The pro cess of ethnicization of the Islam diaspora in Eu rope67 is only partly related to the discrimination and Islamophobic resentment Muslim immi-grants encounter. These immiimmi-grants are unfortunately represented mostly by Islamist leaders, who do not have any right to declare themselves “the
80 Islamism and Antisemitism
new Jews of Eu rope.” 68 These leaders do not believe in an integration of Muslims into Eu ro pe an citizenry but prefer to claim freedom of faith in order to establish an Islamic counterculture within Eu ro pe an societies. If Islamists in Eu rope hate the Jews in this pursuit, why do they also steal the Holocaust and identify themselves with the Jews? Why do Eu ro pe ans who discriminate against Muslims suddenly, on hearing them characterized as
“the new Jews,” become receptive to Islamist concerns? And fi nally: how does the distinction between Islamism and Islam apply to the Islamic diaspora in Eu rope? Markovits superbly helps us decipher the issue: “While these immi-grants awakened fi rst and foremost a nasty strain of xenophobia in all Eu ro pe an countries against themselves, they also have triggered a massive, twofold reemergence of antisemitism: fi rst, on the part of those who hate these newcomers and wish them ill, . . . second, on the part of those who are the targets of this hatred who happen to be from cultures where antisemitism has attained a major presence mainly— though not exclusively— by dint of the Arab- Israeli confl ict.” It is outrageous that Eu ro pe an leftists, who were mostly silent when Serbian fascist groups massacred Bosnian Muslims in the Balkans, suddenly changed their attitudes and “raised their voices in the Bos-nian war once the United States intervened.” 69 Their opposition to the in-tervention was driven by anti- Americanism and not, apparently, by any humanistic opposition to war or the slaughter of innocents.
The concern of this chapter is not so much anti- Americanism per se but rather the antisemitism promoted by Islamism, for which anti- Zionism70 and anti- Americanism provide a con ve nient camoufl age. The Swiss daily Neue Zürcher Zeitung carried an article by a British Muslim demo crat, Hanif Kureishi, who described his visits to several mosques in Great Brit-ain: “The mosques which I visited were dominated by ardent and infl am-matory preachers, one after the other agitating in an endless torrent. They were inciting against the West and the Jews. . . . This happens not only in mosques but also in most religious institutions, including the faith schools in which these ideas are disseminated.” 71
It’s worth noting that multicultural Britain is quite different from France.
Until the jihadist assaults of July 2005, the United Kingdom was open to Islamists and allowed them to operate openly in ways denied them elsewhere
Islamism and Antisemitism 81
in Eu rope.72 Some multiculturalists approved of this tolerant attitude, while others saw it as a cause of cultural fragmentation and a disuniting of Eu rope.
This is a delicate area, and I hasten to add that I value cultural diversity and have no patience for Eu ro pe an racism. My point is that even within the open atmosphere of London, the self- appointed spokesmen of the Islamic diaspora— most of whom hate the Jews— engage in cynical doublespeak. In their propaganda they condemn the Holocaust while also denying that it ever occurred, maintaining that the Muslims of Eu rope are as oppressed today as the Jews were under the (non ex is tent) Holocaust.73
The spread of antisemitism among Muslims in Eu rope is a phenome-non to which Eu ro pe ans turn a blind eye even as they are deaf to Islamist propaganda. This happens also in the United States. Some American com-mentators belittle the radicalization of Muslim youth in Western Eu rope.
In a book on Islam in France, published by the Brookings Institution in 2006, one may fi nd a chapter in which Jonathan Lawrence scandalously at-tempts to play down antisemitism by arguing that “in the overwhelming majority of cases antisemitic acts are not elaborate affairs.” 74 This book car-ries a foreword by Olivier Roy, the French scholar who speaks of post- Islamism and dismisses the entire Islamist movement as “tak fi ri pockets of lost youngsters.”
