Kenan Çamurcu wrote | Islamophobia literature – 2: The only way to public visibility is “European Islam”

On October 16, 2020, Paris teacher Samuel Paty showed cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad published in Charlie Hebdo magazine to his students, some of whom were Muslims, as a lesson in tolerance. Paty was brutally beheaded after this attempt. The perpetrator, 18-year-old Chechen Abdullah Anzavur, was shot dead in a police operation.

The Muslim faith, which believes it has the right to execute anyone who draws or publishes a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad, is met with criticism in the West. European leaders are no longer as hesitant as they once were to issue statements that would lead to accusations of Islamophobia. This is because they do not want to coexist with Islamist fanatics who do not believe in due process of law, who do not see it as necessary, and who believe they have the right to kill people for insulting their religion.

This objection is actually valid from an Islamic perspective: Where do these fanatics and radicals derive the right and authority to take people's lives under the pretext of insulting religion? While the narratives claiming that the Prophet responded to insults directed at him in this way are clearly fabricated, we only have the stories and personal statements of those who claim to have carried out these executions in the early period of Islam, told years after the Prophet's death. If they actually committed these murders, they are attempting to absolve themselves of their guilt by claiming that the Prophet ordered them or silently approved them.

As I promised in the first article of Islamophobia literature, I will discuss the assassination stories of the early period of Islam in a separate article and I will clearly show that this matter has nothing to do with the Prophet.

French President Macron, reacting to the murder of Samuel Paty, stated that they would not stop publishing cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. To protest the incident, the same cartoons were projected onto government buildings in Montpellier and Toulouse as giant posters. In other words, the terrorist act, aimed at intimidation and terrorizing the public rather than punishment, fueled the growing backlash.

Mohammed Moussaoui, President of the Islamic Council of France, claimed that the publication of caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad, their display in schools, and their projection on walls were wrong and could not be considered "freedom of expression. " Moussaoui condemned the Paty murder, but he also argued that freedom of expression could be limited when religious values were at stake. However, he did not answer questions such as what those values were, who would determine religious values, the philosophical and legal significance of criticism being considered an insult, or who would establish the criteria for limiting freedom of expression.

As tensions continued, on October 29th, another attack was carried out on the Notre-Dame Church in Nice, killing three people with knives. Police shot 21-year-old Tunisian Ibrahim al-Owaysawi, who was attempting to decapitate one of the victims after reciting the takbir (God is Great) during the attack, which left some injured. Tunisia released a statement saying, "The attack was orchestrated by a group called the Southern Tunisian al-Mahdi Organization. "

On the evening of November 2, four civilians were killed and 22 people were injured in shootings at six different locations near a synagogue in Vienna, Austria. At least three people were reported to have carried out the attack, and one of the attackers was killed by police.

Outside of Europe that week, ISIS carried out attacks on a church in Mozambique and a university in Kabul, Afghanistan.

Austrian Interior Minister Karl Nehammer described the Vienna attack as "an attack by an Islamist terrorist." According to Nehammer, the attack was an attempt to weaken or divide Austria's democratic society.

The attacker, Kujtim Fejzulai, a dual Austrian and Macedonian citizen, was sentenced to 22 months in prison in April 2019 for attempting to travel to Syria to join ISIS, but was released shortly thereafter. Interior Minister Karl Nehammer stated that the suspect served only seven months due to his young age and was released in December 2019.

Austrian Integration Minister Susanne Raab announced the closure of a mosque and an Islamic association where the attacker, Fejzulai, was "influential in his radicalization." It was also reported that a preacher at the mosque, who commanded a German-speaking brigade in Syria, was later killed in a drone strike.

It's true that Europeans turned a blind eye to jihadists to overthrow the Syrian regime. The majority of these terrorists traveled from European cities to Syria. The jihadists were bearing the cost of overthrowing Assad and freeing Syria from Iran's sphere of influence. But they failed to anticipate the impossibility of controlling that cost. When the jihadists brought terrorism to European cities, the margin of error in their support proved far greater than anticipated. Not only did the jihadists destabilize European cities, they also radicalized even-tempered Muslims.

ISIS's attacks in Europe came as the group appeared certain of defeat in Iraq and Syria. Experts warned at the time that the group would launch suicide attacks similar to the one it carried out in Sri Lanka in April 2019, which killed 359 people. While the Syrian Democratic Forces declared the "so-called caliphate destroyed" when the last ISIS-held territory was liberated, terrorism researchers Michael Knights and Alex Almeida found that the group carried out 1,669 attacks in Syria alone in 2019 and 566 in the first quarter of 2020.

