A dogmatic secularism
Such expression of piety (hijab) should not be seen as ‘dangerous’
TLaws alone do not build the bastions of secularism.
HE European Union’s top court, the European Court of Justice, has allowed European companies to ban their employees from wearing the headscarf, or “tudung”, at work, not a blanket ban as such, but rather one that is confined to certain conditions. Muslim women are banned from covering their heads with a scarf. This ban is also applicable to public places. Proud of its secular legal foundation, Europe, one is left thinking, has the objective of neutering any and all attempts at tribalism. A Muslim woman may not now wear their heart on the head. In as much as secularism has pushed Christianity to the confines of the home, so will Islam be stuffed into splendid isolation of the home.
And, yet, the world has witnessed the failure of the separation of state and religion, albeit the Christian religion. The pogroms against the Jews culminating in Nazism’s Holocaust of World War 2, which cost six million Jews their lives is testimony of the strength of prejudicial sentiments. But the European Court of Justice has decided that there must be a genuine need before the employers can avail themselves of the privilege. The courts in Germany will have the final decision to ensure that there is no discrimination or if any religious freedom laws have been violated. These caveats are, of course, important to preserve religious freedoms, irrespective of the particular religion. For example, there has been an instance where a carer in a childcare centre was asked to remove her crucifix. For as long as the intention is to maintain a neutral image, then it is acceptable. In blunt terms, the law is against all forms of religious exhibitionism. The secular identity precedes all other.
Granted, this appearance of neutrality in the public space is positive. In France, much has been done to stop the growth in religions associated with violence, especially in the Charlie Hebdo shooting of January 2015 in Paris, a Muslim extremist reaction to the insult on the Prophet Muhammad perpetrated by the publication, resulting in 12 deaths. The hijab was targeted despite the absence of any woman in the group of killers. In fact, the hijab has become the symbol of Islam in many parts of Europe today. But thus far, legally attacking symbols has not changed things much. Furthermore, some European states have happily participated in the financing and arming of selfproclaimed Muslim terrorists, like the Islamic State, out to destroy states like Syria, Iraq and Iran. Syria’s peace remains threatened by countries like Turkey, who use the terrorists as proxy armies, and Turkey is part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation despite its Islamic population. Islamophobia is but a strain of geopolitical ideology developed by the West, led by the United States, to destabilise the oil-rich Islamic states of the Middle East. That the countering force of Islamophobia has come to Europe to defeat it, is a necessary part of colonial subjection. Not only has it come home to roost, Islamophobia as a product of Western geopolitical machinations, the so-called “Clash of Civilisations”, will not be as easily rolled back. Laws alone do not build the bastions of secularism. Only a sense that secularism can deliver social justice will deliver to Europe the peace it seeks. But is peace the objective, when Islamic terrorism is said to be a part of Western geopolitical strategy?