The history of Muslims in Europe and the United States

History of Muslims in Europe and in the U.S.

Islamophobia - the United States and the European continent

The Islam is at the moment one of the most important religious, cultural, and eventually political entities of the world today. According to studies made in 2009, it represents 23% of the global population of 6.9 billion people

Even so, there are numerous accounts in which the Muslim population is the subject of discrimination or political differentiation. At the moment, this entire phenomenon is defined as Islamophobia. The present paper addresses the issue of islamophobia from the perspective of the two most important regions where it developed and where is most visible. In this sense, the research takes into account the way in which the United States as well as Europe deal with the issue of the Muslim presence. In recent years, especially after the 9/11 events the perception on Muslims has been very controversial, some arguing in favor of identifying better means to include them in the cosmopolite societies, while other argue for a marginalization and eventual exclusion of the Muslims from the respective societies. In this sense, the research paper focuses on several directions of judgement.

The first part of the paper deals with the historical background of the Muslim presence in the United States and in Europe. Indeed, the presence of the Muslims dates back centuries ago; yet, the controversies surrounding this situation has determined increased dissensions between the sides of the pros and cons.

The second part of the research focuses on the way in which the Muslims are regarded in the U.S. And Europe. The paper points out in this sense that Europe is much more affected by this islamophobia than the United States from a political point-of-view, especially given the vicinity and relations with Turkey, a potential future member of the European Union. On the other hand, the United States is more affected by the issue of Muslims from a security point-of-view, despite the fact that to this moment, there is no clear result of the causality of the Muslim presence and the terrorist threat. Even so, the reticence of the American population in general is more intense when asked about terrorism.

The third part focuses on the conclusions of the research and points out the need for better understanding of the cultural differences and religious acceptance.

The present research paper is descriptive by nature, but analytical in content. Therefore, its main aim is to present the current situation of what is islamophobia, to describe its origins, manifestations, and its reactions. However, it is important to point out that the paper addresses the issue from a political related point-of-view, thus trying to underline the fact that islamophobia is in fact a politically driven phenomenon, both in the U.S. And the EU.

Part I: Brief history of the presence of Muslims in the EU and the U.S.

The presence of the Muslim population in Europe is rather old. In this sense, it dates back to the 6th and 7th century as a result of the conquest of West Africa by the Arabs. More precisely, the islamic conquest of the Mediterranean started with the conquest of present day Syria and the Palestine between 633 and 640, after the departure of the Romans from the region

. However, despite the fact that there is proof to point out the presence of the Arabs in Africa, there is still controversy fueling the Arab Jewish conflicts which point to the actual claim of the Arabs over the Palestinian state. Although this conflict is not a part of the scope of the present research, it is important to underline that the conflict dating back to the 19th century has represented a subject for conflict since the end of the Second World War and has contributed to the image of the Islam as a terrorist religion.

The conquest of Spain by the Arabs is viewed as one of the most important events in early European history. More precisely, "the Muslim expansion continued throughout the sixth and into the seventh century. In 711 the Berber Tarik invaded and rapidly conquered Visigothic Spain. Famously by 733 the Muslims reached Poitiers in France. There a battle, more significant to westerners than Muslims, halted the Muslim advance. In truth by that stage Islam was at its limits of military expansion. Tarik gave his name to "Jabal (mount of) Tarik" or, as we say, Gibraltar. In 712 Tarik's lord, Musa ibn-Mosseyr, joined the attack. Within seven years the conquest of the peninsula was complete. It became one of the centers of Moslem civilization, and the Umayyad caliphate of Cordova reached a peak of glory in the tenth century. Spain, called "al-Andulus" by Muslims remained was at least partially under Muslim control until 1492 when Granada was conquered by Ferdinand and Isabella"

. The Reconquista period, the one started by Isabella was as well a turning point in the history of Europe because it marked, on the one hand, the end of the Arab influence in the peninsula and the start of the expansion of Spain as one of the most important colonial powers of its time.