The Islamic world, which has suffered greatly from nihilist terrorism , reacted strongly to the tragedy of the Austrian attack. The Austrian attack came as the pain of the deaths of nine immigrants in the February 2020 racist terrorist attack in Hanau, Germany, was still fresh. The fact that those killed in the Hanau attack were Turks, Kurds, Germans, Bosnians, Pakistanis, and Romanians was seen as proof that terrorism cannot be defined by a specific religion or ethnic identity.

Representatives of Muslim communities unanimously stated that terrorism, whether ISIS or racism, is the ideology of nihilist terrorism. It was emphasized that political groups or politicians who seek to associate terrorism with Islam have a different agenda and are not interested in defeating terrorism through the collaboration of all ethnic and religious groups.

While this approach may seem well-intentioned and constructive, its ignorance of the fact that terrorists emerge exclusively from among Muslims naturally raises suspicions. It also ignores the fact that the epistemic foundation that radicalizes terrorists is nourished by the credible sources of Islam. Consequently, preventative measures fail to include the need to begin by discussing the theory and structural nature of Islam.

With the attacks mentioned above, Europe has once again returned to the debate about "Islam's place on the continent." Rising far-right and racist groups advocate for the removal of the Muslim population from Europe. While representatives of the right-wing political movement are currently refraining from such radical ideas, they are working on measures that will render the Muslim population invisible in public life.

Integration Minister Susanne Raab, in the Austrian People's Party (ÖVP) and Greens coalition government formed in 2020 under Sebastian Kurz, stated that there would be zero tolerance for "political Islam in the country." Raab also announced that the headscarf ban for girls would be raised to the age limit of 14.

Raab's reference was to the results of a study published in December 2019 by Kenan Güngör, a German sociologist and political consultant of Turkish origin. According to the study, 55 percent of young Afghans living in Vienna view Islam as superior to Austrian law. 45 percent also want to see an Islamic leader at the top of the state. Minister Raab argued that political Islam aims to impose sharia and undermine the democratic system.

Coalition Chancellor Kurz's statement that political Islam would be banned has also received support from conservatives in the European Parliament. Manfred Weber, chair of the European People's Party (EPP) group and a member of the German Christian Social Union (CSU), said, "The political wing of radical Islamists poses a threat to our liberal order in Europe. "

This isn't a new approach. The EU Independent Commission on Turkey, chaired by Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari, wrote in its 2004 report on Turkey: "There are also fears that political Islam, which will face no obstacles as the military's influence declines, could come to power in Turkey, and therefore in a major EU member state, by enjoying all the rights of the democratic system."

The EU delegation's lamentation of the army's inability to suspend democratic procedures and its encouragement of obstructing the rule of "political Islam" is undoubtedly an extreme statement, but it should be considered alongside the expectation that it will be tolerated in the face of Europe's helplessness in the face of a greater threat and danger.

Franco Frattini, the EU Commissioner responsible for freedom, security, and justice, openly stated in 2007 that he supported Turkey's full EU membership in the hope that it would be "useful in the fight against radical Islam." He said, "I dream of one day realizing the idea of a European Islam. I'm talking about an Islam where religious freedoms are respected, where young people will not be educated in hatred and violence. Our partners, the imams, religious leaders, and non-radical communities with whom we will work, will be the vast majority of Muslims living in Europe who are victims of terrorism and radicalization. This is Europe's strategy."

What does the EU, which rates the democratic standards in countries, mean by "political Islam" that frightens people to the point of abandoning the democratic system?

Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, then the prime minister, made a series of harsh statements after the Vienna attacks. Among these measures announced as part of the fight against terrorism, they implied that the Austrian government viewed "political Islam" as the ideology of Muslim radicals and terrorists. The announced measures included: Those who joined jihadist groups in the Middle East and later returned to Austria and were imprisoned would have their freedom of movement restricted after their imprisonment and would be monitored with electronic tracking devices. Those classified as "foreign terrorist fighters" or dual citizens convicted of terrorism charges would have their Austrian citizenship revoked, their state benefits would be cut off, and their driver's licenses would be revoked.

Vienna established a Documentation Center under the banner of "fighting political Islam." A budget of €500,000 was allocated for the center, which is similar to the one established in 1963 to combat Nazism and conduct research on neo-Nazi groups. The center would keep tabs on Muslim activities. Its establishment sparked criticism that Nazi ideology was being equated with Islam.

