Iyad Ameen Madani HARDtalk

in Muslim countries, and acts of terror committed across the world,

how worried easy that all Muslims are getting a bad name? -- is he.

Secretary General Iyad Ameen Madani, welcome to HARDtalk. Thank you very

much for having me. As leader of the world's only pan Islamic

organisation, you must be extremely worried when you look around the

world and you see constantly acts of terror being committed by Muslims.

You must be having sleepless nights. Well, we all worry about terrorism.

Our position in the OIC is that terrorism has no religion, no

ethnicity, no gender. We don't think of terror as necessarily Islamic or

a cause and effect with Islam. I didn't say there was a link between

Islam and acts of terror but you must accept that when you look

around the world, Europe, France, Burkina Faso in Africa, Indonesia in

Asia, the Arab world, Libya, wherever you look there are terrible

deeds, acts of terror, committed by Muslims. Well, it is always more

useful to speak specifically. Let's talk about Iraq, for example. I was

at a place that you mentioned, as you said, were acts of violence are

taking place, where other religious groups were. Iraq was invaded. All

the institutions in Iraq were dismantled, the army, bureaucracy

and security forces. Discourses of sectarianism were encouraged.

Everyone was identified as Sunni, Shia, Kurdish or Arab. It was a

process of modernisation, exclusion. We created an environment that

almost invited violence. Because people found violence as a way to

get back. I think we should understand every location within its

own context. Just picking up Iraq, which you have mentioned. The Iraqi

Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi said last year, if what you have said is

true, we need an explanation, he says, why there are so many

terrorists from Saudi Arabia, the Gulf, Egypt, European countries. He

is right, isn't he? Why are they there and what attracts them? If you

say it is a failure of lack of institutions. He himself is

questioning that hypothesis and saying that if that is the case then

why do you have acts of terror committed in European countries or

by non- Iraqis? We have to put this in a wider context. Ever since the

end of the Cold War there has been strong voices in many other

countries outside of the OIC member states who have done their best to

picture Islam and Muslims as the new other, the new opponent, so to

speak. Red was no longer the colour that is one of danger but it has

become green and we see this in many of the political... That being the

colour of Islam. When there is an area of conflict, like Iraq, more so

in Syria, where the whole country is being destroyed, because the

international community sort of had a cold drink and a comfortable seat

and watched while the country destroyed itself, that started as a

very peaceful demonstration asking for a better life. When you create

that environment and when you put the context of struggle between two

backsides, when you put a clash of civilisations, you end up attracting

people who either come because they believe they can get back by taking

part in Iraq -- two sides. Whitey UKIP Eagle Farm Chechnya? Why don't

you answer that question? -- why don't we talk about people from

Chechnya? The wider point made here is that you've got Muslims who are

Europeans committing acts of terror in Europe. You've got Muslims who

are Indonesian committing acts of terror in Indonesia. Wherever you

look in the Muslim world, and it is not sufficient to just point to the

failure to intervene in countries of conflict, as the reason why you are

seeing this. Well, but I think what you said is partial. If you can look

at any country there are groups of people who are committing violence.