The influence of the Arab conquest of Spain is considered as having a pivotal role for the creation of Europe as it is today. In this sense, "according to the French historian Henri Pirenne, the Islamic conquest created Europe - at least Europe as it has existed since the end of the Roman Empire. Unlike the invasions of Rome by the Germanic barbarians in the first century after Christ, which were easily absorbed into existing institutions, the Islamic invasion changed everything (...) both powers - Europe and the West and Islam as a civilization - arose together historically and constitute a challenge for one another (...) (in terms of, n.a.) European pharmacology and troubadour poetry, in the Muslim custodianship of many works of Greek philosophy through the Dark Ages"

. Despite the views of the historians, there is little consensus on this matter, as there are many who consider the stay of the Arabs to have been an inevitable ruin of the true European spirit.

The Ottoman empire played as well a crucial role not only in shaping the borders of the European continent but also by the influence it exercised throughout the centuries over countries in Eastern Europe in particular. After the Reconquista period, the Arabs became mostly identified with the Ottoman Empire and acted as a single powerful entity. The rule of the Empire in countries such as Romania, Bulgaria affected the linguistics of the region as well as their borders in the sense of the way in which territories were conquered, regained, and again set under occupation. However, the influence exercised by the Empire on the political front of the region cannot be viewed as decisive in the sense other empires extended their rule. More precisely, for instance the rule of the Russian Empire, especially during the 17th and 18th century included the creation of Russian systems of governance in the countries in its vicinity. Another point which is essential for the development of the Turkish Empire is related to the actual degree of pressure placed on the territories. In this sense, the influence the Turks had on the systems of government in Romania for instance stretched only to small regionals pasalics as called at the time, which represented administrative regions of the territories

. Still this type of organization was possible to change in exchange for a proper sum of money often guaranteeing the regional autonomy of the territories and the clear independence from the Ottoman Empire in terms of internal affairs. Therefore it can be said that not even the organization of the Empire and that of its territories was not imposed, as it could have been bought.

The actual history of the Arab world in Europe however starts after the end of the First World War and in particular after the Second World War. This is largely due to the fact that the First World War had as major consequences the break up of the European Empires. In this sense, the Ottoman Empire broke apart and left the place for the Turkish Republic which would soon become the subject of the famous Ataturk revolution. In the early 1920s the changes made by Ataturk shifted the power from a clearly oriented religious state to one which leaves place for the laicization of the country. This is one of the most important moments in the history of modern Turkey because it started the journey of a new, democratic oriented country. At the same time, this change of perspective laid the grounds for the claim that Turkey is facing more the European continent rather than the Asian one.

The migration of the Arab turks to Europe started after the end of the Second World War. The international context allowed this migration to take place and even encouraged it. In this sense, the massive loss of lives during the war left the continent with insufficient labor force for the reconstruction of Europe as devastated by the German and Russian armies. The French in particular, as they are to this day considered to be one of the greatest losers of the war (and the most important battle field of the war)

were in desperate need of men to reconstruct the country. Therefore, the immigration policies changed and allowed for an increase in the labor force flow. More precisely, "due to a perceived demographic insufficiency and labor market needs, the French government had long authorized or allowed extensive recruitment of foreign workers and colonial workers. In 1945, there was a broad consensus in governmental circles that large-scale immigration should resume. To this end, a National Immigration Office was created and given a legal monopoly over recruitment of foreign workers. (...). It welcomed the immigration and settlement of Italians and Spaniards, judged to be assimilable, while pursuing temporary foreign worker policy when North African Muslims were recruited for employment."

