Naima Bouteldja: Muslims and European authoritarianism
Naima Bouteldja, in today's Guardian, discusses the impending Dutch niqab ban and the pattern of governments stoking anti-Muslim hostility for political ends:
Naima Azough, a Dutch Green MP, points out that the ban would apply to fewer than 100 women. "This didn't come from public pressure," she says, "but was initiated by the immigration minister, Rita Verdonk, whose Liberal-Conservative party is scrambling for far-right votes." The result will simply reinforce the perception of Muslims that they will never be accepted in Dutch society.
And the French anti-hijab laws similarly didn't come from the public, but from on high:
France provided the political laboratory. In April 2003, the headscarf row came out of nowhere; within a year it had been outlawed in state schools. No serious demands to ban the headscarf had ever come from teaching bodies, students or the public. It simply wasn't seen as a problem before April 2003: of the 10 million students in French state schools, only 1,250 wore the headscarf.
So who or what sparked "l'affaire du foulard"? Françoise Lorcerie, the editor of The Politicisation of the Veil in France, Europe and the Arab World, points the finger at France's interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, who, in a generally well-received speech to the Union of French Muslim Organisations in April 2003, sparked uproar in the hall when he reminded the audience that wearing the headscarf on national ID card photos was "unlawful".
Within days, commentators and celebrities were demanding the banning of the headscarf in schools. In 2003, three French papers (Le Monde, Libération and Le Figaro) published 1,284 articles on the subject. By contrast, the hotly contested plan to reform social security - a genuine national debate that brought tens of thousands on to the streets - registered only 478 times.
Significantly, the Stasi commission, which recommended the ban, also recommended such things as including things like slavery and colonialism in the teaching of French history; the government ignored nearly all of them.
Comments
Salam alaikoum. You know I wish I could say something deep about the French stuff (considering I wrote a thesis on it) but all I can do is shake my head and say "Gaah". Sarkozy not only messes with my hijab, he messes with my French Citizen Husband's right to marry a person of his own choosing. Not that Segolene Royal is going to be any better--I think French politics is becoming more and more "American" in its lack of real ideas.
Posted by: cncz | November 21, 2006 3:31 PM
the sad thing is that these tactics seem to work so politically so you can bet they will continue to be seen. and they may come from on high, but the fact that they work indicates that these bigotries are indeed present in the society itself in an implicit manner that is just waiting to break free into something explicit and ugly.
Posted by: Lawrence of Arabia | November 21, 2006 9:35 PM
Some Muslims are fighting back against the prevailing climate of fascism and McCarthyite authoritarianism - and winning!
Muslim student forces college boss to back down
Written by Chaminda Jayanetti
Wednesday, 08 November 2006
A Muslim student has forced his university’s former principal into an embarrassing climbdown after winning a long-running dispute over freedom of speech.
Following a year of wrangling, ex-SOAS head Colin Bundy has retracted his claim in spring 2005 that he had reprimanded student Nasser Amin over an article Amin had written.
A SOAS statement dated November 6th read: “Professor Bundy sincerely regrets … the reference on the School’s website to the author of the article entitled ‘When only violence will do’ in the spring 2005 issue of the SOAS SU Spirit magazine. He further regrets the use of the word ‘reprimand’, which he acknowledges was inappropriate.”
The row began whilst SOAS was engulfed by allegations of anti-Semitism in early 2005, with the student union barring an Israeli official from giving a speech and electing Ken Livingstone as honorary president in the wake of his verbal attack on a Jewish reporter.
Amin’s article argued with regards to Palestinian terrorism that: ‘Those that benefit from the immoral actions of a colonial state in which they have chosen to reside cannot be considered as innocent.’
The article sparked thunderous criticism from commentators such as Melanie Phillips, whilst American websites made death threats against him. Labour MP David Winnick called for him to be prosecuted.
Bundy warned Amin that the article may have broken SOAS rules, but no formal sanction or reprimand was ever applied. However, Bundy then secretly wrote to ministers in the Home Office and Department for Education, as well as local MP Frank Dobson, saying that Amin had been reprimanded over the article. SOAS posted a similar statement on its website.
