Swiss Shock: Minaret Rejection, European Values, and the Challenge of Tolerant neutrality

In 2009 Switzerland, for long an apparent beacon of European toleration and neutrality, voted to ban the erection of minarets. Internal religious matters are normally dealt with at the regional or local level – not at the level of the Swiss national parliament, although the state does seek to ensure good order and peaceful relations between different faith communities. Indeed, the freedom of these communities to believe and function publicly is enshrined in law. However, as a matter of national policy, now constitutionally embedded, one religious group, the Muslim group, is not permitted to build their distinctive religious edifice, the minaret. Switzerland may have joined the rest of Europe with respect to engaging the challenge of Islamic presence to European identity and values, but the rejection of a symbol of the presence of one faith – in this case, Islamic – by a society that is otherwise predominantly secular, pluralist, and of Christian heritage, poses significant concerns. How and why did this happen? What are the implications? This paper will discuss some of the issues involved, concluding the ban is by no means irreversible. Tolerant neutrality may yet again be a leitmotif of Swiss culture and not just of foreign policy.

Troublesome Issues: Current Debates on Tensions between Gender Equality and Cultural Diversity in Austria

This paper will first deal with the legal and social situation of Islam and Muslims in Austria and then turn to particular “troublesome issues” at the intersection of gender equality and ethnic/religious diversity. The public debate on Muslims particularly focuses on the notion “not willing to integrate” and in the assumption of “parallel societies”. Hierarchical gender relations and “harmful traditions” such as veiling, female genital cutting, forced marriage and honour based violence recently became the centre of attention. We will show that the Austrian debate on these issues is shaped by the idea of “dangerous cultural difference” as something coming from outside and being concentrated in segregated Muslim enclaves. Despite the public authorities’ rejection of the idea that Islam was responsible for “harmful traditions”, legal as well as political measures in Austria not only combat violence against women but also fuel “cultural anxieties” between different ethnic and religious groups.

Islam and the Legal Enforcement of Morality

Over sixty years ago, British high court judge Patrick Devlin and legal philosopher H.L.A. Hart fought out a famous debate over the legal enforcement of morality, which was generated by the question whether homosexuality should be legalized or not. Jurists agree that this debate was won by Hart, also evidenced in the fact that the state has since been retreating from its previous role of moral watchdog. I argue in this paper that the two most conflicted and essentially unresolved issues in the integration of Islam, the regulation of the female body and of free speech, have reopened this debate anew, pushing the liberal state toward the legal regulation of morality, thus potentially putting at risk its liberalness. I use the Hart-Devlin debate as a template for comparing and contrasting the Muslim quest for restricting free speech with the host-society quest for restricting the Islamic veil. Accordingly, there is a double threat to liberalism, which this paper brings into view in tandem, one originating from Islam and another from a hypertrophied defense of liberalism.

Europe and Islam: Alarmists, Victimists, and Integration by Law

This article reviews the minefield of Muslim integration in Europe, paying special attention to the legal integration of Islam, which has not yet found the attention that it deserves. In a first step, the article contrasts ‘victimist’ and ‘alarmist’ views on contemporary Muslim integration, both of which are found misleading. Instead, as argued in the second part, significant progress has been made through the legal route. The conclusion provides a reflection on the role of Islam for Europe’s ‘liberal identity’ today.

European Immigrant Integration after Multiculturalism

This paper takes the recent abdication of multiculturalism by the leaders of Europe’s most powerful nations (Germany, France, and Britain) as hub for a reflection on common themes in Europe’s crisis of multiculturalism. The most obvious common theme in this crisis is Islam and problems of Muslim integration. Accordingly, this paper addresses the role of religion and Islam in Europe’s multiculturalism crisis, and elaborates on the “muscular liberalism” or “civic integration” policies that have appeared in lieu of a discarded multiculturalism. In a final step, I tackle, in a forward-looking mode, some “critical issues” that will shape European immigrant integration after multiculturalism: the need to fight discrimination despite multiculturalism’s ebb, a greater concern for majority culture, the importance of robust debate and democracy as medium of integration, the often-neglected factor of immigrant selection, and a recognition that institutions matter more than policy in the process of integration.