Similar policies were adopted not only by the French state but also by the German and the Swiss ones. The French justified its encouragement of the immigration policy as there was need for a new policy in relation to the Algerian war. After the independence of Algeria, the legal situation of the Algerian muslims had to be decided and the population was allowed to either retain their French nationality or gain the Algerian one. However, even if it was not a majority, a lot of Muslims arrived in France in the framework of the new immigration policies and the right to work in France. This led to the establishment of clear cut Muslim communities throughout France. At the same time, this was considered to have been the price paid by France to free the Algerian country

. In Germany and Switzerland, the situation was different in the sense that their immigration policies had a very particular aim which was strictly related to the improvement of the workforce with cheap, quality labor. The concept had been one dependent on the periods of economic growth and recession. More precisely, the working permits would be renewed during times of economic boosts and would be withdrew in moments of stagnation or regress. However, this was not viable especially from the point-of-view of the legal limbo the guest workers were in, especially in Germany

Given the fact that the economic recession influenced the labor market, the European states were eventually faced with unemployment rates in the community of foreign workers. Moreover, the new technologies that would eventually change the production market and the costs influenced the number of workers needed for particular areas of the European industries. In this sense, "the economic restructuring of the 1970s disproportionally adversely affected employment of aliens as they were concentrated in those sectors that suffered the most job losses. Aliens in France, for example, comprised one out of every three workers in the building sector and one out of four autoworkers. The massive job losses in these two key sectors between 1973 and 1979 greatly increased unemployment of aliens, many of whom were Muslims. The fate of largely Moroccan workers painting cars at the Renault-Flins plans outside of Paris was typical. They were replaced by robots."

This change affected the image of Muslim immigrants throughout Europe. They became associated with unemployment and with increased birth rates. While the first aspect of this assessment is presented above, the birth rate is, in line with the Muslim religion, a trait of the Islamic world. In particular, the birth rate among the European muslims increased mostly at the settled population due to a secure environment especially during the 60s and the 70s. More precisely, "these rates in fact belong to an already settled population of immigrants whose children, for example, comprise a growing proportion of the British and French population of the last quarter century"

. Moreover, the fact that the Islamic religion encourages the consideration of family as the base of the society has determined a change in the democratic spectrum of the European society as a whole.

The Muslims are at this point present from Albania to Great Britain in very large numbers as opposed to the total population of the European continent. In Albania for instance the percentage of the Muslim population reaches 70, an aspect which is explicable given the history of the Albanian state and its allegiance to the former Ottoman Empire. However, at the 2004 statistics, in Austria, the muslim population was 4.1% of the total population, in France it reached 9.6%, the Netherlands had 5.8% Muslim population, whereas in Spain, UK, Sweden, or Switzerland it varied from 2% to 4.2%

. The birth rate of the Muslim population makes it almost impossible for the statistics to follow a very precise line and constant updates are necessary.

Brief history of the Muslim presence in the U.S.

According to scholarly views, the "muslims now constitute an important part of North American society. Islam may be the fastest growing religion in the United States, poised to displace Judaism and become second only to Christianity in number of adherents. Its growth is mainly due to the rapid influx of immigrants and their relatively high birthrates, but the number of African America, Euro American, and hispanic converts is increasing too."

The initial immigration flow of Muslims in the United States tend to follow a similar path as the one in Europe, albeit of more recent date. In this sense, in the 19th century and the early 20th century there was a massive immigration into the United States in terms of Muslims from the Turkish Empire as well as from the Asian continent. This in turn determined a new categorization of American Muslim groups. Thus there are, according to Leonard Karen, three different American Muslim groups. These include African-Americans, Arabs, and the South Asian group

. This can be explained by the large cultural difference that exists in America and in particular by the history the American society has experienced. More precisely, the African-American muslims, even those descending from slave ancestors, did not conserve their religious muslim background but rather became adherents at the beginning of the 20th century. The fact that often Christianity had been associated with white people and white supremacy, drove African-Americans to other religious ideas, among which the Islamic belief. Thus, "African-American Muslim history starts again in the early 20th century, when black migration to the North encountered religions new to them and drew upon to create alternatives to Christianity and white America"

. The other groups of Muslims have maintained their religious background and have benefited from the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965.

