Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia (Cultura. Vol. IX, No

Home , Irshad Manji, Symbols of Islam, The Caged Virgin, Wafa Sultan, War on Islam controversy, Ziauddin Sardar

CULTURA 2012_263867_VOL_9_No1_GR_A5Br.indd 1 CULTURA mote theexplorationofdifferentvalues andculturalphenomenain ted tophilosophyofcultureandthestudyvalue. Itaimstopro- www.peterlang.de are ding thevalues andculturalphenomenainthecontempo that research original on based judged tomake anovelandimportantcontributiontounderstan- manuscripts of submission the contexts. international and regional and ulture C F ounded in2004, ISBN 978-3-631-63867-5 ISBN xiology A hilosophy of hilosophy P of ournal J International ultura. C isasemiannualpeer-reviewed journaldevo- T he editorial board encourages encourages board editorial he rary world. 2012

International journal of philosophy of 1 culture and axiology CULTURA CULTURA 2012 and axiology of philosophyculture Internat i onal journal journal onal Vol IX Peter Lang 24.07.12 15:37:38 Uhr No 1 No CULTURA 2012_263867_VOL_9_No1_GR_A5Br.indd 1 CULTURA C F www.peterlang.de are ding thevalues andculturalphenomenainthecontempo that research original on based judged tomake anovelandimportantcontributiontounderstan- manuscripts of submission the contexts. international and regional mote theexplorationofdifferentvalues andculturalphenomenain ted tophilosophyofcultureandthestudyvalue. Itaimstopro ounded in2004, ulture and and ulture A xiology C ultura. International International ultura. isasemiannualpeer-reviewed journaldevo- T he editorial board encourages encourages board editorial he J ournal of of ournal P hilosophy of hilosophy rary world. - 2012

International journal of philosophy of 1 culture and axiology CULTURA CULTURA 2012 and ax of ph Internat i losophy ofculture i ology i onal journal journal onal Vol IX P eter 24.07.12 15:37:38 Uhr L No 1 No ang CULTURA

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF CULTURE AND AXIOLOGY Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology E-ISSN (Online): 2065-5002 ISSN (Print): 1584-1057

Advisory Board Prof. dr. Mario Perniola, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy Prof. dr. Paul Cruysberghs, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Prof. dr. Michael Jennings, Princeton University, USA Prof. Emeritus dr. Horst Baier, University of Konstanz, Germany Prof. dr. José María Paz Gago, University of Coruña, Spain Prof. dr. Maximiliano E. Korstanje, John F. Kennedy University, Buenos Aires, Argentina Prof. dr. Nic Gianan, University of the Philippines Los Baños, Philippines Prof. dr. Alexandru Boboc, Correspondent member of the Romanian Academy, Romania Prof. dr. Teresa Castelao-Lawless, Grand Valley State University, USA Prof. dr. Richard L. Lanigan, Southern Illinois University, USA Prof. dr. Fernando Cipriani, G.d’Annunzio University Chieti-Pescara, Italy Prof. dr. Elif Cirakman, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey Prof. dr. David Cornberg, University Ming Chuan, Taiwan Prof. dr. Carmen Cozma, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University Iassy, Romania Prof. dr. Nancy Billias, Department of Philosophy, Saint Joseph College, Hartford, USA Prof. dr. Christian Möckel, Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany Prof. dr. Leszek S. Pyra, Pedagogical University of Cracow, Poland Prof. dr. A. L. Samian, National University of Malaysia Prof. dr. Dimitar Sashev, University of Sofia, Bulgaria Prof. dr. Kiymet Selvi, Anadolu University, Istanbul, Turkey Prof. dr. Traian D. Stănciulescu, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University Iassy, Romania Prof. dr. Gloria Vergara, University of Colima, Mexico Prof. dr. Devendra Nath Tiwari, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India Prof. dr. Massimo Leone, University of Torino, Italy Prof. dr. Christian Lazzeri, Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense, France Prof. dr. Asunción López-Varela Azcárate, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain

Editorial Board Editor-in-Chief: Co-Editors: Prof. dr. Nicolae Râmbu Prof. dr. Aldo Marroni Faculty of Philosophy and Social- Facoltà di Scienze Sociali Political Sciences Università degli Studi G. d’Annunzio Alexandru Ioan Cuza University Via dei Vestini, 31, 66100 Chieti B-dul Carol I, nr. 11, 700506 Iasi, Romania Scalo, Italy [email protected] [email protected] Executive Editor: PD Dr. Till Kinzel Dr. Simona Mitroiu Englisches Seminar Human Sciences Research Department Technische Universität Braunschweig, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University Bienroder Weg 80, Lascar Catargi, nr. 54, 700107 Iasi, Romania 38106 Braunschweig, Germany [email protected] [email protected]

Editorial Assistant: Dr. Marius Sidoriuc Designer: Aritia Poenaru Cultura International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology Vol. 9, No. 1 (2012)

Editor-in-Chief Nicolae Râmbu

PETER LANG Frankfurt am Main · Berlin · Bern · Bruxelles · New York · Oxford · Wien Bibliographic Information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de.

Umschlagabbildung: © Aritia Poenaru

ISSN 2065-5002

ISBN 978-3-631-63867-5 © Peter Lang GmbH Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften Frankfurt am Main 2012 All rights reserved. All parts of this publication are protected by copyright. Any utilisation outside the strict limits of the copyright law, without the permission of the publisher, is forbidden and liable to prosecution. This applies in particular to reproductions, translations, microfilming, and storage and processing in electronic retrieval systems. www.peterlang.de

CONTENTS

CULTURAL ILLUSIONS

Danial YUSOF 7 Parallels between Contemporary Western and Islamic Thought on the Discourse of Power and Knowledge

Andrei CORNEA 29 Relativity and Relativism: On a Failed Analogy

Andityas Soares DE MOURA COSTA MATOS 43 A Western Cultural Illusion: State and Law or State as Law?

Steven CRESAP, Louis TIETJE 57 Irreconcilable Foundations: An Analysis of the Cultural Environment Facing Moral Educators

Liudmila BAEVA 73 Existential Axiology

Paola PARTENZA 85 Mary Wollstonecraft: Ideology and Political Responsibility

Dan-Eugen RAŢIU New Theoretical Framework for Approaching Artistic Activity: the 101 Principle of Uncertainty. Pierre-Michel Menger’s Sociology of Creative Work

Frederic WILL 123 Cultural Illusions

Dennis IOFFE 135 The Notion “Ideology” in the Context of the Russian Avant-Garde

Abdul Rashid MOTEN 155 Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia

Seungbae PARK 179 Against Moral Truths

Reena CHERUVALATH 195 Analyzing the Concept of Self-Deception in Indian Cultural Context

Alexander BAUMGARTEN 205 Li/toij ferome/noij. Notes towards Plotinus’ Semiology of Heaven

Morten Ebbe Juul NIELSEN 215 The Duty to Recognize Culture

Madalena D’OLIVEIRA-MARTINS 235 The New Feminine Emotional Codes in Hochschild: New Perspectives for Modern Social Studies

Vilmos VOIGT 249 The Bridge in Semiotics

10.5840/cultura20129127

Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178

Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia

Abdul Rashid MOTEN Department of Political Science International Islamic University Malaysia Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia [email protected]

