Islamophobia
Islamophobia: The Challenges of Pluralism in the 21st Century

In recent years, books on ‘Islamophobia’ have suddenly mushroomed in the already crowded market of scholarship on Muslims in the West. This year alone, at least another five books will be published on the subject (Ansari and Hafez, 2012; Helbling, 2012; Lean, 2012; Morgan and Poynting, 2012; Taras, 2012). It is therefore opportune to reflect on the origins, usage and definition of the term in question. This is what Chris Allen (2010) sets out to achieve in his offering based on over a decade of research in this area including a PhD published in 2006. Allen can certainly claim to be one of the foremost experts on the subject. He has regularly provided evidence for the All Party Parliamentary Group on Islamophobia that was initially set up in November 2010 and recently wrote a report on the functioning of the group in July 2011 after some controversy over its secretariat (Allen 2011). He also co-authored the 2002 report of the then European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (now known as the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights) entitled Summary Report on Islamophobia in the EU after 11 September 2001. It was of course another report on Islamophobia produced by the Runnymede Trust which first established the use of this term, at least in academia if not among the wider public. Since the momentous events of 9/11 it has become increasingly pertinent and is now regularly referred to by politicians, journalists and international bodies such as the United Nations.

The Runnymede Trust established the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia in 1996. Chaired by Professor Gordon Conway, the commission's report Islamophobia: a challenge for us all was published in 1997. One of the main aims of Allen's book is to critique the definition of Islamophobia that came out of this report. This is an important task as it is often still referred to as the benchmark for deciding what constitutes Islamophobia. Others have also weighed in with various definitions over the last few years (Stolz, 2005; Bunzl, 2007; Gottschalk and Greenberg, 2008; Bravo López, 2011). Allen's book has the aim of clearing up some of the ambiguity that exists around the term and he proffers his own definition in the concluding pages. Indeed, the very validity of using the word ‘Islamophobia’ has become a political issue. In France, for example, the anti-racist movement has been torn over this and many refuse to speak of Islamophobia (Peace, 2012). This uneasiness and contestation over the word is brought into focus by Allen. The main concern is that criticism of Islam or Muslims becomes conflated with anti-Muslim prejudice leading to possible restrictions on freedom of speech. These issues have of course been drawn to our attention with the publication of the caricatures of Mohammed in Denmark and before that with the Rushdie affair in Great Britain. In the opening chapters Allen rightly identifies the controversy over the publication of The Satanic Verses and the subsequent fatwa again Salman Rushdie as a defining event in shaping how Muslims and Islam have been viewed in Europe, particularly in the UK. He also covers some of the significant historical episodes of anti-Muslim sentiment in Europe from the Crusades to colonial expansion. He is however keen to point out that, unlike other authors, Allen does not see contemporary Islamophobia as merely the re-emergence of a historical anti-Islamic phenomenon.

Chapters four and five of the book offer a detailed study of the putting together of the 1997 Runnymede report and what is referred to as the ‘Runnymede model’ of Islamophobia. While some may appreciate the historical insight, it seems a little unnecessary for a book which almost certainly seeks an audience outside of academia. This is, in fact, one of the many examples in the book where the transition from doctoral thesis to monograph has been not entirely successful. Despite this, Allen does convincingly show that this report both failed to establish a sound case for the adoption of ‘Islamophobia’ and that the model they proposed failed to differentiate between this and racism based on markers such as ethnicity. He also sees the report as contradictory, inconsistent and incoherent as well as being prone to a process of essentialising Muslims, albeit in a manner quite different from those who are Islamophobic. Such criticisms of the report have been made by others, notably the late Fred Halliday, whose work Allen refers to. Unlike Halliday (1999) though, Allen believes that the concept of Islamophobia should not be discarded in favour of alternatives such as ‘anti-Muslim racism’. Such terms, he argues, have their own failings and Islamophobia has achieved a certain level of recognition in social and political discourse. He is therefore convinced that ‘Islamophobia, for all its weaknesses and inadequacies might be the best, if not only, option at this present juncture’ (Allen, 2010, p. 138). Drawing on the work of John Thompson, Allen sees Islamophobia as an ideology that is perpetuated through various ‘modes of operation’ that entail exclusionary practices that disadvantage, prejudice or discriminate against Muslims and Islam. Interestingly enough, unlike many other authors (Meer and Modood, 2009) he does not see it as a form of cultural racism.