The issue here is not “pockets” but the return of antisemitism to its original home. The Jews are scapegoats for the failed integration of Muslim immigrants in Eu ro pe an societies. Seyran Ate{, a Turkish lawyer who acts on behalf of Muslim women in Germany, has frequently criticized anti-semitism in the Muslim diaspora. Ate{ accuses multiculturalists of bigotry because they refuse to acknowledge Islamist antisemitism. In Berlin in 2007 she was fi red upon, but she survived the assault and blamed antisemitic Turks in Berlin.75
At a symposium conducted at the Vidal Sassoon Center for the Study of Antisemitism at the Hebrew University in 2006, the interaction between Islamic fundamentalism and Western multiculturalism was one of the issues under debate. When multiculturalists romanticize non- European cultures, including Islam, they establish taboos against any criticism of these cultures as practiced by immigrants in Eu rope. The result is that Jew hatred in the
82 Islamism and Antisemitism
diaspora of Islam in Eu rope is granted a degree of respectability as a form of outrage of the despised directed against oppressors. It does not matter that while Muslims in Eu rope are viewed as oppressed, the oppressors are not Jews in par tic u lar but rather Eu ro pe ans at large. On a different occasion, Jef-frey Herf noted, “The unambiguous expressions of Jew- hatred from the Is-lamists have not aroused the same degree of moral revulsion that would be the case if the source was neo- Nazism in Eu rope.” 76
As I have argued throughout this chapter, antisemitism is a Eu ro pe an disease that in the past generated the deadly racism that resulted in the Holocaust. Germans have laudably committed themselves to the idea that this crime must never be permitted again. They have established this as a basic element of their po liti cal culture. It is thus most perplexing to watch the same people remain silent about antisemitic Islamism or describe it as a legitimate response of the “oppressed.” In a lecture on antisemitism deliv-ered at Yale in March 2007 I felt I had more freedom to say this than at any time in Eu rope.
There is no denying the social marginalization of diaspora Muslims in Eu rope. Muslim immigrants exist as a poor ethnic underclass in Eu ro pe an societies in a kind of segregation, partly imposed, partly self-chosen. When they express their resentment they do it through Islamist identity politics. It is unfortunate that these people turn their anger, which is largely justifi ed, against the Jews. I do not like Islamist blame games, but I cannot refrain from ascribing their misery partly to Eu ro pe ans. Even those Muslims in Eu-rope who are privileged to be among the middle class feel the brunt of the ugly Eu ro pe an exclusionary culture. Multiculturalism and cultural relativ-ism exist side by side with this exclusionary racrelativ-ism and are not free of it. The majority of Muslims who make up the ethnic underclass in Eu rope are not educated and may not have even heard of multiculturalism, but they hear Eu ro pe ans talk about tolerance of non- Western cultures while practicing exclusion. In Germany, for instance, the major application of affi rmative ac-tion policies is to ensure the employment of (German) women, not to redress discrimination against Muslims. Jews pay for this Eu ro pe an practice. In the agitprop of “Islam under siege,” in which Islam is believed to be encircled by Jews and crusaders, Islamists project onto Jews the role of instigators.
Islamism and Antisemitism 83
Multiculturalism, meanwhile, presents itself as a postcolonial world-view poised to abandon the West’s “mission civilisatrice” and its ugly Euro-centrism. This positive aspect seldom goes beyond rhetoric. Instead we get, in the name of cultural relativism, a new ideology that dismisses the uni-versality of the values of humanism. Even the new antisemitism seems to be admissible as a view of the cultural other, granted respectability under the guise of anti- Zionism. Matthias Küntzel reports that after he wrote about his work on Islamist antisemitism, he was “excluded” by his peers. Jew ha-tred among Muslims in Eu rope is a taboo subject. The Eu ro pe an left’s view of Islamists as anti- imperialists and of their totalitarian movement as an antiglobalization effort legitimates the suppression of any critique of Islamism. Instead of Islamist antisemitism, one is encouraged to talk about Islamophobia.
This attitude explains situations in which the perpetrators of Jew ha-tred are tolerated when they are non- Western (for example, Islamic, espe-cially Palestinian) immigrants. In the name of diversity, multiculturalism honors cultural difference indiscriminately. Recognition, elevated to a basic right, requires an unchecked toleration of the cultural views of others with-out any limitation. Thus as Herf rightly notes, antisemitism is condemned only when expressed by local Eu ro pe ans. When it originates from other cul-tures, excuses are brought forward: it signifi es the “outrage of an oppressed people” against Zionist atrocities in Palestine and the world.
