From the War on Terror to the far-right conspiracies, Islamophobia manifests in various forms. In today’s world, systemic Islamophobia continues to cast a long and dark shadow over the lives of Muslims across continents. Rooted in historical and contemporary contexts, this pervasive form of discrimination and prejudice has significant implications for individuals, communities, and societies at large.

Systemic Islamophobia operates within power structures, institutions, and cultural biases, perpetuating inequality, marginalization, and the violation of human rights. Implicitly and explicitly, Islamophobia is reinforced by various layers of society, including governments around the world.

While its manifestations may differ from one region to another, systemic Islamophobia shares commonalities across countries and societies. It operates as a product of historical legacies, geopolitical dynamics, cultural narratives, and power imbalances. It thrives in contexts where Muslims are viewed as the “Other,” perpetuating stereotypes, prejudices, and negative portrayals that undermine their rights, dignity, and societal inclusion.

The impact of systemic Islamophobia is far-reaching. Muslim individuals and communities face challenges in various domains of life, as the titles included in this Bundle will show. They experience heightened surveillance, racial profiling, and discriminatory legislation, hindering the realization of fundamental human rights and the pursuit of justice and equality. Furthermore, the interconnetedness of discrimination makes the issue even more pressing for all.

Recognizing and understanding systemic Islamophobia is essential for dismantling its deeply entrenched structures. It requires comprehensive analysis, dialogue, and collective action which this collection hopes to envoke.

The Rise of Global Islamophobia in the War on Terror: Coloniality, Race, and Islam delves into the complex and far-reaching consequences of the ‘War on Terror’ on global perceptions of Muslims. The book examines the intersection between Islamophobia, and various social, economic, and political factors that have shaped its prevalence.

The authors convincingly argue that the ‘War on Terror’ has not only intensified anti-Muslim racism but has also provided a framework that perpetuates a global Islamophobic narrative. By framing Muslims a perpetual enemy, this conflict has fostered a climate of fear and suspicion, fueling the growth of nativist and populist movements worldwide.

One of the book’s strengths lies in its comprehensive analysis of the different forms and manifestations of Islamophobia. Through an examination of localized histories, conflicts, and contemporary geopolitical realities, the authors map out the intricate ways in which Islamophobia has taken shape across the global North and South. This approach adds depth to the understanding of the diverse factors contributing to the rise of anti-Muslim sentiment.

The book offers a nuanced and comprehensive analysis of the connections between interpersonal and institutional racism. While highlighting the deeply rooted nature of Islamophobia, the book also sheds light on the activism and resistance that have emerged to confront this issue. By featuring narratives of individuals and groups challenging Islamophobia, the authors provide hope and inspiration for those seeking to combat this pervasive form of discrimination.

Naved Bakali and Farid Hafez, The rise of global Islamophobia in the War on Terror: Coloniality, race, and Islam (Manchester University Press 2022) ISBN: 978-1-5261-6175-8, 264 pages

Islamophobia in France: The Construction of the “Muslim Problem” presents a groundbreaking examination of the multifaceted nature of Islamophobia in the country. Authored by Abdellali Hajjat and Marwan Mohammed, the book challenges the prevailing notion that Islamophobia arises solely from individual bias but rather that Islamophobia in France is deeply entrenched within existing structures of power and control.

The book sheds light on pivotal moments in French history that have contributed to the marginalization of Muslim communities. It highlights the 2004 ban on veils in schools, followed by the 2010 legislation that prohibited face-covering clothing in public spaces, primarily targeting women who wear burqas. President Emmanuel Macron’s public statements regarding the hijab’s compatibility with French ideals further illustrate the pervasive Islamophobia within the country. These cultural biases not only perpetuate discriminatory practices but also position the Muslim population as scapegoats for broader issues surrounding immigration in France.

Hajjat and Mohammed go beyond surface-level analysis to uncover the structural dimensions of Islamophobia in France. They argue that French elites strategically employ Islamophobia as a state technology to exert control and contest the presence of specific groups of postcolonial immigrants and their descendants. By exploring the data on Islamophobia and examining its functioning in contemporary French society, the authors paint a comprehensive portrait of the mechanisms through which Islamophobia operates.

Islamophobia in France is an English translation of Abdellali Hajjat and Marwan Mohammed’s Islamophobie: Comment les e´lites franc¸aises fabriquent le “proble`me musulman.” and an essential contribution to the field, providing a nuanced and insightful examination of the systemic nature of Islamophobia and its consequences on Muslim communities in France.

Abdellali Hajjat and Marwan Mohammed, Islamophobia in France: The Construction of the “Muslim Problem” (University of Georgia Press, 2023) ISBN-10 0820363251, 306 pages

In The New Crusades: Islamophobia and the Global War on Muslims Khaled A. Beydoun presents an essential examination of Islamophobia from a legal and ground-up perspective. Drawing on his intellectual prowess and moral imperative, Beydoun presents a compelling analysis of the network of anti-Muslim campaigns unfolding worldwide and offers a comprehensive analysis of how Islamophobia is utilized by both democratic and authoritarian regimes to persecute Muslim populations.

