But Europe’s thinking about Muslims, not all immigrants, is changing. They are turning away from the tolerance of multiculturalism to a stricter regime of ‘national culture’. As that new order takes hold, Muslims will find themselves at a disadvantage. European prejudice rests on several incidents in recent years: the 2004 Madrid and the 2005 London attacks, the 2004 ban of the headscarf coupled with the 2011 ban of the ‘burqa’ in France, the 2005 Paris riots, the 2006 Danish cartoon incident and several high-profile murders.
The July 2011 killing spree in Norway by Breivik, who preached against multiculturalism and ‘Islamisation of Western Europe’ has further underscored the deepening tensions on the continent. The Muslims are poorly integrated compared to other immigrant communities. Can one avoid discussing this aspect of the problem?
One reason for resistance to integration is the quality of manpower that emigrates from the Muslim world and the other is their loyalty to sharia.
In a thoughtful book Transnational Islam: Religion, Ideology and Power (Pluto Press 2004), an article titled “Islam: An Alternative Globalism and Reflections on the Netherlands”, by Jan Nederveen Pieterse, says: “Common understandings of the way Muslims define their boundaries with Dutch society focus on the areas of purity, sexuality and religion. Purity relates to food (pork, halal meat), drink (alcohol) and habits of cleanliness. Sexuality relates to control over women. In terms of religion, Muslims may view the Netherlands as an anti-Islamic country because of its degree of secularisation in the separation of church and state. Such boundaries give a sense of self-worth. Purity and sexuality provide a sense of moral superiority, which may compensate for class inferiority” (p.98).
The truth is that Muslim refusal to integrate has resulted in closed ethnic neighbourhoods, high crime rates in Muslim communities, calls for use of Sharia law in Europe and the wearing of the veil. Muslim scholar at Oxford University Tariq Ramadan says: “Over the last two decades Islam has become connected to so many controversial debates it is difficult for ordinary citizens to embrace this new Muslim presence as a positive factor.”
Muslim governments got together in the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to plan some kind of response to the rising anti-Islamic sentiment in the West. In 2008, the OIC (then known as the Organisation of Islamic Conference) established an observatory on Islamophobia at its General Secretariat. Its 35th Council of Foreign Ministers, noted manifestations of Islamophobia and the rising trend of Islamophobia in parts of the western world.
Ekmeleddin Hisanoglu, the ninth secretary-general of the OIC, in his book The Islamic World in the New Century (Hurst & Company 2010), has outlined Islamophobia in the West, but has not taken much note of the provocation to the baser European self offered by the expat Muslims who resist integration and do not show moderation in the face of what they think is discrimination and injustice. The OIC has not set up any monitoring cell to observe the behaviour patterns of the Muslim communities in Europe.
The latest race-based rioting in the UK has served to somewhat tone down the prejudice of the intolerant Briton. The Muslim community, a majority of whom is Pakistani, not only stayed away from violence and crime, but gave a good account of themselves as loyal British citizens.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 28th, 2011.
COMMENTS (24)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@P N Eswaran: Dear Sir, please don't forget that all those europeans married to locals, and as a result of that a new generation of Anglo-Indians was born, majority of those later migrated from Pakistan but many still living in Karachi and Cantonment areas of Pakistan. Anglo Indian sided with Colonists in entire liberation movement, integrated in European culture and converted to their religion. Whereas most christians in Indo-Pakistan belongs to very poor class and those were usually haunted by Hindu cast system, who were later converted. Moreover in all urban areas of Pakistan billion rupees churches were constructed, those still exists. Those were not built for integration but for conversions. All of the European countries were not as civilised like UK, and still in many countries not a single mosque is allowed to be built. When colonies were squeezing and those require labors, so peoples from colonies were welcomed. Indo-Pakistanis in UK. West Africans in France, Malays in Holland, Goa peoples in Portugal and watch demography of Carrebean etc. Majority converted to Christianity except migrants of Indo-Pakistan. The vicious blow of second world war pushed Europeans to talk about human rights but those have changed their stance and particularly NATO has pushed third world or non christian countries to the wall. US allowed migration of South Koreans and South Vietnamese, all whom converted to christianity. Integeration mean change of religion nothing else.
