Institute for Security Studies's Negative Remarks

JAMIATUL ULAMA TRANSVAAL’S STATEMENT ON

South African Institute of Security Studies’ (ISS)
Martin Schönteich Negative Remarks on South African Muslims

The Jamiatul Ulama together with all its affiliate bodies throughout South Africa are greatly disturbed and dismayed at the comments of Martin Schönteich, a researcher at the ISS, at his presentation at the Crime Writers Club.

We regard his comments as hugely misleading, immensely provocative and highly inaccurate. Such comments have the potential of fuelling Islamaphobia in South Africa, creating artificial ideological barriers between Muslims and people of other faiths, leading to a hostile environment towards Muslims in general.

According to SAPA reports, Schönteich is alleged to have stated the following:

1. There is a link between criminal elements in SA and Islamic extremists.

2. Muslims are a bigger threat to South Africa than the right-wing Boeremag.

3. The threat of Islamic terrorism is linked directly to rising fundamentalist sympathy in the community.

4. Traditional Muslim leaders are becoming increasingly outspoken over the Middle East, American policy and Israel, thus contributing to the threat of Islamic terrorism.

The above claims have to be dismissed with the derision they deserve. Islamic extremists, if the term is to be accepted at all, do not engage in petty criminal activity! Extremists perpetrate extreme acts of violence. Further, the Muslims of South Africa have been more a victim of right-wing Boeremag terrorist activities rather than the opposite. It would seem that Schönteich is either deliberately propagating an antagonistic view, or is totally oblivious of the South African political landscape.

According to his lop-sided thinking, the increasing fundamentalist sympathy would fuel Islamic terrorism, so much so that even conservative Muslim leaders would speak out against American/Israeli policy. Does he not consider that in the past week alone, over 12 million people protested against these same policies, many of whom were non-Muslims? Do all these people support terrorism? Why is ‘legitimate’ political dissent allowed to manifest in military strikes in the case of America and Israel, and legitimate freedom of speech not allowed from others? Schönteich’s simplistic research implies that criticism of American foreign policy and its support for Israel is enough to brand and individual as a ‘terrorist”, a designation that would fit many within the ANC, including former president, Nelson Mandela!

However by far, the most damning aspect of his view is that all Muslims are painted with one brush: those who are not extreme are potentially extremist; those who are not violent are potentially violent, hence, Muslims as a whole are terrorists. This collapsing of barriers and fallacious generalisation smacks of US intelligence tactics, which seek to justify action against Muslims, anywhere, anyhow, presenting them in a worldwide caricature of evil and extremism. Everyone knows of this hollow tactic, but it seems that it has been lost on the "researcher."

Interestingly, Mr Schönteich relies on the US for his absurd postulation. He states: “Qiblah and other local Muslim organisations which have been classified by the US government as extremist…” What credibility has the US government in these times?

Muslims are not a security threat to South Africa, but statements such as these are. It would be very unfortunate if the Institute does not distance itself from such bigotry, designed to sow the seeds of hostility and suspicion within the rainbow nation of South Africa.

We call upon Schönteich to unconditionally retract his statements, issue a public apology to all the Muslims of South Africa.

Jamiatul Ulama Transvaal
(Council of Muslim Theologians)
Fax: 011 373 8022
Johannesburg

20 February 2003

[Back|Home]