11.10.2006

Support a woman's right to wear the niqab. Support a woman's right not to wear the niqab

Jim Moody comments on Jack Straw's dangerous political manoeuvre

Leader of the House of Commons Jack Straw deliberately courted controversy last week with his 'remove your veil' article. Writing in his regular column in the Lancashire Telegraph, he knew exactly what he was doing - keying into and feeding the growing hostility to muslims across Britain that has become almost respectable after 9/11, 7/7 and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Muslims are being singled out and demonised. Unless they assimilate along the lines demanded by New Labour and the mainstream media, they are to be treated as the enemy within. So as well as courtship of prominent figures, responsible organisations and moderate mosques, there has been the stick of legislation and a whole wave of crude propaganda.

This has effectively given the green light to a whole string of petty and not so petty incidents. On the streets of every town bigoted elements feel that they have Jack Straw's blessing when they demand that a muslim woman take off her veil - a common occurrence. Worryingly over the last week there have also been violent attacks, including arson in Windsor and a stabbing in Preston.

A year ago, apparently, a woman wearing what was probably a niqab (a veil with her eyes showing), visited the MP's constituency surgery, causing him no end of discomfort. So much so, Straw tells us he has subsequently asked all women who come to see him wearing a niqab to remove it, and, as he writes, "I can't recall a single occasion when a lady has refused to lift her veil."

Straw left it a year before embarking on writing his article. So why wait until now? Besides the deteriorating situations in Afghanistan and Iraq, hats are being thrown into the ring for the position of deputy prime minister. That also explains why others such as Peter Hain have publicly disagreed with his 'unveil' article. But it must have been particularly galling to Straw that on Sunday's AM John Prescott himself said that he would not ask a woman to uncover her face, adding: "If a woman wants to wear a veil, why shouldn't she? It's her choice" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4801801.stm).

However, given the positive comments that have flowed in the press and elsewhere, Straw must nonetheless feel that he has hit home by raising this issue and gaining such public support. This cannot but fail to enhance his bid to become the next deputy PM, or so he must hope.

Despite the article's attempt at blokeyness Straw's seigniorial attitude to 'his' female constituents is all too apparent. He is telling them that their traditional dress is unacceptable. Hardly the approach of a democrat. Communists certainly emphasise that dress should be a voluntary matter - whether for muslims, hindus, orthodox Jews or punks. What matters to us is that people feel happy with what they wear and are able to fully participate in all aspects of social life, not least the militant struggle for a better world.

Sadly, but predictably, Respect only talks about the 'right to choose' in its statement condemning Straw's "inflammatory" remarks (October 11). Nothing about the oppression of women. Obviously, fighting the oppression of women necessitates a highly sensitive approach - crucially when it comes to a section of the population which is itself oppressed.

The fact of the matter is that the command found in the Koran for women to dress modestly (the fullest meaning of the word 'hijab') has become interwoven with male domination and the seclusion of women in society. Historically, true, veiling of muslim women was learnt from the islamic conquests of Persia and Byzantium - higher cultures. In ancient Mesopotamia, for example, veiling and seclusion marked status. Only wealthy men could afford to fully privatise their women: prostitutes were expressly forbidden to don the veil. But this form of oppression was assimilated by the Arabs and given an islamic justification by Koranic scholars and jurists.

So despite some women choosing to adopt the niqab voluntarily - actuallythey are a tiny minority amongst muslim women in Britain - there can be no doubting that the garment is both a sign and means of oppression: keeping as it does the whole face covered except the eyes.

Women who wear the veil should always have a perfect right to do so; just as women should have every right to wear whatever garments they choose, be they western clothes, the salwar kameez, dupatta, chunari, chador, yashmak, khumur or burqa. We, however, want them to feel free to give up such barriers as veiling: but it must be their choice to do so, not that of their male relatives or their (usually male) imam, sheikh or other religious teacher. Or anyone else, come to that.