Interview with Nawal El Saadawi (Cairo,29th January 2006)

Nawal El Saadawi, trained as a physician and psychiatrist, has long enjoyed international acclaim as a writer and feminist activist. Her work, admired for its courageous and outspoken stance on women's and human rights, has also attracted severe criticism and even death threats from religious fundamentalist groups. El Saadawi worked as Director of Public Health for the Egyptian government until she was dismissed from this post for her publication of Women and Sex in 1972. Imprisoned by the then Egyptian president Anwar Sadat – an experience that shaped her Memoirs from the Women's Prison (1983a) – she was only released following his assassination in 1981. She has written theoretical studies (The Hidden Face of Eve (1980), and Women and Neurosis in Egypt (1976)) as well as numerous novels: Women at Point Zero (1983); God Dies by the Nile (1985) and The Circling Song (1989) among others. ¹ A driving force behind Arab feminism, she recently branched into politics when she stood as a presidential candidate in the Egyptian elections of 2004. ²

El Saadawi's influence on Arab feminism has been profound. She is currently one of the most widely read of contemporary Egyptian authors – male or female – and her books have been translated into no fewer than 12 languages, taking her influence beyond Arab lands and to the whole world. The major theme of her work to date is Arab women's sexuality, which she tackles as part of a wider socio–political problem. Despite the fact that women's sexuality is a taboo subject in many Islamic countries, El Saadawi's views on the subject are frank and uncompromising. Her writing – both fictional and non-fictional – confronts the subject head–on, forcing a reconsideration of sexual politics and reclamation of women's sexual rights. The Hidden Face of Eve (1980) in particular situates the sexual oppression of Arab women firmly within a political context.

At the very root of El Saadawi's struggle is her refusal to accept exploitation, oppression and injustice, wherever they may manifest themselves. Following her work in Egyptian politics, she went on to influence the international political scene. From 1979 to 1980, she was UN advisor for the women's programme in Africa (ECA) and in the Middle East (ECWA). In 1982, she founded the Arabic Women's Solidarity Association (AWSA), an international feminist and socialist organization devoted to promoting women's liberation through international conferences, the publication of conference papers, magazine publications and through creating income-generating projects for rural women. She now concentrates on her writing and is currently working on a new novel as well as regularly speaking across the world on women's issues. She is a passionate spokeswoman for the emancipation of both women and men worldwide.

Sophie Smith: In your 2001 paper ‘Breeding Terror or An Uncivilised Clash of Civilisations’ you use the term ‘hierarchy of human life’ and in your novel Woman at Point Zero there is a line: ‘There are only two categories of people, Firdaus, masters and slaves’ (1983b, 95). Is this how you see current global politics, as two groups: the masters – the United States and their ally Britain; and the slaves – the developing world and the Middle East?

Nawal El Saadawi: No. Well, of course I can say in short that we are still living in a slave society, in a post-modern slave society and in a post-modern patriarchal class society. It is a post-modern capitalist patriarchal society in which women are inferior to men, in which the working class are inferior to the people who own the wealth and the money, in which the black people and the African people, the Asian people, the so–called ‘third world’ (l don't call it the third world), people living in Africa, In Asia, in Latin America are considered slaves and are exploited by the so–called first world. We live in a world that is dominated by this system, one system where the top of the hierarchy constitutes a few families, and a few multinationals own 80% of the wealth and the trade. They live in Europe, in Paris and London, in Washington D.C. and New York, and they are very, very few, about 500 people and 500 multinationals. Of course, the numbers differ – these are the figures of some years ago – today there are maybe 600, maybe 550, but nevertheless there is still a very small minority of multinationals of men and women who own 80% of the wealth of the world where the majority of the people in Africa, in Asia, in Latin America, in the Arab world are certainly starving. In addition, these people possess the military power. They have the capitalist power, the money power, the trade power; they have the military power, the nuclear power; and Israel can be included in this group of nations. The rich people in these capitalist societies go and kill people in Iraq, in Palestine, in Somalia, in Afghanistan, in Egypt, in Syria, in Iran. They have a pretext. They say Iran has nuclear power; Iraq had nuclear power or some chemical power, even though they have proved there are no weapons in Iraq. So, they are using lies, they are using weapons, they are using the media to exploit the majority of the world; and women, poor women, are at the bottom of that society. So, who are the terrorists? When I wrote my article about terrorism, ‘Breeding Terror or An Uncivilized Clash of Civilizations’, there is no clash of civilizations. It is a clash of interests, of economic interests. I have lived in the States, I taught in the States and in Europe for more than 13 years. There was no clash between myself and them, between myself and the American people. With my students, I lived in harmony. The clash is between the people who own the money and the military power – the colonizers and exploiters – and the poor and women. That is the clash, a clash of economic interests. There is no clash of civilizations. This is a very false theory to hide the economic reason for oppression.