But now we have decided to call some sorts of violence terror and other

sorts of violence as misguided individuals. Individuals with some

psychological problems, or they were mistreated by their parents or by

their schoolmates or this or that. If you just account for all the acts

of violence that a country like the United States has seen, you will

find that statistically, those committed by Muslims are really a

fraction of those acts of violence. But we have decided to call those

acts of terror and the other is individual acts. That is the case,

however, isn't it? I will tell you what President Obama said in

December. He said you cannot deny the fact that an extremist ideology

has spread within some Muslim communities. I put it to you with

all respect that it sounds as though you are denying that. I am denying

associating terror with Muslims or Muslim communities. I think the air

we make here when we analyse terror that has something to do with a

religion -- error we make. Isn't it the case... If Muslims are

committing acts of terror and they are describing themselves as

Muslims, acting within their own warped idea of Islam, you cannot

then, as head of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, which

represents all of the Muslim countries of the world, say that

these people have nothing to do with us, nothing to do with Islam. They

define themselves as Muslims. What I am saying is we have to understand

the context. If we are to face up to this phenomena, which concerns all

of us, regardless of what religion or non- religion we believe in, we

have to understand context. What is the social context, what is the

economic root causes, what is the environment that creates such a

situation. If I may go to another geographical area. If you go to Boko

Haram in Nigeria, if you visit the north-east of Nigeria, where Boko

Haram's stronghold is, you will find high level of unemployment, young

people drifting in the streets, with no sense of their worth, with an

omission, with no future to look at. They end up either as addicts, drug

addicts -- with no mission. More petty criminals. Or, certainly, they

are given this message of active recruitment which gives them a sense

of themselves and a sense of what they are. Poverty is one reason you

are saying. And unemployment. And social marginalisation. Everybody

who is socially marginalised, is poor or unemployed, you are trying

to explain to some extent, excuse those acts of terror, killing other

people, usually who are as poor as themselves? That sounds like what

you are trying to do. No, but usually such acts also harm such

community. If you go back to Los Angeles, if you recall those big

demonstrations, one of the first of the United States has witnessed in

Los Angeles, the first damage was the areas where Afro-Americans

lived. They took their van at all their own community first because

this is what is in front of them -- they took their menace. What I am

saying is terrorism has no religion. Terrorism is against all believers

in whatever religion and community. You say that but then use a look at

northern Nigeria. You are talking about poverty. There are some very

rich terrorists. Osama Bin Laden came from one of the richest

countries. His successor, from Al-Qaeda, is an Egyptian

paediatrician. These are educated, not marginalised, people. So, what

you say really cannot hold as explanation as to why some people

turn to terror. Osama Bin Laden started in the Afghani and

Mujahaddin war. The United States supported that war and many others.

Once the Soviets withdraw, decided to withdraw, they forgot these

Mujahaddin that we encouraged and applauded. We did not do any post-

conflict management. We left them on their own and then we blamed

others... People like Osama Bin Laden. He is to be blamed. You blame

outside forces all the time. Your mission is to safeguard Islam.

President Rouhani said it is Alli greatest duty to correct the image

of Islam in world public opinion -- our greatest duty. He says the image

of Islam has become tarnished. Is he right or wrong? It is not a beauty

contest. I am a Muslim and as Muslims we are there to convince

anybody that we are good people. Muslims represent a quarter of the

planet population. There are millions upon millions of Muslims

who are doctors and engineers and students and good citizens and

whatever... Of course, the vast majority, of course. So, we cannot

just put a label on the quarter of the planet population. Of course I

was not, but that tiny minority's wrecking it for everybody else. Use

the incidence of Islamophobia have really increase. I don't have to

quote opinion polls. You know it is a factor that Muslims were ever feel

that the name has been hijacked by their small minority who have their

warped ideology. And you need to understand and accept that and do

not say it is the fault of outside forces. I did not say it was the

fault of Al-Qaeda forces but we have to understand context. Secondly,

another recent -- outside forces. You have that hijack. Those who

claim is Islamic legitimacy to their cause, it is certainly the

responsibility of Muslims spot for anyone else, to prove these people

wrong. -- the responsibility of Muslims, before anyone else, to

prove these people wrong. From a public relation campaign, this is

different from saying that we are nice, please, we move into the house

next door to you. You need to do something fast. You have Donald

Trump, a presidential contender in the US, a leading one, saying, close

the door and ban Muslims going into the US and those who are US

citizens, have surveillance of them. That kind of opinion is quite

popular with vast numbers in the population. Mr Trump has said many

things. He also wants to build a nice view the full wall across the

borders of Mexico. -- beautiful. He wants to hold the keys to the gates.

You know it is the constituents of Mr Trump who have to judge him. Have

you written to him and said it is not right that you should whip up

this anti- Muslim fervour because that is what he is doing? He is a

candidate and they normally say many wild things and we leave it to his

constituencies to judge him. For those who have lived in the USA

students... US educated. -- in the US as students. We believe this is a

great country with great people and great values. We think that Mr Trump

will be just another bubble... We focus very much inevitably as the

media often does on acts of terror committed globally in Europe, be it

in Paris or whatever, but the fact of the matter is Muslims are killing

other Muslims. The vast majority of the victims of acts of terror,

wherever they are, Libya, Iraq, Syria are Muslims. 90 -95% of the

victims are Muslims. That is something that must make you

despair. Aren't you despairing? What about

the Muslims being killed by Palestinians or it is really is? You

are the leader of that organisation. -- Israelis. People within your

organisation are killing and is stopping Yeminis killing Yeminis.