Abstract. Though centuries old, Islamophobia has increased in intensity as it is ex- tensively documented by surveys and reports published by various governmental and non-governmental organizations. This dislike towards Islam and Muslims is, due, amongst other factors, to an increasing number of Muslim citizens and asylum seekers in the West bent upon preserving their own identity giving rise to the perception of “us” versus “them.” Such negative evaluations by the in-group may be due to the conflicting values, beliefs and the actual or perceived threat posed by Muslims. This is also attributed to the negative messages transmitted by the national media and the powerful elite. The strategy for countering Islamophobia must con- centrate on “unlearning intolerance” by focusing on removing negative perceptions through education, reforming the media and reshaping the foreign policy of West- ern powers. Keywords: Islamophobia, Social-identity, Muslims in the West, Media and Islam, Islamic Threat

ISLAMOPHOBIA: EXPLAINING MILITANCY AND VIOLENCE

Islamophobia has been a contested concept. The reason, as suggested by Cesari is that “it is often imprecisely applied to very diverse phenomena, ranging from xenophobia to anti-terrorism” (Cesari, 2006: 6). It has been used interchangeably with neo-Orientalism, anti-Muslimism or cultural racism. Nevertheless, the concept has been used in many circles and hence requires clarification. French in origin, first used by Etienne Dinet and Slima Ben Ibrahim (1925), the word “Islamophobia” in English first appeared in an article by Edward Said in 1985 (Said, 1985: 1-15). Since then, and particularly since about 2000, the term has gained a greater discursive prevalence. Most of the existing literature use the term Islam- ophobia to refer to “the intolerance and discrimination against Muslims” implying therefore, that the term entails both an attitudinal and a behavioral component. The OIC observatory defines it as “an irrational or very powerful fear or dislike of Islam” (OIC Observatory, 2008). Its

155 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia manifestations include prejudice, stereotyping, hostility, discriminatory treatment, denigration of the most sacred symbols of Islam, and non- recognition of Islam and Muslims by the law of the land. John Esposito and Dalia Mogahed (2007: 136), suggested that “Islamophobia was coined to describe a two-stranded form of racism – rooted in both the ‘different’ physical appearance of Muslims and also in an intolerance of their religious and cultural beliefs.” The Runnymede Trust report defines Islamophobia as “unfounded hostility towards Islam” and the conse- quent “unfair discrimination against Muslim individuals and communities (…)” (Runnymede Trust, 1997). Some scholars criticize the report for oversimplifying a complex issue (Fred Halliday, 2003). Others, however, use the definition approvingly (Esposito and Kalin, 2011) thus, giving it some discursive resonance. The Runnymede Trust points out that Islamophobes consider Islam as a static bloc separate from the West and is seen as the “other,” inferior, irrational, barbaric and violent. Hence, many in the West consider it appropriate to exclude “Muslims from mainstream society.” The denigration of Islam by the West as a religion of terror and extremism is a cause of concern in the Muslim world. Is- lamophobia, as pointed out by Kofi Annan, “is at once a deeply personal issue for Muslims, a matter of great importance to anyone concerned about upholding universal values, and a question with implications for international harmony and peace”(Secretary General, 2004). Though not spelled out in the existing literature, Islamophobia is an attitude which is “the amount of affect for or against some object”(Fishbein and Azjen 1975, 11). It “is simply a person’s general feeling of favourableness or unfavourableness” (Azjen and Fishbein, 1980: 54). Specifically, Islamophobia refers to a negative attitude towards Islam and Muslims. There are various theories that explain this attitude for- mation. The social identity theory is based on the argument that people yearn for a positive self identity, which is largely derived from social group membership (Turner, Brown and Tajfel, 1979). People belonging to a group evaluate themselves positively as against others who are looked at negatively. People usually identify themselves with the national group and develop positive attitude towards their own country and people while holding a negative attitude towards out-groups living within the country or abroad (Decker, 2001; Coenders and Sheepers, 2004; Ha- gendoorn and Poppe, 2004). Such negative evaluations may be due to the conflicting values and beliefs and the actual or perceived threat posed

156 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178 by the members of the out-group. Scholars have also attributed negative attitudes to the frequently received negative messages about the out- groups from family members, friends, elites and the mass media. Of these agencies, elites and mass media play dominant role as they possess the most resources and skills to influence and manipulate perceptions and emotions. The messages emanating from the media are basically com- munications aimed at changing people's attitudes and behaviours. Islamophobia, it has been noted by many scholars, does not refer to a critical study of Islam or a disapproving analysis of Islam. It refers specifically to negative attitudes towards Islam and Muslims and their manifestations in words and deeds. Admittedly, it is difficult to distinguish between legitimate criticism of Islam and, in the language of Runnymede Trust, “unfounded hostility.” It is absolutely essential, however, to be clear about the analytical distinction between the two. Islamophobia, is an attitude that sees Islam as a retarded monolithic block resisting change and modernization. Attitudes toward social groups and other issues define social and personal identities promoting or militating peaceful social existence. Using social identity theory as a framework, this study analyzes the attitudinal and behavioral aspects of Islamophobia in the Western world. This is followed by a consideration of factors that gave rise to Islamophobia and the policies advocated for ameliorating the situation and to establish a just, humane world order.

ISLAMOPHOBIA ON THE RISE

The word Islamophobia is used widely in the UK media. The term was used hundreds of times in the Guardian in 2007 as against 26 times in the New York Times (Cesari, 2009). Nevertheless, attack on Muslims and Is- lam continue in the United States as it is in Europe and other places. In Britain, for instance, Muslims are characterized as a “problem community” in statements made by Government and police officials (The Muslim Council of Britain, 2005). There is a mass of polling data that shows hostility to Muslims in various guises and under many headings. Analyzing the data relating to Islamophobia in the United Kingdom, between the years 1988-2006, Clive Field (2007: 466) has observed that “there ap- pears to be an increasing perception that Muslims in Britain are slow to integrate into mainstream society, feel only a qualified sense of patriot- ism and are prone to espouse anti-Western values that lead many to con-

157 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia done so-called Islamic terrorism.” Mosques and Muslim institutions have been attacked and bombed, and individuals have been punched, kicked, stabbed and shot in many countries including Austria, France, the Neth- erlands, Spain, Russia and the United Kingdom. Hate crime of this kind in London increased, after the London bombings on July 7, 2005, “by an estimated 600 percent” (Human Rights First, 2007: 1). Two years later, the EUMC noted in Britain, the vulnerability of Muslims to face discrimination “and manifestations of Islamophobia in the form of anything from verbal threats through to physical attacks on people and property” (European Monitoring Centre for Racism and Xenophobia 2007, 108). The situation, according to an accompanying report, “had deteriorated over the last five years” (European Monitoring Centre for Racism and Xenophobia, 2007: 7). Islamophobia has also been noted outside Britain. European countries, as Clayton (2002) pointed out, worked without a clear operational definition of Islamophobia. Some adopted the definition provided by the Runnymede report, others considered all anti-Muslim activities as Islam- ophobic. Manifestations of Islamophobia are reported across the Euro- pean Union and other areas in various sectors including government institutions, employment, housing and health. In 2011, the European Mus- lim Research Centre voiced their concern: “In the thirteen years since the Runnymeade Trust published Islamophobia: A Challenge For Us All the problem of anti-Muslim hate crimes in Europe has grown worse not bet- ter” (Lambert and Githens-Mazer, 2011: 184). What is true of Europe is equally true of the United States, where several key polls indicated not merely that Islamophobia exists but also that it continues to rise on a yearly basis. According to the USA To- day/Gallup poll, some 39 percent of Americans felt some prejudice against Muslims. Almost the same percentage favored requiring Muslims, citizens and non-citizens alike, to carry a special ID as a “means of preventing terrorist attacks in the United States.” Some 22 percent of respondents to USA Today/Gallup poll would not want American Muslims as their neighbors. (Council on American-Islam Relations, 2007: 6). Rep. Virgil Goode slammed the planned use of the Qur’an for the congres- sional swearing in ceremony for Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress. The New Yorker magazine of 21 July 2008 published a satiri- cal cover that shows Senator Barack Obama in a Muslim robe and turban, his wife Michelle as a terrorist wearing a machine gun, the American