Part II: The muslims in Europe and the U.S.

There have been wide debates on the way in which Muslims and the Islamic community tends to adapt themselves to the changing societies int he United States and the European Union. It can be said that in both regions of the world, the attitude lacks a clear sense of religious and cultural tolerance. The cases of allegation of discrimination against Muslims in France and other countries in the world, the politically incorrect attitudes of the Danish newspapers in 2005, as well as the general negative attitude facing Muslims in the United States, determined a case of Islamophobia which is present throughout the two regions under analysis. For the proper construction of the research, each of these cases is dealt with in more detail.

The situation in France is one of the most worrisome in Europe. Recently, the daughter of former far right leader Jean Marie Le Pen considered the Muslim presence in the country to represent "an occupation." More precisely, "it is an occupation of sections of the territory, of districts in which religious laws apply. it's an occupation"

. The statement addressed the comparison between the German occupation during the Second World War to that of the Muslims at the moment. The reactions were fierce in the comments made by president Sarkozy who condemned both the comparison and the statements in themselves. Even so, the situation in France provides a clear sense of tension between the local French and the Muslims.

One of the most difficult moments in the relation between the French state and the Muslim community was in early 2010 when the law banning the wear of the hijab (the Arab scarf covering the face of Muslim women) in public schools. There have been numerous discussions on the issue, as the Muslims consider it to be of religious importance. However, the general perception of the women wearing veils is of growing fundamentalism and an reconsideration of France's traditional beliefs.

The background for this scandal is represented by the 2004 banning of all ostentatious religious symbols in public schools

. The motivation of the law was, according to the Time Magazine, "that the garment serves a dual purpose for extremists: it sends French society a visually arresting message of radical Islam's presence and forces adherents to efface their identity and individuality as a gesture of faith. In announcing Sarkozy's decision, government spokesman Luc Chatel said it took aim at "a symbol of a community's withdrawal and rejection of our values" and a "violation of the dignity of women."

Therefore, the two most important justifications for the banning of religious items in public schools referred to the attack the French government viewed against the core values of the French republic as well as an offense to women's rights. However, the opponents of this initiative, as well as those who are mere commentators of this measure argue that, indeed, it is rather difficult to consider a fight against the violation of women's dignity in the conditions in which the women voluntarily cover their faces in the spirt of their guiding religious principles.

It is rather hard to determine the actual nature of the laws related to the wear of the hijab. However, the main arguments which lay at the base of the decision to ban the hijab in public schools bear no meaning if thought of it differently. In this sense, for instance, the ban of hijab implies that no woman, or girl must wear it in public schools because it represents a violation of women's rights. However, the woman, although it is not written but assumed from the International Convention of Human Rights, has the right to decide over hew well being and therefore on the type of clothes she choses to wear. However, if the veil is thus forbidden by law, this law too is in breach of women's right as there is a clear restriction on the choice of the woman. Moreover, wearing religious items in public schools is again a subject for debate. Still, there is no law in the state to suggest the banning of Christian crosses as a jewelry item or as a sign of Christian belief. Therefore, given the fact that the hijab is a sign of religious belief, there is no justification for its banning.

The situation over the banning of the veil has turned to the niqab which is the veil covering even the eyes of the woman. In this sense, in Great Britain in 2007 schools were given the power to ban its wearing

. The official justification related to the relationship teachers and the other students must have with the girls wearing them. More precisely, "efforts must be made to accommodate religious clothing, but stresses the importance of teachers and pupils being able to make eye contact"

. Moreover, the justification was underlined by the need for security. Thus, "while they should make every effort to accommodate social, religious or medical requirements of individual pupils, the needs of safety, security and effective learning in the school must always take precedence (...) if a pupil's face is obscured for any reason the teacher may not be able to judge their engagement with learning or secure their participation in discussions and practical activities"

An important case in reference to the wearing of the veil took place in Great Britain when a teaching assistant was asked by the pupils to take off the hijab and she refused to do so as there were male pupils in the classroom. The decision of the employment court where the case was tried considered that this was not a matter of religious harassment but rather a basic aspect of the education process as the children had complained they could not understand her

. The eventual effect of the row was the actual dismissal of the woman from the teaching environment.

