Saeed Taji Farouky- Battle for Islam

THE BATTLE FOR ISLAM

Contrary to Samual Huntington’s infamous thesis, the future of Islam will be marked not by a clash of civilizations, but by a battle within the religion itself. This is the argument behind prominent British/Muslim author Ziauddin Sardar’s latest project, in which he writes and presents Robert Jenkins’ BBC documentary film, The Battle For Islam. The film, which premiered on BBC Two in September, was also screened at London’s Frontline Club, giving the audience a rare opportunity to question Sardar and Jenkins directly about their ambitious project.

In the film’s opening monologue, Sardar sets out both the film’s central arguent and his own personal motivation for his involvement: “I want to find out how Muslims are trying to rescue their faith from those bent on abusing it.”

He leads the viewer around Morocco, Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia and Malaysia, introducing us, through a combination of interviews and insights, to the most progressive elements of Islam in those countries. His range of interviewees is certainly impressive: they reflect an extremely committed and dedicated approach to liberal religious discourse – not merely philosophers and activists, but genuine pioneers. People like Razlina Razala, for example: a female lawyer with the Malaysian organisation Sisters of Islam who gives advice on divorce law and works to protect Malay women from abuse and inequality in the law. Or Jyafi Anwar, an Indonesian cleric, influenced by Buddhism and Hinduism, who presents his moderate view of Islam on the main government television channel.

It is clear from the onset that Jenkins and Sardar were inspired to make the film as a direct reaction to contemporary political events, and more, as a reaction to the British media’s coverage of those events. In this respect, the film is invaluable, and it is clearly in demand now more than ever as politics and violence force many to question the fundamentals of their own faith. However, it is also quickly clear that this is an extremely personal project for Sardar, and one in which his personality often takes precedence over his argument. He described the film at the Frontline Club screening as “highly constructed” and “totally biased,” explaining that he chose his interviewees specifically in support of his argument.

If the film is to be considered purely as an illustration of Sardar’s opinions, this is perhaps an acceptable approach, but the fact that it presents itself as more than an editorial, that is, as a broader comment on the state of global Islam, is problematic. It is true that the interviewees provide very powerful examples of the positive changes within Islamic thought, but they also highlight the film’s most salient fault: it cloys with over-simplification, leaving the viewer with a nagging feeling that the whole story is not being told.

The film’s format that is partly to blame for this: too often it flits between reportage, editorial and travelogue and as a result fails to maintain a distinct tone. As a result, there are major omissions that cannot be explained away as mere editorial decisions. Sardar makes o mention whatsoever of the Middle East, for example, and offers no explanation for this choice. Similarly he repeatedly suggests that economic development is the solution to religious extremism without then asking why economic inequality might lead to extremism in the first instance.

As an introduction to the liberal reforms currently found within Islam, the film is an accomplishment. But in trying to please everyone at the same time, it often undermines Sardar’s otherwise authoritative voice and as such fails, at the most crucial times, to dwell for long enough on key questions. Instead, it overwhelms the viewer with concepts that Sardar never fully sinks his teeth into, resulting in an extremely dense film that, though certainly tantalising and revealing, too often sacrifices clarity for volume.

Return to writing & journalism