Global Arab Network | Without hypocrisy: Real Message From the Swiss Minarets

Translate this article to your language:

GAN Publicatins

e-Publications

Service Menu

Add Site to Favorites

Add Page to Favorites

Make Homepage

Share This Page

Without hypocrisy: Real Message From the Swiss Minarets

By Iman Kurdi

Tuesday, 08 December 2009 03:17

The Swiss people have voted, they do not want minarets in their landscape. The first reaction from the European establishment was condemnation and indignation, and then slowly, other voices are coming to the fore.

The reality is that the Swiss have simply told the truth: if you call a referendum and ask people whether they want places of worship of other religions in their neighbourhood, the majority is likely to say no.

Except that it is not places of worship per se that the Swiss have banned, and on this they are right. A minaret is not strictly necessary in a Muslim place of worship, a mosque without a minaret is still a mosque. The role of the minaret is to call people to prayer and in this day and age, technology has replaced the need for it. The minaret has thus become an emblem of Islam, part of its architecture and history, but you cannot argue that banning minarets stops people from practising their faith. If the Swiss had banned the construction of mosques or of Muslim prayer rooms then that would be a infringement of the rights of Muslims to practise their faith, but that is not the case.

The Swiss have taken a hard knock. To read some of the papers you could easily believe that Switzerland is a land of racists who are fervently anti-Muslim. This is not entirely fair to the Swiss.

For a start, I would wager that if you undertook the same referendum in say France or the Netherlands, you would get the same result. That’s the problem with referendums: they’re democratic. Whereas local councils, ministers, government officials, planning officers and all the other bolts of bureaucratic decision-making have to follow principles and procedures to justify the validity of the decisions they make, the public at large when it votes does not. Ask the man on the street if he would like to have a symbol of another religion loom tall over the local horizon and the knee-jerk answer is no thanks. Ask him whether he would like to have a Mosque in his back yard and the answer is also likely to be no thanks.

And let’s not be hypocrites, if you held a referendum in a Muslim country asking whether the construction of new church steeples should be permitted, you are also likely to get an overwhelming no. So let us not brand this a Swiss phenomenon and let us also remember that it is not the majority of the Swiss population that supported the ban but the majority of those who voted, which if you do the maths comes to 30 per cent of the population. Again that is part of the problem with holding referendums, only those with strong opinions for or against will make the effort to vote. It is by its very nature a polarising process.

What is more interesting is why the question was asked in the first place.

There are up to 400 000 Muslims in Switzerland representing roughly 5 per cent of the Swiss population. The early arrivals were mainly from Turkey whilst the recent surge in Muslim migrants has come from the break up of the former Yugoslavia who now make up the bulk of Swiss Muslims. In other words, Swiss Muslims blend fairly well with the rest of the population. And yet the campaign against the construction of minarets depicted that beloved symbol of the anti-Muslims, that seriously scary figure: the woman in a burqa.

The French are considering a law to ban the wearing of the burqa in France and yet only a tiny minority of French Muslim women wear it. The Swiss have voted an amendment to change their constitution to ban the building of minarets and yet there are only a total of four minarets in the country.

This leads to at least two conclusions. First, it is the visibility of Islam that is at issue. A woman wearing a burqa stands out, she is immediately recognisable as Muslim. Similarly, a minaret puts a Muslim stamp on the landscape. It states that in this land Muslims exist side by side with the Christian majority, that they are now part of the country’s cultural identity. Partly this is a legacy of secularism. There is a distaste not so much for Islam as for the idea of religion being visible and public.

Essentially the message sent by Swiss voters and now repeated across Europe is one that could be summed up by a French proverb: ‘to live well, live hidden’. In other words, you can practise your religion, but only privately and discreetly. Moreover, there is the idea that Muslims who choose to live in a European country should adopt the ways of the land. The onus is on them to adopt the local culture and the fear is that the opposite will happen. Second, the fear is not of the moderate Muslims who have been living peacefully in Switzerland — or France, or Britain, or Germany — but of the influence of the extremists and the potential for let us call them Westernised Muslims to turn into the burqa-wearing missile wielding terrorists of the Swiss posters. There is undoubtedly a growing paranoia against Muslims and Islam as a religion.  There are aspects of Islam or of the way it is practised in certain countries that are unpalatable to Western thinking. If you listen carefully, the message you hear is not that Muslims are not welcome, but that a perceived movement towards a more radical form of Islam is ringing alarm bells. The problem is that by voting in such laws you achieve the exact opposite effect and create the very tension that can lead to radicalisation.

Global Arab Network

Iman Kurdi is an Arab writer based in London. (khaleejtimes)

Comments

Add New

Daisy

|2009-12-11 07:21:58

Very well argued. Personally, I am opposed to the ban on any religious architecture or its part - but here, it is well said that minarets are only decorative pieces of architecture, they are no longer functional anywhere in the world. So, it's a vote against the extremism in Islam, not against the practice of Islam itself.

I also commend the Western groups for taking an extremely democratic and sensitive stand by opposing the minarets, but you are very right, the real message of the Swiss voters is getting lost in all this.

There is also a need to seriously debate why there is no equal global concern over the ban on all religious architecture except the mosque and practice of all religiouns except Islam in the Islamic countries. I think they are being hypocritical by asking for a democratic support when they are not being democratic in their own lands.

Do we really need to increase the global warming through oil technology at all costs?