@hassan: Excellent and on the spot analysis of the origins of Islamophobia. In addition following points are relevant and complete the analysis.
Many of the children born in the host country start hating the country of their birth and say they are Muslims first and citizens of the country second and only as far as they can get state benefits without contributing to the country. They start dressing as Arabs did 1400 years back with full burka and hijab becoming the vogue. High levels of crime becomes prevalent amongst Muslims. Some of the real radicals start engaging in acts of terrorism and killing the host community. Then some of them want to establish a Muslim caliphate. And the hatred against Muslims continues to grow and grow.
@hassan
Very well said.
How Islamaphobia Starts
If you want to know at which point the Islamaphobia in a country starts, you should first understand the pattern of the Muslim immigration across most countries in the world.
--First muslims, mostly labourers, electricians and plumbers and other manual workers, land in as immigrants. They all live in a mohalla or a ghetto together. They keep to themselves, not mingling with the people of the rest of the country. Other country men think, ‘hey, they are harmless people minding their own business’. So far, good.
--After some time, the number of people in mohalla swells up and there is a need for a mosque. Government thinks, ‘hey, these are harmless people, let’s allot some land so they can have their prayer rooms. They mind their own business, they have quaint customs, these nice immigrants’ !! So far, so good.
--Now, the numbers swell up more, as the mosque means more immigrations. Mullahs, his relatives, more collateral immigration from other muslim countries. Segregated schools, more teachers, more doctors and engineers. People now want halal food as they hate the food of their host country. Government says, ‘hey, they are harmless guys, so let them have halal or whatever food, what the heck’ !!
--Halal food means more immigration from other muslim countries.More halal butchers and more halal cooks and more halal establishments. The number of faithful swells up and now there is demand for more mosques and more land. Government says, ‘hmmm, they looked harmless before, so why not’…they allot land or sell land for more mosques.
--More mosques, mean more mullahs and more collateral immigration and the numbers are much much more. Now the faithful among the immigrants don’t like the people of host country wandering near their mohalla in haraam dresses. Whatever the host countrymen do, it is disrespectful or hurtful of the religious practices. The faithful object to the foreign policy of their host country, their women,their songs and dances, their culture, their history and their education.
--Now that the immigration have achieved the critical mass, they now vehemently object to the very way of life in the host country that attracted them in the first place.
--At this point, immigrants step up their demands: ‘We don’t like the laws of your country, so can we have our own shariah please?”
--Government of the host country wakes up, and now tells the immigrants; ‘Hey, we allowed you in because we took pity on you, you can’t do this to us.’
But, alas, it is too late. Now the Ummah steps in. Ummah says, ‘If you do or say anything against our community, you should be prepared for the consequences !!’
Government of the host country is concerned but it can’t show its face of fear. But the countrymen are scared. And soon an aggressive right wing starts talking about why they are scared. It is at this point....Islamaphobia starts...
@Zamalek Khan: What is the need for an OIC like organisation? Does the rest of world have organisations for Christian, Buddhist or Hindu countries?
@Dr.Salim Haidrani: Mr Khaled Ahmed is not anti Muslim. He is just anti hypocrisy that pervades the Pakistani society and much of Pakistani media!
* "Muslims not only from Pakistan but from several other countries who live and work in Britain are very law abiding, peaceful" *
This is not true - Muslims are massively over represented in British prisons and the criminal underclass - much more than other minority religious groups. There is a massive problem of violent extremism and hatred for non Muslims in the Islamic ghettoes too.
Dear Editor Sahib
I suggest for your leading newspaper one thing that whenever a controversial article is written by a columnist and readers reply and give their points of view and you publish them. That is very democratic practice and I appreciate it. I am suggesting if a columnist gets a large number of responses about the specific issue then the newspaper must ask the columnist to reply the some outstanding responses made by the readers because then it clarifies the position of the writer of the article and also it clears the air of bad feelings of certain readers.
In this specific case I ask Mr Kaled Hassan to come and clarify his position about what he wanted to say and how the readers responded to his article ‘This Thing Called Islamophobia’, dated 27th August 2011.
