On 11 April, the law that prohibits
the full face-covering veil in
France came into force. The following day the first two face-covered
women were fined €150 – not a small
amount of money. One of the women declared that she had travelled about a
thousand kilometres from Marseilles to
Paris in order to be fined. Another man,
who had organised a small group of 20
people at the event where she was fined,
stated that they wanted to court arrest and
be fined in order to bring the matter to the
European Court of Human Rights. For decades, Muslim fundamentalists have mastered the art of using human rights concepts and mechanisms to their benefit.

While the international media focused
on protesting “Muslims”, other voices
were totally ignored, which may well rep-
resent the vast majority of the presumed
“Muslims” in France.

 The Political Actors Involved

What are the reasons behind the passing of
yet another new law by Sarkozy, in response
to the growing Muslim fundamentalist demands in France? More than a year ago,
progressive members of parliament made
public a list of existing laws (in particular
those regarding public security) that may
have allowed the government to restrict
the full face-covering veil, without having
to pass a new law. This option was discarded by Sarkozy, who obviously wanted
and needed the visibility that a new controversial law would grant him. With the
2012 presidential elections approaching,
enacting a law was a straightforward way
to court the votes of the extreme right National Front (NF) Party. The recently held
regional elections of 20 March amply
demonstrated the growing electoral influence of the NF party, making it an indis-
pensible future partner of the right.

In Europe today, the traditional xenophobic far-right parties are fast rising and
will play a major arbitration role in any future elections. France, Denmark, Norway,
the Netherlands, Austria and Hungary are
credited with having at least 15% far-right
voters, while in Switzerland and Serbia
they already represent more than 30%.

Additionally, there are now new movements rapidly growing in France, on the
right of the traditional far-right parties –
such as Bloc Identitaire, Resistance Republicaine and Riposte Laïque – which are
not satisfied with the ban on the full face-covering veil. They demand more drastic
measures to combat “Islam” per se. They
demand that “Islam” be outlawed in
France, that immigration from Muslim
countries be stopped, and that discussions
be held with Muslim countries to organise
for “French Muslims to migrate to countries where they will be able to freely practice their religion”. One wonders about the
extent to which both Sarkozy and the NF
will go, in order to grab their votes in 2012.

The new far-right groups organise provocative actions, in response to provocative actions by Muslim fundamentalist
groups. For instance, unauthorised street
gatherings “with wine and pork” take
place in the heart of Paris, at the very location where equally unauthorised public
Friday prayers actually block the streets
(while there is sufficient empty space in,
for instance, the Great Mosque of Paris).

Police authorities pretend not to see either
of these illegal occupations of public
space, despite the fact that street prayers
have been going on for several years, and
that announcements with pomp are made
in advance for the “wine and pork” street
parties. It is clear that both Muslim fundamentalist groups and these emerging new
far-right groups are looking for physical
confrontation, which would make their
political presence more visible, as well as
rally and radicalise their troops.

On the other hand, a very vocal unholy
alliance has formed between the left, far-left, human rights and Muslim fundamentalist groups, all protesting against
the law banning face-covering, in the
name of the human rights of “Muslims”.
These protests received full coverage from
the international media, whose vision is
impaired by identity politics.

This ban and the kind of one-sided coverage it receives, is a gift from Sarkozy to
the Muslim fundamentalists. It gives them
one more occasion to make the front page
headlines and to appear as the voice of the
“oppressed Muslims” in “the West”. But
what do they actually represent?

A considerable number of migrants into
France came from north Africa, and within it, from Algeria (till recently, they constituted the majority of migrants). Algerians had already begun to migrate to
France between the two world wars, and
this trend increased after second world
war, with massive post-war industrialisation plans. These early migrants were generally unskilled workers.

Between the 1970s and the 1990s, “family reunion” was encouraged, i.e, wives of
migrant workers came to join their husbands. Their children became French citizens at birth, thanks to the “law of the
land” which, till the late 1990s, granted
French citizenship automatically to any
child born on French territory. The acquisition of French citizenship was made eas-
ier for parents of French children. (This
explains why there are an estimated 30%
of French citizens of foreign origin today.)

These economic migrants had grown
deep roots into the political tradition of
the French working class struggle, especially through trade unions. Documentary films, directed by their grand-daughters and great grand-daughters as
a moving homage to their foremothers,
show French working class women of Algerian origin in the 1940s, 1950s and
1960s wearing the same clothes as other
women of that class and time. These documentary films speak about the strong
will of these women to see their daughters fully educated and capable of earning their living independently. The films
also show the struggle of these women
against patriarchy (both that of their Algerian husbands and that of the working class French parties and unions); and
finally the films testify to the fact that the
religious beliefs – if they had any – or religious traditions of the migrants, did not
conflict with French secularism.

In the 1990s, there was a different
wave of emigration, consisting of artists,
writers, intellectuals, feminists, etc, who
fled fundamentalist violence in Algeria
in order to save their lives, as armed fundamentalists specifically targeted these
sections of the population. This latest
wave of political emigrants had a firsthand experience of what it meant to live
under fundamentalist boot. Exiled intellectuals were rattled to have to face in
France the very same political force – the
Muslim religious right – that forced them
into exile.

Women especially could identify each
and every step taken by the rising fundamentalist forces in Algeria being replicated in France. They witnessed in awe
and anguish, the progressive forces in
France, as well as in the rest of Europe
and in Canada, refusing to recognise the
extreme right political nature of the Muslim right and supporting their demands
in the name of religious, cultural or
minority rights.

