Muslims in Europe A Shared Citizenship Transcending the Imposition of Cultural Homogeneity
Politics of the Veil
The challenge of accommodating Islam has thus manifested itself in the women’s head and face covering, also being a reflection of existing stereotypes and misperceptions regarding Islam and Muslims. At the same time in the secular discourse, freedom is a core concept whether through freedom of speech, thought, or religion. Yet we see that in fact issues like banning of the headscarf and veil illustrate the contradictions and paradoxes of secularism, where the same states are in essence dictating how certain people should dress, particularly in which aspect of religious piety they allow to appear in public. This then amounts to an enforced emancipation of Muslim females.
This myopic paradigm of the uncovered and therefore liberated or veiled and oppressed Muslim woman also reflects the consistent stance of viewing Muslim women through a liberal framework i.e. as victims without any agency. It reflects a patronizing attitude where the West feels obliged or compelled to save Muslim women from their oppressive religion. Some also observe how near some feminists freedom is defined in the context of challenging social conventions so that even if one “freely” chooses to accept them it is not an act of freedom. Thus veiling as an act in accord with (and therefore not in contest with) Islamic norms (even if voluntary) is not an act of freedom in regards to social conventions (though wearing torn jeans or dying ones hair blue would be).
Furthermore its being seen as a “threat” to European values can be likened to the ‘Securitization’ of the headscarf/veil whereby it is seen as a political symbol, an expression of Islamic fundamentalism/ extremism, and not as a religious symbol. This reflects how important and significant the framing of an issue is in determining how it is addressed. A view of the controversy reveals the divergence and diversity of European Pluralism and the dynamics behind the difference in how the issue is dealt with through legal attitudes and regulations particularly in schools, universities and courts. One observes that, as European recognition of Muslim religious practices has occurred within legal and social frameworks designed to accommodate European Christianity it has produced conflicting results. Though more significantly, it is impacted by the differences in the relationship between state and religion/church within European countries.
One also sees how ideas about citizenship and nationhood determine a state’s response. Thus it is France which has been at the forefront of a more or less continuous saga having one of the most restrictive legislation on veiling in Europe. Here Laicism seeks to create a neutral public space in which religious belief, practices, and institutions have been pushed into the private sphere. In France laws pertaining to it are seen as a means of hastening the pace of assimilation. Yet the policy of demanding complete integration or assimilation implies an abandonment of ones culture.
More so, an intolerance of cultural difference anywhere leads to reaction, sometimes to the embrace of Islam partly as a form of rebellion or as self defense. Here Islam is not recognized as an official religion and the wearing of Islamic clothing in public spaces is seen as a threat to the French understanding of citizenship and to French republicanism. Furthermore The European Court of Human Rights puts the neutrality of the state higher than the individual’s right to freedom of religion.
An overall view of the related legislation and discourse of European countries will reveal how this saga has evolved and in a way been “imported” by other nations from France. So that a religious practice of Muslim women, in essence a non-issue has resulted in a piece of cloth, all by itself, threatening secularism and European values in France and elsewhere. Here the media’s role in initiating debates on the headscarf can be seen in the background of the electoral win of the FIS (Islamic Salvation Front) in Algeria in 1994-1995. Thus the issue was framed in the context of Islamic fundamentalism/ extremism and veiling being linked together.
As the conflicts and cases over headscarves became more prominent, its culmination was staunchly secular France passing a law banning the wearing of headscarves followed up recently by the veil ban. Advocates of the veil ban argue the legislation is necessary if the country’s Muslims are to integrate. Taking cue from France, Belgium has followed suit. As for other states, whether it is the Neutral Secular states or countries with a State Church, along with varying legislation, we find that overall they have not generally restricted the wearing of headscarves by law, neither in public institutions nor in private enterprises. At the same time legislation by France, followed by Belgium seems to have set in a domino effect.
Being a means to confine women to their homes, a form of “house arrest” shows the counter-productive nature of these laws, and defies the logic of facilitating their participation in public life. It reflects discrimination against women by denying women equal access to public space especially in education, employment and attaining economic independence. For example in Germany the bans have caused some women to give up their careers or to leave Germany, where they have lived all their lives. In France Muslim groups report a worrying increase in discrimination and verbal and physical violence against women in veils, as well as a sense of exclusion from the social sphere.
It centers on the mantra of the oppressive notions of Islamic dress as being entirely against the western ideals of liberty and freedom, bringing into contest, concepts such as gender equality, basic human rights, citizenship, liberal democracy, religious diversity, freedom of religion and freedom ‘from’ religion. The argument seems to be that freedom from religion supersedes freedom of religion so that the wearing of headscarves for example by teachers must be prohibited to guarantee pupils the freedom of not being confronted by a teacher manifesting a particular religion.
It is not that such legislation violates the rights of those who choose to wear the veil making them feel alienated and excluded, but more so it does nothing to support or empower the few who are compelled to do so. It is also a means of stigmatizing the Muslim population and its culture. The different forms of female Islamic clothing especially the niqab are seen to symbolize a willful refusal to integrate, as well as Islam’s posing a threat to women’s rights. Thus it is used to illustrate cultural and religious difference, the threat of religious fundamentalism and the pitfalls and failures of multiculturalism so keenly espoused and exploited by the far-right.