Sophie Smith: If you were face to face with George W. Bush now, what would you say to him?

Nawal El Saadawi: Well, I would tell him that even the people in his own country do not agree with what he is doing. I would tell him you are the real terrorists, not the Palestinians and children that are throwing stones at Israeli tanks, not the resistance in Iraq or Afghanistan. Those are the people of limited resistance who fight for their life and for their dignity, but you are the one who is killing them to take their oil. Why should you go to Iraq to take their oil? You have your oil in the States, what is this greed? What is this capitalist greed? What is this male capitalist greed that you kill thousands of people in Iraq, in Palestine, in Afghanistan? You kill other people, you threaten Iraq and Iran and you lie to everybody. Why are you doing that? Why? Of course, I understand politically [why he is doing it] but people should question him. He should be on trial. I would tell him, you should stand in front of a court as a criminal, as a war criminal, with Tony Blair and other people who followed him into Palestine, in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

Sophie Smith: What are your views on the current antagonism between the United States/Britain and Iran?

Nawal El Saadawi: Well, I think the problem in Iran is the oil. The problem in Iran is like the problem in Iraq and in Afghanistan: oil. Since the discovery of oil in Iran, in Saudi Arabia, in the Arab world, in Venezuela, anywhere in Israel, war has not ceased. Even Israel was planted in Palestine because of the oil. So, oil has been a disaster for all these countries, including Iraq. Also, the local government in Iran is not working for the people. They are using Islam. I am against the religious state, whether Islamic, Christian or Jewish. That is why I dislike the Jewish state in Israel.

Sophie Smith: So you don't think that religion should ever play a part in politics?

Nawal El Saadawi: No, religion is a private matter. It has nothing to do with the state, or the laws or anything else. It is a very private matter, you are free to choose your own god, your own goddess; you are free to believe in no god – you are free, you pray at home, not in school, not in the state, not in the parliament, not at your work. There should be complete separation between religion and the state. There is no completely secular country in the world. The United States is a Christian fundamentalist country supporting Bush. I am talking about the top people in the society. There is no secular state in the whole world. They use religion at any time. They use Christianity at any time; they use Judaism at any time. They use the Torah to invade Palestine. We must separate between state and religion in every country, including our countries.

Sophie Smith: Is democracy truly possible in your view, given human nature?

Nawal El Saadawi: Is democracy possible in our country? It depends on how you define democracy. How do you define democracy?

Sophie Smith: As individual freedom, to express yourself and to vote freely.

Nawal El Saadawi: Is Individual freedom against human nature? It is in human nature. Every person, every human being, any animal even has individual freedom, you look at plants; they want to move with the air. Look at the trees; they don't want anybody to interfere with them. Human beings love freedom by nature. They cannot live without freedom, real freedom, and this means not only freedom of expression, but economic freedom, political freedom, social freedom and sexual freedom. It is the dream of every human being. But there is a price to this. There is no democracy because there is no secularism due to the presence of the patriarchal class system. This slave system cannot work if people are free. Governments cannot work if there is real democracy and real secularism. They need God to justify injustices. They need God to exploit people. They need false democracy to deceive people. Under democracy they oppress people. I went to prison under Sadat, under the slogan of democracy. George Bush is killing people in Iraq under the slogan of democracy, even under human rights and the rights of women. They use all these nice slogans – democracy, development, human rights… – they manipulate everything for their own needs and for their own interests and for their own greed.