I like myself Mr Kaled Hassan but many readers believe he is an anti – Islam and he is not very kind to Muslims either. It does not matter what he believes but it does matter when he writes. So I would like to see him explaining his opinion after publishing this article – what he wanted to say and whether he himself understood the concept of Islamophobia and or he just wanted to wind up a conservative majority of Muslims who live locally in Pakistan and abroad?
Thanks so much. Dr. Haidrani UK
Nobody has referred to Criticizing of Muslims about "integration" as islamophobia, its basically comments like that of Greet Wilders who says that even Modern Muslims secretly want to overtake europe and impose sharia law and want to kill all the infidels. His Dutch party basically just runs on Islamophobia and nothing else. And this guy is very influential in Europe.
@P N Eswaran: I may add that its intolerable to a lot of fellow muslims as well.
@Khadim Husain: The Europeans ruling India believed that they were on 'civilizing' mission and the missionary activity was only in the beginning during the company period. While this was an absurd reasons for colonization there was a degree of feeble justification at least to themselves because the western civilization in their own countries progressively developed universal human values. Can the same be said of Islamic societies eigther in the past or in the present?
@Syed Ali: You should really visit the US and see the way the jewish community practises their ” sharia” there. YOu will see a stricter version of veils, kosher shops, women with 4 to 5 children ...... Men of varying ages weaing full beards ( molana style), long black dress and a copy of Torah in their hands. In eminent hopsitals likd MOunt Sinia or NYU, you will find, Sabath observence, elevators stopping on all floor automatically and on certain days, people not touching elevator buttons. But where does the difference lie? The Jews may be practicing their religion in a non intrusive way, but Muslims impose their will on others. Their intolerance is intolerable not only to the westerners but also to the rest of the non-Muslims throughout the world.
Khaled Sahib writes:
"The latest race-based rioting in the UK has served to somewhat tone down the prejudice of the intolerant Briton. The Muslim community, a majority of whom is Pakistani, not only stayed away from violence and crime, but gave a good account of themselves as loyal British citizens".
The Riots in Britain were not based on race and ethnicity - the riots were spontaneous and thousands of disaffected young people in London and also in other cities took part and it showed how Britain failed to provide social justice to these young people.
Muslims in Britain generally and young Muslims particularly did not choose to take part in riots because Muslims not only from Pakistan but from several other countries who live and work in Britain are very law abiding, peaceful and socially very conservative due to the nature of the British society which does not encourage Muslims to fully integrate into the fabric of the society.
However, these riots were not race – based as you labelled them because these riots were caused by social injustice and alienation of disaffected young people from the British society.
I worked with Britis for over 16 years and during that period interacted with thousands of Goras in Pakistan and UK. The issue is not about Muslims integrating with them, the issue is that they would accept your integration they way they want, means meeting at the local pub.
Issue with Muslims is that when they are asked difficult questions, they are ill prepared to answer, so on their part, they avoid.
I know that 9-11, things have changed, and Muslims living abroad do not want to run into any trouble with their Gora contacts, hence try to avoid any discussion and interaction.
Its easy to make comments, but one must try to understand the ground realities.
Hi I am one of these expats reffered to in this article. I live in Oslo...
The notion that muslims are generally not well integrated is wrong. Pakistanis started coming here in the 70s and even the first gen of pakistanis has integrated itself quite good. You will find pakistanis here in every rank of society...from shop owners to politicians. The vice pesident of the norwegian parliment is also a pakistani immigrant.
The problem in regards to integration is high when it comes to african immigrants, especially the somalians. This problem is not related to some specific religious group. The main factor here is geograohical background.
When it comes to islamophobia, this problem has always existed in Norway. The first anti-muslim organization in Norway was formed almost a decade before 9.11. Even the term islamophobia is highly discussed these days, coz many thinkers rather prefer to use the term "muslimhate" instead of islamophobia. This hate ideology is not targetting an ideology but all of its muslim adherents. So therefore, for the article writer to find excuses for a hate ideology which generalizes against all muslims is utterly disgusting.
Thanks Mr. Khalid Ahmad for changing sides, peoples say that you are the top Islam basher in Pakistan. I don't know you would stick to current stance. Remember imperialism and colonialism is a product of Europe and integration mafia may tell us that natives, first nations or true locals, have those adopted European culture? Answer is no, however christanity has been imposed on them. Study American and Australian history. In three hundred years whether British were merged in Indian society, answer is big no.