Hakan Gördü, Chairman of the Soziales Österreich der Zukunft (Social Austria of the Future / SÖZ), claimed that the government could easily stigmatize any person or institution it wanted with the very open-ended term "political Islam." Gördü said , "Someone who engages in politics and defends the rights of Muslims can be considered a manifestation of political Islam in their eyes." Georgetown University political scientist Dr. Farid Hafez also pointed out that the term "political Islam" has been deliberately left unfulfilled, making it much more useful for Muslims. According to Hafez, the main goal here is to portray any civil dissent by Muslims as criminal activity because it represents "political Islam. "

European Union Home Affairs Commissioner Ylva Johansson's reaction to the Austrian government's statements may offer a clue to what Austrian officials actually mean by assessing the threat they coded as "political Islam": "Islam is not a threat. Terrorists are a threat. Extremists and far-right extremists who appear to be Islamists must be combated. Immigration is not a threat to Europe either."

During the presidency of French President Jacques Chirac, the wearing of "visible religious objects" was banned in public schools and public institutions. While the term "religious objects" was often used in general terms, it was widely understood that the headscarf was the intended target. The process continued with a law passed during the presidency of the next President, Nicolas Sarkozy, banning the wearing of full-body chadors in public spaces. President Emmanuel Macron, meanwhile, is pursuing the "French Islam" he promised during his election campaign and banning any other form of Islam. While Macron was working on reorganizing Muslim organizations, he drafted a law to "fight against political Islamist separatism" in response to criticism from the far right.

In one speech, Macron was criticizing a specific ideological stance by referencing Wahhabism, radical Islam, and Salafism, when he suddenly took direct aim at Islam, declaring, "Islam is a religion experiencing a crisis all over the world." His postponement of his opposition to "political Islam"—"We don't believe in political Islam, we don't believe it's compatible with global stability and peace"—showed a more structured perspective on the issue. Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin expressed his discomfort with the presence of special aisles for "halal food" in Turkish supermarkets, broadening the scope of "political Islam" even further.

It doesn't seem to end there. Examples are beginning to emerge proving that all Muslims are held responsible for terrorist attacks. Muslims' rejection of caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad has also begun to be considered "political Islam," and therefore terrorism.

In Albertville, France, four children were treated as terrorists for responding to a teacher about cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. French police raided their homes early this morning and took them to a police station for questioning. Three of the 10-year-olds were of Turkish origin, and one was of Maghrebi origin.

The incident occurred after some children at Louis Pasteur Elementary School responded to a question by saying, "They didn't like cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad and that they were bad," and were reported to the police by their teacher. The children were taken to the police station alone during a police raid and interrogated for 11 hours. One of the children allegedly asked the teacher what he thought of the murdered teacher, Paty, to which the child replied, "I'm sorry he died, but nothing would have happened if he hadn't shown that cartoon. " The families denied this and stated that they requested a statement from the police, but were not provided with any documents.

Prof. Dr. Hasan Köni, a faculty member at Kültür University, explains the turbulence Europe is gradually entering: “There are nearly 6 million immigrants in France. They believe it's impossible to contain them in this economic climate. They fear they will be radicalized if they don't adapt to their own culture, and they're implementing a policy of Frenchification. They'll become even harsher. They also have major problems within themselves; remember the Yellow Vests. As the economy deteriorates, racism rises. This has also exposed both America and Europe as shams on human rights.”

German sociologist Ralf Dahrendorf's statement, "Populism is simple, democracy is complex," is thought to explain the rise of populism in Europe. Factors such as the economic crisis in Europe, the unequal income distribution caused by globalization, rising unemployment rates, and the rise in terrorist incidents are seen as contributing factors to the rise of populism. Populists oppose elites and pluralism. There is a concern that both are weakening the country. This is the same mass anxiety, fear, and hysteria that brought Hitler's Nazism to power. Growing concerns about security and identity are increasing the popularity of the populist right in Central Europe as a potential power. As demonstrations for Sharia law intensify in European cities, it becomes clear that the center-right will no longer exist and the far-right will begin to establish authoritarian regimes. Or is a hidden hand encouraging these demonstrations to hasten this political outcome? Is this too much of a conspiracy theory?

With the far-right trend gaining strength in Europe, the Freedom Party of Austria secured first place in the 2024 general elections with 28.8% of the vote. This is so powerful that the left-wing Greens were forced to enter a government with the far-right Freedom Party of Austria in order to maintain their grip on power. This is related to the recent decision within the left to "respond to right-wing populism with left-wing populism in order to gain power. " But those who warn that this is a dead end find the pursuit of copying right-wing populism, which appears to be a response to desperation, alarming.

