FIFA World Cup 2022: How Qatar has shown liberalism is a weapon of mass distraction

The 2022 FIFA World Cup is now in progress. Just before the event kicked off this week, the host nation of Qatar decided to go back on yet another promise. There would be no beer sold in the stadiums. Under the Sharia law, alcohol is tightly regulated in the Gulf state. Drinking in public is punishable with a six-month prison sentence. It is possible to buy alcohol to take home, from one single government-owned retail store in the entire country. But for that, one must purchase a permit, attest that they are non-Muslim, bring proof of immigration status, and a formal permission letter from their employer on company letterhead. It goes without saying that much of the same applies to the sale of pork products. Some time ago, the authorities in Qatar had assured people around the world that at least some of these rules would be relaxed for the duration of the tournament. The joke is on everyone who believed them. Perhaps on a much more serious note, Qatar will not allow the sale of cooked kosher food to Jewish visitors. And soccer fans who tried to wear rainbow shirts or hats in support of LGBT rights were thrown out. Such behaviour raises an important question. And according to the global Left, it is the following. Are we Qatarphobic? The concept of ‘Qatarphobia’ was introduced by Mehdi Hasan many years ago, when Qatar first won the right to host the world cup. Do you disagree with Sharia law in Qatar? Do you support the rights of women, Jewish minorities or LGBT individuals in Qatar? Then, you might be Qatarphobic. Most of the Indian liberal elite would be familiar with Mehdi Hasan, formerly of Al-Jazeera and now with MSNBC. He is considered a star for his stinging criticism of beef bans in India, as well as for comparing Hindutva to Nazism. Did someone say Al-Jazeera? The prestigious television network is known for raising all sorts of awareness around the world. Most thinking people among India’s liberal elite, journalists, filmmakers and artists have been to Al Jazeera at least once to raise supposed issues of civil liberty and human rights in India. This is not surprising. After all, Qatar is ranked 119 in press freedom, far ahead of India which languishes at 150! Then why would Al Jazeera sit it out over issues surrounding the world cup in Qatar? Journalism is not a crime. I think Al Jazeera started that hashtag. How Indian liberalism feeds the Qatar exploitation machine They say that as many as 6,500 migrant workers have died since Qatar began preparing for the world cup. The fact that the world is willing to play soccer over their bones should have been one of the greatest human tragedies of our time. But it wasn’t. Qatar has no concept of workers’ rights, neither unions nor collective bargaining. The workers cannot even leave the country without permission from their employer. There is a special point for India to consider here. Among the workers that died in Qatar, the single largest group was from India. What if these workers had been building say Vizhinjam port in Kerala, or one of Asia’s largest refineries at Ratnagiri in Maharashtra? What if they had been building the bullet train from Mumbai to Amdavad, a dam on the Narmada river or the POSCO plant in Odisha? Then, there would have been an outcry. Over land acquisition, workers’ rights, environmental concerns, everything. But those workers would have been much safer, working in their own country. And India would have gained expressways, bullet trains, deep sea ports, refineries and steel plants. All those assets that would have been ours to keep. But India’s liberal elites create unrest every time a big project is about to take off somewhere in India. Do they realize that their actions are actually feeding a modern version of slavery in countries of the gulf? I do not know, but I refuse to give them the benefit of doubt. A virtual theme park of repression Qatar is not a democracy, not even nominally. It is an absolute monarchy run by Sharia law, which is enforced by a brutal religious police. There are strict dress codes for women. Couples are not allowed to show affection in public. Unmarried couples cannot share rooms. There is no concept of bodily autonomy. Seven years in prison for having sex outside marriage! Homosexual acts carry the threat of death penalty, especially for Muslims. There is no question of religious liberty either. Islam is the state religion. Converting out of Islam is considered apostasy, again punishable by death. In other words, if you were putting together a virtual theme park of repression, what would it look like? Probably like Qatar, and the rest of the Gulf states. Except that those who live in Qatar are neither props nor actors, but real people. And there is one big difference. Qatar has money. In fact, it is the richest country in the world. And their theme park of repression answers the question: could you buy the silence of liberals on every ideal that they claim to stand for? Absolutely, yes. And how did Qatar become so fabulously wealthy? From fossil fuels. The environmentalist lobby of course has nothing to say about that. How Qatar bought up the global liberal ecosystem Okay, so if you have money, the activist class will give you a pass. But could you go further? Could you get this activist class to become your cheerleaders? Again, yes! Qatar is nothing without its flagship television network Al Jazeera. Through this network, the liberal elites in every country can get paid handsomely. They can reach a global audience in order to push their agenda. Compared to most media organisations, Al-Jazeera has a huge budget and near unlimited resources. And so the platform can boost the reputation of anyone on the global activist circuit. Why would they ever want to speak up against Qatar? There is even the glitzy AJ+, made specifically for the Internet. It is targeted at young people who no longer consume news in the old television based format. The AJ+ platform has the power to transform regular internet influencers into superstars of journalism. With such prospects and perks, why would they speak up against Qatar? These incentives don’t just affect those who work for the Al-Jazeera network. With its massive budget, Al-Jazeera is positioned at the top of the global media ecosystem. For every one person who works for them, there are a hundred others who would like to have the same career prospects. Or at the very least, copy what they are doing. Everyone wants to be like them. Think of it like the IITs or the UPSC. Only a few thousand actually make it to IIT. But the entrance exam shapes the lives of millions of young people. So why was Al Jazeera really founded? You do not have to take my word for it. In a professionally produced video titled “The Qatar blockade: Start here” on the YouTube channel of Al Jazeera English, they explain: “Qatar also launched a television network called Al Jazeera. And this isn’t a plug, it’s actually a very key part of the story. You see, while Saudi Arabia had been dropping its support for certain political Islamist groups like the Muslim brotherhood, Qatar didn’t