Amin told London Student in March that the episode left him suffering from depression and disrupted his studies. He also suffered racial abuse from other students following the controversy. When his lawyers first asked for a retraction and apology in summer 2005, Bundy replied: “I regret that Mr Amin feels that he has been treated badly by SOAS. However, SOAS has acted at all times in accordance with its disciplinary procedures.”
In fact, Bundy had merely given Amin an informal caution, whereas a formal reprimand required a full disciplinary process. Bundy’s retraction, following a formal grievance hearing and threats of legal action, represents a major climbdown.
Amin said in a statement to London Student: “I am pleased to say that the dispute between myself and SOAS has been resolved in a way I find to be highly satisfactory. A public apology has now been published on the official SOAS website.
“I hope that lessons have been learnt,” Amin added, “and that no student will have to go through a similar ordeal for simply expressing opinions about topical issues which many people in wider society also have views on.”
Amin told London Student in March that his article had been a response to a previous article that called on Muslims to ‘categorically’ condemn Palestinian terrorism in order to counter Islamophobia. He felt such condemnation was as unreflective as supporting a cause just because it affects your own people.
“The problem is these arguments are taken from their academic setting and thrown into the wider community,” said Amin. He added that he did not support terrorism, including Hamas suicide attacks on non-combatant civilians.
SOAS’ November 6th statement added: “Mr Amin sincerely regrets that his article unintentionally caused offence to certain members of the School and persons outside the School. His intention had merely been to discuss a difficult and controversial issue within the context of the School's Freedom of Expression policy.”
SOAS’ decision to publicly denounce one of its own students for his views drew strong fire from staff. Amin’s tutor Mark Laffey said at the time: “It is part of the job description of an academic institution that you are willing to give offence. Our job is to seek out the truth, no matter how uncomfortable or unpleasant for various groups or interests.”
SOAS academic John Game wrote in an open letter to Bundy: “If this student is to be subjected to investigation and harassment then so should I and so should many full time academic members of staff at this institution.”
Game also wrote in Spirit: “Islamophobia in the wider society means that SOAS’ ‘reputation’ is under assault. Either one aggressively stands up to such Islamophobia or one decides to sacrifice a few students to it.”
http://www.london-student.net/content/view/444/29/
http://leninology.blogspot.com/2006/11/nasser-amin-victory.html
http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2006/11/9/nasser-amin-forces-soas-retraction.html
Posted by: Worker Will | November 22, 2006 12:02 AM
I don't think there's much point making a fuss about people who want to wear silly clothes, but the problem remains: can a society deal with an intolerant and intolerable minority without adopting those qualities itself?
Posted by: Thersites | November 22, 2006 11:52 AM
Asalaamualaikum wa rahmatullah.... Everyone.
I havent been on here for so long. SCHOOL SCHOOL and MORE SCHOOL. Anyway brother Yusuf, I hope everything is cool with you. Is Umar Lee back from outer space. Dunno. Anyway tell those Europeans that they should worry about thier economies before they stay talking about the sisters. Jerks.
Posted by: Bikhair | November 22, 2006 12:55 PM
Well, Bikhair, perhaps we should model our economies on the Muslim world, where, oil aside, they don't seem to be doing all that well.
It is ironic to see so many Muslims coming out in favour of freedom. Does this extend to cartoons?
Posted by: Old Pickler | November 22, 2006 9:20 PM
Old Pimple,
"Well, Bikhair, perhaps we should model our economies on the Muslim world, where, oil aside, they don't seem to be doing all that well."
Back from the crypt I see. Actually most Muslim countries dont have oil economies but much like the developing world have primary goods exporting economies. Yes there is need to industrialize. But Europeans can talk all they want about what Muslim women choose to wear and not wear while the bread lines grow.
In your comfortable position you can sit around and pontificate about these issues but others dont have that luxury and it isnt because Muslim women want to cover thier faces.
Posted by: Bikhair | November 22, 2006 11:53 PM