In a Nutshell:What's going on with stripping Shamima Begum of her citizenship?
Shamima Begum publicly and defiantly rejected the government's grand narrative against terrorism - seeing ISIS as responding to their violence
in kind. The Home Secretary Sajid Javed's decision is not based in law, nor on a careful and impartial review of her citizenship. It's based on Prevent strategy demanding Muslims integrate and categorically accept their narrative and values. Rejection of this is the modern equivalence of apostasy, requiring ultimate sanctions - in this case banishment from Britain, through revocation of citizenship, never to return.
Many believe the British govt does not believe in their ideals, they have made a mistake with this decision, or they have got their facts wrong.
I disagree with all these claims.
They believe in their ideals, promote them and defend them - they know the facts and are aware even if they are overturned on judicial review it's not a problem. All these considerations are temporarily being put aside as they conflict with strategic ideological aims akin to when they are put aside when economic imperatives are at stake - remember the bailing out of the bankers? What are these strategic ideological aims?
The British government (under the coalition and agreed by pretty much the entire establishment) in 2011 published their strategy to fight "Islam the ideology" as advocated by those they term Islamists.
The Islamists according to the Home Office were those calling for resuming the Islamic civilisation, establishing the caliphate, sharia law, da'wa to other nations, unification and expansion, opposition to Israel and so on. Their narrative claimed foreign powers had colonised and divided them and supported tyrant regimes to maintain geopolitical control over the Muslim world whilst they exploited its resources.
The British response was published in their Prevent Strategic Review of 2011 following a predetermined dubious consultation undertaken by terrorism legislator Lord Carlisle - who has interestingly been commenting on the Shamima Begum decision today.
He had argued the British needed a narrative and clearly articulated fundamental British values to counterbalance the narrative of their enemy. It was apparently essential to unify their society and Muslims into one integrated society and marginalise those who did not accept their narrative or values. What was their narrative?
Their narrative was that Britain went around the world with benign intent seeking to do good - a positive spin on claims of malignant intent.
The fundamental British values political elites had been championing for decades in the UK were to comprise: democracy, rule of law, individual liberty and respect and tolerance of other (secular) faiths and beliefs. So what has gone wrong?
Shamima Begum publicly and defiantly rejected their narrative and values. Originally fleeing the UK to join those who she believed were fighting for liberation, seeking to bring about a legitimate Islam - a parliamentary select committee and the heads of the police in attendance guaranteed immunity from prosecution should they return - tail between their legs and repentant. That didn't happen.
She clearly was mistaken as ISIS was a reaction by a constellation of interests including ex-bathists and marginalised Sunni nationalists in Iraq following the war, joined by jihadists, using the garb of Islam to create a state amidst the collapse of Iraq and the civil war in Syria.
The Home Office's attitude then changed - their entire ideology is being challenged publicly and via media dissemniation globally by this brown woman in a squalid refugee camp.
Sajid Javed's decision is not based in law, nor on a careful and impartial review of her citizenship, nor of her or her child's human rights nor on equity nor on sympathy nor on mercy.
The decision is based on Prevent strategy demanding Muslims integrate and categorically accept their narrative and values.
Rejection is the modern equivalence of apostasy, demanding ultimate sanctions - in this case banishment from the polity to never return. Conclusion
In conclusion, this is the generational conflict. The state is creating an "us vs them" dichotomy - laying the foundations of a new cold war, that will consume endless lives and resources bringing chaos for generations.
British elites are openly speaking of a generational conflict that will not be ending in the foreseeable future - this is despite the fact ISIS has been defeated - this conflict is against Muslims and Islam. We either integrate, believe in their fictitious story and dubious secular values or we will feel the consequences.
However unlike the flawed ideology of communism, a war with Islam is a war with the truth - the outcome will not be something they could ever imagine.
"They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah will perfect His light, although the disbelievers dislike it." Qur'an 61:8