The definition of Islamophobia that Allen concludes with is unfortunately rather tortuous and unworkable. Providing a parsimonious description of complicated social phenomena is taxing, but using 224 words to do so is not helpful if one wishes to successfully operationalise the term for social research. What is more, the author often shies away from giving concrete examples of what can be considered as Islamophobia. For example, discussing events in Britain such as Jack Staw's comments on the niqab, it is apparently ‘unclear’ whether this can be construed as Islamophobia. Similarly, we are told that it is ‘open to debate’ whether the various security measures taken as part of the crackdown on suspected terrorists amount to Islamophobia. It is frustrating that in a book which purports to provide greater clarity regarding what Islamophobia is, Allen often decides to sit on the fence. Also, despite repeated references to the term being contested, particularly in continental Europe, he does not take these criticisms head on and deal with them. The question of whether Islamophobia exists is ‘entirely legitimate’ and ‘yet to be convincingly answered’ but this book also fails to provide the answers the reader is looking for. Another frustrating aspect is the frequency of convoluted and often poorly phrased sentences which detract from getting the author's point across.

Where the book does succeed, however, is in pointing out examples which are definitely not cases of Islamophobia. For example, he notes that the lower educational attainment of British school children of Pakistani or Bangladeshi heritage can not be attributed to Islamophobia as there is no evidence to suggest that this is a result of their ‘Muslim-ness.’ Indeed, he admits that because of the strict criteria he sets out for something to be considered as Islamophobia, it ‘renders much of that put forward as being Islamophobia as invalid’ (Allen, 2010, p. 162). This is important as he repeatedly stresses the need for the term to be taken seriously and not bandied around as a cheap criticism. He admits that much of the research into Islamophobia is inconclusive and limited and that despite the name, it should not be seen as a ‘phobia’ that can be pathologised. Reading through the discussion one is reminded of the debates over what constitutes antisemitism. The book could have benefited from a wider engagement with this literature and a closer comparison with prejudice against Jews. Indeed, the working definition that the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) proposed for antisemitism in 2005 could have been used as a template for a clear definition of Islamophobia. Replacing the appropriate words, this would have given us the following:

Islamophobia is a certain perception of Muslims, which may be expressed as hatred towards Muslims. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of Islamophobia are directed toward Muslim or non-Muslim individuals and/or their property, toward Muslim community institutions and religious facilities.

The EUMC/FRA definition also provides a list of examples of antisemitism which are absent in Allen's account. In his most recent report, however, he does correct this oversight by informing us that Islamophobia is ‘when ordinary British people are spat upon, shoved, verbally abused, discriminated against in the workplace, beaten up, have their houses graffitied and fire-bombed or even worse, just because they are—or are believed to be—Muslim. When ordinary British people are discriminated from being asked for interviews or given jobs on the basis that they have a 'Muslim' name … when blatant lies and mistruths appear in the media about Muslims and their organisations’ (Allen, 2011, p. 8).

