Search
SearchToday in Islamophobia: In India, the country’s Supreme Court has frozen the practice of bulldozing the homes or businesses of citizens deemed “criminals” by regional law enforcement, saying that such actions, often targeting Indian Muslims, are “harsh and arbitrary, meanwhile in the UK, a new book published by Baroness Sayeeda Warsi claims that Tory ministers systematically marginalized Muslim concerns, undermining human rights that should be universal, and in the US, a senior adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris met American Muslim and Arab leaders on Wednesday as Harris’ presidential campaign seeks to win back voters angry at U.S. support for Israel’s wars in Gaza and Lebanon. Our recommended read of the day is by Niginakhon Saida and Svetlana Dzardanova for The Diplomat on how Central Asian governments are tightening restrictions on the wearing of religious clothing in public such as the hijab in the name of “upholding secularism” with Asian Muslim women bearing the heaviest burden as a result. This and more below:
International
Central Asia’s War on Hijab | Recommended Read
“Although I began praying in sixth grade, it wasn’t until 2020 that I started wearing hijab,” Malika, a 20-year-old university student from Fergana who asked not to use her real name, told The Diplomat. “This led to unexpected pressure from my school community as everyone, including the teachers I was close with, began telling me to take my hijab off.” “Once the school principal confronted me in front of everyone, harshly insisting that I stop wearing hijab and accused me of using it as a form of self-advertisement.” Central Asia’s war on hijab has persisted for years, and Malika’s story echoes the experiences shared by countless women who face similar struggles across the region. In our previous work for The Beet, we unpacked the political dynamics of the hijab ban in Central Asia, tracing its historical roots and policy implications. Now, we turn our attention to the real-world consequences on women’s lives, delving into the costs of state-imposed restrictions on religious expression. As the region has aggressively promoted a secular, traditional dress code, Muslim women have become the unintended victims of new regulations. Control over their attire is enforced largely through educational institutions, where young women study and work. “Banning or restricting hijab in the countries of the region falls within the overall framework of combating ‘wrong’ Islam as a central narrative in countering so-called religious extremism,” said Anastassiya Reshetnyak, Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism (P/CVE) consultant and a research fellow at Paperlab Research Center, in an interview with The Diplomat. read the complete article
Wikipedia: Accuracy or Prejudice? Islamophobia in the Web 2.0 Era
This article explores whether Wikipedia upholds its promise of neutrality or perpetuates prejudice against Islam, examining the role of Web 2.0 dynamics and Islamophobia. Is the free encyclopedia contributing to the global spread of Islamophobia? Is it enabling anti-Islam or Muslim narratives? While studies show a “balance” on the platform between praise and censure of Islam, examining the history of the articles on the subject indicates the lack of a neutral point of view by the platform’s editors. Islam’s coverage in global media changed dramatically in the early 2000s. The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks launched an information war and greatly changed how Islam was represented in the media. The attacks thrust Islam into the global spotlight, and coverage of the religion increased exponentially. This surge of attention also led to a significant shift in how Islam was framed, often associating the religion with terrorism and extremism. Misrepresentation occurred not only in the media but also in Web 2.0, especially Wikipedia, which was influenced by these trends, where the majority of articles related to what is bad about the religion rather than presenting its teachings. Was this part of a broader media agenda? One user on Quora wrote this about Wikipedia’s coverage of Islam: “Most of English Wikipedia’s contributors are academically inclined English speakers. This overrepresentation of Western perspectives can lead to a skewed portrayal of Islamic topics, reflecting the interests, biases, and experiences of Western contributors rather than offering a balanced view.” This imbalance is not merely a theoretical concern. A study by Majid et al. analyzing Wikipedia’s coverage of Islam found that while positive representations of Islam exist, they are frequently overshadowed by negative portrayals. For example, articles on “Islamic Governments and States” often focus on issues of violence and human rights abuses, reinforcing the stereotype of Islam as a religion of violence. In contrast, topics like “Nature of Islam” or “Islamic Texts and Teachings” receive less attention. This contributes to a one-sided view of the religion. read the complete article
United States
Harris adviser meets US Muslim, Arab leaders angry at support for Israel
A senior adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris met American Muslim and Arab leaders on Wednesday as Harris' presidential campaign seeks to win back voters angry at U.S. support for Israel's wars in Gaza and Lebanon. Harris' national security adviser, Phil Gordan, told the community leaders in the virtual meeting that the administration supports a ceasefire in Gaza, diplomacy in Lebanon and stability in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, the vice president's office said. Ali Dagher, a Lebanese-American attorney and community leader, said the outreach from Harris' office was not enough. "It's too little, too late," said Dagher, who did not participate in the meeting. Harris, a Democrat, faces Republican former President Donald Trump on Nov. 5 in what polls show to be a tight presidential race. President Joe Biden won most of the 2020 Muslim and Arab votes, but their backing of Democrats has fallen sharply during nearly a year that Israel has been fighting Hamas in Gaza. Activists say Biden and Harris have done too little to stop Israel's military campaign in the Palestinian enclave. read the complete article
