Islamophobia

Chris Allen

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781317112082
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Teologia e religione
• Subtopic: Religione

Despite numerous sources suggesting that Islamophobia is becoming both increasingly prevalent and societally acceptable in the contemporary world, there remains a lack of textual sources that consider either the phenomenon itself, or its manifestations and consequences. There is no authoritative text that attempts to understand or contextualise what might be seen to be one of the most dangerous prejudices in the contemporary climate. Chris Allen begins by looking at ways of defining and understanding Islamophobia. He traces its historical evolution to the present day, considering the impact of recent events and their aftermath especially in the wake of the events of September 11, before trying to understand and comprehend a wider conception of the phenomenon. A series of investigations thematically consider the role of the media, the contemporary positioning of Muslims throughout the world, and whether Islamophobia can be seen to be a continuum of historical anti-Muslimism or anti-Islamism, or whether Islamophobia is an entirely modern concept. The issue of Islamophobia is considered from the perspective of the local, regional, and global. The incidence of Islamophobia, and the magnitude of the phenomenon and its consequences, is one that warrants a greater investigation in the world today. This book is both academically and socially relevant and necessary.

PART 1
Introduction

Chapter 1
The First Decade of Islamophobia

The ‘first decade of Islamophobia’¹ began with the landmark publication of the highly influential report entitled, Islamophobia: a challenge for us all: report of the Runnymede Trust Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia (‘the Runnymede Report’). Of course, this is not when the phenomenon of Islamophobia began: it was merely the year in which the first major report was published. Since then, Islamophobia has gained a far greater prevalence across both the public and political spaces. In the most vocal instances, claim and counter claim to Islamophobia typically emerges from bi-polar extremes, from those who decry and denounce any criticism whatsoever of Muslims or Islam as being ‘Islamophobic’ to those who actively and openly espouse a vitriolic hatred: both sides basing their views on a multitude of different causes and justifications. Between these poles a much broader and diverse range of far less obvious and explicit issues and incidents exist. On the one hand are the loosely veiled attacks on Muslims and Islam by those such as the personality-cum-politician Robert Kilroy-Silk² and ‘Will Cummins’³ through to the more weighted comments of those such as Melanie Phillips in the United Kingdom (‘UK’). In Europe the same applies, from Geert Wilders’ internet-based Fitna film through various dialogues and diatribes by those such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Oriana Fallaci⁴ elsewhere. In the political spaces, high ranking voices describe Muslims as ‘whining maniacs’⁵ while others in France, the Netherlands and Switzerland initiate debates about the extent to which the niqab – face veil – and other visible aspects of Islam are barriers to integration and whether minarets should be allowed to punctuate European skylines. On the more extreme fringes of the political mainstream, there exist those who claim that Muslims intend to establish an Islamic republic in London by 2025 – citing the ‘super-mosque’ being built in East London as evidence of this – duly followed by the eventual overthrow of Christian Europe.⁶ Elsewhere, those such as Silvio Berlusconi openly differentiate between the superiority of ‘Western civilisations’ over and above ‘Islamic civilisations’.

At the same time, these have been countered by a somewhat reciprocal process that has initiated a range of different legislative measures and various social policies being implemented. In addition to a number of Europe-wide reports being commissioned that consider the phenomenon, in the UK the growth of a burgeoning cultural awareness – read ‘Islam Awareness’ – industry that seeks to challenge and potentially halt the perceived growing acceptance of negative attitudes and ideas towards Muslims is beginning to flourish. With the latter venture being largely undertaken by Muslim organisations and institutions, some critics cite this as merely being a front for dawah more so than to improve or promote better understanding and awareness. But so too have other initiatives been established including an awards ceremony that recognises the ‘Islamophobe of the Year’⁷ and the setting up of an organisation dedicated to combating Islamophobia, the UK’s Forum against Islamophobia and Racism (FAIR).⁸ Whichever way one reflects upon the outcomes and events of what was the first decade of Islamophobia, it cannot be argued that the language, discourse, notion and concept of Islamophobia failed to acquire a contemporary British, European and global relevance. What with this permeating across such a wide range of public and political spaces, the need to explore and further consider both the meanings and manifestations of Islamophobia is therefore somewhat overdue.

This book seeks to be both timely and relevant: to contribute to the better understanding of this ongoing and rapidly developing phenomenon as well as raise numerous other questions that will require further consideration and investigation. This latter point is both essential and necessary. What with the increasing recurrence of events and the increasingly globalised nature of our everyday world, there would appear to be a concurrent process being played out, where despite Islamophobia either discursively or conceptually being increasingly referred to or spoken about, there remains a distinct lack of clarity about what Islamophobia is – and is not – as well as what can be done about it. The asking of these questions has so far brought about some consternation and confusion that in turn has resulted in contestation: contestation that incorporates issues of definition, usage, meaning and ownership. In acknowledging this, there is now a desperate need for further investigation and enquiry. One way of beginning this process might be to consider the evolution and development of Islamophobia both as a name – or neologism as some sources prefer – and as a concept. This introduction therefore sets out a historiography of contemporary Islamophobia, mapping its birth, evolution and development, before considering how the emergent theories and discourses have been subsequently shaped and determined. From here, some consideration can be made about what is known of Islamophobia. Where and how then did ‘Islamophobia’ originate?

