Are human rights in reality just a neo-colonial tool used to spread Western values and imperial interests in Muslim countries?

To understand the relationship between the colonial era and the postcolonial time that we find ourselves in today, it is best to view the issue through a power dynamic. A state possesses “power” when it is able to force others to do as it wishes—either through threats of violence (i.e., military attacks) or by offering benefits (i.e., economic advantages). The greater the global inequality, the more effective this power imbalance becomes. Military threats work best on those who are militarily weaker, and economic pressure works best on those who are poorer. Both the colonial and postcolonial eras are marked by immense inequality in the balance of power.

In both periods, Western states have used their superior technological, economic, and military power to create immense wealth, enabling them to exert control over weaker states through threats of violence or promises of reward. During colonial times, this power was exercised directly, through forced acquisition of land and human resources in the form of slavery. Western nations occupied colonized territories and formally established colonial rule. The end of World War II marked the beginning of the postcolonial era. The old empires were dissolved, and non-Western peoples were formally granted political independence. Simultaneously, the United Nations (UN) was established, and the United States emerged as the dominant Western power, unmatched in technological, economic, and military strength.

NGOs and Human Rights as a Tool to Control Muslim Nations

The UN is an international body that is used to promote “development” and “progress.” It is structured in such a way that it gives Western states an advantage through “funding.” Western nations are wealthier and can thus contribute more financially. This money buys influence over how the supranational organization is run. Furthermore, Western nations have a special position in the UN Security Council, where they hold veto powers over important international decisions. Lastly, the UN headquarters are also actually located in the United States.

The UN is tasked with implementing “development programs” in so-called developing countries. In this way, the UN promotes a set of (American/Western) values and human rights, which are constantly evolving and changing. To this end, Western states primarily use NGOs, where Western institutions, foundations, and multinational corporations are the largest financial contributors.

Formally, the former colonies have gained independence and are no longer ruled by the old Western empires. However, the former colonial powers still influence these territories more indirectly through the UN and NGOs. By threatening with force (i.e., military means) or tempting with economic incentives, Western states demand that non-Western states conform to constantly shifting liberal norms and values; and that they also allow the establishment of Western NGOs in their countries. In this way, Western states remain dominant in the international power structure. The UN can be viewed as a sort of continuation of the old empires’ treaties and agreements on how to divide the world and coordinate joint development projects, including the “civilizing” mission and the spread of “universal” human rights. Similarly, secular NGOs can be viewed as a continuation of the Christian missionary NGOs of the colonial era.

RELATED: The White Man’s Burden: An Overview

“Good” and “Bad” Muslims

Just as Western liberal empires ruled Muslims through a form of authoritarian governance, postcolonial states also employ authoritarian systems, where the religious infrastructure is monitored and tightly controlled. This is done with the aim of bringing “development” and “progress” to their Muslim populations.

These states can generally be described as liberal or at least favorably inclined towards liberalism, especially after the fall of communism in the 1980s. This remains true even despite the brief Islamic revival that occurred between 1970 and 2000. During this period, liberalizing trends in the Muslim world suffered a temporary setback, but after 9/11, these trends were reestablished. Thus, postcolonial Muslim states have legal systems that have been inherited from the liberal European empires of the colonial era. Certain Islamic norms are still partially applied in family law or in matters such as blasphemy, sex, and drug use, but Islamic law generally does not extend beyond these areas.

From a Western perspective, Muslims fall broadly into two main categories.

There are “good Muslims,” who accept the current status quo, Western dominance, and the existing power structures. They have adopted the ideas of secularism, liberalism, and capitalism, and, for the most part, they are Muslims in name only.

The “bad Muslims,” on the other hand, are labeled “fanatics” or “extremists.” They are critical of the prevailing Western paradigm and the postcolonial power structure from which they seek to break free.

Western politicians and decision-makers reward and support the “good Muslims,” and they punish the “bad Muslims.”

Since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and subsequent conventions in 1966, 1979, and 1989, the UN has spearheaded a continuous stream of ever-changing moral laws in the form of “human rights.” Muslim states with “good” Muslim leaders gradually adjust their constitutions and legal systems to incorporate UN human rights, while “bad” Muslim leaders are hesitant and reluctant. NGO activism helps push this process forward.

NGO activism is manifested in many ways, though primarily through documenting human rights violations, running media campaigns via publications and social media, organizing protests, funding human rights lawyers to bring cases against states, and advocating for legal reforms, such as the decriminalization of blasphemy and extramarital relationships.

RELATED: How Western NGOs Use Aid to Attack Islam and Re-Engineer Muslim Society

Reformed Islam

With funding and support from the West, Muslim states use the religious infrastructure under their control to promote a reformed version of Islam. This form of Islam demands absolute passive submission to the government and the secular state. It renounces resistance against injustice, corruption, and immorality, especially that stemming from the state apparatus. It is a version of Islam that is constantly aligned with the latest developments and trends in human rights and is ready to adopt new interpretations without hesitation to match the prevailing liberal paradigm. This version of Islam is spread to the Muslim masses through state-appointed “muftis,” Friday sermons in state-run mosques, and programs on state-controlled TV or radio channels.

It can be called “Reform Islam.”

Reform Islam is embedded in the curricula of state-run schools and universities, including various prominent Islamic institutions like the Al-Azhar University in Cairo and the Islamic University of Madinah. Reform Islam, i.e., a version of Islam that is deformed and made to align with the most recently updated liberal paradigm, also leads efforts to “reinterpret” and “update” the remaining parts of religious law that are still applied in courts. NGOs contribute to this development by advocating for Reform Islam through social media campaigns, rewriting school curricula and publishing new textbooks for state educational institutions, as well as proposing new legislation.

European states use similar tools to control their Muslim populations that have migrated to the West as a result of colonialism. Curricula in state-controlled educational institutions (primary/secondary schools and universities) employ specific methods to ensure Muslims assimilate into a liberal Western lifestyle. These include teaching children human rights and making it difficult—if not impossible—for them to maintain orthodox religious practices in terms of dress, diet, and worship. Examples include hijab and niqab bans, prohibitions on prayer in schools, compulsory swimming lessons with Western dress codes, lack of halal food in cafeterias, etc. Adult immigrants must take courses that are designed with the express purpose of instilling Western values before they can be eligible to take citizenship exams. Those who resist liberal Western values—for example, by refusing to shake hands with the opposite sex—risk having their citizenship applications rejected and being deported.

Conclusion

It is commonly believed that liberalism is anti-authoritarian, and it is often assumed that Muslim-majority countries are authoritarian and oppressive because they have not yet embraced and implemented Western liberalism. The assumption is that if they would just accept liberal democracy, then autocracy and repression would disappear. This belief stems from a whitewashing of history and a misunderstanding of liberalism. The truth is that most Muslim countries have liberal governments that have ruled through brutal authoritarian repression. It may be that this form of liberalism manifests itself differently than it does in the West, but that’s only because liberalism takes on different forms depending on the populations it governs.

RELATED: Human Rights: A Tool for Governing Muslims