158 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178 flag burning and a picture of Osama bin Laden at the background. The intention obviously was to further instil fear in the minds of people should Obama, alleged to be a Muslim, be elected president of the Unit- ed States. Prejudice against Muslims in the West has increased since the Septem- ber 11, 2001 incidents. A Washington Post/ABC News Poll found in 2006 that the negative view of Islam amongst Americans has increased by seven percentage points from 39 to 46 percent. The poll also shows that the proportion of Americans holding the view that Islam encourages violence against non-Muslims, have more than doubled since the 9/11 attacks, from 14 percent in 2002 to 33 percent in 2006. A Pew Research Centre survey found about a third of Americans, 36 percent, believed that Islam encourages violence amongst its followers (Esposito and Mogahed, 2007: 46). Many human rights organizations have documented this increase in Islamophobic events and hate crimes against Muslims. Kofi Annan, in his speech, referred to this “increasingly widespread big- otry (…) a sad and troubling development” (Secretary General, 2004). The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) documented 1,717 incidents of violence against Muslims, ranging from verbal taunts, employment discrimination and airport profiling, from September 11 through February 2002. In its June 2007 report on the status of Muslim civil rights in the United States 2007, CAIR counted 2,467 incidents and experiences of anti-Muslim violence and discrimination in 2006 compared to 1,972 cases in 2005 (Council on American-Islamic Relations AIR 2007: 5). The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2002) reported 301 cases of Muslims having been fired from their jobs. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), as of June 2002, had in- vestigated 111 complaints from airline passengers being singled out at security screenings because of their ethnic or religious appearance (Wan, 2002). For the same reason, additional 31 passengers were barred alto- gether from boarding airplanes. CAIR published its report in 2011 documenting the close-minded prejudice against or hatred of Islam and Muslims in America. The Gallup Centre for Muslim Studies reported in the early part of 2010, that 43 percent of Americans admitted to feeling some prejudice toward Mus- lims. The CAIR document also cites the CBS poll, conducted in Sep- tember 2010, showing some 58% of Americans knew someone who had negative feelings toward Muslims. The Pew Research Centre found that

159 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia the public’s favourable rating of Islam dropped from 40 percent in No- vember 2001 to 30 percent in August 2010. Likewise, in late November 2010, the Public Research Institute found that 45 percent of Americans agree that Islam is at odds with American values (Council on American- Islamic Relations, 2011: 23). Thus, the polls consistently showed that a sizable number of Americans hold prejudiced views toward Muslims. In- terviews conducted by CAIR researchers concluded that there is a general societal acceptance of derogatory commentaries about Islam and Muslims. The governments in many countries have enacted laws prohibiting discrimination. However, these laws have not prevented inhumane treatment of Muslims. Discrimination is evident in random stop-and- search practices by the police, in unnecessary harassment of Muslims, and in the recruitment and retaining of Muslims in the police force. Mus- lims face manifold challenges in obtaining employment and gaining ac- cess to public services. In education, Muslims are the victims of segrega- tion, racist bullying and unfair treatment. At the societal level, Muslims and some other descendants segregate themselves from the society (Gauci, 2011).

HISTORICAL ROOTS OF ISLAMOPHOBIA

Hostility towards Islam and Muslims has been a feature of Western societies for centuries. Dante Alighieri, an Italian poet from Florence, placed Prophet Muhammad in the circle of hell reserved for heretics. This antithetical relationship was perpetuated by the Crusades. There has appeared a plethora of popular literature in justification of the Crusades for the repossession of the Holy Land by Western Christendom from the militant, fanatic and illegitimate Muslim occupants. The Muslims were portrayed as the “other” because they fanatically believe in a wrong religion. Christopher Marlowe and William Shakespeare depicted the Sara- cen, Moor and the Turk in less than positive terms (Daniel, 1975; Fletch- er, 2004; Wheatcroft, 2003). The Ottoman advances of the 15th and 16th centuries led to a further chapter of anti-Muslim diatribe. Fred Halliday suggests “this experience above all shaped European attitudes” (Halliday, 2003: 177-179). The Ottomans were dreaded as the “public calamity” and were regarded as “a dull and backward sort of people” (Çirakman, 2001). Thus, contrary to Allport’s (1979) original formulation, the direct

160 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178 contact with the attitude object did not result in a positive attitude. On the contrary, many studies found that direct contact may increase stereotyping and lead to negative attitudes. The long historical contact between the West and Islam has been negative, the former considering Muslims as savage and uncivilized. The idea of a barbaric, uncivilized, fanatic Muslims was used to justify conquering the Muslim land and colonizing the subject people. Colonial- ism was a mission to civilize the “natives.” During the colonial period, Orientalists became more active and started the negative portrayal of Is- lam and Muslims, which continues unabated. Drawing on a civilizational view of history, the Orientalists constructed the West as ancient, unique civilization with a core set of values such as freedom, rationality, scien- tific progress and development. Conversely, the land inhabited by Mus- lims came to be characterized as static, undemocratic and uncivilized (Lockman, 2004: 58). Orientalists were also race-based and placed Euro- pean Caucasians at the top of the racial hierarchy and placing darker, “coloured peoples” at the bottom. The two theories were used to legiti- mize the colonial project with a corresponding need to show the irrationality and barbarity of the Orient, and particularly of Islam and Mus- lims, and hence, their need to be “civilized” and “enlightened.” Edward Said’s analysis of 19th century orientalism shows clearly the myriad ways in which the West stereotyped Islam, Muslims and the Arab world (Said, 1978). Ernest Renan’s depiction of Islam as antithetical to reason, crea- tivity and development in his famous lecture on “Islam and Science,” is an early example of such attitudes. To Said, orientalism is a “corporate institution for dealing with the Orient” beginning in the eighteenth century and is “a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient” (Said, 1978: 70, 202-203).

