We’ve now heard John Howard’s
view of what Australia’s Muslims have to do to be allowed to continue
practising their religion. It’s no surprise, but it’s not pretty. It
doesn’t involve the government actually dictating a theological line,
but it’s the next best thing: government approval of a set of friendly,
“official” Muslims who in turn would be given the power to vet all
Muslim teaching in Australia.

Amir Butler in yesterday’s Age
pointed out that the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils “enters
the meeting with the clear objective of being given power and funding
to police Islamic thought in this country. This includes controlling
the curriculums in Islamic schools …, being involved in immigration
decisions regarding visiting Islamic scholars, and holding the power to
approve or decline the appointment of religious leaders in the
community.”

Just imagine the outcry if it was proposed to
regulate Christianity in the same way, if there were “official”
churches that could be relied upon to do the government’s bidding, and
in return the government would bar or deport clerics who didn’t conform
to their line.

Actually, we don’t have to use our imagination:
that’s exactly how Christianity was controlled in the communist
countries, and still is today in China. Christian activists object,
quite rightly, that it makes a nonsense of freedom of religion. But
Muslims apparently are fair game.

Not that there’s any shortage
of critics in the media today pointing out the problems. “An Australian
imam academy was laughable, flawed and would run the risk of creating
an underground movement of clerics who would claim legitimacy through
their independent stance, Islamic experts have warned.” And this from The Age:
“Islamic Friendship Association founder Keysar Trad, who was not at the
summit, said he was concerned there could be licensing of Muslim imams,
which did not apply to Christian priests or Jewish rabbis, and which
would be discriminatory.”

Also in The Age,
Michelle Grattan takes aim at the government’s increasingly bizarre
don’t-mention-the-war attitude, which its hand-picked “moderates” are
apparently willing to connive at: “But until the Government
acknowledges [its foreign] policy heightens both resentment and the
terrorism risk, it will be operating in an unreal world.”