German political philosopher Jan-Werner Müller expresses his concern as follows: “Strategically, it doesn't make much sense for leftists to try to emulate Trump or Le Pen in some respects. If they're talking about appealing more to emotions in their politics, that's fine, but that's not really important. But if left-wing populism, in line with what real theorists like Argentinian political scientist Ernesto Laclau say, means something much more than that, then I think that's a cause for concern.”

Experienced political scientist Bertrand Badie, an emeritus professor at the Sciences Po Institute in France, says that two parameters must be considered in understanding the language used and attitudes displayed by Macron and Erdoğan, and comments that shaping domestic public opinion is used as a tool in foreign diplomatic relations: “Macron, like Erdoğan, has a desire to use public opinion as a witness and turn an intergovernmental issue into a matter of disagreement. Opinions spread faster in countries than political rhetoric and government choices.”

Jawad Bachare, President of the Collective Against Islamophobia in France (CCIF), criticized Emmanuel Macron for prioritizing Muslim issues over addressing the country's pressing domestic issues: "They've brought on the Muslim problem when we already have serious economic, social, and, with Covid-19, health problems. Because targeting Muslims is easier than solving the real problems." However, this approach ignores Muslims' excess capacity to create problems. It's as if Muslims, while behaving in a civilized manner that would put Europeans to shame, are leading the pack in adherence to rules and customs, are brimming with qualified and skilled human resources, and are contributing significantly to the country's economic, social, intellectual, and political development, are now targeting Muslims for no reason.

The issue of “European Islam” has begun to be discussed again after French President Macron brought up “French Islam” to “fight against political Islam.”

Macron's reform package includes a plan to cut foreign financial and political influence over French Muslims. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Türkiye have been criticized in the context of these discussions.

The new law announced by Macron abolishes the practice of appointing foreign imams and language teachers. Foreign aid to associations is prohibited. State aid to associations that do not sign the secularism clause is cut. Religious demands such as virginity tests are penalized in social life, and strict financial oversight is envisaged for Muslim organizations and mosque associations. To create a "French Islam," clergy will be trained in secular culture in France. A University of Islamic Theology will be established, Islamic studies will be increased in university departments, and Arabic will be taught in public schools upon request. Requirements such as "halal meat" in school cafeterias, "female doctors" in hospitals, and "women's sessions" in swimming pools will be eliminated. National education will be made compulsory from age 3 to 16, from kindergarten to high school. In schools, mosques, streets, and associations, every Muslim will be raised as individuals committed to the rules of the republic and the principles of secularism.

A similar initiative exists in Germany. A group including former Green Party co-chair Cem Özdemir, sociologist Necla Kelek, female imam Seyran Ateş, psychologist Ahmad Mansur, and former social democratic SPD Bundestag deputy Lale Akgün have come together under the umbrella of the "Secular Islam Initiative." The initiatives aim to "develop an Islam compatible with human rights" and propose that Muslim immigrants organize independently of the institutions and religious representatives of their countries of origin. They also list among their goals the secularization of Islam by reducing the decisive role religion plays in daily life.

However, the institutional situation in Germany differs from what entrepreneurs desire. According to Article 136 of the Constitution, there is no state church, and anyone can establish an independent religious institution. Almost all Islamic institutions have received this status. The highest level religious institutions can achieve is Körperschaft des Öffentlichen Rechts (Public Law Institution). The German Protestant and Catholic Churches hold this right. Religious institutions with this status are granted certain privileges. They are exempt from state taxes, can collect taxes from their members, can open daycare centers, schools, etc., in the name of the church and receive state support, can determine the content of Protestant and Catholic religious instruction in public schools, and have veto power over the appointment of staff to Protestant and Catholic theology faculties at universities. However, with the exception of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in Hesse, no Islamic institution has yet been recognized as a Public Law Institution equivalent to the Catholic and Protestant Churches.

The "European Islam" debate is undoubtedly very different from the framework presented by Macron and similar populist leaders. Bassam Tibi, a Syrian-born political scientist living in Germany, began using the term "EuroIslam" in the 1990s. In 1999, Tariq Ramadan also attempted to develop a theoretical and practical system for the integration of Muslims into European countries under the name "European Islam. "

Bassam Tibi describes encountering the phenomenon of "Afro-Islam" during a trip to Africa in the 1980s: "The Islam I saw in Senegal was quite different from the Islam I knew in Damascus. Therefore, there might also have been a European Islam."

