The Right to Towers
The Swiss vote to ban the building of minarets shows that Europe’s view of Islam is still plagued by fear and ignorance.
The Swiss vote to ban the building of minarets has led to a global outbreak of irritation and indignation. On the surface this may have concerned a building ban, but the core issue was a different one: Minarets make crystal clear the deep-seated change our society is undergoing, through the immigration of people with different cultural backgrounds and religions. Those who ban the building of minarets want this social change to stay invisible. They are ignoring reality and hoping that Muslim believers will continue to exercise their religion behind the scenes, in prayer rooms in back-to-back houses or out of the way on industrial estates. This attempt to drive it to the proverbial margins of society represents would be exclusion.
We must recognise that Islam has become part of our society, just as it is part of all European societies. More than three million believers in a form of Islam live in Germany. For the most part, we brought them into our country decades ago as »guest workers«. They and their children today are citizens, and often also Germans with all the rights and duties arising from this fact. Until a few years ago, eleven years ago to be precise, this was ignored. For a long time, the prevailing view was that Germany was not a country of immigration. When I became Chancellor in 1998, it was important for me to stop us from living a lie. That was why we passed a modern immigration law which controls migration in a transparent way, but which supports integration at the same time. We also fundamentally altered the law on citizenship, and added to the principle of ancestry – you could only be a German if you were descended from Germans – the so-called principle of birthplace. Whoever is born in our country can obtain German citizenship. These were important first steps.
People from other countries and cultures who live with us and wish to go on living with us have to make a clear and unmistakable commitment to our legal order and our rules of democracy. It is no accident that we describe the values of democracy and enlightenment as universal values. And they are values which must also be accepted and followed by those who come from another culture. They are the basis of our life together, irrespective of cultural differences.
But integration is not the same as assimilation. It must not mean the wish to destroy cultural and religious differences. Such an approach to integration is doomed to failure. There is no shortage of people, particularly in conservative parties, whose aim is precisely that. The fact that Islam and the Muslims in our country have a negative image encourages this approach. This view is largely defined by negatives – for example, by emphasising the problems of integration, the conflicts over banning the hijab, the rare cases of forced marriage or the struggle against international terrorism, which is portrayed as having a religious motivation.
However, we should resist distortions and premature generalisations. Unfortunately, in past years these prejudices have become more and more influential in our ideas about Muslim societies and the Islamic religion. It is all too easy to make thoughtless judgments, based partly on sheer ignorance. But anyone who wishes to resist prejudices must be prepared to differentiate. We should remind ourselves what the culture of our society is based on: respect for other cultures, tolerance towards those who think and believe differently, respect for variety and differences. We must not allow what is foreign to be perceived automatically as hostile. Recognising the other as your equal is a form of cultural progress which distinguishes our country, and which we wish to support everywhere in the world. Fairness forms part of differentiation, and that must characterise the way we treat any minority.
Islam is in no sense a monolithic block, as is often claimed in the current debate. On the contrary; Islam has many varieties, and the Muslim societies also vary widely. We should not define human beings simply and solely by their religion. Every person acts within the framework of his social conditions, which are not only defined by religion, but also by economic, social and political factors. That applies to Muslims as it does to Christians, Hindus or Buddhists. We should stop producing sweeping generalisations about » Islam«.
Our historical experience obliges us to be tolerant
Just as it is a fact that Muslims live in our European continent, so it is a fact that for centuries we have been shaped by the academic and cultural exchange with the Islamic world. In the Middle Ages it was Arab scholars who supplied the world with the key to medicine and astronomy, chemistry and mathematics, and not least to the rediscovery of classical philosophy. The Islamic culture has given us architectural wonders, splendid literature and music. This influence has culturally enriched us, just as the cultural influences of the West are changing the Muslim world. The »West« does not just have Judaeo-Christian roots, but Muslim ones as well.
Islam is not a political ideology, but a peaceful religion. That is what the Koran teaches. And that is what more than a billion people believe, who like everyone else wish to live in peace, prosperity and security. Dialogue between religions is important to achieve peace, because in every religion there are fundamentalist minorities. But if we allow these minorities to dictate how we should live together, we will already have lost. And if the false accusation is made that Islam is violent and bellicose, then we Europeans, and especially we Germans, should take a look at our own history. It was the Christian states of Europe which colonised other countries in the 19th and 20th centuries, many of which have a Muslim population. And it was not Islamic states which were guilty of starting the two world wars of the last century. We have no reason for arrogance towards others. Historical experience obliges us to be tolerant, which is not the same thing as apathy or indifference.
