October 09, 2009

Fear and Possibilities

 

Since 9/11, the Muslim migrant experience in the West has come under particular scrutiny. Westerners are struck by the generosity and friendly behavior of people when they visit Muslim lands and are, therefore, perplexed to find that Muslims in Western lands have not made the anticipated inroads.

For example, in the UK, following World War II, and with the shortfall of labor resources in Britain, the requirements necessitated a huge influx of workers from Pakistan who were relatively unschooled and not conversant with English, therefore lending themselves to isolation and ghettoization. And then there was the issue of class. This immigrant underclass was seen through the lens of the British upper class, reinforcing unfavorable stereotyping. The migrants saw Britain as a place to work, not as a place to live. Also, their own rigid social conservatism disengaged them from the mainstream. During the Thacher era of the early 1980s, there was rising bigotry and before that there was race-baiting Enoch Powell. More recently, in an environment of an unfriendly foreign policy and few domestic job opportunities, immigrant elders were not equipped to provide direction to the alienated youth who had difficulty coping with the mounting frustrations and humiliations of being socially insignificant, thereby giving space for militancy to incubate.

A query often raised by Westerners is why the overseas Indian community seems to be better integrated and more prosperous. There are reasons for it. Historically in the West, there is no threat perception with respect to the Indian community – the majority Hindu community being largely perceived as a subject race. They did not have the “baggage” which accompanied Muslims – seen as a conquering group – in the European imagination. As late as 1683, the Ottoman armies were knocking on the doors of Vienna. The Hindus were swifter to assimilate, to change names, and to adapt to local customs. They gave greater priority to education and had better business skills.

In striking contrast to the negative perception of Muslims fostered in the West, Western visitors in Muslim lands are pleasantly surprised by the reality of hospitality.

 

Muslims in the West have a palpably weak presence in the thinking professions, which has made the public relations contest into a lopsided affair. The pervasive use of smear terminology like hyphenating Islam with terrorism, fascism, fundamentalism, and nukes, has sharpened the divide. The Prince of Wales was on target during his landmark speech of October 27, 1993, at Oxford where he said that, with respect to the Muslims “the extreme is often depicted as the norm.” In the West, state misconduct is often downplayed while group or individual misbehavior is magnified. That is why discussion about terrorism is compartmentalized with little reference to its underlying motives and roots. One exception to that trend is the cover story of the October 2009 issue of the Atlantic magazine. It spells out the moral damage done to the US through the Bush-Cheney approval of torture tactics.

In all of the above, Muslims cannot absolve themselves of their own responsibility in not availing the possibilities of living in the West. At Washington, DC, on Friday, September 25, an attempt was made to rally US Muslims by organizing Juma prayers in front of the US Capitol – the seat of the US Congress. Citing lame excuses, prominent Muslim groups were hesitant to come forward for the prayer event in which thousands participated, including this scribe. Their abstention merely gave more space to non-Muslim protesters present there to vent their anger.

Here, “moderation” and “appeasement” are not a sustainable strategy for co-existence. Just recently, with the full backing of the Western bloc, an ex-Bulgarian communist, Irina Bokova, was elected head of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) after defeating Farouk Hosny from the “moderate” country of Egypt. According to a NewYork Times story of September 24, it “sends the message that the West can swallow someone’s communist past very easily but can’t abide an Arab who is anti-Israel.”

While Muslim presence continues to grow in the West, its effectiveness is hampered by the myopia and timidity of its leaders to avail the freedoms and unique opportunities of political expression. The possibilities can be realized if there is a bona fide attempt to fight the fear within.