The New Crusades does not shy away from challenging the established narratives. It delves into the role of the War on Terror in fueling and intensifying anti-Muslim campaigns around the world. Beydoun skillfully illustrates how Islamophobia operates as a unifying thread, perpetuating state and social bigotry and igniting hate-mongering from both liberal and right-wing factions. Through trenchant analysis and firsthand accounts from Muslims on the ground, the author brings to light the various manifestations of Islamophobia in Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and beyond.

The book’s global perspective sets it apart, as Beydoun incorporates on-site experiences, interviews, and a diverse range of contexts. This approach enhances the authority of the narrative and makes it accessible and engaging for scholars, students, and the general public.

The New Crusades unravels the distinct systems of demonization and oppression that have emerged across the post-9/11 geopolitical landscape. Whether it is the imposition of hijab bans in France, state-sponsored hate speech and violence in India, or the existence of concentration camps in China, Beydoun examines how Islamophobia operates as a global phenomenon, perpetuating discrimination on multiple fronts.

The book powerfully reveals the unsettling reality that Islamophobia remains one of the few acceptable forms of hate in the world today. By exposing this truth, Beydoun calls attention to the urgent need for collective action against Islamophobia and its far-reaching consequences. By weaving together social science, law, and captivating narratives, the author highlights the pervasive impact of Islamophobia on Muslims across the globe.

Khaled A. Beydoun, The New Crusades: Islamophobia and the Global War on Muslims (University of California Press, 2023) ISBN: 9780520356306, 390 pages

In Fear of a Muslim Planet: Global Islamophobia in the New World Order Arsalan Iftikhar, a renowned American Muslim human rights lawyer, offers a comprehensive exploration of global Islamophobia. The book refers to the chilling reminder of the Christchurch massacre, where a white supremacist perpetrated a horrific act of violence against Muslim worshippers in New Zealand. Iftikhar draws attention to the manifesto left by the attacker, titled “The Great Replacement,” which espoused the belief that Muslims posed a threat and sought to replace white people. This incident serves as a starting point for exploring the dangerous legacy of this theory and its influence on extremist acts.

Iftikhar goes on to emphasize that the victims of the “Great Replacement” theory extend beyond Muslims alone. The tragic attack on the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, which targeted Jewish congregants, exemplifies the broader impact of this ideology including the infamous actions of Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik.. The perpetrator’s anti-Semitic and Islamophobic motivations, fueled by anti-immigration sentiments, underline the interconnected nature of discrimination.

Throughout the book, Iftikhar critiques the presidency of Donald Trump, which he argues has contributed to the exacerbation of Islamophobia in America. He dissects Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric and policies, including his claim that “Islam hates us” and his call for a complete ban on Muslims entering the US. Iftikhar contends that Trump’s leadership has fueled the growth of Islamophobia.

The book goes beyond the United States and the Western world to shed light on global Islamophobia. Iftikhar highlights the genocidal levels of Islamophobia in countries like China and Myanmar, where Muslim communities face severe oppression. Additionally, he addresses the European focus on policing Muslim women’s hijab, exposing discriminatory policies that curtail religious freedom.

Arsalan Iftikhar, Fear of a Muslim Planet: Global Islamophobia in the New World Order (Skyhorse Publishing, 2021) ISBN-13 978-1510761872, 288 pages

The Suspect: Counterterrorism, Islam, and the Security State offers a captivating and deeply personal exploration of the impact that two decades of policing and counterterrorism have had on the state of mind of Muslims in Britain. Drawing from his own experiences, author Rizwaan Sabir takes readers on a compelling journey through British counterterrorism practices and the pervasive policing of Muslims.

Sabir’s narrative describes his wrongful arrest and detention on suspicion of terrorism. He recounts the distressing process of being unjustly made a target in the “war on terror.” With candor and vivid detail, he outlines the events leading up to his arrest, including being found in possession of the Al-Qaeda Training Manual, which he had downloaded for legitimate postgraduate research purposes. Sabir sheds light on the excruciating experience of being subjected to suspicion and surveillance solely based on his Muslim identity.

Throughout the book, Sabir recounts the harrowing aftermath of his arrest. He vividly describes the relentless monitoring and scrutiny he faced upon release from custody. This included frequent stop-and-search encounters, detentions at the border, surveillance by police and government departments, and an attempt by the UK military to recruit him into their psychological warfare unit. The author’s firsthand account provides a chilling insight into the intrusive and discriminatory practices endured by Muslims in the name of national security.

Sabir argues that the profound harm inflicted on individuals like him is not merely the result of government planning errors but rather a deliberate consequence of employing a counterinsurgency warfare approach to combat terrorism and police Muslim communities. Through his writing, Sabir advocates for and building networks of solidarity and support to challenge the injustices perpetuated by these policies and practices.

The Suspect serves as a powerful call to action, urging readers to recognize and resist the profound injustice faced by Muslims. By sharing his story, Sabir empowers readers to challenge the harmful narratives and practices that perpetuate the policing of Muslims.

