Muslim Youth and Women in the West: Source of Concern or Source of Hope?

Session IV – Debate on Security, Integration, and Religious Practice—A Western Islam?

Security and Western Foreign Policy and Politics

In the general discussion that ensued, some participants concurred on the importance of including in the debate the issue of Western foreign policy in the Middle East. Haroon Siddiqui, editorial page editor emeritus, Toronto Star, launched this part of the discussion by referring to Ms. Scholefield’s diagram (see page 29). In his view, we should not shy away from discussing international conflicts that also give “oxygen” to extremism. There has been more terrorism since the war on terror was launched—it is not possible to overlook the centrality of this issue. It is widely recognized that terrorism has, in fact, increased manyfold since the United States and its allies launched the war on terror, a fact acknowledged by the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate, a précis of the best judgments of all intelligence services.¹³

Along the same lines, Martin Schain, professor of politics, New York University, observed that more drugs, terrorism, and illegal crossings have been taking place since the war on terrorism and the fortification of the frontiers. Randy Beardsworth, vice president for human capital and corporate communication strategies of Analytic Services Inc. and former assistant secretary, policy, planning, and international affairs directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, agreed that it was impossible to pretend that Western foreign policy in the Middle East is not an issue, even if the conference had no capacity to directly change these foreign policies.

Edward Mortimer, senior vice president and chief program officer, Salzburg Global Seminar, spoke next, pointing out that although the conference was not authorized to make foreign policy decisions, it was certainly competent to discuss surrounding issues. Foreign policy, he stated, is a very important dividing factor in at least a few Western societies, as Ms. Scholefield’s presentation indicated. In Britain, he added, there is remarkably little debate about how foreign policy gets made, even though a lot of people feel strongly about foreign policy. He expressed his regret that there was not a separate working group on foreign policy and integration.

Abdul–Rehman Malik, contributing editor, Q–News (United Kingdom), agreed that the conference should address the prevailing feeling at ground level. He noted that while some say that young people are concerned with foreign issues as an escape, as a distraction from socioeconomic problems, that does not change the fact that people feel that they have been poorly served by the foreign policy of the United Kingdom and United Sates. The Muslim generation of 16 to 35 year olds feels deeply committed to their community; they are frustrated about the 600,000 dead in Iraq and about the continued situation in Palestine.

Mustapha Tlili remarked that foreign policy is always the “elephant in the room” in these debates, but he expressed the need to move on and be practical. He remarked that the Alliance of Civilizations’ High Level Group came to the conclusion that while foreign policy is important, a compromise is necessary. He affirmed the need to be practical—to focus on what can be done on the social policy level.

Aziz Huq, director of the Liberty and National Security Project, Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, noted that American Muslims found themselves in a small antiwar minority, while in the United Kingdom, there was a relatively broad movement against the war in Iraq. The challenge in the United States lies in developing means by which Muslim minorities can participate in foreign policy debates, even though they are a relatively small constituency. Other national and ethnic minorities in the United States have been effective in finding a voice in foreign policy decisions, he added.

Integration as Part of the Security Agenda

The discussion again acknowledged that integration has become part of the security policy for many governments worldwide. Mr. Malik remarked that there is a feeling that the Muslim community only became important in terms of social policy once this community became a threat to others, just as race relations became a subject of interest after the 1981 riots in Brixton. Mr. Malik added that religious practice is not a discretionary issue, but a security issue that is driving the whole agenda. The vast majority of initiatives aimed at Muslim communities today fall within security and counterterrorism measures; even the U.K. project called the “Radical Middle Way” belongs to this category.

Sophie Body–Gendrot, director, Center for Urban Studies, the Sorbonne (France), noted that it was unfair to mention only the riots in Brixton and not mention what had happened after 2001, when British nationalist parties started inciting trouble.

Roger Hardy, Middle East and Islamic affairs analyst of the BBC World Service (United Kingdom), cautioned against associating security and integration, even though he recognized that there is a link between them. Merging them leads to the politics of fear, he warned. Furthermore, like the cold war, the war on terror threatens to become a distorting lens through which we view the world.

Difficulties Faced by Religious Leaders Cooperating with Governments

Abdul Wahid Pedersen, foreign relations manager, Muslim Council of Denmark, raised the issue that religious leaders might face difficulties with their communities if they choose to cooperate with government security services. He noted that the imams in Denmark, who for several years met with the security services, and with good results, were put in a vulnerable position. They have been accused by their own people of being traitors. It is a very delicate balance to strike between cooperation and loyalty to one’s community of believers. Mr. Beardsworth agreed and noted that transparency of the interaction between religious leaders and the government could help alleviate fears.

