Tariq Ramadan was in the Netherlands to talk about his dismissal by the city of Rotterdam and the Erasmus University because of his ties with Press TV in Iran. ‘It is all about the local elections.’
Tariq Ramadan (47) made a quiet yet combative impression as he told of his disappointment in the Rotterdam city executive, the board at Erasmus University, and above all, Rotterdam mayor Ahmed Aboutaleb. The mayor should have stood up for him, he said, when the city council asked for his dismissal because of his connection to the government-financed Iranian television station Press TV.
He is especially piqued by a remark Aboutaleb made in April during a debate in the city council about Ramadan’s alleged homophobic statements. “We could sit out this construction, but my advice would be: never again.”
Ramadan: “The muncipality conducted an investigation which showed that I had been falsely accused. Shortly after that I was called in by the [Erasmus University] rector. He asked me to move to another university in the Netherlands and to break all ties with the municipality. Everything pointed to the mayor being behind this. The university was asked to solve his problem, and the problem was me.”
Mayor Aboutaleb categorically denies Ramadan’s reading of the events.
How do you know the mayor was behind it?
“The rector referred to the mayor twice during our conversation. He supposedly said ‘the situation was difficult’.”
Did you ask why Aboutaleb wanted to get rid of you?
“Not directly, but I did ask why the rector wanted me to quit. The answer was that, with local elections coming up [in March 2010], I would sooner or later become a political problem. I declined the offer.”
The mayor is a Muslim too. Did that play a role?
“I think it definitely did. Before he became mayor he told me: ‘You’re doing good things. We need more people like you.’ As mayor he changed his position. He didn’t want to give the impression that he was looking out for other Muslims. I understand: a Muslim mayor and a Muslim intellectual... That’s just too much for some people.”
The rector says you didn’t understand how sensitive your work for Press TV was for the Western world.
“The rector places me outside the Western world. But I was born in Switzerland. I grew up and I was educated in Europe. I am a part of this continent. And I would not understand the West? It is ironic that the way I am being treated in the West is a lot like people are treated in Eastern, non-democratic countries. What has happened here is not Western. It is only by casting me as an outsider who just doesn’t get it that the rector can justify his decision.”
What does that mean?
“The rector’s reasoning reflects a deeper feeling that exists in the Netherlands: you are a Muslim, so you are incapable of understanding our Christian values and norms. That’s just sad.”
What did you think when you watched the city council debate about your performance in April?
“It was humiliating. People without any knowledge about the matter at hand, who had never read a single one of my books, expressed their opinions about me and my performance. It was all about the local elections. I was like a ping-pong ball. I thought: why bother listening to this? But it also made me realise that Rotterdam still has a long way to go. The debate reinvigorated me: there is work to be done here.”
Did you make any mistakes yourself?
“No. I didn’t have the time to make mistakes. Perhaps I should have been more insistent that my reports to the municipality were published. There were three of them and two are still in a drawer somewhere. If I can be blamed for anything it is that I have been too nice.”
Why were two out of three of your reports never published?
“Out of fear. It’s the only reason I can think of. One was about the jobs market, the other about the role of the media. Both were visions based on conversations with people in Rotterdam. I made 34 proposals in all. Nothing was done with them. I should have said: I want these proposals published, then we can talk about it and everybody will know what I proposed. My critics are now saying that I wanted the municipality to train journalists - like I am some kind of a Stalinist. I do think that journalists, and politicians too, should have a better knowledge about what’s at stake in the city.”
What is at stake in the city?
“Rotterdam, like the whole of the Netherlands, is frightened and angry. Politicians play on that fear by encouraging the fear of Islam. Geert Wilders is the best example, and he has forced other parties to follow suit. You can dismiss Wilders as a foolish leader, but you can’t ignore the fear among the voters. What is needed is a counter-movement: people who point to ideas, to involvement, to similarities. That’s what I was working on.”
Why are people so frightened?
“There are several reasons. Globalisation. The Netherlands is a small country, part of an ever bigger and ever more threatening world. An identity crisis, in short. Secondly: immigration will continue. The economic demand for workers is at odds with the culture of these people. Thirdly the second and third generation of immigrants are developing rapidly and are becoming more and more visible. They are Dutch. They speak their mind. That’s new and therefore threatening. Finally, there is Islam. Everyday we see images of violence connected directly or indirectly to Muslims. That’s undeniable. Take the cartoon riots, or the bombings in Madrid and London. It leads to mistrust.”
What is the antidote, you think?
“I always tell Muslims: you have to show understanding for the fear, but you have to fight against political recuperation of that fear. So tell Wilders: ‘you’re lying, you’re cultivating the fear’. But be open towards others. Explain to them who you are, what you want and that you are willing to contribute. People are frightened, but that doesn’t make them racists.”
What does your dismissal mean for the integration debate in the Netherlands?
“When I see how mixed the audience was at last Friday’s debate in the Arminius church... [A debate organised by the committee to support Tariq Ramadan, Ed.] Muslims and non-Muslims were side by side. When I see that I am not pessimistic. There was an atmosphere of: we’re not going to let this happen. If that’s my heritage then my dismissal may have some positive sides to it.”
Rotterdam cans Ramadan’s reports
The Rotterdam city council on Tuesday voted unanimously to dismiss the recommendations Tariq Ramadan made during his two years as integration adviser.
At the request of the populist Leefbaar Rotterdam party the city executive released two of Ramadan’s previously unpublished reports about the jobs market and the city’s media policy, as well as his vision for Rotterdam in the year 2020.
But the city council said it found few new insights in Ramadan’s reports. One of his recommendations was that the city should have a positive attitude towards diversity, and should reject all kinds of discrimination.
For the city executive in charge of citizen participation, Rik Grashoff, the reports confirmed that the January decision to downgrade Ramadan’s advisory role was the right one. Council member Peggy Wijntuin (Labour) found solace in the fact that Ramadan’s recommendations have not exposed “any shortcomings in the existing policy”.
Next week the Rotterdam city council will debate the dismissal of Tariq Ramadan.