MUSLIM IMMIGRATION TO THE WEST AND ISLAMOPHOBIA

It is suggested by many scholars that contemporary Islamophobia is but the continuation of a centuries-old hatred of Islam (Sardar, 1995; Milton- Edwards, 2002). This hatred intensified following such events as the Sep- tember 11 incidents in 2011 (referred to as 9/11), the 7th July 2005 Lon- don bombings (often referred to as 7/7) and the train bombings in Ma- drid. There are scholars who, however, would not attribute contemporary Islamophobia to entrenched historical positions. They consider con-

161 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia temporary Islamophobia as a new reality and hence suggest focusing on contingency factors associated with the attitudes hostile to Islam and Muslims. One important factor singled out for negative evaluation of Islam and Muslims is the large scale Muslim immigration to Western countries. A report by the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia alludes to “the presence of some fifteen million Muslim people in western Eu- ropean countries” (Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia, 2006: 7). Muslims have lived in Western countries for centuries. Howev- er, most Muslims living in Europe and America arrived during economic boom of the 1960s as migrant workers and also as asylum seekers in the 1990s. “The majority initially settled in capital cities and large industrial areas” (European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia 2007: 22). Muslims have a high birth rate, which is reflected in their demographic profile and is reportedly younger than the general population. In the United Kingdom, for instance, in 2001, one third of the Muslim population was under the age of 16 compared to one fifth of the UK population. “The average age of the Muslim population in the UK is 28, 13 years below the national average. On 1 January 2004 some 38 per cent of Muslims in the Netherlands were not migrants, but of migrant de- scent” (European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, 2007: 24). It is estimated that the Muslim population in Europe, as a whole, would double by 2015. In line with the social identity theory, the Muslims, with the increase in their number, yearn for a positive identity. They demanded and established their mosques, schools, provision of halal meat and separate Mus- lim eateries and cemeteries. There are also several organizations engaged in introducing Islam to the members of host countries (Cesari, 2004; Modood, 2000; Haque, 1999). Thus, Muslims have emerged gradually as a “minority” clearly distinct from the rest of the population, giving rise to the “us” versus “them” phenomenon. They are no longer “temporary guest workers,” but a permanent part of Western national landscapes. Yet, thirteen European states reportedly do not recognise Islam as a religion. Many of them do not even bestow minority rights embodied in their Constitutions on Muslims because they are not a recognised ethnic group. Muslims are resisting assimilation into secular societies and are willing to integrate without losing their Islamic identity and practices.

162 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178

It is feared that Muslim immigration would result in the Islamization of Europe, transforming secular Europe into Muslim “Eurabia.” It has given rise, according to Laurence and Vaisse (2006: 7) to four inaccurate premises: One, “the idea that Muslims taken as a demographic bloc are gaining against the native population.” Two, Muslims form “a distinct, cohesive, and bitter group.” Three, “Muslims seek to undermine the rule of law and the separation of church and state in order to create a society apart from the mainstream.” Finally, Muslims as a bloc influence on the domestic and foreign policies of the host countries. “The idea is that France, Europe in general, but France more precisely, is kind of held hostage by its growing Muslim population and that it is tilting towards a more anti-Israeli and anti-American position.” There are many publications including Fleming Rose’s the Tyranny of Silence and Thilo Sarrazin’s Germany Abolishes Itself advocating the idea that Islam posed a real “national” threat (OIC, 2011: 26). “The increasing Muslim presence in Europe has reopened debates on several issues: the place of religion in public life, social tolerance in Eu- rope, secularism as the only path to modernity, and Europe’s very identity” (Savage, 2004: 39). The Economist warned, as reported by Savage (2004: 44) that this “could be a huge long-term threat to Europe.” The French Commission, which recommended banning the Islamic head scarf, declared that the secular state was under “guerrilla assault” by Muslims (Dilanian, 2004: 49). The Middle East editor of Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung depicted the situation as “frightening” since, according to him, “at least 10 percent of Germany’s Muslim population – 400,000 individuals – are followers and supporters of radical Islam, whose aim is the establishment of an Islamic state” (Dilanian, 2004: 53). Bernard Lew- is reinforced the fear by declaring, in the Jerusalem Post in 2007, that Eu- rope would be Islamic by the end of this century “at the very latest” (Es- posito, and Mogahed, 2007: 138). A trend toward xenophobia and nationalism in Europe is also responsible for the attacks in Norway on July 22, 2011 killing at least 77 people (Kulish, 2011). Anders Behring Breivik admitted to have carried out what he called the “atrocious” but “necessary” killings to save Europe from Islamization of the continent. Islam is also seen as a threat to the American identity defined by “the political principles of liberty, equality, democracy, individualism, human rights, the rule of law, and private property embodied in the American creed” (Huntington, 2005: 54). The cultural core that nurtures these val-

163 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia ues, according to Huntington, is White Anglo-Saxon Protestantism and the homogeneity of race, religion and culture. To Huntington, America should remain a Christian, Anglo-centric country. Tellingly, after 9/11, President George W. Bush evoked the memory of the crusades, banned Islamic organizations, and signed into law the USA Patriotic Act that au- thorized, amongst others, indefinite detention of immigrants, carrying out searches without court order and without the permission of the owners. In short, the West sees Muslims as a direct challenge to the collective identity, traditional values, and public policies of their societies and thus, it becomes a major source of Islamophobia. The issue of Islam and its “challenge to the West” was fuelled by events such as the Salman Rushdie affair, the September 11 2001 incidents, the attacks in Bali and Madrid and the July 2005 London bombings. The Muslim reactions to the cartoon controversy also demonstrated an apparent popularity of the perception that “Muslims are making politically exceptional, culturally unreasonable or theologically alien demands upon European states” (Modood, 2003: 100). It is, therefore, the fear of “crash of Western civilization” that has ignited the discourse on the clash of civilizations (Attali, 1997).

INTELLECTUAL DISCOURSE AND ISLAMOPHOBIA

The rise in Islamophobia is equally the result of the writings of some no- table Islamophobes who “have denigrated and demonized Muslims as ‘the others,’ juxtaposing them with idealized images of ‘civilized’ Ameri- cans” (OIC, 2008: 6). Pat Robertson, a Christian evangelist, called Islam a “bloody, brutal type of religion” and referred to Muslims, who protest- ed controversial cartoons, as “motivated by demonic power” (Mediamat- ters for America, 2006). Charles Krauthammer (1993), the American political columnist, wrote that “an Islamic World united under the banner of Iranian-style fundamentalism in existential struggle with the infidel West.” Daniel Pipes, Director of the Middle East Forum, warned that “keeping Islam at bay was Europe’s preoccupation from 1359, when Gallipoli fell to the Turks, until the last occasion on which the Ottoman soldiers stood at the gates of Vienna, in 1683. Islam is once more a preoccupation in the face of the Islamic Revolution” (Pipes, 1990: 28). Ber- nard Lewis, Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies, Princeton Uni- versity, warned of “the perhaps irrational but surely historic reaction of