Libyans killing Libyans. I could go on and on. That is lamentable. That

there are many different contradictory things. Libya, the

Muslim world is not just this region. It is from Indonesia to the

West. In Bangladesh you have Muslims killing... Why is Libya

disintegrating right now? You are going to say it is because of

Gaddafi. Wet weather reins it in. In exactly the same way we send horses

to celebrate the birthday of the Emperor of Ekene fasts us. -- We

tolerate. Week he did for him. -- Burkina Faso. That is why it Libyans

are killing other Libyans? This is why it is disintegrating. There were

no institutions. You decided to get rid of him. You did not listen to

the African initiative that was pushed forward by African leaders to

find a solution for that they now the country disintegrated. -- that.

That is the context. A country that sold mountains Oliver Letwin. You

are blaming the outside world again. -- of weapons stop eye and not

blaming anybody. Most of the prime ministers of these countries are

going around selling arms. -- I am not. When the United States goes

into a war there is a war economy. If one plane is destroyed factories

make another one. There is a war wealth. When a country loses arms

they need another one. I will bring you back to Muslims killing Muslims

extremists killing others. Not what you say. What about the fact that we

now say... Libya is uniformly Sunni, so I won't talk about the Sunni-Shia

divide. Now, we are seeing there is a religious divide between Sunni and

Shias manifested in a dreadful rivalry with Saudi Arabia, the Sunni

state against the Shia state. It is a political conflict we are

witnessing. Not a Shia Sunni conflict. What is happening is a

clash of political influence. This is where the OIC comes in, to find a

new paradigms that will define the problem. We see the world

normalising relations with Iran. Would you push for better relations

with Saudi Arabia and Iran. The world is happy they can sign more

contracts in Iran. With Myanmar, in spite of the atrocities... But

shouldn't you... We are actively working and promoting the absolute

necessity for a paradigms in this region. We don't want this region to

be a liability and burden of the Muslim worlds of -- last of the we

share the neighbourhood, the religion. -- world. They share the

same national resources. If you are going to consolidate the bonds

between member states, as your mission statement says, why did you

recently stay in your communique that you condemned Iran for meddling

in the affairs of Yemen, Somalia, Syria... -- say. You condemned them

for that. It is not them, it is the foreign ministers that agreed to see

this. It was not a statement initiated by the body of the OIC. --

say. But it does prefer a rapprochement. Yet. We communicated

to condemn the breaking into the diplomatic offices. After the

execution of Sheikh Nimr. And some found that that should be expanded

to look into their domestic stage... There are other items in

the community that are calling for such a rapprochement. A political

process. You talk about the need to solve conflicts in countries like

Syria and Iraq. Saudi Arabia announced in December that they want

everybody to come into a fight against terrorism. It isn't getting

traction. Shouldn't the OIC be doing more to say it is the role of Muslim

states, their responsibility, to give troops and money, whatever, to

stop the conflict. In 1990 the OIC was the first organisation to agree

to go against terrorism. A code of conduct that commits its member

states. So, the OIC, as an international organisation and body,

we have recognised this threat and have agreed to a structure of how to

deal with that. Wasn't the idea to get everybody to act together? We

are involved in economic development. Outreach programmes.

Humanitarian programmes. Encouraging signs and technology. We have a

summit is just on technology. -- science. Why aren't the rich

countries doing more to take in Syrian refugees? The golf states

could do more. Other Muslim states. These are Muslim refugees. -- Gulf

states. We have a number of series and accepted that live in their

countries. -- Syrians. But the bulk of the Syrian refugees lived in the

neighbouring countries. I think the question of Syrian refugees is

important, especially with a European context. But the solution

is not to think about those who have arrived at the doors of Europe, it

is to address the conflict itself. Syrians did not go to Scandinavia

because they enjoy the cold weather, it is because they want to live. But

why can't they go to Malaysia, Indonesia, you name it, one of the

57 was in countries... As you know, human trafficking across the

Mediterranean... -- Muslim. It has been going on for years now. We have

seen the attacks of women in Cologne in Germany, Muslims I getting a bad

name and you need to act together to tackle that. -- are. We do. But you

also have to understand, and I am sure he did, a thousand times better

than I do, the political terrain in Europe. All these divided groups who

have anger. And the way to express their anger is with Muslims. It was

immigrants and now it is Muslims. They want to use Muslims and

refugees as part of a political agenda. Secretary General, thank you

for coming on this programme. Thank you.

The wildest of the conditions on Tuesday were brought to you

by Storm Henry, which has pushed its way to the near continent.