 |
Bashy Quraishy |
Islam Online has raised, through this debate , a few very timely questions as follows: Is integration the best possible way of interaction between European Muslims and the secularized public domains in the European states? If so, are the European Muslims communities ready to consider the challenges facing them, including their institutionalization and visibility in the European societies?
Answers to these simple, yet complex questions, depend on many factors. One must analyze all the hurdles one must pass. The first hurdle is the definition of the word integration. The second hurdle is the diverse history and differential integration processes used by member states. The third hurdle is that the term Muslim communities is imaginary and thus can not be used as a starting point. Islam is not an ethnicity or nationality, but rather a faith. The fourth hurdle is that not all European societies are secular, even if they claim to be so.
Entering The Huge Machine
Let's look at the word integration and see what it means. The term integration comes from Latin integratus and means a wholeness, wherein the single parts retain a relative independence.
According to the New Webster's dictionary, integration means "to make up or to complete as a whole, to bring together parts into a whole."
The American Encyclopedia describes integration as being "a process that brings different cultures and races together, and is based on equality, justice, and equal protection under the law."
These descriptions are the ultimate ideals of integration that a democratic and humane society should aspire to.
But when we look at the European societies and the way they want minorities to integrate, it rather reminds us of a huge machine, where all the ethnic groups enter from one end, with all their different cultures, religions, norms, traditions, historical backgrounds, social understandings ,and economical status. The door to the machine is then closed. Different buttons with labels such as culture, traditions, Anglo-Saxon ancestry, religion, mentality and especially, one enormous button labeled "language" are pressed.
The machine starts. The people get mixed, bleached and brainwashed, and finally a whole new bunch of Europeans roll out on the conveyor belt. A bottle of beer in one hand, a local flag in the other, shouting the national anthem of the host country. I think that such models are not only a pigment of the European wishful thinking, but also hurt the acceptance and participation of all non-European minorities, particularly of Muslim communities.
Even if Europe were to agree to a common definition of integration, its successful implementation would depend on each country's own history, style of government, and socio-economic needs.
The Complex Equation
Looking at the European integration today, one can see that problems faced by ethnic minorities are identical in their nature and substance, whether these are legal, socioeconomic, political, or cultural. But the solutions vary from country to country. The United Kingdom has chosen a multicultural approach, France has its assimilation policy, Germany, until recently, kept ethnic minorities only as guest workers, Denmark talks of being a tribe to which no foreigner can belong to, and in most countries in Europe, nationalism based on Islamophobia is on the rise. In this confusing landscape, the so-called Muslim communities find themselves as personae non gratae.
There are nearly 15 million minorities in European Union, many of who come from countries where Islam is either the majority or the dominant religion. People from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Turkey, Morocco, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia, and Indonesia have a common religion named Islam but religious practices, languages, length of residency in Europe, history, customs, and traditions are so different that lumping them together as Muslims is not only false, but also frightening to many decision makers in Europe.
Power Games
To add to this complex equation is the belief that European societies are all secular, while Muslims are traditionalists and very religious. This scenario is used not only by European politicians to define integration as a matter of cultural compatibility and a desired separation of religion and politics, but also by religious leaders in Muslim communities to scare ordinary Muslims by invoking "Islam is in danger" slogans. Both of these assertions are power games. It must be also remembered that many European countries still recognize Christianity as the state religion and have Christian political parties, schools, and newspapers.
I sincerely believe that the integration of ethnic and religious minorities, especially those who have a Muslim background of diverse shades, is not possible. Acceptance and respect in the present prejudiced atmosphere in Europe is simply not present. On the contrary, the situation is worsening by the day. This unfortunate assessment is based on many years' participatory work with ethnic and religious minority rights both in Denmark and throughout the European Union.
The International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (IHF) released its report on Intolerance and Discrimination Against Muslims in the EU: Developments Since September 11, 2001 in Vienna on March 7, 2005.
The findings of this report are very thought provoking, both for the European societies and the Muslim Communities. The report not only documented that the majority of Europeans consider Islam to be a source of terrorism, extremism, and a means for oppressing women, but it also states that the unbalanced and stereotypical media reports portraying Muslims as "alien" in EU societies and as "an enemy within" is creating widespread negative attitudes towards Muslims. The July 7, 2005 bombings in London further galvanized the issue.
This general derision of Islam as a religion or faith is very insulting, derogatory, and provocative to most Muslim communities. The recent developments that came to light after the anti-Prophet Muhammad Danish cartoons were published are a good reminder. Muslims welcome criticism of individuals, groups, or even whole societies in which Islam is the major religion, but they draw the line between the freedom of speech and the freedom of hate speech.
It is hard to support the European model of integration because it is based on segregation and exclusion and not inclusion. Further more, minorities find it difficult to accept that societies that advocate an individual's right to be the master of his or her own destiny also dictate the terms and conditions of their lives based on their ethnicity and the characteristics of their cultures.
What Can Be Done?
If European societies really wished for a two-way integration, they must stop demanding and start listening in order to lay the foundations for a fruitful dialogue.
It is imperative that the majority representatives sit down with minorities and discuss, with an open mind and an open heart, all of the problems they have created for the minorities and the problems minorities have created for themselves.
Through these dialogues, a consensus would appear that would help both sides to find ways to solve the problems and bring down the barriers against a mutual integration. I believe that there are two ways to look at these barriers. From the majority point of view and from the minority point of view.
In order to achieve a successful integration policy, authorities must show political will and moral courage to admit that there structural and institutional racism in their societies. The ethnic minorities and the progressive forces must join hands, and this cooperation must be above party politics, political ideology and human pity.
We must work to build a Europe, a Europe free of prejudices, a Europe bubbling with mutual respect and heart-felt openness. This can only happen if the rational European spirit mingles with the Eastern philosophical soul, paving the way for a true understanding.
|