Definition of “Common Values”

The subsequent discussion focused on how to define common values. Mr. Siddiqui pointed out that nobody asks for definitions of Western common values. What are “British values”? For instance, “national belonging” should be defined by living within the geographical boundaries of the country and obeying the laws of the land; to demand adherence to any set of beliefs places unfair demands on minorities. The best definitions of a country’s values are its constitution and bill of rights, he concluded.

Mr. Huq commented that the issue of Muslim minorities and mainstream Western values had been raised in the discussions of the religious practice group, but not at length. In his view, however, there were both positive and negative aspects to this sort of integration. On the downside, the appeal to “liberal values” can covertly exclude Muslim groups from shared consensus without being overtly racist. During the Danish cartoon crisis, for instance, there was much talk of differences in the way “freedom of speech” is valued across cultures. On the upside, the appeal to shared values can provide a stronger bond than simply following the rule of law. The law itself is an inadequate reference for a nation’s value system since it does not include the processes of debate. Instead, shared values are influenced by the media, the citizens, and the government in the creation of new policy. One way of thinking of shared values is to debate those same values within a given community

Abdelmajid Charfi, professor emeritus of Arab civilization and Islamic thought, University of Tunis, reminded the group to distinguish between values and religious practices. Human rights are considered universal values but have been jeopardized since September 11 by Western governments’ actions outside of their borders, Mr. Charfi claimed.

Shireen Hunter, visiting scholar, Center for Muslim–Christian Understanding at Georgetown University (United States), noted that indeed there is no consensus in the West on issues such as abortion, euthanasia, or homosexual marriage. These topics and the value judgments they imply should be subject to ongoing debate in Muslim communities and society at large.

Lastly, Mr. Huq remarked that in regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the difficulty resides in specifying how universal values should be applied in the local sphere.

Muslims and Political Participation

Discussion turned to the poor representation of Muslims in politics. Mr. Schain mentioned that Muslim communities in Europe and the United States are among the most undeveloped in terms of political capacities—political mobilization and engagement in politics—and stressed the need to focus on the development of these capacities. Mr. Hardy noted that there are only 32 Muslim parliamentarians in the European Union and that the figures are also low in the national parliaments.

Ms. Body–Gendrot agreed with Mr. Schain and noted that political parties should indeed make efforts to include minorities. However, she acknowledged the danger that extreme right–wing parties can pose to minority candidates. The Western Indies communities in France, for example, had played it very “softly,” choosing in various elections not to emphasize cultural difference.

Defining Integration

Once again there were concerns raised over defining integration. Mr. Schain suggested that instead of asking what integration is, the question should be, how does one know when integration is successful? In his view, the conference should be looking to conceptualizing measures and public policy recommendations that focus on the recognition of integration.

Ms. Hunter disagreed with Mr. Schain’s comments that fixed reference points must be established for measuring integration change, particularly in times of crisis. The integration panel had recommended some kind of definition based on statistical data, she recalled. In the case of Canadians, they take adherence to their constitution as the only benchmark. Vincent Tiberj, senior research fellow, Center for Political Research at Paris Institut des Sciences Politiques, seconded the call for an empirical definition of integration. Statistical instruments, he agreed, are needed to identify the problem areas and evaluate the integration of subgroups, such as women. They are also important to judge public policy and identify discrimination.

Ambassador Hans Gnodtke, commissioner for dialogue with the Islamic world and dialogue among civilizations, Federal Foreign Office (Germany), expressed his concern that the reports take an unnecessarily defensive approach. In Ambassador Gnodtke’s view, the project of integrating Muslim minorities in the West has been, for the most part, already accomplished. The focus at this point should be to establish where integration has failed. He restated the notion that one country’s model could not easily be applied to the rest of the world.

Mr. Hardy said that integration will have succeeded when Islam and Muslims have become “normalized,” in other words, when Muslims will no longer seem to be exotic strangers but fellow citizens. Mina Al–Oraibi, current affairs journalist, Asharq Al–Awsat (United Kingdom), agreed with Mr. Hardy’s point, but noted that Muslims need to address their problems and at the same time do not want to be treated differently. Mr. Tiberj suggested that this problem could be mitigated by creating and joining associations that are concerned with general community problems.

Rudolph Chimelli, journalist, Süddeutsche Zeitung (Germany), pointed out that disenfranchised communities are not necessarily the product of failed integration. In some slums in Algeria, for instance, there is no drinking water, 75 percent of young men are unemployed, and there are poor education, housing, and social services. Yet, these men are not children of immigrants; they are at home. In other words, integration is not exclusively a national or religious problem; it is a problem of social conditions—it is everywhere. In addition, he noted that it should not be assumed that integration, at least in terms of accepting Western norms, is an automatically desirable outcome. Among both immigrants and native Westerners, there are those who resist supposedly mainstream values.