Rizwaan Sabir, The Suspect: Counterterrorism, Islam, and the Security State (Pluto Press, 2022) ISBN: 9780745338484, 256 pages

H

umza Yousaf became the first minister of Scotland after narrowly winning the election for leader of the Scottish National Party. The health secretary received 52.1 percent of SNP members’ ballots, defeating finance secretary Kate Forbes, who received 47.9 percent.

Yousaf became Scotland’s first leader from an ethnic group and the first Muslim to head a democratic Western European country after he was sworn in as first minister on Wednesday, March 29, 2023, following a parliamentary decision on March 28.

In his victory speech, he said his “immediate priority will be to continue to protect every Scot as far as we can from the harm inflicted by the cost of living crisis, to recover and reform our NHS and other vital public services, to support our wellbeing economy and to improve the life chances of people across our country”. In addition, he attributes his success to his family, saying, “from the Punjab to our Parliament, this is a journey over generations that reminds us that we should celebrate migrants who contribute so much to our country”.

It is a narrow win over Forbes, an SNP rising star who campaigned as a change candidate, occasionally criticizing Yousaf and the SNP’s performance in government. Yousaf is close to former minister Nicola Sturgeon and campaigned on the promise of continuity — but the outcome underlines the difficult challenge he’ll face in rebuilding a party shaken by a contentious election.

Despite Yousaf winning the SNP leadership race, new polling performed by Ipsos Scotland between 17 and 21 of March suggests that the Scottish public are more favorable towards Kate Forbes than towards Humza Yousaf, while Nicola Sturgeon remains the most popular Scottish and Westminster political leader – ahead of all her potential successors – as well as beating Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who has a favorability rating of 20%, in contrast to Sturgeon’s rating of 46%.

The First Minister’s newly appointed cabinet revealed:

• Shona Robison, the new Deputy First Minister, will take on the Finance portfolio, including responsibility for the Scottish Budget
• Michael Matheson becomes the Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care
• Jenny Gilruth joins Cabinet for the first time as Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills
• Màiri McAllan joins Cabinet for the first time as Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Just Transition
• Neil Gray joins Cabinet for the first time as Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy
• Mairi Gougeon remains Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands
• Angus Robertson remains Cabinet Secretary for Constitution, External Affairs and Culture
• Shirley-Anne Somerville becomes Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice
• Angela Constance returns to Cabinet as the new Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs

On Thursday, March 20, Parliament was requested to ratify the new ministerial nominations.

Humza Yousaf commented:

“The Cabinet team I have unveiled reflects the priorities that we will pursue as a government – including tackling child poverty, improving public services and building a fairer, greener economy”.

Controversies

Yousaf was one of 86 MSPs who supported the Scottish Gender Recognition Reform bill in December, which would have made it simpler for trans and non-binary people to acquire a gender-recognition certificate (GRC).

The legislation would have made it easier for trans people in Scotland to formally change their gender identity – without the need for a gender dysphoria diagnosis – and would have reduced the age at which a person can file for a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) from 18 to 16 years old. It would also reduce the time it takes to obtain formal acknowledgment of one’s gender from two years to a few months.

The measure was approved by the Scottish Parliament in December 2022 by a vote of 86 to 39.

The decision has sparked a lot of discussion about devolution and Scottish independence. The decision comes just two months after Scotland lost a supreme court attempt to conduct a secession vote without Westminster’s permission.

The measure was eventually blocked by the UK government under section 35, which Yousaf and others called an “unprecedented attack” on the Scottish parliament.

Concerns about the bill’s potential effect on women’s rights led the UK government to halt its implementation, citing a conflict with the UK Equality Act. Women’s rights activists have said that this strategy would undermine the safety of women-only spaces.

In an interview with Times Radio, Scotland’s former first minister Alex Salmond criticized Yousaf’s battle over Westminster, saying, “concentrate on self-determination, not self-identification.”

Concerns over a potential independent Scotland

Yousaf, reaffirmed his commitment to take an independent Scotland to the EU while maintaining the rights of Scottish voters over their ‘constitutional future’, saying “as we make the case for Scottish independence, we will continue to govern well and demonstrate to the people of Scotland the benefits of decisions about their lives being taken here in Scotland”.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has warned new First Minister Humza Yousaf about plans for a second Scottish independence referendum. Sunak told Westminster’s Liaison Committee: “I think in elections people vote on all sorts of different things and I don’t think it’s appropriate to try and hijack a general election for one issue”.

“People in Scotland will vote on the various issues they think are important to them.” He added that Scottish voters made their votes known in the 2014 referendum.

The British Prime Minister then continued: “As I’ve always said, I think actually what people in Scotland want is to see their two governments working together to deliver for them.”

Q

Queen Elizabeth II lived a remarkably long life and was the longest reigning monarch in the history of the country. She was considered as a symbol of stability, service and embodiment of Britishness. Her passing is a rare historic moment and while many are mourning her departure, this event has also resurfaced grievances among people in the U.K.’s former colonies as well as generating critical reactions domestically.