164 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178 an ancient rival against our Judeo-Christian heritage, our secular present, and the worldwide expansion of both” (Lewis, 1990: 60). This he called “a clash of civilizations,” a notion popularized by Samuel Huntington who set an example of an Islamophobic mindset by clearly articulating his hatred for Islam. To Huntington, “the underlying problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power” (Huntington, 1996: 217). Earlier Francis Fukuyama wrote that “Islam has indeed defeated liberal democracy in many parts of the Islamic world, posing a grave threat to liberal practices even in countries where it has not achieved political power directly” (Fukuyama, 1992: 45). Islamophobic discourse is not confined to non-Muslims. Salman Rushdie’s novel, The Satanic Verses in 1988 in London by Vi- king/Penguin, is very well known. Salman Rushdie was given the Whit- bread Novel Award, the “Best of the Booker” prize and, in June 2007, was honoured with a Knight Bachelor for “services to literature.” The Somali born Ayaan Hirsi Ali presented Qur’an as a “brutal document” and the Shari’ah as the law of the jungle that obligates the caging and beating of women, capital punishment and all brutal practices (Ali, 2007: 47). To the Indian born Pakistani, Anwar Shaikh, the God of Islam “is compassionate in words only, but cruel in action, does not deserve man’s respect or devotion” (Shaikh, 1999: 100). The Syrian-American psychia- trist, Wafa Sultan declared that the language of Islam is a negative and dead language, “replete with violence, anger, hatred, and racism” (Zun- nurain, 2009: 54). The Ugandan-born Canadian author and lesbian femi- nist, Irshad Manji, wrote about “a nasty side of the Qur’an” that must be reformed. She is lauded by media commentators as a fearless voice of progressive Islam (Manji, 2004). She is hailed in the West as a Muslim leader of tomorrow. Manji quotes admiringly the works of other liberal Muslims like Bassam Tibi, Khaled Abou el-Fadl and Ziauddin Sardar, none of whom denounces Islam as harshly as Manji does. Nevertheless, Tibi’s project of “Euro-Islam” to alleviate the civilizational conflict between Islam and Europe and the promotion of liberal Islam by Sardar, Abou el-Fadl and others have helped to strengthen the general fears towards Islam. These Muslim liberals are referred to by the Western political elites as exemplary Muslims who reform Islam and fight Islamic fundamentalism.

165 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia

MEDIA AND ISLAMOPHOBIA

Perhaps the most important source of Islamophobia is the Western media portrayal of Islam and Muslims. The Western media has consistently been using value-loaded and inaccurate language portraying Islam as a dangerous religion rooted in violence and irrationality. The media is the most accessible and indiscriminate disseminator of Islamophobic ideas at the local and the global level. Barring some “responsible” media publications, certain specific and often predictable sources have been attributing to all Muslims, the entire spectrum of negative characteristics that are fundamental to Islamophobia. The Western media have been carrying reports on Islam and Muslims for a long time. As shown in Table 1, their reporting on Muslim affairs increased dramatically after 9/11, i.e. the September 11 attacks upon the United States. A comparative analysis of the number of articles contain- ing the word “Muslim” that appeared in the selected national newspapers in Britain from January 1, 2001 to September 9, 2001, with those published between June 20, 2001 and June 19, 2002, showing a dramatic increase ranging between 219 to 561 percent.

Table 1: Articles published in the national newspapers between January to September 2001 and June 2001 to June 2002 in Britain

Newspaper Articles Published on Islam and Muslims before 9/11 after 9/11 % increase Guardian 817 2,043 250 Independent 681 1,556 228 Times 535 1,486 278 Daily Telegraph Daily 417 1,176 282 Mail 202 650 322 Mirror 164 920 561 Daily Express 139 305 219 Source: Brian Whitaker. “Islam and the British Press.” In The Quest for Sanity: Reflections on September 11 and its Aftermath. Abdul Wahid Hamid, and Jamil Sharif. Eds. London: Muslim Council of Britain, 2002. 53-57.

166 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178

A report, commissioned by the Mayor of London, looked into the portrayal of Muslims and Islam by the UK national media during the year 2006 (The Mayor of London, 2007: 17-30). It analyzed, amongst others, 352 articles dealing with Islam and Muslims in the British press during one week from Monday 8th May to Sunday 14th May, 2006. The daily newspapers varied in terms of coverage. Thus, the Guardian carried over 50 articles, The Times, Financial Times, Daily Telegraph and Independent carried over 40 but the Sun, Mirror, Express and Star carried less than 20. Of the 352 articles, 288 (82 per cent) were news reports. The others includ- ed 27 (eight per cent) editorials or comment pieces, 26 (seven per cent) features (i.e. non-news coverage typically in supplements or the more central pages of a newspaper), and five (1.5 per cent) cartoons. Of the 352 articles that referred to Islam and Muslims, during the week in question, 91 per cent of articles were judged to be negative in their associations, four per cent positive, and five per cent were judged neutral. Almost half of the articles represented Islam as a threat. “A con- sequence of implying that all Muslims are a threat is that all activities dis- tinctively undertaken by Muslims are seen as threatening, even such activities as attending a mosque for Friday prayers” (The Mayor of Lon- don, 2007: 29). In this “normal” week, the Report explains that,

(…) the vast majority of representations of Islam and Muslims were overly and overtly negative, cutting across tabloid and broadsheet with little apparent differen- tiation or clear ground between them. Crisis and threat informed, determined and overshadowed much of the reporting and subsequent understanding. In this same ‘normal’ week, Muslims both from Britain and abroad – indeed everywhere across the ‘Muslim world’ and also the globe – were seen to be one and the same, without difference or diversity. In this same ‘normal’ week, Muslims were being identified and confirmed as challenging all that ‘we’ are understood to be: challenging ‘our’ culture, values, institutions and way of life. It is ‘common sense’ that no common ground between Muslims and non-Muslims exists, or can exist. (The Mayor of Lon- don, 2007: 29)

In general, the media portrayed Islam as profoundly different from and a serious threat to the West on the world stage and Muslims within Britain as different from and a threat to “us.” The Mayor of London, Kenneth Robert Livingstone, who commissioned the study, said the findings showed a “hostile and scaremongering attitude” towards Islam. “Facts are frequently distorted, exaggerated or oversimplified (…) The tone of language is frequently emotive, immoderate, alarmist” (The Guardian,

167 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia

2007). To prove that media coverage is having an influence on attitudes, the report quotes a UK survey which found that “74 per cent of Britons (…) claim that they know “nothing or next to nothing about Islam.” Of these, 64 per cent claimed that their knowledge of Islam and Muslims is gained through the media. Interestingly, Livingstone was defeated in his second re-election bid by Conservative candidate Boris Johnson on May 1, 2008. The 4th Observatory report of the OIC noted that between May 2010 and April 2011, the media remained anti-Islamic associating terms such as “terrorism,” “terrorist,” “extremist,” “fanatic,” “radical,” and “fundamentalist” with Islam (OIC, 2011: 24). US news media’s portrayal of Islam and Muslims is in tune with those found in the UK and Europe in general. Sam Harris of Washington Times commented that “it is time we admitted that we are not at war with ‘terrorism.’ We are at war with Islam (…) The only reason Muslim fundamentalism is a threat to us is because the fundamentals of Islam are a threat to us (...)” (Harris, 2004). Suad Joseph and her team of researchers have systematically analyzed news reports in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal for the period of 2000-2004. Assessing the texts qualitatively (for how they represent Arab and Mus- lim Americans) and quantitatively (analyzing the use of 1500 words that recur frequently in articles) they found, amongst others, that the media regularly represent Arab- and Muslim-Americans as more tied to their country of origin than to the United States. The media imply that Arab and Muslim-Americans are more linked to Muslims in other countries than to other people in the United States and that Muslims globally are seen as so devout that they verge on the fanatical. According to Suad, distorted press coverage “narrates Arab and Muslim Americans in ways that enable racial policing of Arab and Muslim Americans as marginal, suspect citizens.” She found that “through word choices, rhetorical moves, and thematic patterns, Arab and Muslim Americans are racialized as different types of “others” and as dangerous citizens” (Khouri, 2006). Jack G. Shaheen after analyzing more than 800 feature films and hundreds of television newscasts, documentaries and entertainment shows, found that “lurid and insidious depictions of Arabs as alien, violent strangers, intent upon battling non-believers throughout the world (…) On the silver screen the Muslim Arab continues to surface as the threatening cultural ‘other’” (Shaheen, 2002: 92). According to Anthony Lane, “the Arab people have always had the roughest and the most uncompre-

