Hizb ut-Tahrir and Violence

After last year’s bombings in Uzbekistan and more recent ones in Kazakhstan and Tajikistan, the role of Hizb ut-Tahrir inevitably drifts into the conversation. Some reporters misreported that Uzbek authorities directly pointed the finger at the group after the July attacks. A couple news outlets got the translation correct though and reported that the concern directed at HuT had to do with it being a radicalizing ground–a gateway drug to terrorism if you will.

I’ve mentioned on a few occasions that given the decentralized nature of the group, it is also entirely possible that cells that likely have nothing to do with the home office in London may have decided that it makes sense for them to drop the whole non-violent struggle thing. That, of course, doesn’t make all of its members terrorists, but it should give reason for pause.

So, when I see stories like this, I can’t help but think that the whole “well, they’re non-violent, so we can’t do anything about them” thinking is glaringly naive.

After Hizb ut-Tahrir’s appearance in Auburn, Iraqi exiles described protesters as fundamentalists sympathetic to al-Qaeda’s leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, saying they had held up the same black flag with white lettering that has appeared in the videos that precede beheadings of hostages in Iraq.

“So it’s very scary to people,” said Thair Wali, an Iraqi adviser for the International Organisation for Migration.

Indeed, the day after the demonstration, four people were injured in shootings in Auburn, which followed a brawl in the main street.

Mr Doureihi denied his organisation had any role in the violence. Police investigating the shootings agreed. “We aren’t looking at organisations and groups – we’re looking at a small number of individuals,” said Superintendent Alan Harding.

But Mr Doureihi, 27, a sometime accountant, made no secret of Hizb ut-Tahrir’s ultimate ambitions. Founded in the Middle East in 1953, the organisation seeks to unite the Muslim world in a single Islamic state administered in accordance with shariah law.

Speaking to The Australian from his flat in the western suburb of Liverpool, which seems to double as Hizb ut-Tahrir’s Sydney base, Mr Doureihi said the media had tried to spread fear about the group.

“They keep writing that we’re al-Zarqawi supporters,” he said. But he would not say if the group supported al-Zarqawi and refused to repudiate him.

“This occupation needs to be reversed – if we want to change the situation, let’s remove the original injustice,” he said.

Mr Doureihi denied that the 20 to 25 members of Hizb-ut Tahrir demonstrating in Auburn had threatened exiles voting in the election, despite saying “vote and you die” during polling in what some construed as an attempt to create a rift between Australia’s Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

“We’re calling for the unity of all Muslims,” he said.

Maybe someone can clear up the flag thing. Here’s HuT’s and Zarqawi’s is here. I would assume that those commenting in the story would know the difference, but to my untrained, non-Arabic reading eyes, the writing on the HuT flag appears to be the same as what’s on Zarqawi’s.

I would hope that, given the refusal to repudiate terrorism and the willingness to intimidate and threaten the lives of voters, reporters might get wise to Hizb ut-Tahrir’s commitment to nonviolence isn’t as strong as they’d like them to believe. Asking questions, like the reporter for this story, rather than recycling press releases and talking points, is a good place to start.

This post was written by...

Nathan Hamm – author of 2040 posts on Registan.net.

Nathan founded Registan.net in 2003. He was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Uzbekistan 2000-2001 and received his MA in Central Asian Studies from the University of Washington in 2007. Since 2007, he has worked full-time as an analyst, consulting with clients on Central Asian affairs, specializing in how socio-cultural factors shape risks and opportunities. Follow him on Twitter or drop him a line.