Sophie Smith-, you dislike the term ‘third world’. Could you tell me why?

Nawal El Saadawi: Yes, because it is hierarchical, you say the first, the second, and the third. This means I am the third. This is a hierarchy. The people in Africa are the third. Who is the first world that you rank so highly? The United States? No. The US government of George Bush does not deserve to be first world. In fact, he is fourth world. He does not even deserve to be considered third. I am against all this hierarchy. If we must have a hierarchy, the best should be on top, not the killers. We should not put the war criminals on the top of this hierarchy and call them first world, and call their victims ‘third world’.

Sophie Smith: What terms would you prefer?

Nawal El Saadawi: I say Africa, Asia, Latin America, North America, South America, Europe and Eastern Europe. We call the countries by their geography. Why should we rank them?

Sophie Smith: What is the true meaning of the ‘War on Terrorism’ for you?

Nawal El Saadawi: This is a pretext. The term ‘War on Terrorism’ was invented after 9/11. There are some theories that say that the event itself was invented, manufactured. I do not know but some people believe these conspiracy theories. Nobody knows for sure what happened that day. History shows us, however, that the masters – the minority that own the money and the military power – usually lie. They cannot live without lies so they create things like the ‘War on Terrorism’. And usually, this system – the patriarchal class system – punishes the victim and the criminal is set free; men are set free. If they commit sexual crimes, they are set free – because they are men. Here in Egypt, a man can marry, he can divorce; he can do anything. Look at the case of Hamawi. ³ This man married a woman but refused to give their child his name and the child will consequently be illegitimate. If you belong to the male sex, then you belong to a ‘higher’ gender. Equally, if you possess an American or an Israeli nationality, then you have a ‘higher’ nationality in the wider hierarchy. This ultimately means that criminals are often set free because they belong to a more powerful group. This is against not only justice, but common sense. They must therefore use slogans and lies like the ‘War on Terrorism’. They must create terrorists, even suicide bombers. There are some theories that claim that some Israeli forces encourage Palestinian children to become suicide bombers to create a problem. Consequently, some people say that the Americans created September the 11th, to create a problem so they can justify their invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. We don't know the truth because they lie all the time. The truth is not known.

Sophie Smith: What role do women have to play in international politics? How do you propose a meaningful and effective female political input?

Nawal El Saadawi: First of all, I believe that female (or male) political input must be local and global. I usually use the word ‘glocal'! Glocal means global and local. For instance, I am here in Egypt. I must work here as this is how we organize ourselves and the Arabic women's institute. The government closed us down, but now we are called the Arab Women's Solidarity Association (AWSA). ⁴ We must organize, because organization means power. Unity means power. To be effective, we must unite and we must organize. That is why the government closed us down. They are against organization. They can allow you as an individual to have rights, but when you are a group they must stop you, because as a group you are more effective than as an individual. So, the local work is very important but we have to connect it with the global. There are many men and women in every country who are fighting with us. I have been to Porto Alegre in Brazil twice. I have been to Mumbai for the World Social Forum, where hundreds of thousands of people come together regardless of their nationality, colour, gender or class. They come together fighting against lying and oppression, against class, against the capitalist patriarchal system, in order to work for justice – social justice and global justice and local justice. That is the future.

Sophie Smith: So, in a country like Egypt and many other countries in the world, where women are not encouraged to speak their mind, how do you mobilize these women?

Nawai El Saadawi: That's why we need to organize. Our main objective is the unveiling of the mind. That is very important, because the mind of the majority of people is veiled by lying, by the media, by education. People don't know what is happening. They get confused by terrorism. They think that the Palestinian and the Iraqi resistance are the terrorists, not George Bush! They don't know who the enemy is. The veil of the mind is more dangerous than the religious veil. This is why we are fighting to organize women – and men, because this isn't an issue for women only. In our association we have 35% men and also here in the AWSA we have a lot of men. The unveiling of the mind is a re-education to make people understand that knowledge is power. Knowledge is power.