The death and legacy of the Queen prompted a number of national and local British Muslim organizations to offer their condolences and tributes. Well known scholar Abdal Hakim Murad devoted a Friday sermon at Cambridge Mosque to the subject of kingship, Islam and the implications of the current King being sympathetic to Islam. The Queen’s passing was widely discussed on social media with popular Muslim YouTubers such as Paul Williams discussing the positive things Charles has said about Islam.

The National Anthem was even sung in Regents Park mosque to mark the accession of the new King. Some Muslims are convinced that Charles is a secret Muslim and others have made the dubious claim that the Queen was a descendent of the Prophet. London-based researcher Muhammad Ahmedullah told Politics Today, “The idea that the symbol of British power, the Queen and the Monarchy, could somehow be related to and descendant from the founder of Islam can be deeply comforting for people experiencing powerlessness and lacking the intellectual, creative and critical tools to confront their predicament head on without relying on mythical reassurances.”

Muslims growing up in Britain in the1970s and 1980s, appear to be more sympathetic to the deceased monarch and have affection for her as an individual. They could be described as “Queenist,” while not necessarily being Monarchist. Amir Suleman, a media professional from Peterborough, noted to Politics Today he experienced a sense of personal loss, adding “The more I digest her passing, I only now begin to realise how important she was to me personally. She was always ‘there’… It was just normal to always have the Queen. I’m 48 years old and she was, like most, the only monarch we’ve ever had and there are many memories associated with her.”

For political commentator Sami Hamdi, the experience of living in a Britain with its freedoms and opportunities made him appreciate what the late monarch represented “I cannot lie… A deep sadness grips me for a Queen who (for me) was the powerful symbol of the stability of the refuge and sanctuary in which I was born and raised (and which was not, and is not, afforded to my family elsewhere),”he said to Politics Today.

Attitudes are changing, nearly a third of the public, most of whom are young people, want to abolish the monarchy, some polls suggest that less than 40 percent of people from minorities  favour keeping the institution. Underlying this sentiment is the view that the Royal Family is symbolic of privilege and inequality and the fact that the ancestors of the U.K.’s Muslims lived and died under British colonialism. The contemporary legacies of the British Empire can be seen in Africa and the Middle East and this history continues to contaminate relations between India and Pakistan in relationship to Kashmir, in addition to ongoing reverberations of Her Majesty’s Government’s mass exploitation of Indian natural resources.

Though the Queen was not personally responsible for these events – she was always silent on these matters.  Her defenders will argue that she had no political power, however, this narrative is difficult to maintain when considering evidence that indicates that she lobbied for changes in the law to hide her private wealth and that the Royals vetted more than a thousand laws through the mechanism of the Queen’s consent.

The extraordinary queuing to pay last respects to the Queen have been interpreted and exploited in a way that equates feelings of sadness about her death with joy at the unquestioned accession of Charles. Loyalty to the Crown is an implied aspect of British identity.

As Afroze F Zaidi has argued, citizenship has become conditional, for Muslim Britons in light of the U.K.’s counter-terror policy, Prevent. A recent report by the Institute of Race Relations shows that British Muslims have their citizenship reduced to “second-class” status and analysis of government data by the Muslim Council of Britain indicates that around 50% of Muslims live in poverty. This is at time when the new King has inherited his mother’s vast wealth while the public will be forced to continue subsidising their lifestyles to the tune of $33 million in the next two years.

Charles to his credit, has has a long track record of supporting charitable  causes such as the Prince’s Trust  and is  patron of the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, where he gave his famous 1993 speech on “Islam and the West“.  According to the author of “Charles At Seventy: Thoughts, Hopes and Dreams“, Charles opposed the Iraq war, disagreed with the burqas and niqab bans in Europe,  told ministers he has  sympathy for the Palestinians and studies the Quran. In a recent speech to faith leaders in Buckingham Palace, King Charles spoke of his personal duty:

“…to protect the diversity of our country, including by protecting the space for faith itself and its practice through the religions, cultures, traditions and beliefs to which our hearts and minds direct us as individuals.”

However, community historian Yahya Birt cautions British Muslims, “…not to be easily charmed by Charles and rush unthinkingly for the photo, career and funding opportunities and the imperial gongs at the crowning of a new Islamophilic monarch.”

Over the last decade, Charles has had 95 meetings in the Middle East and eight were with repressive monarchies. Many of these occurred just before or after  acts of repression against opposition activists, the media or religious minorities and he has played a key role in promoting £14.5-billion worth of UK arms exports to these. The arrests of protesters questioning his right to being King are not encouraging sign for a country that prides itself on the right to free speech.

Also, cancelling hospital appointments and closing food banks on the date of the funeral of the Queen are not the best way to generate good among those in difficult circumstances. As Zara Mohammed, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain notes, “The reign of King Charles III, will force Britain to enter a period where difficult conversations on history, the past and the future direction of the country need to be had.”