Now an argument is often advanced in the debate about the construction of mosques and minarets. It runs: »As long as nobody is allowed to build Christian churches in Islamic countries, we should not allow any mosques to be built here.« What this argument forgets is: Millions of Christians live for example in Lebanon, Egypt and Syria. But even where Christian parishes are being created from scratch, the building of churches is permitted, for example in the ambitious Gulf states or in Indonesia. There is an undeniable lack of religious freedom in some Islamic states, but they cannot serve as an excuse to restrict rights in our own country. We perceive ourselves as an enlightened society. And enlightenment does not mean repeating the shortcomings of other societies in our own. Freedom of religion is of great value, which is why it is rightly protected under our Basic Law.
In Turkey we see fundamental democratisation
The term enlightenment must not be used for the purpose of discrimination. Thus it is sometimes claimed that Christian societies are enlightened and Muslim ones are not. Here there is a crying need for differentiation, instead of arrogantly lording it over others. Of course there is enlightenment in Islam too. In our European societies live millions of enlightened Muslims who share our basic values and are completely integrated. They are professionally successful, for example as lawyers, engineers, academics and entrepreneurs. German Muslims serve and fight in our armed forces, are excellent sportsmen and do unpaid, voluntary work in clubs. They are therefore »highly productive«, even though that is frequently called in question.
It is one of the duties of an enlightened society to recognise the success of these people, quite irrespective of their religious background. The word »Muslim« is quite often used to exclude someone. After the rather painful conflict over the award of the Hesse Prize for Culture to the author Navid Kermani, the prize-winner stated in a remarkable speech: »Yes, I’m a Muslim, and yes, I’m a writer. But I’m not a Muslim writer… I’m a German writer.« And he is absolutely right. We don‘t describe Günter Grass as a »Christian Nobel prize-winner either«.
It is not just our picture of the Muslims in our country which must change, but also our picture of the Islamic states, which stretch from West Africa through North Africa and the Middle East to Southeast Asia. They include backward and progressive countries, authoritarian and democratic systems, failing and successful economies.
And when we classify them in this way, then they are no different from other countries with other religious backgrounds. During and after my period in office I built up many links to the Islamic world on a number of visits to Islamic countries. And personalities such as the reformist former Iranian President Chatami, Turkey’s Prime Minister Erdogan or the members of the ruling family of Abu Dhabi impressed me. Like many others, they are working hard to modernise their societies, both politically and economically.
And if we look in particular at Turkey, there too we can see the success of the modernising process. That is almost entirely to do with the policies of Prime Minister Erdogan and the country’s EU entry process. Under Erdogan‘s leadership, Turkey has changed and modernised more than anyone could have imagined ten years ago in his wildest dreams. We see a fundamental democratisation of the country. And the steps which are currently being taken are really historic in character.
Because with the recognition of the Kurdish minority, the attempt is being made to achieve a peaceful settlement and permanent solution to a long and bloody conflict. Equally important in terms of both domestic and foreign policy is the rapprochement begun with the Christian state of Armenia. This process of reconciliation at long last holds out the prospect of bringing peace to the conflict-ridden Caucasus region. The European Union and the international community are well advised to support these two political decisions, but especially the development linked to them. The rapprochement with Armenia is part of Turkey’s foreign policy concept which is aimed at creating stability and peace in the whole region. Turkey as a bridge between Europe and the Middle East — the significance of this cannot be overestimated, and it is in our interests as Europeans. That is why Turkish membership of the European Union is of great importance for the security policy of our entire continent.
A changed view of the Islamic world and a changed view of the Muslims living in our country and in Europe are urgently required. It is a task for the whole of society, and all the forces in our country must face up to it – politics, economics, culture and the media. The media above all have the task of reporting in a fair and balanced way. But the greatest contribution to integration can come from every individual. Why not invite your Muslim neighbour, colleague or fellow club-member round? Understanding only grows when we meet one another and develop a common interest. Living together in multicultural societies cannot be conflict-free. It does not have to be conflict-free either, but what is essential is that these conflicts are solved through peaceful dialogue. This is not about a struggle between cultures, but a struggle for culture. For that we do not need to be afraid of church spires or minarets.
The German version of this essay was published by DIE ZEIT
It is good to read an intelligent and reflective article on this issue. There is way too much scaremongering going on. Sharp analyses like these help to understand some of the real issues.
Reading an article of this nature is really a pleasure.I think the issue of religion and cultural differences is one of the present cause of most international conflicts.It is and will always remain imperative to sensitise people about the importance of cooperation and togetherness irrespective of the cultural or religious backgrounds.We have to keep our differences away in other to make the world a better place for all.Analyses of this nature are called for.But however, we must not only end at analysing but also try to put it in actual practise
Schroeder’s still talks with two different mouths, same as the time when he has been German Chancellor.