Sophie Smith: What particular aims and objectives should a female/feminist politician ideally have in mind in your opinion? Is there something that unites female and especially feminist politicians across the party political divide, or will party politics by necessity override feminist concerns?

Nawal E1 Saadawi: Women cannot be united because women, like men, are not all of one class. They differ in their personal circumstances and in their aspirations in the same way that men do so how can they always be united? Some women are socialist feminists, others are capitalists, and some are religious fundamentalists. Each group of women works, therefore, within their own political parties and political spheres. As for me, I am a historical socialist feminist. This means I link the struggle of women with all other oppressed groups in the society both locally and globally. For me personally, women's issues are political, economic, social and sexual.

Sophie Smith: Islamic fundamentalism is a growing force in much of the Arabic/ Islamic world at this point in time. Can you outline why you think this is so?

Nawal El Saadawi: Who is encouraging Islamic fundamentalism or Christian fundamentalism? Who is encouraging Jewish fundamentalism or Buddhist fundamentalism? The religious fundamentalist movement is a universal phenomenon. It is not a strictly Islamic movement. It is all over the world and is related to this. The minority need God; they need religion to justify injustices. That is why with the post-modern era, post-modernism and religious fundamentalism are two faces of the same coin. They need each other, the capitalists and the war criminals need God, and they need religion to keep power. They must give power to religious groups, not to secular groups or socialist groups. That is why they don't support us, because we are socialist communists. They support the Islamists. Who created Bin Laden? George Bush and Bin Laden are twins. Really, I say they are twins. They are two faces of the same coin. Who encourages Islamic fundamentalism in Egypt? Sadat, and then he was killed by [the fundamentalists he encouraged]. Then, Bin Laden attacks George Bush, the son attacks the father. This phenomenon of Islamic fundamentalism doesn't come from nowhere. It's related to the power hierarchy. But also, we can add, that because of the scourge of poverty, many young people who graduate from university cannot find work. They join these Islamic groups because they have no hope except in God. And also, they are brainwashed. They think they will guarantee them a place in heaven. Many people are religious; they were brought up in a religious atmosphere. They therefore turn to religion. That's why the Muslim brotherhood is so successful. There are mosques, thousands of mosques here, and they use them for young people and children. They inject children with the idea of religion. That's why it is easy for them. The government here helps them with this. The government here, like governments elsewhere, is very much against the socialists and against the socialist feminist groups. They encourage the right–wing Islamic groups. Most of the Islamic groups and Muslim brothers are capitalists. They have money in New York, Paris and London. They are capitalists and the capitalists work together. The real enemy of the Islamic, Jewish or Christian fundamentalists and, ultimately, of the US government are the socialists and those who are against class and patriarchy, such as feminists, who are also against class and patriarchy.

Sophie Smith: What hope do you hold for the future of Egyptian politics and of Egyptian feminism? What are the principal concerns of Middle Eastern feminists right now?

Nawal El Saadawi: The local government and the domination and hegemony of the US and Israel. The local government of Egypt is dependent. We are colonized; we are an American colony and an Israeli colony. The local government receives $2 billion a year in aid. This American aid is an insult to us. They submit because of this aid, but most of it goes back to the US and that which doesn't is shelled out to the rich here in Egypt. There is a lot of corruption. This aid encourages local government to be corrupt and to oppress people. The main obstacle in front of us as socialist feminists is the local government, as well as US hegemony and domination and religious groups, be they Islamic, Christian or Jewish. They are all one and they are working together. The local government – the Egyptian government – is working with the Muslim brotherhood and therefore with the US government. They have ties together and they are against women, not only women but feminists and socialist feminists and, of course, the socialists. They are right–wing. There are women in government, the likes of Susan Mubarak for example, but her association works with the government. They are not with us.

