Addressing the “Muslim Question”

Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, 2007

As is often the case with edited volumes such as this one, the thirteen contributions (including Introduction and Conclusion) vary considerably in quality and in approach to the overall topic. I shall therefore deal with them one by one. The Introduction by two of the editors gives a brief survey of the historical background to 9/11 and its immediate aftermath, and canvasses some of the ideas in the articles to follow. It points out, perhaps provocatively, that 'Al Qa'eda is not as marginal in Muslim society as is made out by the West and many analysts' (p. 9). The next four contributions are grouped as 'Part I: Theoretical Issues'. Theodore Gabriel argues that the relation between Islam and the West has more often been 'one of mutual interdependence' (p. 18) than enmity but that Muslims have genuine grievances against injustices done by the West, especially in the case of the Palestinians, and these lead to antagonism. John J. Shepherd, by contrast, argues unremittingly that the content of the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim scriptures conduce almost logically to extremism, whether that of Israeli West Bank settlers, Christian anti-Semites, Muslim terrorists, or others surveyed. The need is for greater self-criticism and a recognition that moral criteria stand above religious dogma: not an easy demand. Kenneth Cragg argues that the Meccan (rather than the Medinan) situation of Muhammad should guide current Muslim attitudes toward global politics. The argument is suggestive, creative but somewhat confusing, in a way typical of other writings of his that I have read. Ron Greaves presents the basic dilemma of modern Islam, the loss of its previous pre-eminence and the struggle to regain it, and four ideological positions into which most Muslims fall. He warns against identifying as 'moderate' those who most share the Western worldview, which claims to be pluralist but has its own absolutism, and he calls for a more genuine pluralism. The rest of the contributions are in 'Part II: Case Studies'. Marcia Hermanson deals with responses to 9/11, with the search for a 'good' or

Islam and Muslims in the West, 2018

Founded in 1952 by the Palestinian jurist Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani (1909-1977), Hizb ut-Tahrir’s (HT) raison d’être is the re-establishment of the Caliphate. HT currently has a presence in over forty countries, an estimated membership of a million people, and some millions of supporters across the world. My dissertation examines how HT’s formulation of the caliphate—particularly as it expresses itself in Britain—functions as a site of “Muslim modernity.” It is my contention, in other words, that HT’s ideas of the caliphate are inseparable from, and are thought through—consciously and unconsciously—modern western notions of being and thinking which permeate “the unconscious of knowledge” for people around the world, for the crucial reason that colonialism fundamentally reconfigured knowledge systems across the world, not least the Muslim world. I argue, in other words, that contemporary modes of being Muslim—whether religiously, politically, culturally, ethically—are necessarily inflected by modern western notions of being, as they form the backdrop to our global sense of being in the world. As such, HT’s modern Islamic political project—or any Islamic project, for that matter—is not so much an alien mode of thinking about politics—or ethics, or culture, or religion, or what have you—vis-à-vis western modes of being and thinking, but rather is part and parcel of modern western life writ large.

Feminist Dissent, 2016

Through the erasure of cultural practices and a denial of the diversity of Muslims and Islamic practices across the world, Islamists are reinforcing their world view and creating a homogenous, monolithic Muslim identity, an identity in which culture and history are to be separated from Islam and Islamic practice, in which there is no space for ethnic or tribal identities, and where national, regional and local boundaries are irrelevant. This is a world in which only the boundaries of the Ummah (Muslim world) count, where there is only one law, religious law (Sharia), and in which an identity in which the separation of religion and state is heretical. The religious community is the state, the Ummah is the community, every aspect of one's life is circumscribed by religion and women, their lives and their bodies are the battleground. Anything that does not fit with their world view is simply swept away as not Islamic. Their message and teachings are spread through extensive use of social media, satellite broadcast channels, podcasts, conferences and events, local religious bookshops, study circles, mosques and the establishment of Islamic institutions including schools and Sharia courts. In this article I equate Islamism with Salafis i , 'a term which literally means predecessors but in the Islamic context means those who follow the practices of the

Unpublished Paper, 2012

This article compares American and European policy discourses and practices towards 'Islam' as a religion and the 'Muslim world' as a specific religious-defined category of countries and peoples in world politics. In the European case, we explore the policies of EU institutions as well as two key European countries with important international roles such as the U.K. and France. This comparative analysis reveals that there are multiple and conflicting approaches to 'Islam' across the American and European (EU, British, and French) cases. We argue that the variety of approaches observed is rooted in diverse understandings – based on different American, EU, British, and French identities, geopolitics, power resources, and security interests – of what 'Islam' and the 'Muslim world' are. This article investigates and compares American and European foreign policy discourses and practices towards 'Islam' and the 'Muslim world'. To be clear, we do not investigate counter terrorism policies in any particular detail. Nor are we interested in unpacking American and European approaches to specific countries or Islamist movements (whether violent or non violent) within or beyond the Middle East. We are instead interested in policies which have come to be increasingly and explicitly designed to address and target 'Islam', as a particular world religion, and the 'Muslim world', as a set of countries that cuts across continents and a category of people which transcends national borders identified primarily by their particular religious identity. In particular this article starts from the premise that following the attacks of 9/11 the American foreign policy establishment has developed a range of policies and institutions organized around the notion that 'Islam' and the 'Muslim world' are

A new form of political discourse hostile to Islam has been gaining ground in Europe. Initiated by neo-nationalist parties it appeals to liberal values and is now penetrating mainstream politics. The recent French presidential campaign threw light on the way Centre Right parties vying for government are increasingly instrumentalizing hostility towards Islam to respond to the political crisis triggered by the problem of public debt across the European Union. Critics are approaching this phenomenon through the lens of Foucault's notion of governmentality, questioning the assertion that Muslims cannot integrate in European societies because of their religion and highlighting the failure of European nation states to treat them as citizens and promote their socio-economic inclusion. This perspective yields valuable insights: it shows how the presence of Muslims challenges the belief of European societies in their self-perceived rationality and tolerance, resting on their commitment to secularity as epistemic category. The strident defense of secularism that accompanies Islamophobia is part of the discourse of securitization that characterizes the neo-liberal form of contemporary governmentality and promotes the de-politicization of social problems. The notion of governmentality, however, cannot account fully for the root-cause of Islamophobia: the loss of collective purpose that has triggered a crisis of government and seen the concern for efficient governance to erase the goal of collective self-determination. At heart, Islamophobia constitutes a manifestation of the European states' crisis of democratic legitimacy.

Thinking Through Islamophobia: Global Perspectives, 2010