He has become Head of State of 14 countries in addition to the UK. Some of them have already signalled that they want to become Republics, while staying as Commonwealth members. How will he navigate this and the legacies of colonialism? Will he make the Royal Family more relevant and accountable to the concerns of all British people?

Can his enthusiasm for Islam and Multiculturalism pacify the current government which is in denial about its institutional Islamophobia? Britain certainly could do with a figure head that brings communities together, who could help heal the ever widening social divides on the basis of race, religion, class and work for a more equitable society. It remains to be seen if the new monarch can play this role.

On October 16, 2021, the leading Dutch daily, NRC, reported that during the past few years, mayors of several municipalities in the Netherlands have commissioned a private agency to investigate a number of mosques. As part of this operation, undercover investigators attended mosque services, mingled and socialized with other believers, and reported their findings and impressions to the mayors. The mosques were unaware of these unannounced visits, because the investigators were Muslims themselves – as are the agency’s managers.

In a letter to parliament, the Dutch justice minister, Ferd Grapperhaus, has since commented on the newspaper report, because it also implicated the National Antiterrorism and Security Coordinator (NASC), which is a directorate-general of the Ministry of Justice and Security. The NASC had allegedly recommended this particular agency to the mayors, while it also provided subsidies to cover the costs of the investigations.

In his letter, the justice minister acknowledges that as early as 2017, NASC officials already suspected that the private agency conducted unlawful undercover operations. However, the mayors were not warned about this since, according to the minister, they were the ones responsible for guaranteeing the lawfulness of the investigations.

This is hardly convincing, since, as Grapperhaus acknowledges, the NASC covered the costs of the investigations and recommended the agency to the mayors. As part of this process the NASC assessed the applications for subsidy submitted by the mayors. This should have included a check on the appropriateness of the methodology, especially since reservations had already emerged within the ministry. Since Grapperhaus is also responsible for religious services, his civil servants should have ensured that these investigations would not include infiltration in mosques.

By law, the authority to investigate organizations and persons who pose a threat to democracy and the rule of law has been entrusted exclusively to the Dutch intelligence agency.

This is not the only concern raised by the letter. Grapperhaus admits that mayors, in close cooperation with the NASC, have been involved in detecting tendencies within the Muslim community that might undermine the rule of law and democracy for years. However, mayors and the NASC have no role to play in this area.

By law, the authority to investigate organizations and persons who pose a threat to democracy and the rule of law has been entrusted exclusively to the Dutch intelligence agency. In addition, to be able to use these powers the intelligence agency has to meet strict requirements, such as to demonstrate that there is a serious suspicion that a threat exists. Therefore, the mayors have acted unlawfully.

Research shows that joining terrorist organizations is not triggered by religion, but instead by social exclusion, discrimination, and the treatment of Muslims by Western countries, and in particular the Palestinian people. What is more, it is actually the lack of knowledge about Islam which causes people to join al-Qaeda and Daesh, since possession of such knowledge would make them immune to the claims made by recruiters.

By treating Muslims as a “suspect community,” these problems are not solved but deepened. To combat terrorism effectively, society needs the help of Islam and the Muslim community. As is the case in many countries, the Dutch Muslim community is more than willing to assist and it has even reached out by presenting a plan to combat terrorism, which has ended up in a government drawer.

At the international level, the Dutch government champions the rights of Muslims. Within the EU, Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte is being nicknamed the “rule of law sheriff.” These laudable international efforts would be much more effective if the Dutch government would lead by example at home.

On May 27, the Austrian government presented an Islam Landkarte (Islam Map) as a novel contribution and a breakthrough tool to fight “political Islam.” However, this map has been around for years. The project was initiated back in 2012, by Ednan Aslan, the head of the Institute for Islamic Theological Studies at the University of Vienna and the Documentation Center for Political Islam which was set up by the government.

Nine years later, Susanne Raab, minister for integration from the ruling conservative party (ÖVP), launched a website with an interactive map listing the names and locations of more than 600 mosques and Muslim organizations in Austria as well as their alleged connections abroad.

The map is designed to serve as a monitoring tool for the Documentation Center for Political Islam which is a data-collecting center for integration policy and security agencies. However, the data it collects is problematic to the extent that it is outdated and incorrect; some of the names recorded on the website are no longer actively in service. The most problematic part, however, is that it publishes private addresses of organizations.

When starting a non-profit organization in Austria, individuals have the possibility to register the organization using their personal address. As a result, when the Islam Map was published, not only the addresses of organizations but also personal addresses of individuals were made public.

In her presentation, Minister Susanne Raab (ÖVP) further explained that the “Islam Map” does not mean a general suspicion of all Muslims and the intention is exclusively to fight “political ideologies, not religion.”

Even though, Austrian officials categorize the map as an instrument of combatting “political Islam,” which is an ambiguous term as adopted by the Austrian government that describes any Islamist movement seeking to restructure society according to religious ideas and opposing democratic principles, there is no general agreement on what exactly can be labelled as an Islamist movement.