For example, in the German cities of Essen and Düsseldorf some synagogues were desecrated in October 2000. Everyone assumed that the perpetrators were neo- Nazis. The chancellor at the time, Gerhard Schröder, responded with outrage, calling on all Germans to engage in an Aufstand der Anständigen (uprising of the decent people) against the new rise of antisemi-tism. Upon investigation, the German police found that the perpetrators were not German neo- Nazis but Arab Muslim immigrants. The outrage promptly subsided. It was transformed overnight into a multicultural understanding of the “oppressed” Palestinians. The desecration was no longer a disgrace but an expression of outrage over “the way Jews treat Arabs” in Palestine. The Jews were no longer victims but perpetrators, for some even “the new Nazis,”
and the vandals’ hatred was no longer abhorrent antisemitism but laudable
84 Islamism and Antisemitism
anti- Zionism. It is not known, of course, whether any of the congregants in these synagogues had ever mistreated a single Arab— and not relevant, for they too had been transformed, from individual Jews into “the Jews.”
Following that incident I made an effort to launch a public debate about anti- Zionism and antisemitism. It was diffi cult to fi nd an outlet for the article I wrote. At that time I was still a regular newspaper columnist, but my own publishers, Frank furter Allgemeine Zeitung and Der Spiegel, would not print the piece, nor would any other German newspaper. In the end, the daily Die Welt ran it, but only after another assault: a Berlin Rabbi named Rothschild was beaten by an Arab- Islamist gang and had to be hospitalized.77 What tolerance! What lessons learned from the Holocaust!
Having lived in Germany from 1962 to 2009, I believe the Germans have in fact learned very little.
In the synagogue vandals’ court trial, jurors were urged to understand their deeds as expressions of “legitimate outrage” against injustice in Pales-tine. The public’s favorable attitude toward the perpetrators was refl ected in the exceptionally light sentence they received. Had they been German, the sentence would have been much tougher and civil society would have been unanimously unforgiving.
In France assaults against Jews have become a daily business. The French police advise Jews to abandon all outward displays of their Jewish-ness as the best way to avoid assaults by young Muslims allegedly protesting Zionism or contesting their marginalization. The same happens in Scandi-navia. Sweden hosts the antisemitic Radio Islam. Many Eu ro pe an Jews living there describe a level of harassment suffi cient to make them consider leaving, but which Scandinavians tolerate as “frustrated expressions of jus-tifi able po liti cal grievances.” Multiculturalism thus has become a cover for the return of antisemitism to Eu rope via Arab- Islamic migration. Among the so- called repentant Eu ro pe ans, recognition of the right to cultural dif-ference has been extended to enforced tolerance of Arab- Muslim antisemi-tism. Those who criticize this Islamist antisemitism are accused not only of Islamophobia— even if, like me, they are themselves Muslims— but also of creating tensions by offending Muslim immigrants.
Islamism and Antisemitism 85
Every analysis of diasporic cultures needs to deal with the invention and construction of cultural identity. This is especially relevant when the envi-ronment is perceived as hostile (such as Eu rope, seen as dar al- kuffar). Under Islamist infl uence, the underclass of the Islamic diaspora is constructing its cultural identity around an ideology of antisemitism. The Berlin newspaper Tagesspiegel reported that in some schools in predominantly Arab- Muslim districts (such as Neukölln), students underlined their Muslim identity in terms of antisemitic slogans such as Hier kommt kein Jude rein (no Jews are allowed to enter). Multiculturalism presently tolerates this variety of identity politics even as it decries identity politics of local people as “right- wing radi-calism” and “anti- immigration.” The equally radical right- wing Islamists are given a free pass.