Origins of the Word: ‘accès de délire islamophobe’

It is widely believed that, Islamophobia both as a concept and neologism has its origins in Britain. This may not however be entirely true. Whilst the Oxford English Dictionary suggests that the term was first used in print in a 1991 American periodical, Insight, other sources and literature would suggest that it was first used in France by Etienne Dinet and Slima Ben Ibrahim, when in 1925 they wrote, ‘accès de délire islamophobe’.⁹ In writing about the Prophet Muhammad, it would appear that Dinet and Ibrahim were not employing the term in such ways that it reflects the contemporary concept or usage. Elsewhere, other competing claims also exist. Those such as Caroline Fourest and Fiammetta Venner claim that the term Islamophobia was used during the Iranian Revolution by the ‘Mullahs’ to describe Iranian women who refused to wear the hijab and less so, Muslim feminists and liberals: ‘islamophobie’ fut inventé – on ne le dit jamais – par des mollahs iraniens juste après la révolution islamique’.¹⁰ In addition to Fourest and Venner, Chahdortt Djavann¹¹ and Carla Amina Baghajati¹² offer similar affirmations, but as with the 1925 usage, here the concept of Islamophobia and the context within which it is being employed is different to how it is now. And most importantly, the way in which it is being investigated here. So whilst Fourest and Venner argue that this particular type of usage – as a means of describing Muslims frightened of Islam – was the premise from which it was re-contextualised by those such as al-Muhajiroun and the Islamic Human Rights Commission (‘IHRC’) to name the fear of non-Muslims towards Islam and Muslims, there is – aside from this single reference – little other evidence to suggest any inter-linkage between the two. This book then is concerned with Islamophobia as a phenomenon that is directed at Muslims by non-Muslims even if at this stage an exact meaning remains unclear.

Somewhat unsurprisingly, the coinage and origins of Islamophobia are also openly disagreed upon where a number of competing stories are in current circulation. Recorded in 1997 by the Hyde Park Christian Fellowship, the first theory suggests that Islamophobia as a term was first coined by a Muslim researcher at the Policy Studies Institute (‘PSI’) in the late 1980s.¹³ At the same time though, rather more authoritative sources at the Runnymede Trust were claiming something quite different. Given that the term had already been used by the Runnymede Trust and had achieved some socio-political discursive resonance, the Hyde Park Christian Fellowship’s theory appears to have little credence. However, it is true that Tariq Modood worked for the PSI in the late 1980s. This is interesting because over half a decade later, a French source – via the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (‘EUMC’) – made a similar claim to that of the Hyde Park Christian Fellowship, specifically citing Modood rather than a mere ‘Muslim researcher’.¹⁴ Whilst Modood has used the term and was very close to being the first to use it in print, no evidence can be found to suggest whether he ever claimed coinage of the term himself. Attributing him with authorship therefore remains questionable.

Another theory about authorship is documented in the oral hearings of the House of Lords Select Committee on Religious Offences from October 2003. Here it states that Fuad Nahdi, one time editor of Q News, claims in his Curriculum Vitae that it was he who coined the term Islamophobia.¹⁵ It would appear that Nahdi allegedly passed the term onto the late Dr Zaki Badawi who, as a co-opted member of the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia (‘the Commission’), subsequently suggested it to them thus culminating in the report of the same name. Somewhat contradictorily however, Badawi also claimed ownership in the same proceedings: ‘I am guilty because I am the one who coined the phrase’.¹⁶ From interviews and information gained about the Commission, it would seem that not all were aware of either Nahdi’s or Badawi’s claims. From interviews with Robin Richardson who drafted the text for the Commission’s report, he suggests that the term was much less individually conceived: ‘it was the term preferred by the targets and victims of the phenomena themselves’.¹⁷ In this way, Richardson implies that the term was both used by and derivative of a collective Muslim experience rather than any one individual, a point that he has reiterated numerous times since.

Emerging Identities: ‘their offspring say that they have a Muslim or Islamic identity’

Possibly the most credible theory comes from Khaleda Khan and her observations of the grassroots situation of Muslims in the London Borough of Brent in the early 1980s.¹⁸ Whilst claiming that it was here that a distinct anti-Muslim prejudice was first identified, she also notes a simultaneous trend emerging where a previously unprecedented and distinct ‘British Muslim’ identity was also beginning to emerge. Such events do not however occur in a vacuum and so the socio-political context provides some explanation as to why this might have been so. As Yasmin Ali observes:

At the beginning of the 1980s ‘communities originating in some of the countries of the old empire’ would have been expressed unselfconsciously as ‘black communities’… it was a usage predicated on the politics of anti-racism. As such ‘black’ became ‘hegemonic’ over other ethnic/racial identities in the late seventies and eighties.

Adding:

The moment was not to last. From within marginalised communities and from without there was, in the 1980s, a steady assault upon this fragile hegemony.

Since their arrival as one constituency of the mass migration to Britain from the West Indies, India, Pakistan and other Commonwealth countries following the Second World War, Muslim communities were, up until the 1980s at least, largely both politically and socially invisible not least because the first generation primarily defined themselves in terms of their country of origin albeit with a religious component. Initially therefore, Muslim communities both defined and described themselves largely in terms of their heritage, namely: Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Indian and so on, a process that was reciprocated by wider society. Consequently, early Muslim communities became a part of the hegemonic collective that was known as the ‘Asian’ community.

As Muslim communities grew in numbers and social and familial networks began to emerge, so a first generation of British-born Muslims duly emerged that grew up to identify themselves in quite different ways to their parents. For many, especially in the second and subsequent generations, the country of ancestral heritage was attributed much less emotional or cultural meaning. For many today, ancestral heritage constitutes little more than one facet of increasingly hybridised identity. But most relevant for the purposes of understanding t...