These attitudes are not isolated. When the issue hit the United Kingdom, most of the population supported the ban of the veil, as surveys suggest "61% said they would approve a ban in airports and at passport control, 53% in courtrooms and 53% in schools"

. On the one hand it is justified as more and more threats are present at the borders of European countries. On the other hands, the human rights justification has no basis is seen from the point-of-view of the Muslim women.

The entire debate over the vail and the right of women and girls not to wear the hijab reveals in fact a more serious issue related to the actual presence of the Muslims in Europe. However, the first step to ban the religious items in France and Great Britain has determined a clear cut reaction of the cultural and religious heritage of the Islam in Europe. More precisely, in 2010, Euro parliamentarian Silvana Koch Mehrin openly stated that the wearing of the vail in Europe "openly supports values that we do not share in Europe. (...) I wish that Germany and all of Europe would also outlaw the wearing of the burqa in all its forms," she said adding that "burqa is a massive attack on women's rights"

. This can be viewed as a serious statement becuase it was made at the level of the European Parliament. Indeed, the EP represented the views and opinions of her constituency; however, previous to that statement, there were clear signals of support for this point-of-view as the Belgium and the French underwent significant steps to further ban the wearing of religious items in public, and not simply in public schools.

The veil and the religious aspects its wearing entails are part of the cultural history and background of the Muslim population. Disregarding and banning this also implies a lack of cultural cohabitation. President Sarkozy pointed out that "We [the French] cannot accept, in our country, women imprisoned behind a mesh, cut off from society, deprived of all identity. That is not the French republic's idea of women's dignity"

. There are at this moment serious discussions on the fact that the wearing of the hijab is part of the religious worship and its banning may provoke a clear divide into potentially extremist groups. Thus, the constant debate over the fact that the hijab is part of Muslim identity has triggered consequences and actions such as the ones from the militant muslims in Iraq "who in August 2004 kidnapped two French journalists, demanding that France revoke the ban on religious symbols in public schools. For them, Muslims around the world should not compromise their religious identity for any reason whatsoever"

Despite these elements, the clear negative reactions of the Europeans to the presence of the Muslims on the continent is visible throughout the region. One crucial case was that of 2005 when a Danish newspaper presented cartoons mocking the religious nature of the Islam.

One of the most controversial event in media history of the so called "Muslim-Western" war took place at the end of 2005, originating in Denmark. The Jyllands-Posten, a Danish newspaper published several Muslim connected editorial cartoons that they saw fit to put on the table of the public debate on Islam. Also, the editorials were meant to introduce in the debate on freedom of speech and freedom of expression the issue of self-censorship.

The controversy that this publication created escalated into the Muslim communities in Denmark, the European countries and soon, in the entire Islamic world. This was, for Denmark the "biggest crisis since the Nazi occupation during the second world war" and destroyed any good relations it had with the Arab world and with the classical Muslim communities. Embassies closed offices, violence erupted in Syria, Lebanon or Iran against Nordic Embassies and, eventually, the Arab League filed a motion to the United Nations to impose sanctions to Denmark. This chapter will focus on the effects of the cartoons on the overall effects on the Muslim community on a whole, and particularly in Europe, as well as the debate on freedom of speech and censorship, issues so significant within the Muslim vs. West debate.

The cartoons showed Prophet Muhammad depicted by various individuals that the newspaper invited to show how they see the prophet and Islam. Critics of these cartoons argued that they are "despicable racism (…) ridiculous and revolting."

