Muslims and European Integration — Farish A Noor

If some European Muslims have turned their backs on their societies and sought refuge in the false asylum of the mosque, conservative imams and mullahs or communitarian politics, perhaps it is time to ask serious questions about the failure of nation building in Europe in the first place. It was not Islam that made European Muslims defensive or anti-social

For weeks to come I will be on yet another lecture tour across the capitals of Europe, talking about subjects that are close to my heart. For the past two years I have been asked to speak about Muslims in Europe or something similar: European Islam, Muslim integration in the West, the future of Islam in the Occident, etc.

On all these occasions the hosts have been keen, sincere and well-meaning. Many of these conferences, seminars, lectures and workshops have been organised by liberal minded European intellectuals, academics and activists who truly wish to see the emergence of a diverse, multicultural Europe comfortable with its multiculturalism. Yet, despite the best intentions, the debate over the question of Muslims in Europe has been marred by geopolitical considerations that are impossible to ignore: The racial profiling of Muslims following September 11, 2001, the bombings in Madrid and London, the riots in the urban ghettos of Paris, as well as the demonstrations against the recent cartoons that caricatured Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

In time, popular European opinion has been presented with the idea of the Muslim as the outsider and a potential threat. This is happening at a time when the economies of Western Europe are facing the very real threat of structural collapse. After decades of nursing a welfare state system they could ill afford, the governments of Western Europe are now forced to make cuts to retain economic competitiveness while also dealing with the entry of new, poorer states from the former Soviet Union into the European Union. Fears of migration, economic collapse and breakdown of law and order have contributed to the gloomy mood in the West. It is against this sombre backdrop that the debate on Muslim integration is taking place.

The debate over whether the European Muslims really want to be European citizens is, I would argue, a rather facile and clumsy one. One suspects a thinly veiled hypocrisy at work here. It is as if the “problem” of Muslims in Europe is the core issue that will determine the future of Europe. As a theme and idea it is blank and general enough to be used as a vehicle for a host of unrelated concerns and objectives, such as the demonisation of immigrants in general.

It also rests on a fatal misassumption — that there is something called a “European mainstream” that Muslims are expected to integrate with. One is compelled to ask: How many ordinary (non-Muslim) Europeans have fully integrated with Europe? What is this thing called “Europe” that Europeans are expected to be part of? Is there such a thing as a neatly demarcated, well-defined and finalised concept of Europe that ordinary Europeans already belong to, and which Muslims cannot come to terms with? In short, has Europe already been defined and its parameters set?

An honest answer can only be a negative one. Civilisations — if they are to be living, dynamic and evolving entities — have to remain open, evolving and historically diachronic. To suggest that there is a fixed entity known as Europe would be as silly and illogical as claiming that the Muslim world or Asia is static and homogeneous. All civilisations are constantly in the process of historical evolution and one of the factors that determine the richness and complexity of these civilisations is the diversity within them. Islamic civilisation is rich precisely because of its beneficial contact with Europe and Asia, and vice versa.

To expect European Muslims to fully integrate with the European “mainstream” is therefore a logical folly for the simple reason that the cultural, political, economic and historical frontiers of Europe are ever-changing and ever-expanding. European Muslims have contributed to this richness as have European Hindus, Buddhists and other faith communities. But the individual contribution of these people can only be private, subjective and particular. We all relate to our societies on the basis of personal interaction and subjective engagement. Our dealings with society begin with our relations with our friends and neighbours — the neighbourhood butcher, shopkeeper, postman, colleagues at work, etc.

So if Europe’s political leaders wish to ensure that European Muslims integrate well and fully with the rest of European society, they ought to ensure that European Muslims are given the same equal opportunities as other European citizens and minority groups. If some European Muslims have turned their backs on their societies and sought refuge in the false asylum of the mosque, conservative imams and mullahs or communitarian politics, perhaps it is time to ask serious questions about the failure of nation building in Europe in the first place.

It was not Islam that made European Muslims defensive or anti-social; it was neo-Nazi football hooligans with their slogans of “Pakis out”, “Arabs go home” and the painful realities of daily life in the broken down suburban ghettos of Europe. This is a problem that all Europeans — Muslims and non-Muslims — have to address together.

Uri Avnery is an Israeli peace activist who has advocated the setting up of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. He served three terms in the Israeli parliament (Knesset), and is the founder of Gush Shalom (Peace Bloc)

Originally published in the Daily Times at http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006%5C03%5C28%5Cstory_28-3-2006_pg3_4