How tobacco firms tried to undermine Muslim countries' smoking ban
Attempts
to tackle sales threat by framing criticism of smoking as
fundamentalist fanaticism are outlined in cache of documents from 1970s
until late 1990s
A man lights a cigarette in front of a roadside tea stall in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Photograph: Andrew Biraj/Corbis
The tobacco industry attempted to reinterpret Islamic teaching and
recruit Islamic scholars in a bid to undermine the prohibition on
smoking in many Muslim countries, an investigation has shown.
Evidence from archived industry documents
from the 1970s to the late 1990s shows that tobacco companies were
seriously concerned about Islamic teaching. In 1996, an internal
document from British American Tobacco warned that, because of the
spread of “extremist views” from fundamentalists in countries such as
Afghanistan, the industry would have to “prepare to fight a hurricane”.
BAT and other companies, which were losing sales in affluent
countries where anti-smoking measures had been introduced, devised
strategies to counter this perceived threat to sales in places such as
Egypt, Indonesia and Bangladesh, which have large populations of young
people who smoke.
The industry was concerned that the World Health Organisation
was encouraging the anti-smoking stance of Islamic leaders. A 1985
report from tobacco firm Philip Morris squarely blamed the WHO. “This
ideological development has become a threat to our business because of
the interference of the WHO … The WHO has not only joined forces with
Moslem fundamentalists who view smoking as evil, but has gone yet
further by encouraging religious leaders previously not active
anti-smokers to take up the cause,” it said.
A No Smoking sign in Syria Photograph: Alamy
“A Moslem who attacks smoking generally speaking would be a threat to
existing government as a ‘fundamentalist’ who wishes to return to
sharia law,” says one of the archive documents. It adds: “Our invisible
defence must be the individualism which Islam
allows its believers … smoking and other signs of modern living should
encourage governments to a point at which it is possible quietly to
suggest their benefits.”
It adds: “With Islam we might ask what other aspects of modern living
are similarly open to extremist demands for prohibition under strict
interpretation of sharia: motion pictures, television, and art depicting
the human being? Use of electronic amplification by muezzin calling
from a minaret? The education of women?” the document says.
The earliest fatwa against tobacco was in 1602, but many scholars
believed smoking cigarettes or taking tobacco in water pipes or other
forms was harmless until evidence of the dangers to health began to
emerge in the mid 20th century. Jurists pronounced that tobacco use was makrooh
(discouraged). In many Islamic countries, a harder line was taken, with
smoking prohibited on the grounds that the Qur’an does not permit
self-harm or intoxication.
The WHO negotiated the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control,
starting in 1999, in response to what it describes as the “explosive
increase in tobacco use”. The convention, which outlines strategies
intended to reduce demand, was adopted in 2003.
A report in 2000 from the Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (Cora)
department at BAT after the first international negotiations said: “It
appears that the WHO’s efforts to link religion (specifically Islam)
with issues surrounding the use of tobacco are bearing fruit … We will
need to discuss separately how we might understand and manage this
aspect in line with the Cora strategy.”
The tobacco industry attempted to re-interpret anti-smoking Islamic
teachings. A 1996 BAT memo suggests identifying “a scholar/scholars,
preferably at the Al Azhar University in Cairo, who we could then brief
and enlist as our authoritative advisers/allies and occasionally
spokespersons on the issue.
Egyptian residents of the Masr el-Gedida district walk under hanged
cardboard cigarettes during a “No Smoking Day” in Cairo. Photograph:
Khaled Desouki/AFP/Getty Images
“We agreed that such scholars/authority would need to be paired up
with an influential Moslem writer/journalist … such advice would present
the most effective and influential opinion able to counter extremist
views, which are generally peddled by Islamic fundamentalist preachers
largely misinterpreting the Koran … This is an issue to be handled
extremely gingerly and sensitively … We have to avoid all possibilities
of a backlash.” Tobacco industry
lawyers were also involved in this attempt at revision. A presentation
from 2000, prepared by the firm Shook, Hardy and Bacon, gave an overview
of the background to Islam and smoking, with slides stating that there
is no prohibition on smoking in the Qur’an – and that “making rules
beyond what Allah has allowed is a sin in itself”.
Prof Mark Petticrew from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical
Medicine, who led the research, said he was amazed by what researchers
had found in the archives. “‘You couldn’t make it up’ comes to mind,” he
said. “The thing that jumps out at me from all this is the fact that we
had tobacco industry lawyers actually developing theological arguments.
That was pretty surprising.”
A document suggest Philip Morris wanted to try to recruit Islamic
scholars at McGill University in Montreal, Canada. A representative of
the Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers’ Council “agreed to make exploratory
contact”, it says. Petticrew and his team do not know whether they were
successful. “We couldn’t find the papers,” he said.
Advertisement
The
tobacco industry is still heavily promoting smoking in countries such
as Bangladesh and Egypt, which are predominantly Muslim and have high
proportions of smokers.
Its marketing is generally adapted to the “not overly devout”, says
the study. The authors call for further research to find out how the
industry had approached other faiths.
“The launch of the Faith Against Tobacco
national campaign by Tobacco Free Kids and faith leaders in the US, for
example, brings together Christianity, Islam, Judaism and other faiths
‘to support proven solutions to reduce smoking’. Understanding efforts
by the industry to undermine the efforts of other faith communities
brings to light a broader strategy to marginalise tobacco control in
diverse communities, and refocuses the problem on tobacco-related health
harms,” says the paper.
BAT told the Guardian. “This study, which concerns material written
nearly 20 years ago, does not represent the views, policies and position
of British American Tobacco. We are a global business that holds itself
to strict standards of business conduct and corporate governance,
manufacturing and marketing our products in accordance with domestic and
international laws and observing the cultural and religious beliefs in
the 200 countries in which we operate.”
Philip Morris did not respond to the Guardian’s request for comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment