEIKH PROFESSOR PALAZZI ANSWERS:
When Emir Feisal declared in 1919 that he was welcoming the
Jews home, no one used a religious argument against him. Maybe
some said
that from a political point of view we are not inclined to accept your
idea
of cooperating with the Zionist movement, but no one said that Islam
forbids
cooperating with the Zionists, or that Islam prevents us from accepting
the
existence of a Jewish state. That ideology, which is so widespread
in the
Arab world today, simply did not exist.
Even today, if you look at how anti-Semitism is spread in
the Arab world, it is done by translating anti-Semitic European literature
like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Roger Garaudy into Arabic.
If
you look for sources in classical Arabic literature, you can't find
them.
Of course, many leaders understand that promoting hostility
against Israel prevents the spread of democracy to their own countries.
As
long as those countries go on being dictatorial regimes, they need
scapegoats, and it's easy to hold Israel responsible for everything
that is
wrong at home.
I think that fighting democracy and spreading anti-Semitism
are two sides of the same agenda.
************
MELISSA RADLER ASKS:
Is the West sufficiently aware of the threat of Islamic
extremism?
************
SHEIKH PROFESSOR PALAZZI ANSWERS:
No.
After 9/11, President Bush invited Saudi Crown Prince
Abdullah to his ranch in Texas, and told him: "You are our ally
in the war
against terrorism".
The reality is that Prince Abdullah contributed funds to
both the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaida.
Prince al-Turki, former head of the Saudi secret service, is
practically the founder of al-Qaida. The relatives of the victims
of 9/11
sued him for damages [the suit was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction],
but
now that same sponsor of terrorism is the Saudi ambassador to Britain,
where
he publishes poems praising suicide terrorists in British newspapers.
The power of the oil companies in the Western world is such
that the role of the House of Saud as the main supporter of extremism
and
international terrorism goes on being covered up.
************
MELISSA RADLER ASKS:
Is there a counter-appeal to Islamic fundamentalism in the
West?
************
SHEIKH PROFESSOR PALAZZI ANSWERS:
We should try to create a moderate Muslim education network
which can balance the influence of the extremist network, but it is
a hard
task because the extremists have huge funds at their disposal.
If you look at the rest of the Muslim world, anti-Semitism
is not common in Turkey or former Soviet Muslim republics like Uzbekistan
and Kazakhstan; it was not part of any political agenda. But
I think that
the situation in the West is different because Muslims who live there
in
most cases can only attend Saudi-controlled mosques, Islamic schools
and
Islamic centers. In general, the countries in the Muslim world
that are
closer to democracy are the most friendly with the West, and those
in which
extremism is limited. So the logical consequence should be that
Muslims in
the West are the most open-minded. But the role of the extremist
network in
taking control of the mosques means that the opposite has happened.
One of the effects of 9/11 in North America is that those
who were afraid to be heard are starting to speak about the danger
of
fundamentalist and extremist networks. If the number of those
speaking out
increases, the public will start understanding that the extremists
have no
right to speak for Islam.
************
MELISSA RADLER ASKS:
You've stated that the Palestinians have no religious or
historical right to Judea and Samaria, and that the Koran endorses
a Jewish
return to the Holy Land. How should Muslims respond to the establishment
of
a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria?
************
SHEIKH PROFESSOR PALAZZI ANSWERS:
I think that those Palestinians who abide by Israeli law
have a right to go on living in Judea and Samaria, exactly like Israeli
Arabs in Galilee or Beduin Arabs in the Negev. However, I do
not think that
being a minority in a certain country gives that minority the right
to claim
a state of its own. Consequently, I think that every Muslim should
protest
the idea of a P.L.O.-controlled state in Judea and Samaria. The
area of
Palestine is already divided into a Jewish Palestinian state, Israel,
and an
Arab Palestinian state, Jordan; creating a third Palestinian state
for the
P.L.O. is neither in the interests of Israel nor in the interest of
Jordan,
and even less in the interests of those Palestinian Arabs who would
be
compelled to live under a barbaric regime.
Moreover, accepting the creation of such a state would mean
that terror works. Many Muslims rejoiced when the U.S. administration
liberated the Muslims of Iraq from Saddam Hussein. I think those
same
Muslims must protest when the White House pressures Israel to accept
the
creation of another dictatorial regime in the Arab world.
Muslims need democracy, and democracy for the Muslims of
Judea and Samaria can only be granted by Israel.
************
MELISSA RADLER ASKS:
Yet millions of Palestinians, and the majority of Israelis,
support an eventual Palestinian state. What's the solution?
************
SHEIKH PROFESSOR PALAZZI ANSWERS:
I think the biggest step toward real peace in the Middle
East was the war in Lebanon: By expelling Arafat and the P.L.O.,
the level
of terrorism was reduced. If they had let Arafat die in Tunis
and never
permitted his close associates to come back, terrorism would have been
defeated within 10 or 20 years, and it would have been possible for
a new
leadership to emerge in favor of some kind of political agreement to
grant
the residents of the West Bank their rights as a foreign minority living
in
Israel.
Oslo simply destroyed that opportunity by bringing Arafat
back and giving him control of the population. After [prime minister
Ehud]
Barak, Israelis voted for [Ariel] Sharon, the man who expelled Arafat
and
expanded settlements in Judea and Samaria, but now even Sharon is abiding
by
the principle of withdrawal.
Israel needs a leader who is able to say that negotiations
with the P.L.O. are not a solution, who says that we oppose the creation
of
a Palestinian state now and in the future, and that we will establish
administrative autonomy
[with Jordanian citizenship] for Arab inhabitants of the West Bank.
If President Bush claims that the war against terrorism is a
global war, and that the solution is to spread democracy, Israelis
have the
same right to fight against Yasser Arafat and Sheikh Yassin [killed
by
Israel a week
after this interview] as the United States has to fight against the
Taliban,
Saddam Hussein or al-Qaida.
************
MELISSA RADLER ASKS:
Did you ever run into Jews who disagree with your activism?
************
SHEIKH PROFESSOR PALAZZI ANSWERS:
It happens frequently. Until recently, most of my opponents
in Rome were leftist Jews, criticizing me as an enemy of the peace
process.
I remember when some of my friends wanted me to speak at the Jewish
center
in Rome, [the center] opposed the idea, claiming that I'm an extremist.
Some weeks later, they invited Yasser Abed Rabbo and Sari Nusseibeh
to be
their guests; they called them moderate leaders of the Palestinian
Authority.
I told them if someone thinks Sari Nusseibeh is a moderate,
then I'm glad he considers me an extremist.
Russian version