Among the warning signs of the rising
influence of the Muslim right was, of
course, the creeping enforcement of new
dress codes for women. Although the garment that passes off today as “the Islamic veil” is indeed not a traditional
costume in north Africa, but a totally imported or invented one, we are still waiting to hear, in the concert of “progressive”
clamours in defence of the so-called Islamic veil, a virtuous voice that would
defend north African cultures and traditions of dress from being eradicated by
this alien outfit.

 Where Are the Secular Voices?

Given the politicised background of Algerian immigration into France, it is no surprise that many French citizens of Algerian descent, especially women, came forward to oppose the full face-covering
veil. However, they did not necessarily
want a new law. Many would have preferred the use of other means. Supporting
the passing of the law banning the full
face-covering veil can be seen as a global
endorsement of Sarkozy’s rightist social
agenda and bending to the far-right xenophobia. Citizens of migrant Muslim descent find themselves in a catch-22 situation, where their clear and repeated demands to stop the rise of the Muslim right
in France are either hijacked by racist political forces or scorned by anti-racist
ones. But on the other hand, if they do not
speak up now, they will be, once again,
the victims of the Muslim right.

Similarly, many such voices of migrant
Muslim descent had spoken up in 2004
in support of the 1905-06 laws on the separation of “churches” and state that are
the founding principles of French secularism. These laws, enacted at a time when
the question of Islam was irrelevant in
France, are the basis on which children
below a certain age are forbidden to wear
any sign of religious affiliation inside the
premises of state secular schools (be it a
head scarf, a cross, a kippah or any other
symbol).

Just as with the present law on the full
face-covering veil, the then French government, serving its own vested electoral
interests, chose to pass a new law rather
than to enforce the century old ones. Many
women and women’s organisations that
mobilise citizens of Muslim descent in
France were of the view that enforcing the
1906 law would have made a stronger
statement in favour of secularism. Passing
a new law paved the way for Muslim fundamentalists to claim being victims of a
racist law – it is one of their biggest
achievements and successes that a law that
only mildly reiterated in 2004 the secular
principles elaborated in 1906 is now
known the world over as “the law against
the veil”!

There is no denying, however, that racism and discrimination, especially in jobs
and housing, do affect French citizens of
migrant Muslim descent. While 10% of the
youth in the entire population is unemployed, this is about 16% for French citizens of migrant descent and nearly 50% in
poor suburbs around the capital city.

Progressive groups, including women’s
organisations, in which citizens of Muslim
descent are prominent actors, have taken
and are taking numerous actions to combat discrimination and racism. But these
are rarely reported in the international
media, which prefers the exoticism of
veiled “Muslimness” to the banality of
secular citizens’ struggles.

In the wake of this difficult economic
situation and growing racism in France, if
this news was indeed reported, it would
have amply demonstrated to international
audiences that, the vast majority of the
French population of migrant Muslim descent still refuses so-called religious solutions to problems that they first and foremost identify as social and political, and
that this population still firmly stands
for secularism.

Studies by the Institut National d’Études
Démographiques (INED) show that 20% of
the French population of Muslim descent
claim to have no religion (vs 28% in the
total population), and among those who
declare themselves believers, 21% say
they very rarely attend religious ceremonies (vs 15% in the total population). An
overwhelming number of citizens of Muslim descent (a much higher percentage
than that in the rest of the population)
stands for secularism, stating that it
guarantees them freedom of belief and
practice, while firmly keeping religion
out of the political sphere.

The above statistics show that this section of the French population is not different from the rest of the population with
regard to religion and secularism. The
fact that they are increasingly labelled
“Muslims”, even if they are non-believers,
points at the worldwide trend, massively
relayed by the international media, to ethnicise and religionise social and political
problems in Europe and elsewhere.

 Setting the Record Straight

Today, international media reports claim
that fully covered women do not represent more than a few hundred cases in
the whole of France. Their implicit conclusion is: Why bother? However, this
small figure is not to be taken lightly, as
citizens of migrant Muslim descent repeatedly warn the authorities that the
Muslim right is advancing its pawns in
France, using exactly the same strategies
they used in Algeria or in other Muslim-majority countries. The veil is only the flag
that makes their political presence very
visible – they are working hard at, on the
one hand, convincing families to adopt it
through their charities and social work, as
well as, on the other hand, at coercing
girls through the jobless and hopeless
young men they keep under their influence by assigning them a rewarding
“morality watch” role over the females in
their families. It is not to be taken lightly,
as Muslim countries have repeatedly witnessed that targeting women is only
the very first step in enforcing the full political totalitarian agenda of the Muslim right.

Is it not time for the international media
to give the floor to the section of the
French population of migrant descent that
knows from within the strategies of the
Muslim right and dares to oppose them,
even in the very difficult double-bind situation they find themselves in, in Europe?
Where in this debate are the voices of secularists (believers and non-believers
alike) and where are the voices of the numerous progressive Muslim scholars
who argue that veiling is not an Islamic
prescription?

The “black and white” simplistic manner of thinking of the international
media is efficiently silencing and eradicating the progressive political views of a
large and well-informed section of the
French population.

Is it not time for human rights groups to
amend their one-sided policy of defending
the Muslim religious right on the ground
that their religious or cultural rights are
threatened? What about the freedom of
thought and the freedom of expression of
secularists of Muslim descent that is daily
trampled upon by threatening fundamentalist groups in France even today?

The time has come for left organisations to seize the issue of the growing
Muslim fundamentalism out of the hands
of the right and the far-right political par-
ties and groups, which exploit it for racist
purposes, and to cut the grass from under
the feet of the Muslim right by address-
ing seriously and urgently the social and
political discrimination that citizens of
migrant descent face.

We also need to confront directly the
communalisation of Europe, to start reha-
bilitating the concept of citizenship (as opposed to “communities”) and to guarantee one law for all citizens.

Marieme Helie Lucas

---