US Government
and American Muslims Engage to Define Islamophobia
By Dr M. A. Muqtedar
Khan
Assistant Professor
Department of Political Science and IR
University of Delaware
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution
On December 4, 2006, the national
leadership of American Muslims met with key senior
US government officials to discuss the state of
Islamophobia in America and US-Muslim relations.
The conference was organized by the Bridging the
Divide Initiative of Saban Center at the Brookings
Institution. It was co-sponsored by the Institute
for Social Policy and Understanding and the Association
of Muslim Social Scientists.
As the conference chair of the program, the most
extraordinary challenge that I faced was to bring
together two parties that did not see eye to eye
on this issue. While American Muslim leaders and
participants were arguing that Islamophobia was
not only a reality but rapidly increasing phenomenon
in America, the government’s position was
that while there have been increased incidences
of anti-Muslim episodes in the US, the word Islamophobia
deepens the divide between the US and the Muslim
world. Other representatives of the government
also suggested that the fear that Muslims were
referring to was not the fear of Islam but the
fear of Muslim terrorism as manifest on September
11, 2001.
Stephen Grand, the Director of the US-Islamic
World program, welcomed the forty plus participants
from the US government and the Muslim community
and launched the conference. The government was
represented by several participants from the Department
of State, the Department of Homeland Security
and associated agencies.
The morning keynote address was delivered by Alina
Romanowski, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
State for Professional and Cultural Affairs. She
was introduced by Ambassador Martin Indyk, Director
of Saban Center. He argued the importance of such
dialogues at a time when the gap between America
and the Muslim World appeared to be widening.
Alina Romanowski reiterated the vision and objectives
that Ambassador Karen Hughes seeks to advance
at the State Department on public diplomacy. She
talked about the three key public diplomacy objectives
-- offering a positive vision of hope and opportunity
around the world that is rooted in America's belief
in freedom, justice, opportunity and respect for
all; isolating and marginalizing the violent extremists
and confronting their ideology of hate and tyranny;
and fostering a sense of the common values and
common interests between Americans and peoples
of different countries, cultures and faiths around
the world.
The question and answer session was remarkably
open and candid. Ms Romanowski agreed to relay
the issues raised by the group during her session
to others in the Department. Listening and creating
opportunities for people-to-people exchanges and
dialogue, she said, was a key component of the
work of the Education and Cultural Affairs Bureau
at the Department of State.
Nihad Awad, the Executive Director of the Council
on American Islamic Relations, argued that Islamophobia
was a new word but not a new phenomenon. He presented
data to indicate that hate crimes against Muslims
had risen by 29% in the last one year and in the
ten years since 1995 that his organization [CAIR]
had collected data on Islamophobic episodes, it
has shown nothing but steady increase. He concluded
that being critical of Islam and Muslims is not
Islamophobia, but to ridicule the faith and the
faithful, certainly is.
Louay Safi, the Executive Director of the ISNA
leadership Development Center, insisted that Islamophobia
deepens the divide between the US and the Islamic
World. He argued that increasingly Islam is being
presented as a violent and intolerant religion
and this message is spreading from the margins
to the mainstream. A report entitled “Blaming
Islam” authored by Dr. Safi and published
by the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding
was released at the event.
Imam Mahdi Bray, the executive Director of MAS
Freedom Foundation expressed concern that in spite
of the fact that most Muslims cherish American
values, they are portrayed as seditious. He lamented
the ignorance of Islam that underpins Islamophobia
and suggested that occasionally some measures
of the government, when in its overzealous endeavor
to prosecute the war on terror it overplays its
hand and undercuts Muslim civil rights, may also
be contributing to the growing instances of Islamophobia.
The afternoon keynote address was delivered by
Dan Sutherland, the Officer for Civil Rights at
the Department of Homeland Security. Mr. Sutherland
started by observing that there is “a lot
of heat but very little light” on the subject
of Islamophobia. He addressed the issue of Islamophobia
and the rising hate crimes and anti-Muslim discourse
in America head-on. He argued, based on fifty
years of statistical data, that America has progressively
become less and less racist.
Sutherland then spoke at length about the stunning
achievements of American Muslims in every sphere
of American life asserting that the degree to
which American Muslims are integrated and successful
belies any claims of systematic Islamophobia in
America. He did however concede that there have
been several incidences of Islamophobic episodes,
but he also claimed that there were many which
were resolved in favor of Muslims and discussed
a few cases where the government had interfered
effectively on behalf of the Muslims.
The government’s case was very clear; yes
there are disturbingly large numbers of incidences
that suggest that prejudice is at work, however,
the overall picture indicates that things are
not as bad as some Muslim leaders were claiming
them to be.
The final panel of the day included Ahmed Younis,
the National Director of the Muslim Public Affairs
Council, Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad of the Association
of Muslim Social Scientists and Muqtedar Khan
of Brookings Institution. This panel sought to
balance the debate by arguing that while there
are disturbing indications of the growth of anti-Muslim
prejudice in America, there are several surveys
which speak to this reality, American Muslims
must be careful how they talk about Islamophobia.
The panelists also argued that American Muslims
must work with the government to not only challenge
the anti-Islamic discourse that is spreading in
the US but also work to correct some of the misunderstandings
that the government itself may be harboring about
Islam and American Muslims.
An additional theme that was explored was the
need to challenge anti-Americanism that was spreading
within the Muslim community. Recognizing that
anti-Americanism and Islamophobia feed each other,
the panelists called for simultaneously addressing
both prejudices.
While this was the first US Government and American
Muslim conference on Islamophobia, there is need
for several more of such interactions in order
to help define the term and come to a common understanding
about the extent of anti-Muslim prejudice in America
and how the government and the community can jointly
address it.
(Dr M. A. Muqtedar Khan is Assistant Professor
at the University of Delaware and a Nonresident
Senior Fellow with the Saban Center at the Brookings
Institution. He is also a fellow of the Institute
for Social Policy and Understanding and the Alwaleed
Center at Georgetown University. His website is
www.ijtihad.org.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