168 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178 hending deal from Hollywood, but with the death of the Cold War the stereotype has been granted even more prominence” (Lane, 1999: 104). Clearly, there exists an unending barrage of hate-filled images, equating Arabs with terrorists and Muslims with fundamentalists bent upon destroying the West. These stereotypes are continuously repeated leading to a surge of anti-Arab, anti-Muslim and racist attitudes. The media in general chose several themes to depict Islam and Mus- lims both textually and visually. Textually, the media depicts Muslims as unequivocally violent and hence, are not part of “us.” Muslims are also considered illiberal; the reason suggested by the media is that Muslims force their women to cover from head to toe. The veil is thus a symbol of oppression which must be fought to restore the rights and dignities of women. Indeed, Belgium was the first country to ban wearing the head to toe veil or burqa by Muslim women in public. France followed the suit on April 11, 2011. The media also uses the visual images to depict Muslims as violent. The cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad, with a bomb in his turban, published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten is the clearest example of visual depiction of Muslims as violent. Gottshchalk and Greenberg (2008) contend that cartoons are a crucial component of the American media and that these cartoons and carica- tures haven’t been overtly biased against Muslims. The media would represent American leaders in cartoons with bold face, big eye glasses, bushy hair or small mouth. In contrast, Muslims are caricatured as wearing the Arab headdress and gown, bearded, mustachioed and holding a curved sword. After 9/11, cartoons appeared of Muslims in America as violence-prone and mentally backward bowing to the wishes of Usama bin Laden. From the information provided above, it is clear that the media’s representation of Islam and discourses in the Western media, relating to Muslims, are negative and inimical. Indeed, there are exceptions in the mainstream media but these are “exceptions” and therefore aren’t that influential. The media by and large is dominated by the negative portrayal of Islam and Muslims. This negative representation provides the general public with a good deal of material for socio-political discourse and helps them shape their attitudes towards their Muslim neighbors as well as those living far away from them.

169 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia

POLITICAL ELITES AND ISLAMOPHOBIA

Finally, Islamophobia is also used by the leaders to wage war of aggres- sion against the Muslims. At time of international conflict, the media and political leaders demonise the enemy and idealise their own side. Religion is used as an instrument to mobilize support and maintain morale. “His- torically,” according to the Archbishop of Canterbury, “religious faith has too often been the language of the powerful, the excuse for oppression, and the alibi for atrocity” (Commission on British Muslims and Is- lamophobia, 2004: 19). After 9/11 and during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, politicians and newspaper editors maintained that terrorists were totally opposed to all things Western. “The perpetrators acted out of hatred for the values cherished in the West (…)” (New York Times, 2001). President George W. Bush spoke of “a monumental struggle of Good versus Evil.” President Bush’s address to the nation on September 11, 2006 was thoroughly Islamophobic as according to Bush:

Since the horror of 9/11, we’ve learned a great deal about the enemy. And we have learned that their goal is to build a radical Islamic empire where women are prison- ers in their homes, men are beaten for missing prayer meetings, and terrorists have a safe haven to plan and launch attacks on America and other civilized nations. The war against this enemy is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century, and the calling of our generation (…). This struggle has been called a clash of civilizations. In truth, it is a struggle for civilization. We are fighting to maintain the way of life enjoyed by free nations. (The White House, 2006)

Margaret Thatcher wrote that “America and its allies, indeed the western world and its values, are still under deadly threat. That threat must be eliminated, and now is the time to act vigorously (…).” She lamented that “We have harboured those who hated us, tolerated those who threatened us and indulged those who weakened us” (New York Times, 2002). She was happy that American could offer the leadership to de- stroy Islam. Thus, U.S. Islamophobia is related to the emergence of the United States as a global power. The war on terror aims at controlling the regions of the Middle East and Central Asia so as to benefit from their strategic locations and their oil and natural gas resources. As pointed out by Arundathy Roy (2004: 34) “the War against Terror is not really about terror (…). It’s about a superpower’s self destructive impulse to-

170 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178 ward supremacy, stranglehold, global hegemony.” U.S. invasions of Af- ghanistan and Iraq were justified by Islamophobic assertions that their leaders and people constitute security threat to “our” way of life and must be fought. Indeed, the war on terror has left Afghanistan and Iraq totally devastated. The Bush Doctrine rhetoric has succeeded in convinc- ing most Americans that Muslims constitute a threat and that the war on terror is necessary to protect U.S. citizens and their allies. Islamophobia is also politically rewarding. Islamophobic speech and actions received support from the public, who were anxious about their identity. The English Defence League in Britain has become more visible. In the Netherlands, the anti-Islam Freedom Party (PW) led by Geert Wilder, famous for inciting racial hatred against Muslims, is the third largest party by winning 24 seats in the 2010 Dutch parliamentary election. In Sweden, the right wing extremists won 20 seats. While politically rewarding, identity driven politics increases social unrest and violence. John Esposito and Dalia Mogahed argue that “diagnosing terrorism as a symptom and Islam as the problem, though popular in some circles, is flawed and has serious risks with dangerous repercussions” (Esposito and Mogahed, 2007: 163). They emphasize that Anti-western feelings result mainly from Western policies and actions. The Gallup data confirms that “the crucial issues in improving relations are the beliefs and perceptions of ‘the other,’ which affect and need to inform foreign policies.” They stress the need to win “minds and hearts” of “the other.” This, they suggest, “requires a public diplomacy that addresses the ideological dimensions of war: the war of ideas and the foreign policies created” (Esposito, and Mogahed, 2007: 165).

POLICY PRESCRIPTIONS

The policy prescriptions to deal with Islamophobia, vary depending upon the way the problem is perceived. The Runnymede Trust’s report, concerned with Islamophobia, is addressed to the government. It lists a number of steps that the government should adopt to address the issue of Islamophobia, including a greater range of positive images of Islam in the media, a more balanced and responsible use of Muslim spokesper- sons, more expert use of public relations methods, modification and strengthening of existing codes of practise, appointment of more Muslim reporters and journalists and provision of seminars and training to raise

171 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia awareness of Muslim issues and cultural particularities among journalists and the media generally. The OIC Observatory Report (2008) is addressed to two parties: (1) the OIC and the Muslim World and (2) the Western World. The recom- mendations are divided into two parts, i.e., short term for immediate action and long term for subsequent or simultaneous actions on legal aspects, inter-cultural dialogue, and media at the level of the civil society. The report suggests, amongst others, that the OIC member states should help the Observatory to project Islam as a religion of moderation, peace and tolerance. They should monitor all Islamophobic incidents and report to the Observatory and assist the victims of Islamophobia to file complaints under the Human Rights Council Complaint Procedure, promote inter-cultural dialogue and encourage the Islamic media to react against negative reporting of Islam and Muslims. Muslims in the West need to become pro-active respondents rather than passive recipients. They should also make use of all available democratic channels to promote inter-faith understanding in the hope that it would end the demon- isation of their faith. Likewise, the Western world should take necessary steps to “protect Muslims as a vulnerable group” from all sorts of discrimination, hostility and violence and to prosecute and punish perpetrators such acts. They should take the “necessary measures against publications of inflammato- ry, insulting and provocative materials in the media or postings of such in websites.” The OIC Observatory Report suggests that the governments “avoid using Islamophobic rhetoric used in the war against terror” (OIC, 2008). The concerned authorities should strengthen law enforcement against violent hate crimes and “ensure that provisions covered by international legal instruments, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, are applied equally to all” (OIC, 2008: 32) The UN General Assembly Resolution adopted in its 61st session emphasizes effective measures to prevent tarnishing the image of any religion in general, and Islam and Muslim in particular, specifically in the arena of human rights. However, the policy prescriptions by the former U.N. Secretary Gen- eral, Kofi Annan, fits neatly with the analysis of the problem attempted in this study. Kofi Annan suggests eight steps to “unlearn intolerance”: (1) enforcement of the right to freedom of religion and to be free from discrimination based on religion as enshrined in international and other