One must give credit to Allen for stepping into an area of scholarship which is a political minefield, as the controversy over the All Party Parliamentary Group on Islamophobia attests. However, it remains to be seen whether his definition of Islamophobia will be taken up by others writing on the subject. The contributions to the volume edited by John Esposito and Ibrahim Kalin (2011) still rely, for the most part, on the Runnymede definition. Esposito was of course one of the first scholars to address the issue of the fear of Islam in The Islamic Threat: Myth or Reality first published back in 1992. In his introduction to this new edited collection on Islamophobia, Esposito refers to it as a ‘social cancer’ that must be recognised along antisemitism. By bringing together contributors from Europe and America, the collection is designed to illuminate the causes of Islamophobia on both sides of the Atlantic. However, it must be said that the majority of the case studies concentrate on the UK and the USA and the absence of a contribution on Canada is regrettable. Ibrahim Kalin's chapter argues that Islamophobia is a form of racism which cannot be separated from the ethnic or racial hatred of Arabs, Asians and Blacks. The result of this is a sense of victimisation and marginalisation of second and third generation Muslims. He also notes that this pressure on Muslim communities from the outside makes them less likely to engage in self-criticism.

The chapter by Jocelyne Cesari deals more critically with the concept of Islamophobia, which in previous work she has described as ‘more a predicament than an explanation’. It is contested because ‘it has often been imprecisely applied to very diverse phenomena, ranging from xenophobia to antiterrorism’. Cesari's is the only contribution that engages in a comparison between Europe and the USA and this makes it perhaps the most illuminating of all the chapters. She argues that in Europe Muslims may face discrimination because they are socio-economically marginalised rather than because they form a religious minority. For this reason it is hard to identify when this discrimination is a result of Islamophobia and when it is simply a case of general anti-immigrant or xenophobic attitudes. Muslims in the USA tend to have higher levels of education and income levels and therefore they are less likely to suffer from this form of discrimination. Islam is also a particularly thorny issue in Europe because it calls into question existing models of state–church relations as well as European conceptions of secularism. Cesari seems to argue that American society is better equipped to deal with religious pluralism, although as other chapters in the volume point out, Islamophobia is still very much present in the USA. Sunaina Maira shows how in the wake of 9/11 both Arab and South Asian Americans have come under intense scrutiny for signs of betrayal to the nation. She explores the impact of this situation on South Asian Muslim immigrant youth which has interesting parallels with research carried out in Britain among young Muslims. Tahir Abbas and Kate Zebiri address Islamophobia in the UK, in particular the role of the British media. Zebiri's contribution is of particular interest as she investigates how British Muslim converts experience Islamophobia. Her results lend credence to the theory of Islamophobia as a form of cultural racism, as some female women converts reported being spoken to slowly as if they did not understand English just because they wore the hijab.

The most controversial chapter in the collection is that of Sherman Jackson who is the only author who sees Islamophobia as a phobia—the irrational fear of Islam. He challenges what he sees as the racial agnosticism of many Muslims in the USA, and sees this as a danger for the second and third generations who may suffer from an identity crisis as they are placed ‘into a racial non-category that disqualifies them from the benefits of America's quest for historical redemption’ (p. 101). Because of the enduring significance of race, American Muslims need to carve out their own racial identity if they are to avoid being cast as simply non-American. This was evident in the attempt to portray Barack Obama as an Arab Muslim in the run up to the 2008 presidential election.

Esposito and Kalin have put together a good collection of thought-provoking pieces even if it is heavily orientated towards the British and US experiences. In such a volume it is perhaps unrealistic to expect all authors do adopt the same definition of Islamophobia but the divergences in interpretation do show that we still need a more workable definition that is credible and useable for comparative and causal analysis. Chris Allen makes a reasonable attempt at this but gets bogged down in too many details and caveats. It is also not clear to me that Islamophobia is necessarily an ideology. A more fruitful approach maybe that of Erik Bleich (2011) who simply defines it as ‘indiscriminate negative attitudes or emotions directed at Islam or Muslims’. He even goes further by trying to develop reliable indicators for the concept so that it can be measured—through for example surveys, focus groups or interview data. He reminds us that if the concept is going to be useful for social scientists, it has to have value for causal analysis. It therefore becomes essential that subsequent studies on Islamophobia are coming from the same starting point. As the number of works on the topic grows, it remains to be seen which definition, if any, can become the standard so that a deeper understanding can be arrived at through further comparative research.