Sophie Smith: You mention in your 1981 article ‘Empowerment of Women, Writing and Fighting’ the ‘veiling’, as you put it, of American women by make-up, cosmetic surgery and so forth. Could you share your thoughts with me on Western feminism? Many people in the West consider themselves to be living in liberated societies and feel sorry for women in other countries. How would you respond to this? Do you think that women are better off in the West?

Nawal El Saadawi: We cannot put all women and all feminists in the West in the same basket. They are divided. There are very political women who are aware; they are against make–up for example. I call make–up the ‘post-modern veil’. That is my expression. Many American women are against this. Some of them are victims of the capitalist system and they put on make-up. They spend money on plastic surgery. When I go to the US, they ask me why I don't get a face–lift! I say why? I am proud of my wrinkles! There are a lot of silly, stupid women, so–called ‘feminists’, who are really right–wing capitalists and who are not aware. But there are also many women who are aware and who are fighting against George Bush's government, against the veiling of the mind, against this ‘post-modern veiling’, they are supporting women across the world in different countries. So, we cannot put all feminist movements in one basket.

Sophie Smith: You are famous for your discussion of women's condition, most notably perhaps in works such as The Hidden Face of Eve, but you also touch upon the constraints of masculinity/masculinities in your work. Do you feel that men suffer in similar ways to women from cultural conditioning or from social pressures? Is it your belief that women are the real victims and the ones who deserve protection the most?

Nawal El Saadawi-. Men are also victims, especially poor men and working–class men, men who suffer from unemployment, for example. They are oppressed, they are slaves. They are economic slaves. But women are economic and sexual slaves, you see? Here, men are exploited economically, socially, intellectually and by military powers. They die in war; they are expelled from their factories. They suffer poverty and hunger. But their wives and daughters, in addition to all that, suffer from their husbands, from sexual assaults, from very, very unjust marriage laws. They suffer from the oppression of the father and husbands, and men in general. So, the oppression of women is triple. Triple – globally by colonization, locally by the State and personally by the family. The man is oppressed globally by the colonization and locally by the State, but in the family, he is the oppressor of the woman.

Sophie Smith: Are men innately patriarchal and controlling or are they simply byproducts of patriarchal culture?

Nawal El Saadawi: Some of them. A few – a minority – are producers [of oppression]. They produce and reproduce oppression and lies. But, the majority of men here and also in other countries, including in the US, are by–products. There are many men suffering unemployment here for example. They are byproducts of the production of oppression. For the minority of powerful people, their interest is in reproducing the patriarchal class system. Most men here are merely by–products of that.

Sophie Smith: You told me recently that you are in the early stages of writing a new novel about a suicide bomber. Could you tell me a little more about it?

Nawal El Saadawi: Well, as a psychiatrist I am interested in why a girl of 18 years would kill herself. ⁵ She [the girl who recently killed herself in a suicide bombing] was from here in Egypt, she was my neighbour. She was recruited by some right–wing fundamentalists. She shot at a tourist bus. Then she shot her colleague – her female colleague – and then finally she shot herself. Why did she do that? She was my neighbour here in Shoubra. ⁶ [In my new book] I am delving into the psyche of those young women. I am not only looking at women suicide bombers, but at women who kill in general. The book is still in its ‘emotional state’ and it will write itself. I have not yet decided on all the details because it is fiction, not a study. The book may concentrate on male suicide bombers later on, but the topic of female killers interests me. If you read my book Memoirs of a Woman's Prison, I am very interested in this book in women who kill others and in women who kill themselves. It is easy to kill others but it is very different to kill yourself.

Sophie Smith: In many of your novels and in your memoirs, you deal with women who commit murder or who kill. Why does the theme of women killers interest you so much?

Nawal El Saadawi: Obviously, I am against killing, whether a man or a woman is the killer. However, in some cases, women have no choice. They are pushed towards killing by misery. Look at Firdaus for example (in Woman at Point Zero). She killed because she wanted to remain true to herself and because she did not fear death. She had no other choice. Some women kill because they have no alternative way of fighting back. As individuals they are weak. The answer to this is for women to mobilize and fight as larger, more significant political entities.