This has resulted in the listing of cultural centers for Bosnian and Albanian immigrants, youth organizations or even sports clubs, without any proof or any links to extremism. Faika El-Nagashi, the spokeswoman for integration of the Greens party which is part of the ruling coalition, affirmed that “no Green minister or MEP was involved or even told about it. The project mixes Muslims with Islamists and is the contrary to what integration policy should look like.”

There was a massive backlash against this action, not only from the Muslim community in Austria but also from the University of Vienna, which was added as a partner to this project.

There was a massive backlash against this action, not only from the Muslim community in Austria but also from the University of Vienna, which was added as a partner to this project. University officials have since distanced themselves and prohibited the use of the university logo on the map’s page with the argument that “the logo on the site gives the impression that the University has scientifically edited and reviewed the contributions, which is not the case.” Meanwhile, the logo has been removed and instead “A project of the University of Vienna – Institute for Islamic Theological Studies – Islamic Religious Education” has been added to the website.

Muslim Youth Austria announced legal action against the violation of personal and data protection rights. An announcement or complaint does not exist yet, however, as a spokeswoman of the organization has declared that “the publication of all names, functions and addresses of Muslims and Islamic institutions represents an unprecedented border crossing and the organization will exhaust all legal possibilities against it.”

While Muslim Youth Austria demands the end of this criminalization of Muslims and that the Islam Map be removed from the internet, the association for Jewish Austrian Students in Austria showed solidarity and sharply criticized the map.

While Muslim Youth Austria demands the end of this criminalization of Muslims and that the Islam Map be removed from the internet, the association for Jewish Austrian Students in Austria showed solidarity and sharply criticized the map. The students told Politics Today that Muslims must not feel “observed and placed under general suspicion and at the same time fear because locations of Muslim institutions are exposed to the public, which is a handbook case of discrimination.”

On May 31, the spokesperson for the secretary general at the Council of Europe, Daniel Holtgen, stated that “[u]nfortunately, the ‘Islam Map’ of Austria overshoots the mark, serves existing resentments and therefore has a potentially counterproductive effect. Many Muslims perceive the form and timing of the publication as extremely discriminatory. They feel stigmatized and feel their security threatened by the publication of addresses and other details. The ‘Islam Map’ of Austria should therefore be withdrawn in its current form.”

In fact, the launching of an interactive “Islam Map” serves as a watch list or a blacklist. The map will only serve as another blow to the presence of Islam in the country, as the map disclosing Muslim organizations not only caused controversy in the country but also led to a spate of Islamophobic incidents. Moreover, the map stirs up prejudices and puts all Muslims under general suspicion. Prior to the introduction of the “Islam Map,” the Documentation and Counseling Center Islamophobia and Anti-Muslim Racism – also known as the Dokustelle Österreich – released the “Anti-Muslim Racism Report” with 1,402 cases of racism against Muslims in 2020 alone. This records an increase of approximately 33% from the previous year.

After barely a week since the website of the controversial map was launched, the government decided to take the map offline. Not only was it criticized by Austria’s Muslim community, various people from all walks of life reacted on the website. The Catholic Church, for example, joined the criticism and rejected the map. The head of the church stated that Islam is now “under general suspicion.” He wondered why Islam has a map and other faith communities do not.

Ümit Vural, the head of the IGGOE, warned against stigmatizing all Muslims living in Austria as a potential danger. His organization stated that several Muslims had already been attacked and a mosque was vandalized since the map became available online. Muslim Austrians Initiative chairman Tarafa Baghajati told broadcaster ORF, “Imagine if we had a Judaism map or a Christianity map in Austria.”

It is without doubt that this map is an indirect attack on all Muslims in Austria, many of whom are of Turkish descent. Tanju Bilgiç, spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey, who has been calling for an end to Islamophobia for a long time now, declared the map to be “xenophobic, racist, and anti-Islamic.”

Although the “Islam Map” has been taken offline, the attention it got from anti-Muslim, racist groups is worrying. The map definitely signifies a general suspicion of the Muslim community. The growing Islamophobia in Austria and the rest of Europe makes Muslim Europeans, and especially young Muslim Europeans, feel concerned about their future. The social pandemic of hate crimes against Muslims is destroying European values, which once were held in high esteem.

The recent Swiss referendum to ban the wearing of the burka and niqab in public places follows similar decisions by the governments of France, Belgium, and Austria, reinforcing the mediatized perception of Muslims as the “difficult-to-integrate “other” in Europe.” This development converges with the state level institutionalization of anti-Muslim sentiment by the likes of Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, who wants to form a common front against “political Islam.”

An EU level policy idea already floated by French President Emmanuel Macron, who believes that “Islam is a religion that is in crisis today all over the world,” and the implication that the presence of Muslims in Europe are a threat to domestic security and the national identity.