172 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178 instruments; (2) educating the public about all religions and traditions; (3) preventing the media and Internet from spreading hatred; (4) condemning Islamophobia and enforcing laws on non-discrimination by public authorities; (5) the need for Muslim immigrants to Western countries as well as the host countries to understand each other’s expectations and responsibilities and to jointly act against common threats such as extremism; (6) Interfaith dialogue to demystify the “other”; (7) adopting policies to deal with unresolved conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere; and, (8) condemning terrorism and violence carried out in the name of Islam. The last item is the responsibility of Muslims to stop the few who “give a bad name to the many” (Secretary General on Confronting Islamopho- bia, 2004).

CONCLUSION

Anti-Muslim and anti-Islam prejudices in the West have been noted by scholars and policy-makers for a long time. This required coining of the term Islamophobia, which was first used in print in 1985. Islamophobes demonise Islam and Muslims, destroying mosques, attacking people wearing Muslim religious dress and denying Muslims their human rights. There is a widespread negative stereotype in all sections of the Western society, which inhibit the development of a just society, characterised by social inclusion and cultural diversity. Muslims have been living in the West for a long time. Since 1960, however, their number has swelled and millions of Muslims are living in the West permanently. They, however, would like to retain their identity as Muslims and hence established their mosques, schools, restaurants and cemeteries. They have a high birth rate and their population is estimated to double by 2015. There also emerged political movements aimed at liberating and protecting Muslim lands from the clutches of oc- cupying Western powers. Thus, Muslims have emerged as a visible minority distinct from the people in the host country. This, as posited by social identity theory, gave rise to the “us” versus “them” phenomenon. The people in the host country developed positive attitude towards their own country and people and evaluate themselves positively, as against the out-groups who are looked at negatively. They also feel threatened, by the possibility that Europe may be Islamized and the secular republics transformed into Islamic states. Such feelings may be due to sheer igno-

173 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia rance about the ‘other’. It might as well be due to looking at the other from “our” worldview which is different from “theirs.” Islamophobia is strongly associated with the received negative messages from the political elites, the mass media and the intellectual discourse. The interpretations of Islam produced by Western orientalists and by “moderate” and “liberated” Muslim scholars reinforced the negative image that the West has about Islam and Muslims. However, it is the per- vasiveness of the media that has significantly shaped the Western perception of Islam. The media portrayal of Islam, with rare exceptions, has been negative. The adherents of Islam are presented as forming a monolithic, static bloc deadly opposed to an idealized Judaeo-Christian West. Muslims, in the words of George Bush, “hate us for our freedom.” They constitute a “Great Threat” to the security of America and the West in general and hence they must be seriously confronted at all levels. The cumulative effect of Islamophobia’s various features is that Mus- lims are made to feel that they do not truly belong to the civilized world. Muslims living in the West are seen as “an enemy within.” Muslim in- sights on various local and global issues are looked upon with disdain. These feelings are accentuated by the double standard in the foreign policy of major Western powers, which are unabashedly pro-Israel. The in- vasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, in the name of the war on terror, is seen by the international Muslim community as acts against Islam. The war on terror has produced increased hostility, hatred, prejudice and fear/threat towards Muslims as some of the observable out- comes. Muslims, in response, see the West as the satanic opponent with America as the “Great Satan.” Such ideological oppositions are not con- ducive for a just and humane world order. Scholars, policy makers and those concerned with the negative conse- quences of Islamophobia, advocated strategies to combat Islamophobia in the West and address the political, economic, social and cultural caus- es of extremism through development programmes and the resolution of long-standing conflicts. There is a need to deal with the great media hype about “political Islam.” The OIC and other organizations are placing great emphasis on inter-civilizational and inter-faith dialogue to help promote respect for all faiths. There is a need to enact policies and pro- grams to, what Kofi Anan called, “unlearn intolerance.”

174 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178

References Ajzen, Icek., and Martin Fishbein. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980. Ali, Ayaan Hirsi. The Caged Virgin: A Muslim Women’s Cry for Reason. London: Pocket Books, 2007. Allport, Gordon Willard. The Nature of Prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books, 1997. Attali, Jacques. “The Crash of Western Civilization: The Limits of the Market and Democracy.” Foreign Policy 107 (summer 1997): 54-64. Cesari, Jocelyne. When Islam and Democracy Meet. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. Cesari, Jocelyne. Securitization and Religious Divides in Europe: Muslims in Western Europe after 9/11 – Why the Term Islamophobia is More A Predicament Than an Explanation. Paris: Challenge, 2006. Cesari, Jocelyne. Muslims in the West After 9/11: Religion, Law and Politics. New York and London: Routledge, 2009. Çirakman, Asli. “From Tyranny to Despotism: The Enlightenment’s Unenlightened Image of the Turks.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 33.1 (2001): 49-68. Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia. Islamophobia: Issues, Challenges and Action. London: Trentham Books Limited, 2004. Clayton, Dimitria. “Data Comparability, Definitions and the Challenges for Data Collection on the Phenomenon of Racism, Xenophobia, anti-Semitism and Is- lamophobia in the European Union.” Paper presented at European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) Colloque, Vienna, June 25, 2002. Council on American-Islam Relations. The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States 2007: Presumption of Guilt. Washington DC: CAIR, 2007. Council on American-Islamic Relations. Islamophobia and Its Impact in the United States January 2009-December 2010: Same Hate, New Target. Washington: CAIR, 2011. Daniel, Norman. The Arabs and Medieval Europe. London: Longman, 1975. Daneil, Norman. Islam and the West: The Making of an Image. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1980. Dekker, Henk. “Nationalism, its Conceptualization and Operationalization.” In Ethnic Minorities and Interethnic Relations in Context: A Dutch-Hungarian Comparison. Karen Phalet, and Antal Örkény. Eds. Ashgate: Aldershot, 2001. 113–137. Dinet, Etienne, and Ben Ibrahim, Sliman. L’Orient vu de l’Occident. Paris: Piazza- Geuthner, 1925. EEOC Provides Answers About the Workplace Rights of Muslims, Arabs, South Asians and Sikhs, Press Release, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. ‹http://www.eeoc.gov/press/5-15-02.html›. 15 May, 2010. Esposito, John Louis and Dalia Mogahed. Who Speaks for Islam? What a billion Mus- lims Really Think. New York: Gallup Press, 2007. European Monitoring Centre for Racism & Xenophobia. Perceptions of Discrimination and Islamophobia: Voices from Members of Muslim Communities in the European Union. Vienna: EUMC, 2007.