Karen Hopkins, president of the Brooklyn Academy of Music, and member, Board of Regents of the Department of Education in New York City (United States), urged participants to look for solutions in the realms of education, language, employment, and culture, while promoting constant dialogue through various forums. She resumed the theme of role models and the need for true leadership either based on authority or on a sense of belonging.

Mr. Malik referred to a piece written by Professor John Grey, which appeared in the Spectator (February 17, 2007), about promoting the “habit of tolerance” as a baseline for living in a diverse society.¹⁴ Mr. Malik also advocated identifying Muslim grassroots organizations, which are largely led by women and youth, and evaluating how their work is impacting the community. Across the Western world, leadership at the national level has failed in representing the diversity that is present at the ground level.

Echoing Mr. Malik’s remarks, Michael Rolince, senior associate, Booz Allen Hamilton, and former special agent in charge of the Washington Field Office’s Counterterrorism Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), agreed that efforts should be focused at the grassroots level. However, his own experience in the United States was that the FBI and the American public resisted this approach. The process of integration, he admitted, is like a marathon rather than a sprint.

Mr. Pedersen then returned to the importance of public debate in fostering a feeling of belonging. He cited the strong example provided by the Islamic–Christian Study Centre in Denmark, founded jointly by Muslims and Christians, which focuses on dialogue and the study of religion. It has been running for 11 years with great success and impact.¹⁵

Muslim Women

Farah Pandith, senior adviser on Muslim engagement, U.S. Department of State, inquired whether there was more to be said on the role of women. Adeela Shabazz, trustee, Forum Against Islamophobia and Racism (FAIR–United Kingdom), expressed her concerns with the report on religious practice, which only made reference to the training of imams, excluding women. While women do not want to be imams, she stated, they do want the same kind of skills and have an important role to play in educating their families and communities. Ms. Shabazz gave the example of a Muslim institute in Leicester, England, that trains imams while acknowledging the way of life in the United Kingdom. Muslim women have been asked to do a presentation to each class and are thereby participating in the training of imams. For purposes of the report, she suggested that a broader term than “imam” is used in order to include women.

Mr. Hardy recognized that people are used to talking about men when talking about Muslim leadership. For the first generation of Muslim immigrants in Europe, there was no choice but to have male leadership. Now that these populations have reached the third and fourth generations, more effort should be made to involve women in the governance of their own communities and wider society.

Ms. Hopkins asked whether Muslim women in the West have the same concerns as other women (e.g., equal compensation for the same jobs) or their own particular set of concerns. Ms. Al–Oraibi noted the conference had not established why Muslim women and youth should be singled out from the community at large.

State Intervention in Religion

Discussion returned to the question of state intervention in religion. Mr. Schain insisted that the role of the state is impossible to ignore. The state can only be religiously neutral by granting the same freedoms and privileges to all religious groups. The New York City parking authority, for instance, honors a variety of religious holidays as well as the building of mosques and halal butcher shops. Thus, he noted, the state plays a role, even if it is just by standing aside to facilitate religious practice. Mr. Hardy agreed that the state cannot be kept out of religion. In the United Kingdom, he noted, the state is in fact intervening more in these matters. For example, controversy was sparked in October 2006 by the British Labour MP and former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw in describing the full–face veil as “a visible statement of separation and difference.”¹⁶ Since Mr. Straw was the leader of the House of Commons and a former senior minister, and his remarks were endorsed by then–Prime Minister Tony Blair, many Muslims perceived the incident as state interference in their private affairs.

Media

Ms. Al–Oraibi urged people to write to journalists and editors each time the media provide distorted or incorrect information about Muslims or Islam. For the last five years, she added, the discourse on Islam and on the “clash of civilizations” has cast current events in biased terms. People need to rethink the vocabulary of the media to improve religious and cultural sensitivity. Mr. Rolince agreed that while the majority of the media are on the whole responsible, it is important for those with access to information to contact the media when there are mistakes.

Ms. Hunter noted that the main problem lies with editorial policies. Because the print market has shrunk, the media do not publish the kind of nuanced pieces that could have a positive impact on the Muslim–Western relationship. Furthermore, when it comes to electronic media and television, she stated, there is less likelihood of letters to the editor being published or noticed.

Mustapha Tlili closed the session to allow the group to focus on policy recommendations.

Back to the top.