Committees on antisemitism and Islamophobia find ‘widespread and pernicious’ bias, restricted speech and harassment on campus
Two University committees formed in the wake of the Israel-Gaza conflict found dozens of expressions of antisemitism and Islamophobia on campus. In two 148-page reports released earlier this year, the Muslim Arab and Palestinian (MAP) Communities Committee and the Subcommittee on Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias (ASAIB) outlined instances of harassment, intimidation and silencing of certain Stanford communities. The two reports were released to the public on June 20 after being sent to the president and provost. MAP committee’s report states that MAP communities have felt fearful for their safety, disregarded by the University and “silenced through a variety of formal and informal means” when they expressed support for Palestine or participated in Pro-Palestine protests. The ASAIB subcommittee report, titled “It’s in the Air,” concluded that antisemitism and anti-Israeli bias is “widespread and pernicious” across Stanford’s campus. read the complete article
“Will the Forever Wars Ever End?”: The War on Terror 23 Years Later
September marked the 23rd anniversary of al-Qaeda’s 2001 attacks on the United States, which left nearly 3,000 people dead. For the two decades since then, I’ve been writing, often for TomDispatch, about the ways the American response to 9/11, which quickly came to be known as the Global War on Terror, or GWOT, changed this country. As I’ve explored in several books, in the name of that war, we transformed our institutions, privileged secrecy over transparency and accountability, side-stepped and even violated longstanding laws and constitutional principles, and basically tossed aside many of the norms that had guided us as a nation for two centuries-plus, opening the way for a country now in Trumpian-style difficulty at home. Even today, more than two decades later, the question remains: Will the war on terror ever end? Certainly, one might be inclined to answer in the affirmative following the recent unexpected endorsement of presidential candidate Kamala Harris by two leading members of the George W. Bush administration which, in response to those attacks, launched the GWOT. First, Bush’s vice president, Dick Cheney, who, after September 11th, sought to take the country down the path to what he called “the dark side” and was a chief instigator of the misguided and fraudulently justified invasion of Iraq in 2003, endorsed Vice President Harris. Then, so did Alberto Gonzales who, while serving as White House counsel to George W. Bush and then as his attorney general, was intricately involved in crafting that administration’s grim torture policy. (You remember, of course, those “enhanced interrogation techniques.”) He was similarly involved in creating the overreaching surveillance policy designed and implemented during the first years of the war on terror. Consider those surprising endorsements by former Bush war hawks a possible coda for the war on terror as a major factor in American politics. read the complete article
Opinion: Deal or no deal? What's next for Guantanamo 9/11 detainees?
The case of the Gitmo plea agreement keeps getting curiouser and curiouser. A few weeks ago, we learned that a plea agreement had been entered into by way of a signed contract between the retired general in the Pentagon who is supervising all Gitmo prosecutions, the Gitmo defendants and defense counsel and the military prosecutors. The agreement, as we understand it from sources who have seen it, provides that in return for a guilty plea, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and others will serve life terms at Gitmo, rather than be exposed at trial to the death penalty. The guilty plea is to include a public and detailed recitation of guilt. Stated differently, Mohammed agreed to reveal under oath the nature and extent of the conspiracy that resulted in the crimes of 9/11. So far, this is straightforward. While the trial judge may have given his nod of approval to the terms of the agreement, under the federal rules of criminal procedure, the agreement is not final until the judge hears the defendants actually admit guilt under oath in a public courtroom and then accepts the plea in a written order. That admission has not yet taken place because the Secretary of Defense, who learned of the plea agreement while traveling in Europe, removed the authority of the retired general supervising the prosecution to enter into plea agreements without his express approval. Thus, we have a tangled web, tangled because the government deceived the American public and federal judges about its own criminal behavior — the Bush torture regime. The signed contract was initiated and drafted by the same military prosecutors who have been ordered — against their professional judgement — to ask the trial judge to repudiate it. read the complete article
United Kingdom
Briefing: Impact of 7 October attack and aftermath on British Muslims and Jews
One year on from Hamas’ attack on Israel, we brought together British Muslim and Jewish community leaders to find out how the war had impacted life in this country. Their discussion illustrates how each group “mirrored each other”. Both communities have faced spikes in hate crime, leading to feelings across the board that Britain is not a safe place anymore. Social media was “absolutely bitter” and physical violence culminated in riots targeting mosques across England. In particular, speakers gave examples of the way children have been caught up in the hatred, with swastikas painted on school desks, or Muslim children name-called and ostracised. But both communities have found some hope, in quiet acts of kindness from one faith group to another, stronger relationships of support, and lighter moments of friendship. read the complete article