Schroeder or Blair?
Both have destroyed the Social Democracy in Europe and all they had in mind is power money at any price.
Mister Schroeder, did you remember that it has been YOU who started the illegal war crime against Afghanistan with your special ‘friend’ Joseph Fischer who is no a War Consultants, a multi millionaire since he passed his stage in the United States after you failed to keep on to govern?
Mister Schroeder you can not say that Muslims has the right for such and such things in Europe if at the same time the WAR YOU started and supported in Afghanistan against Muslim and now is keeping on under Madam Merkel, cost the life of innocent victims because of no-controlled military action in the war Germany against the peoples of Afghanistan.
One advice Mister Schroeder: Keep on with your new friends in high level Gas and Petrol trading like you partner Fischer, but stay out of politics because you politics Mister Schroeder you Harts you war against the peoples of Afghanistan has bought pain and pain and the destruction of the European Social Democracy.
We all supported you and Fischer one day and did run from street to street that you get elected, WE ALL DID WRONG like the peoples who support Blair!
Hold on a moment Heinz. Schroeder was the first one who was steadfast against the Iraq war, which is the illegal war. Afghanistan is a completely different cup of tea. The fact that it is now going pear-shaped has little to do with the initial reason for the war. There was a UN mandate and there were good reasons to invade.
Schroeder pursued unpopular economic and social policies which badly damaged his party. I accept that. But this is not a good enough reason to argue that he has not the right to comment on Muslims in Europe. This is actually quite a good essay!
He is not discredited because he never lied to people in contrast to other people. He might have made some wrong policy choices but he is still a credible political voice in my view.
Good reasons to invade? Is there like Obama said, a ‘Good War and ‘bad war’?
Sorry I cannot see as Ret’d Colonel any reason to be in ‘war’ against Afghanistan, I see not any reason why civilians being slaughtered, killed and occupied since 2001.
Osama Bin Laden as a international criminal is a case like ‘The Jackal’ and other fools for the Interpol, Secret Service and so on.
But here, we the civilized oh so much foreigner loving Nation kill and shot them like dogs only because a Criminal has been there. strange? Yes.
In reference to Gerhard Schroeder, it his private and personal opinion what he think about Muslim or Islam in Europe. I say PRIVATE and Personal opinion, nothing else. He does not hold any official mission nor is Gerhard Schroeder elected from any peoples actually.
His opinion is the same as his friend Fischers Opinion in the German Newspaper DIE ZEIT. This are just opinions.
It is true that Schroeder changed this old German Nationality laws, but looking at some facts that recently has been collected, we will see if this has been in favour of Germany.
Another point is, that if Germany had the same DIRECT DEMOCRACY like Switzerland, I am sure and certain that the result would not be 57% like in Switzerland but much higher, and Schroeder know this very well.
Anyway Dominic, Schroeder has been a good man, (I wrote a Book about Schroeder) but since the coalition with Fischer/Greens, he lost the source, the origins of the Social Democratic Party and today as a Multi-Millionaire, he does no longer have any connection to the Working Class, not to the real problems in Germany and the so called EU.
His time is just over as Social Democrat, as Politician as a once highly respected Social Democrat.
Dear Heinz,
I respectfully disagree. Leaving the Afghanistan issue aside, on which we just have different views, there is more to be said about the Islam issue.
Of course this is his private opinion. So what? Any published opinion is a personal one. People who read opinion articles are just interested in the argument somebody else puts forward. For facts we have reporting and it is always advisable to make a distinction between fact and opinion.
“Another point is, that if Germany had the same DIRECT DEMOCRACY like Switzerland, I am sure and certain that the result would not be 57% like in Switzerland but much higher, and Schroeder know this very well.”
Exactly, this is probably why he wrote this piece in the first place. He thinks that the Swiss decision was based on many bogus arguments that are common also in other European countries. As I see it he does not want to criticise the Swiss decision but – knowing that prejudices are widespread – address and correct some of them.
I think that is a very good thing to do and more former and current leaders should join this particular debate.
You are right because we disagree on the killing fields in Afghanistan but because it is Islam Nation, we disagree because Schroeder use two different pools.
His ex-Domestic and International Policy (Illegal War Crime Afghan War)
His Domestic ex Chancellor Politics where he needed the voice of all immigrants.
I think this are in fact his real opinion that let believers pray where they wanted to pray and it is much more easy to make a small donation if you have the pockets full and do not need to worry any more, then if you are at the front, and face millions without have something in the pocket.
Schroeder know that in front of few thousands elector he could not make the same statement, but now as older Statesman, it is nice to see, that once free from the popular electorate you can freely express you own mind, without being placed on the loser place again.
