French President Emmanuel Macron has faced a tough set of decisions as he nears an attempt at reelection in the coming days. In the face of several major terrorist attacks perpetrated by extremist individuals claiming to represent Islam, the situation Macron finds himself in naturally demands a firm and reassuring response. It is unfortunate that, from an outsider's perspective of Muslims, Macron has focused primarily on playing politics rather than approaching the phenomenon of extremism in a constructive way that can overcome the challenges it brings. His policies will exacerbate extremism by validating the narratives and beliefs of extremist recruiters in France who seek to deceive and brainwash vulnerable Muslims.
In response to extremist Muslim terrorists, the French government has enacted several policies that aim to curb terrorism and what they call “Islamic separatism.” Despite Macron’s defenders who claim that these policies are enacted out of concern for security, such policies are unapologetically Islamophobic and discriminatory. They deeply offend Muslims by making their way of life unnecessarily difficult. The burkini, an all-encompassing swimsuit worn by some Muslim women, was famously banned in 2011 and the veil known as the niqab preferred by some Muslim women was banned in 2016. Is this so-called liberal agenda that is founded on secularism truly liberal if it restricts individuals from practicing the most fundamental aspects of their faith in ways that do not harm or inconvenience others? In May of last year, a woman was banned from Macron’s party for simply wearing a Muslim headscarf or hijab. One cannot deny that such policies indicate a bias against Muslims that goes beyond France’s generally strict stance toward religion in public life. Though many states of the modern world believe in the separation of church and state, France’s particular flavor of secularism can be said to be excessive as it inhibits the kind of basic human rights that are underlined in the United Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) and other foundational human rights treaties.
A look at some of the key extremists in Islamic history will shed light on why France’s harsh attitude toward religion creates a major breeding ground for extremists. Every extremist in Islamic history has emerged and grown in popularity by claiming to be a defendant of the religion; take for example Muslims who identify as “Salafi,” individuals who adopt intolerant and hateful attitudes in the name of returning Islam to the Salaf, the early pious generations of Islam, and saving it from traditional moderates they deemed heretics. Osama bin Laden, in his letter declaring a so-called holy war against the United States, relied almost exclusively on the notion that the Muslim world was under attack and colonized by Western powers, and they, therefore, had to be violently expelled. Such demagoguery and victimization narratives always require some sort of claim to be under attack in order to be successful. The claims of such demagogues are typically inflated and exaggerated in order to make a stronger case to would-be followers. Extremists always need a boogeyman – without a seemingly existential threat that can justify an irrationally defensive attitude, their cause would fall right apart. Extremists cannot justify their methods with the original sources of the religion unless they take Quranic verses or Hadith, sayings of Prophet Muhammad, completely out of context. Because their narrative lacks grounding in religion, it requires exaggerated grievances to be effective.
Extremist sects are always built on the hatred of an enemy and require that enemy to stay alive, whereas traditional Islam is built on love, mercy and values that do not require the existence of an archnemesis. The reality of extremist boogeymen is that they’re often imagined and not real, extremists need to create them in people’s minds and make the threat seem like it necessitates violent resistance. The extremist wants to be able to point at something and say “look! There’s the boogeyman.” Macron’s policies make it easier for Muslims to think that the boogeyman is really there. The more the French government oppresses Muslims, therefore, the more extremists can make a case that the religion needs defending from infidels and so forth. Extremism in any form is always by necessity based on an enmity narrative, and the French government’s actions are a means for strengthening such an enmity narrative. This will only make life harder for the French government in the future as it will drive more vulnerable individuals toward extremist beliefs while mass surveillance will cause the extremists to improve their ability to hide. What will likely come about is more virulent, pernicious, violent extremists that are even harder to catch and preempt.
To be sure, we cannot claim that the French government stepping back on its restrictive policies toward Muslims will change the hearts and minds of select determined extremists. No, individuals whose hearts have already settled on hatred cannot be won back easily. The French government is warranted to pursue such individuals as they pose a threat to security. Rather, the place where hearts and minds can be protected is the general body of Muslims that have not yet given in to extremist thinking. The government must cease adopting restrictive policies lest more and more Muslims are swept by extremists who will certainly use the Islamophobic policies of the government to validate their narratives.
Extremist narratives also rely on the idea that coexistence with non-Muslims is impossible for Muslims. Moreover, this perception is essential to extremists, specifically the kind that Macron calls “Islamic separatists,” who can make their followers believe that coexisting with non-Muslims is impossible. This sort of intolerance of non-Muslims is what has caused the French government to be up in arms. Such ideas from Muslims were most heavily formed by the 20th-century writer Sayyid Qutb, the ideological grandfather of modern Salafist groups. It is noteworthy that Qutb himself identified as “Salafi.” Qutb came to the U.S. from Egypt and developed a deep loathing for the customs and culture of non-Muslims he saw in America. Note that this hatred emphasizes differences and stems from the inability to see past such differences as emphasized by Islam. The logic that he formed from this foundation of hatred is the exact same logic that lies at the root of extremist organizations today.
The historically ignorant narrative of the impossibility of coexistence is always at the core of extremist movements. Extremists forget that Islam places a strong emphasis on coexisting with non-Muslims in a variety of settings, from the time of Prophet Muhammad until the Ottoman caliphate. It was with mercy, tolerance and forgiveness that the faith spread to countless hearts from its early days. By cracking down on what Macron calls Islamic separatists he is, in reality, strengthening their narratives and making it more likely that ordinary Muslims, who feel marginalized, may be brainwashed and fall into extremist ranks. The very people that Macron calls Islamic separatists are those who want to believe that living in a non-Muslim land is impossible, and the more Macron makes practicing Islam difficult for Muslims the more he will unwittingly validate the "Islamic separatist" narrative.
It also seems that Macron is taking on these policies in order to pander to the right of France and win over supporters who would otherwise be voting for Marine Le Pen, a far-right political figure in the country. This is politically irresponsible because, for reasons made clear, Macron’s rhetoric and policies will only exacerbate the issue of extremism. Macron, should he stay in power, needs to urgently peel back policies that make life unnecessarily difficult for Muslims. Should he be reelected he will no longer have any need to pander to the far-right with such policies. In order to make extremists less effective in recruiting people Macron must immediately backtrack and reassure French Muslims that he is not their mortal enemy. Terrorist incidents in the last few years have intensified in parallel to the strengthening of the anti-Muslim rhetoric. However, should Macron continue on his current trajectory, a weakening of the extremist influence is not foreseeable for the country. He will not do his own country any good.