, and produced not only the political and social antagonism of the Muslim world towards Denmark, but also had various economic effects on Danish products. The boycott that Danish Muslims, and a large majority of Muslims around the world put on Danish products created significant economic losses on the short and medium term for Nordic companies. For example, the Danish-based dairy group, Arla Foods, lost a high percentage of its 421 million dollars annual business figure with the Middle East.

This is just an example of the higher and higher number of Danish, Scandinavian and even other European brands that suffered tremendously after the cartoon incident. The entire Danish export to the Middle East was cut down by half in the next months and, as BBC News reports, between February and June 2006, the Muslim boycott created a 15,5%

decrease of Danish overall export in the world, creating severe problems for many Danish companies, especially those in the food industry. The level of unity and strategy, as well as high communication within the global Muslim community showed that, despite high differences between them, Muslims can act together in a reactive manner. It is interesting to observe that Muslims in Europe did not react in the same categorical manner as the ones in the Arab world. One of the reasons for which a lower number of them boycotted Danish or Norwegian products, or demonstrated violently on the streets is that there was a feeling with the European Muslims of lesser affront towards the Islamic religion and culture. There is a high probability that living for many years within the democratic countries of Europe, many of the Muslims understand better the existence, reasons and need for freedom of expression and speech, even when this comes close to some form of racism and intolerance.

Unfortunately, the response of the Arab community was inappropriate in many ways. At the political level, actions such as a common position of the Arab League and similar reactions from individual states are to be considered appropriate in the international relations language, even if some of the words were unsuitable, for a diplomatic language. Looking at this episode from the Arab perspective, it is a clear violation of the rules and norms of Islam and it comes against international regulations that "promote peaceful coexistence and which prohibit abuse of religion and tarnishing their images"

. The cartoons were described as Islamophobic, racist, blasphemous and an imperialistic way in which Denmark behaved towards the Islamic world. The tumbling effect of these cartoons on the social environment were far more important than the official once, because they created within the hearts and minds of Muslim communities a more hatred and fury than before towards the Western democracies. More than 100 people were killed across the Muslim world in the protests that followed the publication of these cartoons, and several embassies of Denmark with severe destruction, like the burned out one in Damascus or Beirut. Besides the Muslim or non-Muslims killed in protests in the entire Arab world, death threats and unsuccessful assassination attempts occurred for the ones responsible for the cartoons published or drawn.

The cartoons created even further problems than the ones in the Arab world or the Danish produces commercial boycott. In Denmark, as well as in other parts of a multicultural Europe, there is a strong rise of anti-immigration and right parties that gain votes and power due to several causes: fear of the unknown, differences in culture and societal standards, loss of jobs or socio-political competition for resources, just to name a few. The Danish cartoons episode and its follow ups in Norway, created a negative reaction not only from the Muslims but from the classically views Westerners. Although seen as a very open and multicultural country, Denmark's xenophobic feelings towards Muslims grow every year. Roughly 2% of the Danish population, the Muslims are not allowed a Mosque in Copenhagen for the last 20 years, and only one Muslim cemetery was recently allowed in Copenhagen. As Martin Burcharth wrote in 2006 in the New York Times

, Danish people begin to have a serious problem with the Muslim population, and not only because of the cartoon episode. This was just a spark that initiated more and more imbalance between the "natives" and the immigrants. Coupled with today's economic problems and with a higher number of immigrants, social dysfunctionalities between the two groups are evident and growing.

The Danish system of values and its democratic traditions collide often with the Islamic ones. This is valid for many countries in Europe and, as the struggle for resources grows, as extremist parties go into power and as more Muslims come to Europe, signs of a "cultural war" appear on the horizons of Europe's future. In a country that is looked as an open society like Denmark, such expressions like "cultural war" seem strange. Yet, a 2006 strategy of the Danish Ministry of Culture on preserving national heritage had as fundament the following: "In Denmark we have seen the appearance of a parallel society in which minorities practice their own medieval values and undemocratic views (…) This is the new front in our cultural war."