Muslims Don’t Matter by Sayeeda Warsi review – a stinging rebuke to former colleagues
Prejudices can always be rationalised: racial segregation is upheld as natural. Complaints about sexism get dismissed as emotional outbursts. Muslims encounter a particular version of this: according to hostile politicians and journalists, anger against them is their own fault. Being frightened of their faith is normal – and “Islamophobia” is just a fancy word, invented to shield extremists from criticism. Gaslighting is always hard to counter. To state what should be obvious, however, no belief system has a monopoly on either wisdom or ignorance and violence. Outliers exist in every group. The existence of flawed individuals doesn’t justify gross generalisations, though – let alone the claim that slurs are harmless. Only the most twitchy Muslim-baiter would call Sayeeda Warsi, former Conservative party chair, an extremist. Since resigning from David Cameron’s cabinet in 2014 over its “morally indefensible” policies towards Palestine, she has also campaigned against antisemitism and the persecution of Christians, earning death threats from Islamic State in the process. “It’s time to stop comparing the worst of one community to the best of another,” she writes. She’s actually been arguing that point since her Sternberg lecture in 2011, when she said that disdain for Islam was becoming so routine it passed “the dinner-table test”. Warsi doesn’t spare her former colleagues. Her account, measured but forceful, claims that Tory ministers systematically marginalised Muslim concerns, undermining human rights that should be universal. Slights and smears were commonplace, she writes, and successive administrations often preferred to engage with pliant puppets, rather than credible community leaders. Zealots like Michael Gove barely acknowledged complaints of bias, treating them as distractions or delusions. Misogyny among Muslims was deplored, but women weren’t offered assistance. Though Suella Braverman and colleagues talked up the involvement of British Pakistanis in paedophile grooming gangs, when it came to Shamima Begum, a British teenager groomed by IS, Sajid Javid removed the most basic legal protection of all: her citizenship. read the complete article
'We're still looking over our shoulders after riot'
When a riot broke out in Hull in August, fear gripped members of Muslim communities. Two months on, people who have lived in the city for decades still feel they are looking over their shoulders, but are reaching out to others to build understanding, as the BBC's Jo Makel discovers. “When the riots happened, it really was impactful,” says Bulbul Miah, the mosque secretary. “We've lived in Hull for 30 years, if not more. We've never seen something like this happening in the city. So, it was really an eye-opener – and scary.” “Hull’s been my home for almost 20 years,” one woman tells me. “But I've never felt as uncomfortable and shaken up and distressed as I did after the riots. “It's still taking a while to just feel safe again. You always have that feeling that, you know, you’re looking over your shoulder. You're always wondering, is it safe?” Another adds: “Just like anybody else, we should be able to feel free and happy. read the complete article
India
Indian Muslims say they're targets of 'bulldozer justice'
In recent years, India's Hindu Nationalist officials have been destroying houses and businesses to punish alleged criminal activity. Nearly 800,000 people, mostly Muslims, have lost homes or businesses to what's been nicknamed "bulldozer justice." India's Supreme Court has frozen the demolitions, concerned that they're harsh and arbitrary. That order is expiring as the panel meets for its next hearing. read the complete article
Germany
‘If Germany Can Do It, Why Can’t We?’
In 2015 when Angela Merkel, the former center-right chancellor of Germany, declined to shut her country’s doors to asylum seekers coming into Europe, she garnered bouquets from liberals, but also hoots from the far right and grumbling from European neighbors miffed that Germany was unilaterally taking the high ground without taking their interests into account. Nine years later, the tables have turned. In September, the government of Chancellor Olaf Scholz, a center-left Social Democrat, ordered border controls along Germany’s wide-open western and northern borders to catch undocumented immigrants. The controls were already in force along the eastern and southern borders with Poland, the Czech Republic, Austria and Switzerland, but as of Sept. 16 they were extended to the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark and France. The mass migration of people seeking refuge from war and poverty in prosperous democracies has become a major challenge of the 21st century. While it has posed differing and often real problems in different parts of North America and Europe, a common repercussion has been the rise of far-right movements, which feed popular — and often misguided — fears of invading alien tribes stealing jobs and benefits, spreading terrorism and crime and diluting national cultures and identities. The far right recently scored big in elections to the European Parliament and in France, and immigration is a primary weapon in Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. One consequence has been the rapid rise, after Ms. Merkel flung open the borders, of Alternative for Germany, or AfD, a far-right party that has morphed into a rabidly anti-immigration and anti-Muslim party that the German intelligence service has classified as “suspected extremist.” Once a marginal political player, AfD came in first and second, respectively, in state elections in the eastern states of Thuringia and Saxony. Those elections came in the wake of popular fury over a horrific knife attack in the western city of Solingen, allegedly by a Syrian whose asylum claim had been denied. read the complete article