175 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia

European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia. Muslims in the European Union: Discrimination and Islamophobia. 2007. ‹http//fra.europa.eu/fra/material/ pub/muslim/Manifestations_EN.pdf›. July 18, 2010. Field, Clive. “Islamophobia in contemporary Britain: The Evidence of the Opinion Polls, 1988-2006.” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 18.4 (2007): 447-477. Fishbein, Martin, and Icek Ajzen. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1975. Fletcher, Richard. The Cross and the Crescent: Christianity and Islam from Muhammed to the Reformation. New York: Viking, 2004. Fukuyama, Francis. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Avon, 1992. Gauci, Jean-Pierre. ENAR Shadow Report 2009-2010: Racism in Europe. Brussels: Eu- ropean Network Against Racism, 2011. Gottschalk, Peter, and Greenberg, Gabriel. Islamophobia: Making Muslims the Enemy. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2008. Halliday, Fred. Islam and the Myth of Confrontation: Religion and Politics in the Middle East. London and New York: I.B. Tauris. 2003. Haque, Amber. Ed. Muslims and Islamization in North America: Problems and prospects. Maryland: Amana Publications & A.S. Noordeen, 2007. Harris, Sam. “Mired in a Religious War.” Washington Times, December 2, 2004. Human Rights First. Islamophobia: 2007 Hate Crime Survey. New York: Human Rights First, 2007. Huntington, Samuel Phillips. Who Are We? The challenges to American National Identity. New York: Simon & Schuster Inc., 2005. Huntington, Samuel Phillips. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996. Khouri, Rami George. “Soul-Searching Time in the American Media.” http:// www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=16524, n.d. July 18, 2010. Krauthammer, Charles. “The Foreign Policy President, The Administration has Managed to avoid the Worst Thicket.” Washington Post, April 16, 1993. Kulish, Nicholas. “Shift in Europe Seen in Debate on Immigrants.” The New York Times, July 27, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/28/world/europe/28 europe.html. July 27, 2011. Lambert, Robert and Githens-Mazer, Jonathan. Islamophobia and Anti Muslim Hate Crime: UK Case Studies, 2010. London: European Muslim Research Centre and University of Exeter, 2011. Lane, Anthony. “The Current Cinema ‘Changelings.’” New Yorker, May 10, 1999. Laurence, Jonathan and Vaise, Justin. Integrating Islam: Political and Religious Challenges in Contemporary France. Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 2006. Lewis, Bernard. “The Roots of Muslim Rage: Why So Many Muslims Deeply Resent the West and Why Their Bitterness Will Not Be Easily Mollified.” Atlantic Month- ly, 266.3 (1990): 60-72. Lockman, Zachary. Contending Visions of the Middle East: The History and Politics of Ori- entalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

176 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 9(1)/2012: 155–178

Manji, I. The Trouble with Islam: A Wake Up Call for Honesty and Change. Edinburgh: Mainstream Publishing, 2004. Mediamatters for America. Robertson Labelled Islam a Bloody, Brutal Type of Reli- gion. http://mediamatters.org/items/200605010007, 2006. July 27, 2010. Milton-Edwards, Beverley. “Researching the Radical: the Quest for a New Perspec- tive.” In Interpreting Islam. Hastings Donnan. Ed. London: Sage, 2002. 32-50. Modood, Tariq. “Muslims and the Politics of Difference.” Political Quarterly 74:1(2003): 100-115. Modood, Tariq. “The Place of Muslims in British Secular Multiculturalism.” In Islam and the Changing Identity of Europe. Nezar Al Sayyad, Manuel Castells, and Laurence Michalak. Eds. London: University Press of America/Lexington Books, 2000. 113-130. Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC). 4th OIC Observatory Report on Islam- ophobia , May 2010 to April 2011. Jeddah: OIC, 2011. Pipes, Daniel. “The Muslims are Coming! The Muslims are Coming!” National Re- view 42 (November, 19, 1990): 9-62. Roy, Arundathi. An Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire. Cambridge, Massachusetts: South End Press, 2004. Runnymede Trust. Islamophobia: A Challenge For Us All, Summary 1997. http:// www.runnymedetrust.org/publications/ pdfs/islamophobia.pdf. 2007. Novem- ber 14, 2010. Said, Edward Wadie. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books, 1978. Said, Edward Wadie. Orientalism reconsidered. Race and Class. 27.2 (1985): l-l5. Sardar, Ziauddin. “Racism, identity and Muslims in the West.” In Muslim Minorities in the West. Syed Zainal Abedin, and Ziauddin Sardar. Eds. London: Grey Seal, 1995. 1-17. Savage, Terry Michael. “Europe and Islam: Crescent Waxing, Cultures Clashing.” The Washington Quarterly 27.3 (2004): 25-50. Secretary-General on “Confronting Islamophobia: Education for Tolerance and Understanding.” Press Release, SG/SM/9637, HR/4802 PI/1627. http:// www.un.org/apps/sg/sgstats.asp?nid=1217, 2004. July 16, 2010. Shaheen, Jack George. “Hollywood’s Muslim Arabs.” In A Community of Many Worlds: Arab Americans in New York City. Kathleen Benson. Eds. New York: Mu- seum of City of New York, 2002. 191-212. Shaikh, Anwar. Islam, sex and violence. Cardiff: The Principality Publishers, 1990 The Mayor of London. The Search for Common Ground: Muslims, Non-Muslims and the UK Media. A Report Commissioned by The Mayor of London. London: Greater London Authority, 2007. The Muslim Council of Britain. Electing To Deliver: Working for Representation in Britain. http://www.mcb.org.uk/vote2005/ELECTINGTODELIVER.pdf. 2005. May 15, 2010. The OIC Observatory on Islamophobia. The 1st OIC Observatory Report on Is- lamophobia, May 2007 - March 2008. http://www.oic-oci.org/oicnew/is11/ english/ Islamophobia-rep-en.pdf. 2008. July 15, 2010.

177 Abdul Rashid Moten / Understanding and Ameliorating Islamophobia

The OIC Observatory on Islamophobia. Fourth OIC observatory report on islamophobia (Intolerance and Discrimination Against Muslims) May 2010 to April 2011. Jeddah: OIC, 2011. Turner, John Charles, Brown, Rupert James, and Tajfel, Henry. “Social Comparison and Group Interest in Ingroup Favouritism.” European Journal of Social Psychology 9.2 (1979): 187-204. Wan, William. “Four Airlines Sued for Alleged Post-Sept. 11 Discrimination.” Cox News Service, June 4, 2002. Wheatcroft, Andrew. Infidels: The Conflict Between Christendom and Islam (638-2002). London: Viking, 2003. The White House, “President’s Address to the Nation.” http://georgewbush- whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060911-3.html, 2006. Janu- ary 2, 2012). Zunnurain, Muhammad. “Islamophobia Among Selected Muslim Writers: A Quali- tative Content Analysis.” Unpublished Masters’ thesis, International Islamic Uni- versity Malaysia. 2009. Esposito, John, and K. Ibrahim. Islamophobia: the challenge of pluralism in the 21st century, Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. Allen, Chris, Islamophobia. Surrey: Ashgate, 2010.

178