Photo- Johnson’s anti Muslim remark sparks outrage within the billion Muslim community
America’s Speaker may condemn Iran’s regime for deception, but he has no right to attribute its behavior to the religion of nearly two billion people.
By : Ya Libnan Editorial Board , Opinion
House Speaker Mike Johnson had every right to criticize Iran’s rulers for their conduct at the negotiating table. The Iranian regime has broken commitments, concealed military activities and repeatedly used diplomacy to buy time. Its record deserves the closest scrutiny.
But Johnson crossed a dangerous line when he attempted to explain that conduct by attacking religion.
“The problem has been, and the reason we’ve been frustrated, is that the Iranians simply cannot be trusted,” Johnson said. “They’ll sit at a negotiation table and say something, and they’ll walk away and do the opposite. For some of them, it’s apparently part of their religion that they can just lie to someone they disagree with.”
That statement is false, careless and beneath the dignity of the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives.
Lying is not part of Islam. It is forbidden in Islam, just as it is condemned in Christianity, Judaism and the other great religious and ethical traditions of the world. The Quran instructs believers to avoid false speech and repeatedly condemns those who invent falsehoods. Honesty is not a minor recommendation in Islamic teaching; it is a fundamental moral obligation.
I do not write this as a theologian or as a particularly devoted religious person. I write it as someone who understands a simple truth: no honorable religion could survive by commanding its followers to lie whenever they encounter disagreement.
Who would ever want to belong to such a religion?
Johnson may have been referring—directly or indirectly—to taqiyya, one of the most frequently distorted concepts in discussions about Islam. Historically, taqiyya allowed a person facing persecution or mortal danger to conceal his or her religious identity. It was especially relevant to Shiite Muslims who lived under rulers who persecuted them for their beliefs.
That is a protection for the persecuted—not a general license to deceive non-Muslims, political opponents or negotiating partners.
The distinction should not be difficult for an American political leader to understand. A person hiding Jewish neighbors from the Nazis and denying knowledge of their whereabouts would technically be speaking falsely, but few moral people would condemn the deception. A religious minority concealing its beliefs to escape torture or death is not the same as a government official breaking a diplomatic commitment.
Islamic teaching, like other religious and moral traditions, recognizes extremely narrow circumstances in which concealing the truth may prevent grave harm. Those exceptions do not convert dishonesty into a religious principle.
Christianity also contains complicated moral discussions about deception under persecution and in defense of innocent life. No responsible person would therefore claim that lying is “part of Christianity.”
Johnson’s qualifying phrase—“for some of them”—does not rescue his statement. He attributed the alleged dishonesty to “their religion.” That transforms a criticism of particular Iranian officials into a suspicion directed toward Muslims generally.
It also confuses nationality with faith. Not every Iranian is Muslim. Iran is also home to Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Bahá’ís and people who follow no religion. And the Iranian regime does not represent the conscience of every Iranian Muslim, much less the beliefs of nearly two billion Muslims around the world.
The Islamic Republic frequently invokes religion to justify decisions that are fundamentally about power, survival and regional domination. That does not make every action of the regime an authentic expression of Islam.
Hezbollah invokes Shiite identity while dragging Lebanon into wars that many Lebanese Shiites reject. The Houthis employ religious slogans while threatening civilian shipping. Extremists from many traditions have wrapped political ambitions in sacred language.
Their behavior indicts the perpetrators—not every person who shares their nominal faith.
This distinction matters even more during wartime.
When the Speaker of the House tells Americans that deception is part of an adversary’s religion, he does more than insult that adversary. He encourages the public to distrust Muslim neighbors, citizens, soldiers, diplomats and elected officials. He makes it easier to transform a conflict with a regime into hostility toward an entire people and faith.
America has made this mistake before. In moments of fear, political leaders have treated ethnic and religious identity as evidence of disloyalty. Japanese Americans were imprisoned during the Second World War. Arab and Muslim Americans were subjected to suspicion and collective blame after September 11.
History should have taught American leaders to be precise when identifying an enemy.
The enemy is not Islam. The enemy is any government or armed organization that attacks civilians, violates agreements, threatens international navigation or uses violence to impose its will.
If Iranian negotiators lied, Johnson should identify the lie. He should cite the promise, present the evidence and explain the consequences. That would be a legitimate and potentially powerful criticism.
Blaming a religion is not evidence. It is a substitute for evidence.
Johnson’s remark is especially disappointing because he speaks frequently about the importance of his own Christian faith. A person who expects others to respect Christianity should extend the same respect to Islam. Religious freedom cannot mean defending only one’s own religion while casually misrepresenting another.
An apology would not require Johnson to soften his position toward Tehran. He could remain one of the Iranian regime’s strongest critics. He could support sanctions, military deterrence and strict verification of every agreement while acknowledging that his religious accusation was wrong.
He should say plainly:
“I condemn the deception of Iran’s rulers, but I was wrong to associate their conduct with Islam. Lying is not a teaching of Islam, and I apologize to Muslims in America and around the world.”
Such an apology would demonstrate strength, not weakness. Leaders make mistakes. Responsible leaders correct them.
Iran’s regime must answer for its lies.Islam must not be falsely accused of teaching them.