The indiscriminate tolerance granted by Eu ro pe an cultural relativists to Islamists takes identity politics to absurd levels. As a result of the Islamist indoctrination they receive in diaspora institutions— the scenes reported by Hanif Kureishi are hardly limited to London— young Muslims throughout Eu rope are radicalized from early childhood. The new antisemitism is part and parcel of this indoctrination. In this pursuit, Islamists make full use of civil rights. Invoking freedom of religion, they teach in faith schools an ex-clusive identity that denies the identity rights of non- Muslims and un-dermines efforts at integration of Muslims as citizens. While no balanced observer can overlook the way Muslims are treated in Eu rope, it is not only Eu ro pe ans who are responsible for the failure of Muslims to integrate into Eu ro pe an society. Muslims themselves are also to blame. Islamist leaders in Eu rope support not Eu ro pe anizing Islam but rather the Islamization of Eu rope.78
There is a proverb in German: Angriff ist die beste Verteidigung (attack is the best defense). If you accuse Islamists of spreading antisemitism, they call you an Islamophobe. Then they equate anti- Islamism with antisemi-tism and speak of a new Holocaust against Muslims. By this logic, those who advocate hatred are innocent, but those who object to hatred are pro-moting genocide. Tariq Ramadan defends himself against the accusation of doublespeak79 by turning the tables in precisely this way. In an interview
86 Islamism and Antisemitism
with Der Spiegel he declared, “I am a Muslim Jew.” In view of his troubles with such French Jews as Alain Finkielkraut, this claim is little more than propaganda. Ramadan is mistrusted by Jewish intellectuals in France because they believe he profi les them in an antisemitic manner. In contrast, he has been celebrated in Oxford and in some circles in America as the voice of Islam in Eu rope.80 I fi nd nothing Eu ro pe an in his Islamist think-ing. In contrast there are truly Eu ro pe an Muslims who take a clear stand against Tariq Ramadan.81
In an article in the Frank furter Allgemeine Zeitung titled “Die falsche Parallele” (The false parallel), I disputed the equation of Muslim immi-grants with Jews. As a Muslim immigrant, I can say from personal experi-ence that Muslims in Eu rope today are discriminated against and socially marginalized. But we are not “the new Jews.” We live in a demo cratic Eu rope and are by no means subjected to a Holocaust. Nowhere in the world of Islam do Islamists enjoy the degree of civil rights and freedom they have in Eu rope.82
One needs to deal honestly with the false comparison of antisemitism and anti- Islamism. In Eu rope one often hears Islamists speak of a new Holocaust that targets Muslims. As a Muslim humanist I fail to grasp how people who in fact despise Jews can take advantage of the very real suffer-ing of the Holocaust to advance their po liti cal goals. Despite some wrongs done to Muslims, Eu rope is a demo cratic place. It grants Islamists po liti cal asylum and welfare payments when they fl ee persecution in the world of Islam. Any Muslim is much safer in Eu rope than in any Muslim country.
The Islamists themselves are the foremost benefi ciaries of the strict legal standards for civil rights in Eu rope. If there is a real Holocaust that targets Muslims in Eu rope, why do Islamists pour into Eu rope and continue to seek asylum there? Between 1950 and 2010 the Muslim diaspora in West-ern Eu rope grew from about 1 million to 23 million people.
The return of antisemitism to Eu rope via Islamic migrations happens in the context of the activities of diaspora Islamists who are at pains to hi-jack the Muslim diaspora in Eu rope and abuse it for their own purposes.
They undermine integration and avert any criticism by hurling the stone of Islamophobia. The events in Essen in 2000 display the downgrading of the
Islamism and Antisemitism 87
vice of antisemitism (which is real), and the upgrading of the allegation of Islamophobia (which is also real, but nonetheless highly exaggerated). In Islamist propaganda the two are equated. It bears repeating: Islamists enjoy more freedom and civil rights in Eu rope than in any place in the world of Islam except the countries where they are in charge. The ideologically bi-ased environment of multiculturalism in Eu rope enforces a silence that ben-efi ts Islamists, who fi nd in Eu rope a sanctuary from which to wage their war of ideas.
The multicultural tolerance extended to the Islamists of the diaspora creates a problem not only for Eu ro pe an Jews but also for liberal Muslims, who fl ee Islamism at home only to fi nd themselves exposed to it in Eu rope.
Among the elements in the Eu ro pe an ideology of antisemitism is the doc-trine, much prized by the Nazis, of Volk. There is no similar concept in the original Islamic idea of umma. In its classical understanding the umma is fully inclusive: everyone can join by converting. In Chapter 1 I demonstrated that Islamism invents Islamic tradition by turning the Muslim umma into something like the Nazis’ Volk: pure and exclusivist. Its foremost enemies are the Jews. Earlier I referred to the notion “ethnicity of fear” I coined to
Among the elements in the Eu ro pe an ideology of antisemitism is the doc-trine, much prized by the Nazis, of Volk. There is no similar concept in the original Islamic idea of umma. In its classical understanding the umma is fully inclusive: everyone can join by converting. In Chapter 1 I demonstrated that Islamism invents Islamic tradition by turning the Muslim umma into something like the Nazis’ Volk: pure and exclusivist. Its foremost enemies are the Jews. Earlier I referred to the notion “ethnicity of fear” I coined to