Ancient History as a Means of Transforming Colonial India in the Late-Eighteenth and Early-Nineteenth Centuries

This article focuses on the studies and discourses of mostly British scholars of the early colonial period belonging to two schools of thought. It shows how the studies of both schools – European orientalism and utilitarianism – were intricately connected to the political development of the emerging British paramountcy over the South Asian sub-continent, as both were looking for means of establishing and/or strengthening colonial rule. Nevertheless, the debate was not just a continuation of discussions in Europe. Whereas the ideas of the European Enlightenment had some influence, the transformation of the Mughal Empire and especially the idea of a decline of Muslim rule offered ample opportunities for understanding the early history of India either as some sort of “Golden Age,” as the orientalists and their indigenous supporters did, or as something static and degenerate, as the utilitarians did, and from which the population of sub-continent had to be saved by colonial rule and colonial values. Fearing the spread of the ideas of the French Revolution, the first group of British scholars sought to persuade the native elites of South Asia to take the lessons of their past for the future development of their homeland. Just as the classicists back in Europe, these scholars were convinced that large-scale explanations of the past could also teach political and moral lessons for the present although it was important to deal with the distant past in an empirical manner. The utilitarians on the other hand believed that India had to be saved from its own depravity through the English language and Western values, which amounted to nothing less than the modern transformation of the true Classical Age.

Anke von Kügelgen on Contemporary Islamic Thought

Anke von Kügelgen joins Peter to discuss developments over the last century or so, including attitudes towards past thinkers like Avicenna, Averroes and Ibn Taymiyya. This interview is based on research conducted to write a forthcoming book on Philosophy in the Islamic world in the 19th and 20th centuries, to be co-edited by Prof von Kügelgen together Professor Ulrich Rudolph, and Michael Frey as redactor. It will be the fourth volume of a German Overview of the whole history of philosophy in the Islamic world (Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie in der islamischen Welt, published by Schwabe Verlag in Basel). Prof von Kügelgen would like to recognize the contribution of her collaborators: her main partner for the philosophy in the Arab speaking countries is Sarhan Dhouib, originally from Tunesia, now at the University of Kassel. For Muslim Southasia, she is working with Jan Peter Hartung from the SOAS in London, and for Iran, Reza Hajatpour, Katajun Amirpur and Roman Seidel who are all at present at German Universities. The part on Philosophy in the Ottoman Empire is written by Sait Özervarlı from the Yildiz Teknik Universitesi in Istanbul and for Turkey by Christoph Herzog from the University of Bamberg.

Islam und Muslime im Kontext deutschschweizerischer Öffentlichkeit

This study tries to assess the status of Islam in the context of the Swiss discursive public sphere. Relying on an empirical survey conducted with representatives from fifty Muslim organisations based in the German-speaking part of Switzerland, the study examines the relative position of Muslim organisations in the political public sphere and the role of Islam in public debate from the perspective of the organisations themselves. The empirical findings will be interpreted using two ideal types. The category “public sphere” known from Jürgen Habermas’ works will help to determine the social status of the Muslim community in the context of the Swiss public sphere, while the normative concept “public religion”, as developed by the sociologist José Casanova in his book Public Religions in the Modern World, will contribute to determine the role of Islam in Swiss public debate.

Islamophobia as Reactive Co-Radicalization

Since 9/11, 2001, a new form of religious extremism has arguably emerged, one which paradoxically portrays itself as a counter to another perceived extremism regarded as a real and imminent threat. Within North America and Western Europe, as elsewhere, there is an upsurge of various forms of reactionary rhetoric and opposition expressed towards Islam and Muslims. An increase in extremist behaviour, even violence, is appearing from quarters opposed to, or varyingly fearful of, Islamic extremism if not Islam or Muslims. Islamophobia, as a manifestation of fear of an exclusionary Islam, manifests as exclusionary or negatively reactive behaviours with Muslims and Islam as the target. This article explores the idea that Islamophobia can be regarded as a manifestation of religious extremism and, further, that such extremism is construable as “reactive co-radicalization.” It focuses on two European cases – the 2009 Swiss ban on the building of minarets and the 2011 Norwegian massacre carried out by Anders Breivik – as examples of this “reactive co-radicalization.” This term, I suggest, is an apt denominator for the exclusionary reaction to the rising presence of Islam within otherwise secular, albeit nominally Christian, Western European and North American societies, among others.

Reactive Co-Radicalization: Religious Extremism as Mutual Dicontent

Extremist rhetoric and behaviour, including violence, emanating from those fearing and opposed to Islamic extremism—and typically generalising that to Islam or Muslims—is undeniable. Equally, there is evidence of Muslim rhetoric that fires up fears of a threatening West and antipathy to religious ‘others’ as damned infidels, including Christians and Jews who are otherwise regarded as co-religionists—as ‘peoples of the Book’. Mutual discontent and antipathy abound. On the one hand, Islamic extremism provokes a reactionary extremism from parts, at least, of the non-Muslim world; on the other hand, Muslim extremism appears often in response to the perception of an aggressive and impositional colonising non-Muslim world. ‘Reactive Co-Radicalization’, I suggest, names this mutual rejection and exclusionary circle currently evident, in particular, with respect to many Muslim and non-Muslim communities. This article discusses reactive co-radicalization as a hermeneutical perspective on religious extremism with particular reference to two European cases.