The truth of course, is far more complex. European Muslims are well aware of the complex socio-political challenges before them and are increasingly challenging Islamophobic narratives as their communities grow and younger people become active agents of transformative social change. This has led to the emergence of various political leaders and social influencers who have become vocal public figures and are positively impacting their communities and wider societies. This can be seen in the rise  of assertive Muslim politicians in mainstream parties across Europe such as the Italian MP  Khalid Chaouki,  Mahinur Özdemir the first  hijab-wearing MP in Belgium and emergence of the DENK party in the Netherlands.

In Britain, despite facing various socio-economic inequalities, Muslims are an essential part of the U.K’s economic and cultural fabric.  Around 10,000 of National Health Service (NHS) doctors and nurses are Muslim; they were at the NHS front line during the Covid-19 crisis, and at forefront of community responses to the pandemic.

They have also made significant strides in mainstream politics at local and national governance level, with some achieving senior positions, such as the current Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, a former cabinet member of the Conservative government and the recently elected Leader of the Scottish Labor Party –Anas Sarwar. Muslim Leaders have also emerged from faith based NGOs such as the Muslim Council of Britain, which recently elected its first every  female leader,  Zara Mohammed,  while others lead think-tanks, such as Halima Begum, CEO of  the Runnymede Trust.

In the media, sports and cultural industries, the journalist Mehdi Hasan became internationally known as an anchor for Al-Jazeera English and is currently host of a NBC news program. The writings of Guardian columnist Nesrine Malik are among the sharpest commentaries of race, religion and politics and Nadiya Hussain, is a household name after winning the Great British Bake Off competition, and has hosted several TV programs for the BBC. Other British Muslims have reached the highest levels of their chosen fields in the world of sport like the long-distance runner ‘Mo’ Farah, a four-time  Olympic gold medalist,  Moin Ali, who has captained the English Cricket team and Amir Khan  a former Light-Welterweight world boxing champion.

Like other European states, Britain needed the post-war labor of immigrants from its former colonies, which resulted in a multiculturalist model that enables Muslims and other minorities to achieve a large degree of social mobility.

Though currently going through immensely turbulent times, the U.K is still viewed by outsiders with a degree of admiration for its historical achievements, continuing political influence on the world stage and soft power of its creative industries. Like other European states, Britain needed the post-war labor of immigrants from its former colonies, which resulted in a multiculturalist model that enables Muslims and other minorities to achieve a large degree of social mobility.

These advances are all the more noteworthy given the tough challenges that this faith group encountered and continues to experience today. Social polarization has reached levels not seen for decades, as forms of prejudice multiply –particularly racism and Islamophobia, which are rationalized in the name of freedom of speech.

The continued fallout from BREXIT, presence of refugees, growth of the far-right and unresolved anxieties about security have shaped a climate of suspicion towards ‘outsiders.’ Muslims are often the focus of mistrust and accused of being the “enemy within,” their faith incompatible with “British Values” and alleged to have a unique vulnerability to criminality and violence.

Before his election as leader, Anas Sarwar was subjected to racist slur from within the Labor party and another senior member withdrew her support for Sarwar after seeing a picture of his hijab-wearing wife.

Most of the leaders and influential figures highlighted here have struggled with racist and Islamophobic abuse on a regular basis. Some of shared on social media while others have faced institutional barriers and media attacks. A recent instance was when the leader of the Runnymede Trust was misrepresented by Conservative MPs in a Women and Equalities questions session in the House of Commons. Before his election as leader, Anas Sarwar was subjected to racist slur from within the Labor party and another senior member withdrew her support for Sarwar after seeing a picture of his hijab-wearing wife.

These and many other incidents vindicate the observation by Sayeeda Warsi over a decade ago, when she argued that prejudice against Muslims had “passed the dinner-table test.” Islamophobia and racism has quantifiably worsened in recent years to the point of being normalized in the media and political establishment.

Muslim journalists like Nesrine Malik regularly receive abusive emails and are trolled on their social media and Nadiya Hussain has often encountered racial and religious discrimination both on the street and within the industry that she works in. Furthermore, athletes like Moin Ali and Mo Farah have both complained about racism  they have experienced during their careers.

Representation in the elite levels of political power while symbolically encouraging, is not enough. Most of the politicians highlighted above downplay their faith so they don’t fall out of favor with their party leaders or alienate the voting public.  Other figures are only able to secure positions because their political values align with the party leadership.  This is illustrated in cases of former Conservative cabinet member  Sajid Javid, who denied the existence of Islamophobia, citing his own appointment as proof and  Munira Mirza –an advisor to Boris Johnson,  was selected  to lead the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, even though she believes institutional racism is a myth.

To shape a more amicable future, Western European governments would need to reset relationships with their Muslim citizens and conduct honest conversations that acknowledge failed policies and misperceptions. This looks highly unlikely given the converging political consensus that appears to be forming against Muslim political visibility.

European Muslims communities also need to do better and resolve their internal divisions and nurture infrastructures that help cultivate visionary leadership which can address the multidimensional challenges confronting their communities and wider societies. The increasing number of talented Muslims entering public life raises the possibility that this can become a reality.

On February 15, an internal draft report prepared by the National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism (NCTV) working under the Ministry of Justice and Security in the Netherlands was leaked to the HP/De Tijd, a Dutch-language monthly opinion magazine.