follow suit. And Al-Jazeera gave the voices of political Islam, and others, a platform.” So Al Jazeera was founded with the deliberate aim of giving a platform to Islamists, and specifically the Muslim Brotherhood. That is a startling admission. Do Indian liberals, who often appear on the network to talk about the dangers of Hindutva, make this clear? How many people in their audience know about this? It would also help to know that the founders of the Muslim Brotherhood were inspired by Haj Amin-Al Husseini, the Nazi collaborator who came together with Hitler on a common platform of hatred against Jews. After the war, the Muslim Brotherhood arranged for the escape of Al-Husseini to Egypt, where he became their representative for Palestine. In other words, Al Jazeera is fighting an information battle. Through this network, they are able to insert themselves into every conversation and push their narrative with opinion makers around the world. That includes India, of course. This is a remarkable feat, which would otherwise be well beyond conventional military and diplomatic abilities of a tiny nation such as Qatar. And Qatar is by no means alone in this realisation. Other countries get it too. The BBC performs a similar function for the British government. Seventy-five years after the end of colonial rule, Britain still has the power to influence our internal affairs. Simply the prestige of the BBC means that many of our opinion makers would want to work for it, or align themselves with their perspective. Similarly, there is France24, and Germany has Deutsche Welle. The US military industrial complex has The New York Times and The Washington Post. How many of our leading intellectuals would be willing to embrace their perspective in the hope of being featured in these newspapers some day? Quite a few, I would say. This is of course legal. But it would be good if the rest of us understood the implications of this. Islamist dominance in Leftist alliance One might even understand if a repressive nation like Qatar, ruled by strict religious law, has a problem with alcohol, sex outside marriage, or homosexuality. But why ban people in rainbow hats? Why are they going to such an extent to poke the liberal establishment in the eye? Because they want to send a message. In the global alliance between left liberals and Islamists, the Islamists are in charge. And the world cup is one of the big global platforms where they can show off their dominance. On its part, liberalism has always cowered before Islamism. Everyone knows, for instance, that Indian liberals would never dare ask why Muslim daughters still get only half the inheritance that a son would get. Even on the most basic human rights issues, the so-called liberalism exists in a state of total surrender to Islamism. But because their ally has such a medieval bent of mind, we are watching in Qatar the ritual humiliation of liberalism by Islamism. The Left-liberals also understand how to manage their status as junior ally. They have made some perfunctory noises about human rights in Qatar, to serve as disclaimers later on. The Left-wing Guardian, for instance, wrote about worker deaths. But only two or three times last year. And that was probably the highest for any mainstream liberal outlet. In between, the Guardian must have done a hundred pieces on the supposed threat of Hindutva. But now they get to claim journalistic integrity, as well as equate Hindutva with Islamism! Wokeness as a weapon of mass distraction In the recent case of Sam Bankman-Fried, the kingpin of the FTX scandal who stands accused of diverting $10 billion of customer funds, a correspondent for the left wing outlet Axios raised an important question. What if Sam Bankman-Fried had been a woman? If a woman had shown up in shorts and a T-shirt, would people still have handed over billions of dollars? A spirited discussion followed. You know what? The Left-wing correspondent is absolutely right. Sam Bankman-Fried, now known mostly by his initials SBF, did benefit from his male privilege. We should do something about that. But notice how the correspondent tried to switch the topic from something which appears far more relevant in this case. Let us call it “Biden donor privilege.” The individual in question was the second largest donor to America’s ruling liberal party. Should we not focus on that? But that is not what the liberal media wants. The Washington Post and Vox want you to know that SBF poured millions into preparing for the next pandemic. Now that his fortune has collapsed, the world is in trouble. SBF used to be our savior.  Do not ask questions about corruption, please. Observe carefully how the wokeness machine works. It raised genuine issues, such as male privilege, or the need to prepare for the next pandemic. But in this case, these issues were weaponised to distract from real corruption among the power elites. Similarly, racism is a horrible thing. But during the pandemic, whenever the public tried to ask real questions about the lab leak theory, they were told to shut up or risk being accused of anti-Asian racism. Wokeness is now a language. And once translated into this language, one can use its keywords to push almost any agenda. There are Left-wing school districts in the US that now target kids with video messages preaching “food neutrality”. What is food neutrality? It is the idea that just as you should not discriminate between people on the basis of race or gender, you also should not “discriminate” between healthy and unhealthy foods, such as between a candy bar and a carrot! The comparison is ridiculous, of course. But observe how keywords like “non-discrimination” are being used in a perverse manner to promote something that is bad for us. No wonder that the liberal “experts” featured in these video messages from left wing school districts turned out to be connected to companies that make unhealthy snacks. The idea of ‘Qatarphobia’ is quite similar. Our best instincts about respecting other cultures and celebrating diversity are being weaponised to prevent us from asking basic questions about human dignity, fairness and justice. We should not fall for this. One question remains unresolved. How did Qatar manage a press freedom ranking of 119, when India was ranked much worse at 150? In what sense is Al-Jazeera free? Are they free to criticise the government of Qatar? Then what definition of freedom were they using? The answer might lie in this old joke that the great Ronald Reagan liked to tell: An American and a Soviet are arguing about who has more freedom. “In my country, I can walk into the Oval Office,” the American decides to boast, “I can slam my fist on the desk, and say, ‘Mr President, I don’t like the way you are running this country’.” “No big deal,” the Soviet replies, “I can do that in my country too.” “You can?” the American asks with great surprise. “Of course,” the Soviet replies, “I can march into the Kremlin, slam my fist on the desk and say. Mr Gorbachev, I don’t like the way President Reagan is running his country.” The author is an author and columnist. He tweets @AbhishBanerj. Views expressed are personal.