Riots be they racial or economic are nothing new for the UK. It's been going on for decades in ghettos where youth are disenfranchised and see no future. In fact a good number of the families in the UK, especially migrants live on state khayrat / welfare in government counsel flats and only interact with their own types in these poor ghettos. This is nothing new and has nothing to do with Islamophobia. As for the Muslims in Europe like Norway and Germany, they are mostly asylum seekers who had to make up a story about persecution to stay in Europe. Most European nations do not have an immigration policy that lets them choose to bring in immigrants from Third world countries like they do in Canada or USA. These asylum seekers in Norway and Germany had to smuggle themselves in and spoke of persecution of the worst kind in their home countries to be allowed to stay as refugees. So why should we be surprised if the Europeans think of these societies and countries as being so bad? They have said that Muslims nations are so bad themselves when they apply as refugees from Muslim lands like Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan, Iraq etc.
@author! You should really visit the US and see the way the jewish community practises their " sharia" there. YOu will see a stricter version of veils, kosher shops, women with 4 to 5 children tring to ride busues from back doors not from front ( as is told to them by their husbands). Men of varying ages weaing full beards ( molana style), long black dress and a copy of Torah in their hands. In eminent hopsitals likd MOunt Sinia or NYU, you will find, Sabath observence, elevators stopping on all floor automatically and on certain days, people not touching elevator buttons. Sadly, just like many other liberals, you are obsessed with the term " integration". What does that mean to us? Should we start drinking, going to clubs or gay parades or start yelling at our parents? If intergration is any thing, its maintaining your personal, cultural, religious and social values while at the same time " integrating" in to the economic system of the country you immigrate. A capitilistic economy never demands social, religious, or ethinic sacrifie from a member, who makes his bread and butter and pays his dues. The roots of islam phobia in europe are deeper than just "recent events". Turkey is far advanced and democratic country. Why it has failed to get a EU membership? Why the liberal europe let the massacare in Bosnia and Serbia happen , while most of the muslims their were " just muslims" by name and had no connection to Sharia?
Good, very thoughtful article. You may or may not know this but a number of Muslims have been convicted for looting during the riots. However that does not take away the good sense shown by majority of Muslims in Birmingham. Against this goes the fact that in United Kingdom, the number of Muslim convicts is far greater than their percentage of UK population. A real shame!
The same attitudes are noticed in the USA. We sought migration to uplift our lot and station. But it did not take long for us to seek 'special' privileges on the grounds that we are unique. Now we are demanding whole tracts of real estate for our places of worship, privileges for our children to go to Islamic schools (unsupervised by the State) and holidays. What makes it worse is our in your face holier than thou attitude. We try very hard to rationalize our non-assimilation by alleging 'discrimination'.
“Over the last two decades Islam has become connected to so many controversial debates it is difficult for ordinary citizens to embrace this new Muslim presence as a positive factor.”
That anyone would want to emigrate to a country and then refuse to integrate baffles me completely. And that the host nations are now averse to accepting immigration by muslims is very much understandable. From what I know, no other race, religion or nation so blatantly exploits the hospitality accorded them as do muslims. They clump around in ghettos, abuse benefits, have tons of children and refuse educate them properly. The fault also lies with the lax immigration policies of European nations. They brought into their country, especially in the 70s and 80s, uneducated and uncivilized labor class and expected them to adopt cherished western values. This was a very big assumption, and as the result of this experiment shows has largely failed. America has been fortunate in this regard that the immigrants it allowed in were predominantly college educated and belonging to middle class and above strata of the society. It if for this reason muslims in America are among the best educated and most well-off group in the country and issues about non-integration are almost nonexistent.
@ Khalid, It's Dr. Ihsanoglu as in the word Ihsan, NOT Hisanoglu. Way to misspell the name of such a prominent academic. Khalid is of course yet another pseudo scholar on Islam.
OIC is certainly not an Organization for Islamic Cooperation. It is more like an Organization of Impotent Countries. Look at the economic resources of this group and what it has achieved. The leaders from these countries get together and talk without taking any steps to create a positive profile of their people.