by Jessica Robertson
At a Christian Democratic Union (CDU) gathering earlier this month, German chancellor Angela Merkel called for a nationwide full-face veil ban. One statement she made at this conference particularly grabbed the attention of news media- “The full veil is not appropriate here. It should be forbidden wherever that is legally possible.” As the leader and major party candidate of the CDU, Merkel antagonized many with this blatantly conservative comment. CDU members are wary that her stance on political Islam is strictly a political move aimed to win back her party’s support after she faced criticism for admitting hundreds of thousands of migrants into the country. While the CDU applauded Merkel’s comments, many in the minority Muslim community are outraged by her pointedness. The chairman of the Islamic Council of the Federal Republic of Germany, Burhan Kesici, believes that Merkel’s clearly articulated populist statement reflects the nature of election campaigning.
The question at stake here is whether to allow Muslim women to wear traditional Islamic garb such as the niqab, which keeps the eyes clear but covers the rest of the face, and the burqa, which covers the entire face including a thin mesh that covers the eyes. The hijab, a headscarf that does not cover the face, has been met with less opposition.
The full-face veil debate has not only divided Germany, but also Europe. France and Belgium have already imposed national bans on full-face veils. In France, the penalty for wearing a burqa is 150 euros (the equivalent of $217) and “instruction in citizenship” according to a BBC report. The common justifications for such legislation is that the full-face burqa both impedes gender equality and also compromises physical identification, rendering it a threat to national security. According to Al Jazeera, the Dutch government released a statement to explain, “Everyone has the right to dress as he or she wishes...That freedom is limited only where it is essential for people to see each other, for example to ensure good service or security.” While this justification may appear pragmatic, statements such as this only reinforce Islamophobic behavior throughout Europe.
This past summer, France enforced a burkini ban that has since been overturned. The burkini is a type of bathing suit that allows Muslim women to enjoy a day at the beach while still adhering to the modest dress code required by their religion. Nicolas Sarkozy, a candidate for the French presidency, has made his disdain of burkinis in addition to full-face veils very clear, appealing to the conservative right. Following the Bastille Day terrorist attack in Nice, Sarkozy discussed banning burkinis on all beaches. This was met with some support from French citizens. Manuel Valls, a Socialist Party candidate for the French presidency, claims that the burkini reflects “the affirmation of political Islam in the public space.” Although by France’s top administrative court lifted the ban, the consequences of this legislation still linger in the sociopolitical climate of the country.
In 2014, a 24-year-old Muslim woman challenged the French government on the burqa ban. Although France is home to the largest Muslim minority in Western Europe, only about 2,000 women wear full-face veils on a regular basis. The woman argued the full-face ban targets a small and already particularly vulnerable demographic. Yet, the European Court of Human Rights declared that the French burqa ban was justified and furthermore “made it easier for French citizens to ‘live together.’”
Proponents of the ban offer vague and unsubstantiated arguments, suggesting the purpose of the law is, at its core, to ensure peace and cohesion within society, as exemplified by the 2014 European Court of Human Rights’ decision. Across European countries, this ban represents larger issues of nationality, harsh immigration restrictions, and hierarchical race relations. Concerned about the spread of sharia law into migrant Muslim communities, Angela Merkel claimed, “We don’t want any parallel societies. Our law takes precedence before tribal rules, codes of honor and sharia.” In response to claims such as this one, many Muslims are frustrated with the hypocritical discourse of secularism in Western European countries – especially considering that many, if not most, of their holidays are rooted in Christianity. Anthony Faiola of the Washington Post asserts that, “secularism often becomes a means of attacking Islam in a country still reeling from a string of terrorist attacks committed by Islamic State militants.”
This issue walks a fine line between upholding the freedom to religious expression and the notion that the clothing choices of a small, female Muslim minority impacts national security. As the conflict in Syria continues to wreck communities, especially with the siege of Aleppo, it is crucial to confront the ways in which the international community scrutinizes the Muslim community. It is our duty to engage in conversations that interrogate notions of Islamophobia and to fight for legislative equality for all.
Jessica Robertson is a junior at UC Berkeley studying Development Studies.
