Recently I attended the launch of Britain's first counter-extremism think-tank, the Quilliam Foundation. The event was followed by the release of a document, Pulling Together to Defeat Terror, which called for, among other things, the establishment of 'de-radicalisation' centres (to help Muslims escape Islamism) and formal links between Muslim, Christian and Jewish seminaries (to lead to "a better understanding of other religions among imams, and vice versa").
Such an initiative deserves the full support of non-Muslims. Some critics claim that ex-Islamists such as Ed Husain and Maajid Nawaz are unrepresentative, have no influence and therefore are not worth talking to. Others argue that we should listen more to ordinary Muslims who have never even flirted with Islamism. But it is not 'either-or'. Of course, we should engage with moderate Muslims who have never given extremism a thought. But they are not the problem. The problem is the Islamists, and those who were once made up their numbers have much to teach us about how they think, plan, recruit and operate. To dismiss the knowledge of ex-Islamists would be manifestly foolish.
What about ex-Muslims (as opposed to ex-Islamists) such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Dutch politician and author of Infidel? She is extremely courageous, having taken huge personal risks, and has much to say that demands serious attention. But who do we think stands a better chance of changing Muslim mindsets - ex-Muslims or ex-Islamists who remain Muslim? Unless we think that over a billion Muslims around the world can be converted to another belief system, surely it is the voices of moderation within Islam, rather than the critics of the faith, who have the best chance of ridding the world of extremism?
In addition to supporting organisations like Quilliam, there are two other things which non-Muslim British people can do.
First, we should speak out against the injustices that cause suffering in the Muslim world. We should advocate human rights for persecuted Muslims. We should campaign for Muslims in Muslim-majority lands who are suffering grotesque abuses, such as victims of rape and "honour"-related violence. And we should challenge Muslims to do the same. The impact can be impressive. After the All India Christian Council (AICC) became one of the first groups to respond to the massacres of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002, with humanitarian supplies and fact-finding teams to document the abuses, AICC representatives received invitations to address gatherings of hundreds of thousands of Muslims throughout the country. The topic: why did you help the Muslims of Gujarat?
Second, we need to defend of our Judeo-Christian heritage, bringing an end to excessive political correctness. That means not turning hospital chapels into multi-faith prayer rooms (that are then taken over by Islamists); not banning hot cross buns at Easter; not removing crucifixes from crematorium walls, etc. Surrendering our heritage and deep-rooted cultural values does not please Muslims. It makes us a laughing-stock. We would win the respect and trust of more Muslims if we took the same pride in our traditions as they do in theirs.
Ultimately, however, whilst non-Muslims can do much, solving "the problem" of Islamism is more a matter for Muslims themselves.
Quilliam's launch paper claims that "regrettably, most Muslim communities and leaders are yet to accept publicly the depth of this communal malaise". That silence is starting to break, however. In a recent BBC Doha Debate, 70% of the audience agreed with the motion that Muslims were failing to combat extremism. That was a good result because, as Husain argues, the first step is for Muslims to admit that there is a problem. Only then can they start solving it.
"Solving" it will not be easy but must involve addressing three key areas: blasphemy, apostasy and reciprocity.
On blasphemy: not a day goes by without Christianity being mocked in some form. Yet few Christians would even write a letter of complaint. So why do Islamists respond with such blood-curdling threats and violence? In countries such as Pakistan where blasphemy laws are in place, such laws are used in almost all cases not to resolve genuine religious grievances - but to settle personal scores and target non-Muslims on entirely fabricated charges. How do Muslims explain that?
On apostasy: if a Christian gives up their faith, fellow believers would feel some sadness. Zealous evangelicals might lay hands on them, praying and quoting Scripture. But I know of no Christian who would threaten violence. So why is it so difficult for Muslims to change their religion? Even though nowhere in the Koran does it prescribe the death penalty for apostasy, many Muslims believe apostates should be killed. Those who are not killed are disowned by their families, or jailed and tortured. You only need read the recent report on apostasy by Ziya Meral, No Place To Call Home, to understand the true and horrific depth of this problem.
On reciprocity: even though we have a Christian heritage, we recognise that Britain today hosts a variety of beliefs and rightly provide space for all religions to worship. There are plenty of mosques in Britain. So why can Christians not worship in Saudi Arabia?
Overall, there are few greater challenges for our generation than tackling radical Islamism. All of us - moderate Muslim and non-Muslim alike - need to work together to do away with apathy and ignorance in our communities and rise up to fight the ideology of hatred with a spirit of peace.
Benedict Rogers is a writer and human rights activist. He works for the human rights organization Christian Solidarity Worldwide, and is Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party Human Rights Commission in the UK. He is the author of A Land Without Evil: Stopping the Genocide of Burma’s Karen People (2004, Monarch Books) and co-author of On the Side of the Angels: Justice, Human Rights and Kingdom Mission (2007, Authentic).