Alija Izetbegović, the most prominent representative of European Islam, was interviewed by a magazine and asked about his views on those who adhere to the Wahhabi sect or sympathize with the Taliban. Izetbegović stated that his understanding of Islam differs significantly from these two groups. He openly stated that the Bosnian people dislike religious extremism and that Bosnia-Herzegovina, being multicultural, multinational, and multi-religious, cannot be established as a religious state. Izetbegović explained his vision of Islamic democracy through the concept of European Islam. He emphasized that indigenous European Muslim populations do not perceive Europe as an enemy.

According to Tarık Ramazan, Muslims living in Europe are alienated from Europe because they seek answers to their religious problems from scholars living in the countries they come from. (Ramazan, Being a European Muslim , 2005: 150-151).

Europe's alienation from Islam is undoubtedly rooted in prejudices stemming from historical factors. However, this transformation into "fear and hatred of Islam" emerged after the terrorist attacks in the US on September 11, 2001. Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Islamophobia rapidly became a widespread concept throughout Europe, even in daily life. The concept can be interpreted for a variety of reasons, from xenophobia and anti-immigrant sentiment to the rejection of cultural differences and opposition to terrorism.

Europeans punish Muslims who resist integration with structural poverty and deprivation. The Muslim Development Index, prepared in parallel with the Human Development Index published annually by the United Nations Development Programme, shows that the socio-economic scores of Muslims living in Europe far lag behind those of other countries. One interpretation argues that the real problem in prosperous countries is prosperity chauvinism, a reluctance to share wealth with immigrants and foreigners.

All statements about the integration problems of Muslims living in Europe are accused of being hypocritical. According to them, the truth is the opposite: there are institutional, social, and political roadblocks that resolutely prevent Muslims from integrating.

This proposition is, of course, somewhat contradictory. Why would Europeans want full integration yet obstruct it? And this is despite the fact that they have no plans to send back immigrants who have been settled in European countries for many years. But if Muslims understand integration as simply imposing their own culture on Europe, then this is a demand that will not be accepted in Europe, the cradle of critical thought. How can the universe of burqas, khimars, and so on, be compatible with the European enlightenment?

There's considerable evidence to suggest that racism is not an isolated political stance. The Council of Europe's Commission Against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) published a report on "Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and intolerance in Europe" in January-December 2009, revealing that Muslims face discrimination in areas such as employment and housing, education, and justice. Let's call it a twist of fate for Muslims who are making a tireless effort to make Jews experience the deprivation of their rights.

Chatam House's survey also asked respondents in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Spain, and the United Kingdom whether they agreed with the proposition that "all immigration, especially to Muslim countries, should be stopped." Fifty-five percent of respondents agreed with the proposition, while 25% were undecided and only 22% rejected it.

In an environment of deepening economic problems and security concerns, the policy of directing reactions to "those who are different" increases the far-right's vote, but it fails to solve the social and economic problems of EU countries. The spread of far-right ideas is pushing centrist parties to the margins. This, in turn, undermines faith in the EU's professed values of multiculturalism, tolerance, and non-discrimination based on religion, language, gender, and nationality. It is clear that this uncertainty creates a convenient source for Islamophobia literature.

There's debate about whether the issue relates to terrorism and social security in general, or to Islam and Muslims themselves. Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter's National Security Advisor from 1977 to 1981, advocated for sensitivity in approaching the issue, but he raised the bar so high that, for example, he warned Obama against using the term "jihadist." Jihad, in Islam, denotes a sacred act, and identifying terrorists as jihadists could be seen as a positive act in the eyes of Muslims.

According to the TEPAV report, radical Salafis who have chosen terrorism are captivated not by profound intellectual debates, the metaphysical visions of theology, or the philosophy of Sufism's "perfect human," but by action and violence. They are attracted not by a long process of contemplation, contemplation, or a life of self-purification and asceticism, but by a militaristic lifestyle and violent action.

In its reasoned decision dated September 13, 2005, the ECHR appears to have identified the pretext on which radicalism feeds: “Freedom of thought does not include insulting Islam. Such an insult undermines Muslims' freedom of religion and conscience.” In its 2018 decision, the ECHR also ruled that insulting the Prophet Muhammad does not fall within the scope of freedom of expression.

We are not in the Middle Ages. The security of societies cannot be guaranteed by castles, walls, and ramparts. Prosperity cannot be sustained without security. Even the most prosperous countries are suddenly forced to abandon high-standard social life when terrorism sabotages it. Islamophobia literature is proof that Muslims refuse to confront this stark reality and initiate strong self-criticism. This frequent attempt to pave the way by resorting to this trump card is causing weariness in Europe.