Limits of Integration Policy: Britain and Her Muslims

Abstract

This essay examines a paradox: while the British state has done more than other European states to accommodate the claims of Muslim minorities, recent polls have shown British Muslims to be more disaffected and alienated than other Muslims in Europe. This raises the question of the limits of integration policy, which is obvious but rarely posed. I argue that, more than reflecting an adverse reality, the neologism ‘Islamophobia’ has functioned as a symbolic device of the British state to recognise the Muslim minority. However, the policy focus on Islamophobia had two negative consequences: first, it deflected from the real causes of disadvantage; secondly, it fuelled the quest for ‘respect and recognition’ that stands to be disappointed in a liberal state. I take the latter to be the main limit of integration policy as revealed by the British case.

Keywords:

• Immigrant Integration
• Multiculturalism
• Muslims in Britain and Europe
• Discrimination
• Liberalism

Notes

1. A NOP survey of summer 2006 shows even more startling figures: almost 25 per cent of questioned Muslims said the 7 July 2005 bombings of London Underground were justified in light of Britain's support for the ‘war on terror’; and those under the age of 24 were twice as likely to hold this view as those over 45 (Jon Snow, ‘Muslim integration has come to a halt’, Sunday Times, 6 August 2006).

2. Home Secretary Charles Clarke, in his presentation of the bill in the House of Commons (House of Commons Hansard Debates, 21 June 2005, column 673).

3. For instance, action can only be brought by the Attorney General, intention has to be proved, and only ‘threatening’ (that is, not merely ‘abusive and insulting’) words and behaviour can be prosecuted.

4. Trade Minister Mike O'Brien, in an article published in Muslim Weekly (quoted in Malik 2005).

5. Pakistan and Bangladesh are the two main origin countries of the approximately 1.6 million British Muslims, according to the 2001 census; 92 and 92.5 per cent of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, respectively, are Muslim; by contrast, only 12.7 per cent of Indians are (see Peach 2005).

6. In a November 2004 poll, a staggering 80 per cent of British Muslims ‘disagreed’ with the statement, ‘President Bush and Tony Blair have said the war on terror is not a war against Islam’ (Financial Times, 14 July 2005).

7. Birmingham councilor Salma Yaquoob, quoted in Policy Exchange (2007: 64).

8. For a comparative assessment of Britain's ‘balanced’ response to religious violence, see Bleich, this issue.

9. The ‘Asian’ proxy is used here because stop-and-searches are not recorded by religion.

10. Quoted from UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office/Home Office (2004: 2, 4, 13). From a certain angle, these positive measures are part of an overarching ‘counter-terrorism strategy’ (oddly dubbed ‘CONTEST’) that focuses on ‘prevention’ by ‘encourag(ing) moderate Muslim opinion’ and tackling the ‘roots’ of extremism: ‘discrimination, disadvantage and exclusion’.

11. Preventing Extremism Together Working Groups, August–October 2005 (www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1502010): 9.

12. In the original e-mail exchange that is the basis of ‘The Danish Cartoon Affair’ (Modood et al. 2006) (copy of the original exchange is on file with author).

13. This is the position of cartoon opponent Tariq Modood (Modood et al. 2006: 4–7).

14. This Court of Appeals rule was itself overruled by the House of Lords in March 2006.

15. Lancashire Telegraph, East Lancashire blog, Jack Straw, ‘I wanted to unveil my views on an important issue’, 5 October 2006 (www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/blog/index).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Christian Joppke

Christian Joppke is Professor of Political Science at The American University of Paris