So please let it stop here because I am typing on a new book about the present Chancellor Miss Merkel, and I see this very important at this time now.
OK? Nice talking to you.
This is an open comment thread and I am sure there are other readers with opinions in which I am interested in. So PLEASE don’t worry that this is it for you!
This is a very welcome contribution to a debate that won’t go away but will intensify in the future. We will especially have to define what integration actually entails. I cannot mean assimilation, I agree, but it cannot mean parallel societies in everything other than name either.
The key point is that everybody remains open-minded and accepts dialogue.
In the near future – I think ca. 2030 latest – in Germany there`ll be a majority of Germans of foreign origin with lots of Muslims, much more than today.
There`ll be mostly Germans of Christian religion, Muslims and a few Jews. So what, what`s the problem?
The so called Christians in Germany ( The Catholic Church and the Protestants ) are not brothers up to now.
The respectfully factors of social integration like fraternite`, egalite` und liberte` are obviously not fulfilled in… Europe. In my opinion among other social handcuffs religions seem to be poison for a real integrated society and apart from this… “opium for the people” and for… desperados. The continueing antagonism between the nonworking and the working class is the main-reason for the ugly lack of integration inside our – by capitalists organized and structured societies ( in all continents ).
Schroeder`s political platform to be tolerant and generally to respect Muslims is o.k., but almost a platitude. Nowadays the society of Switzerland, Germany or other European countries distrusts Muslims
(let`s call those societies “sailor” …and sing: “What shall we do with the drunken sailor…?”). Don`t tell me, sarcasm wouldn`t help to overcome problems.
No problems Ulfert, we still have the chance to become the new ‘Wolga Turks’ somewhere between Izmir and Iran or ‘Sieben Schwaben Afghans’ once the Schroeder, Merkel, NATO Mission is completed and Afghanistan and Iran and Iraq is free of ‘bad Muslims’ and they are all exiled in Berlin Paris New York etc..
This whole stuff look very much alike Northern Ireland, which has been called the Protestant Catholic War but in fact has always been a liberation act from the Irish to get ride of the British Colonialist, and the same we can see now in Afghanistan, even after killing of so much civilians, some ‘elected leaders’ require the occupation forces to remind… Why? The BIG MONEY BOY!
Peoples in Switzerland are certainly not Racist’s, what happen in Switzerland is they could CRY out (by direct democracy) the dissatisfaction of selling out all National good, privatization of what belongs to the peoples, (Schroeder-Fischer!) fear of the so called militarized European Union, fear of a new Soviet Union style EU, fear to loos to what they belonged for century and the sold out for profits, for shareholders who never get enough, involve corrupt politicians in all EU States, this is what happens.
There is no racism in Switzerland, not at the Airport, not at the Hotel, not in the Restaurants not when you rent an apartment. And mainly foreigner, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist and so on, without Racism, occupy all this places.
The building of ‘ Towers’ and the affront is not the peoples of Switzerland or France or Germany against Muslim, but the Media who not stop to tell the peoples that Germany and others must fight in Afghanistan to save the world from the Islam Terrorist.
It is the Mass Media, it is our own Politicians who create this feeling, it is the fault of the multinationals who take over the European Union, it is the fault of corrupt an lying politicians who take the peoples for fools, rip them off, sell the national belongings, sell there nation, sell all and everything and keep on lying worse then Munchausen’s, and Schroeder has not been different then Merkel or his ex friend Fischer. So Schroeder should stop to play the ‘preacher’ above because he did also lie during the attack against Iraq and Kosovo and Kabul.
His talks or words above are nothing worth or no more worth then this preacher in the United States who uses the Christian believe to make them build million-dollar church.
http://www.heinzduthel.com/index.php?page=view/article/491/Kunduz-Bombardierung—Neues-Video-aufgetaucht-492009-Deutschland-ist-im-Krieg-in-Afghanistan-Merkel–Jung-and-Guttenberg-luegen
NO COMMENTS!
Gerhard Schroeder is the kind of moonstruck radical who feverishly tries to accord his views with reality. This kind of dissonance is dangerous for Europe and in a few generations will bring to an end it’s democratic tradition on the alter of tolerance. The referendum in Switzerland has proved once again that the public opinion in Europe is constantly drifting away from the governments’ hallucinations. Somehow it’s difficult to take Schroeder and his kind seriously when they “understand” the Muslim rage against the west on the basis of poverty, While fail to recognize that most of the terroristic acts against western targets were committed by Muslim bourgeoisie – young – educated and fully integrated. To sum up, Europe is facing a very dismal future thanks to rulers like Schroeder.