Interessanter Text eines jungen Muslims, der mit dem Protest gegen die „Satanischen Verse“ groß geworden ist.
Im Guardian schreibt Inayat Bunglawala angesichts der neuen Protestwelle gegen Salman Rushdie, wie er seinerzeit die Bücherverbrennungen erlebt hat.
Man kann an diesen Erinnerungen ablesen, wie sehr die Identität der britischen Muslime mit der Rushdie-Affäre verbunden ist. Man kann sagen, dass Rushdie den Typ des britischen Muslims erst geschaffen hat.
Das muss man sich in aller Deutlichkeit vor Augen führen: Das Schlüsselerlebnis für die britischen Muslime ist eine Bücherverbrennung, ein Aufstand gegen die Meinungsfreiheit. Und der Autor erinnert sich geradezu sentimental an die damals gefundene Einheit.
In einem zweiten Teil, der merkwürdig unvermittelt anschliesst, spricht er dann seine „second thoughts“ aus. Nachdem er durch die islamische Welt gereist ist, hat er den Wert der Meinungsfreiheit zu schätzen gelernt. Rushdie würde er heute nicht mehr verbrennen.
Aber den Gedanken, dass an einem Zusammenschluss von Muslimen, ja an einer „muslimischen Identität“ etwas faul ist, die sich auf eine Bücherverbrennung gründet – diesen Gedanken erlaubt er sich nicht.
I remember being rather puzzled as to why Rushdie’s defenders were so vigorous in arguing for the right to offend Muslims. Muslims were not writing books making fun of Christ and other revered religious figures. It seemed to be a deliberate attempt to mock deeply held beliefs.
We were a tiny minority and in the mainstream British newspapers had no voice whatsoever, while our detractors had column after column of newsprint to disparage us and our „backward“ ways. We were utterly powerless.
So on February 14 1989, when the Iranian Islamic leader, Imam Khomeini delivered his fatwa calling for Salman Rushdie’s death, I was truly elated. It was a very welcome reminder that British Muslims did not have to regard themselves just as a small, vulnerable minority; they were part of a truly global and powerful movement. If we were not treated with respect then we were capable of forcing others to respect us.
I remember taking part in the large demonstration in Hyde Park that summer. It was an amazing day. There was an increasing realisation that by giving greater importance to our Islamic identity we could transcend and overcome the narrow sectarian and tribal divides that were widespread among us. We may have Pakistani, Bengali, Gujarati, Arab, Turkish backgrounds, but this was less important than what brought us together: we were British Muslims.
And so Rushdie’s novel became, unwittingly no doubt, the catalyst for the forging of a more confident Islamic identity among many British Muslims.
…
In the intervening years I have managed to travel to Egypt, Sudan, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Turkey and elsewhere and it is always with a sense of warmth that I return to the UK. Our detractors had been right. The freedom to offend is a necessary freedom.
Moreover, Islam has flourished wherever there has been a free atmosphere. I continue to strongly disagree with the way Rushdie caricatured early Islamic heroes of mine, but banning the book was not the answer.