The draft report is entitled “The Development of Salafism among Turks in the Netherlands.” According to the report, the NCTV is concerned by the rise of Salafism among Dutch Turks living in the Netherlands. The report has not yet been signed by the country’s security services and related ministries. However, it created a reaction in the Netherlands due to biasness, factual mistakes, and the overall ignorance of the analysts employed by the NCTV.

The NCTV claims that there is a possible connection between Erdoğan’s “anti-Western rhetoric” and a tram terror attack in Utrecht in 2019, in which four people were killed by Gökmen Tanış. The draft report claims that Turks may be “vulnerable” and open to influence from Turkey and its president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. It also claims that the Turkish President is following a Salafi Islamization strategy, which may further influence Dutch Turks.

Salafism 

The NCTV draft report argues that the Islamic movement of Salafism originated in Saudi Arabia and has now a huge base of supporters in Turkey. It is claimed that Turkish organizations such as Milli Görüş and the “Turkish Muslim Brotherhood” – if the latter has ever existed – have ideologically merged.

The report further alleges that Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has a secret agenda and ambition to represent himself as the “leader of the Sunni Muslims” by 2023, the centennial anniversary of the establishment of the Republic of Turkey. This in all in line with his plot to turn Turkey into an Islamic state.

The draft report raises other issues as well in regards to the Salafist organizations in Turkey that are claimed to have “strong ties” with Turkish-Dutch (youth) organizations in the Netherlands. The draft report allegedly claims that these organizations, having close relationships with Turkish preachers, have become more involved in Salafism in recent years, which the NCTV associates with jihadism.

The report warns about domestic radicalization through social media and the rise of Salafism in the country. It further alleges that the Turkish government provides leeway to Salafist-jihadist organizations, such as the IBDA-C (The Great Eastern Islamic Raiders’ Front) and the Kaplan movement led by Metin Kaplan, and indirectly supports specific groups in Syria, such as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.

The draft report, in fact, mysteriously omits the fact that both the IBDA-C and the Kaplan movement have been on Turkey’s terror watch list for almost a decade. On the contrary, according to research by the Dutch Nieuwsuur and Trouw (Dutch: Nieuwsuur en Trouw) news agencies that conducted the investigation, the Dutch government itself supported Jabhat al-Shamiya, an armed group in Syria, which the public prosecutor in the Netherlands labeled as terrorist.

The Utrecht terrorist attack of 2019

The NCTV argues that President Erdoğan’s condemnation of the far-right terrorist attacks on Muslims in Christchurch in 2019 might have played a role in Gökmen Tanış’s radicalization and plans to organize an attack in the Netherlands. The terrorist attack in Utrecht killed four civilians. The attack took place a day after “Erdoğan’s anti-Western media appearance,” the analysis claims. After the shooting on March 18, 2019, the Public Prosecution Service (OM) revealed the text which was written on the weapon. According to the sources of Radio Television Luxembourg (RTL), the firearm and silencer had the following statement written on them, “Those who follow Sharia go to paradise. Whoever follows democracy goes to hell. You kill people who are Muslims. And Allah lets me kill you…” (translated from Dutch).

However, the 37-year-old Turkish-born Gökmen Tanış, who had been intermittently addicted to hard drugs and alcohol, was a supporter of Metin Kaplan and expressed his hate towards the Turkish president several times. The claim that Tanış might have been inspired by Erdoğan to organize an attack is, therefore, baseless and exposes the authors’ biases.

Although the draft report immediately received heavy criticism for factual mistakes and inaccuracies, anti-Turkey politicians in the Netherlands, led by the far-right leader of the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV) Geert Wilders, suggested that the draft report proved his argument and justified his anti-Turkey and anti-Erdoğan sentiments. On the same evening, Wilders published a cartoon on Twitter illustrating half of President Erdoğan’s face on a Turkish flag and the other half on the banner of DAESH (ISIS) with the word “terrorist” written on it.

Harming bilateral relations?

Following the Dutch-Turkish diplomatic crisis of 2017, the two countries have set the aim of improving their bilateral relations. On January 26, 2021, the eighth meeting of the Turkish-Dutch Bilateral Wittenburg Conference was held. The conference bode well. The ministers of the two nations exchanged views on various issues including trade and innovation as well as their common concerns regarding their fight against terrorism.

Under the influence of right-wing extremism in Western Europe, it’s no longer surprising for political parties to look for fabricated reasons to ignite enmity and polarization, and in this manner gather support. However, there are confusing questions in regard to the draft report. For example, how was the draft report leaked to the press? Why was the draft report by the NCTV leaked to the media a month before the Dutch general elections?

The NCTV’s draft report has a potential to impact the Dutch-Turkish community negatively. Recently, political parties demanded a clarification from Ferdinand Grapperhaus, the Minister of Justice and Security, on how this “unfinished” report could have been leaked. Grapperhaus said the final report will be published in a few months and at that time, the ministries and the security services can express their views and opinions on the report.