Sophie Smith: What is the main message or the main conclusion of your new novel?

Nawal El Saadawi: To explain. I don't justify. I don't justify killing at all, for any religion or for any reason. In my book I say that if I do not write then I will kill. Creative writing is very important and so is creativity [in general], because it takes your energy. It also gives you pleasure. It satisfies you. For people who kill, their creativity is diverted into killing and into destruction, not towards construction, but towards destruction. So, they destroy themselves and they destroy others because they don't have pleasure in life. They are sad and depressed, they are angry and there is no compensation. For me, I am compensated thanks to my creativity. I am compensated only by my writing. When I see a book, when I read my book and when I write. The pleasure of writing and of creativity! It takes my energy. If I don't write, then possibly my energy would go elsewhere. This is why I teach creativity and dissidence. When you are a dissident and not creative then you risk destroying yourself (and others). But, when you are a dissident and are creative, your creativity builds you up and the others around you.

Sophie Smith: I recently read an article by a woman who argued that suicide bombing and political fanaticism can be linked to a more general frustration among young men and women due to social and sexual oppression and frustration. What link is there, if any, between suicide bombings and gender dynamics?

Nawal El Saadawi: There is a link, but the problem is so very complex. It is political, it is economic, it is sexual, it is psychological, and it is historical – it is a combination of many factors, you have to make all these links in order to find an answer. This is why I am writing about this topic.

Sophie Smith: Since the recent bombings in London, British people of all walks of life are thinking more and more about Islam. Some see Islam as an oppressive religion in as far as women are concerned. How would you react to this?

Nawal El Saadawi: First of all, women's oppression has nothing to do with whether or not you are an Arab or a Muslim. Women's oppression is not unique to the Arab/Muslim world – it is a universal phenomenon and it is a consequence of the patriarchal capitalist system. Women are oppressed by class and gender, and by religion too. However, we must remember, all religions oppress women, not just Islam. I undertook a study comparing the three monotheistic religions and the three holy books: the Torah, the Old and New Testaments of the Bible and the Qur'an. The three books are very oppressive to women. It is not only Islam. The three books are against democracy. There are many elements in the three holy books that are against democracy and that are against freedom of speech. There are many elements that are unjust and that attribute power only to the people in power. There is a lot of racism. The idea of a chosen people, for example. Why should the Jews be the chosen people? Or why should the Muslims or the Christians be chosen people? Why should that be? Why should people be chosen by a certain god? This is racism. With regard to killing, there are many instructions from God in the three holy books that instruct these people to kill. He instructs his people to kill the heretics, the non-believers, those who do not believe in Judaism, Christianity or Islam. These are clear instructions. There are many, many negative aspects in the three holy books. That is why I am eliminating these negative aspects of all three religions. In the West, they are now trying to blame Islam only, but this is simply lying. We are living in a world of lies.

Sophie Smith: So, do you think the way forward with Christianity, Judaism and Islam is education? So that people are educated enough to read the books for themselves and to assess and interpret their religion rather than to blindly accept it?

Nawal El Saadawi: you cannot believe in a religion without reading its book. How many Jews have read their book, the Torah? How many Christians have read the Bible? How many Muslims have read the Qur'an? Very few, and even those who have rarely understand because there are thousands of interpretations of the same verse. I have studied Islam, and within the religion itself there are many schools of thought. There are many schools within Christianity and Judaism too. It is not only your own school of thought, you need to read the others too, in order to be able to compare. Who can do that? Nobody. That is why we have to separate religion and school and state education completely. Religion is a private matter and you should pray in the home. If you want to specialize in it, that too should be at home. The state should be completely secular. That is the only solution or we will have war and blood all the time. Religion will continue to be used as a pretext for economic wars. So, we must finish this and we must end this vicious circle by complete separation.