• Home
• /
• Opinion

Now France Debates Islam’s Role in National Identity

In order to protect it, it must first be defined. Hence the debate. The French have been asked through a series of town hall meetings, a dedicated website and parliamentary debates to come up with the definition of French national identity.

This is no light-hearted exercise but something vitally important. According to the French Minister for Industry, a debate such as this one could have spared Europe the World War II. Yes folks, according to Christian Estrosi, had Adolf Hitler undertaken such a consultation about German identity on the eve of the World War II, Europe may have been spared the war and all 
its devastation!

This same Christian Estrosi is the Mayor of Nice and was one of the first French politicians to react to the Swiss referendum vote banning the construction of minarets. There will be no minarets in Nice, he proclaimed. The construction of a minaret in Nice was hardly likely in the first place since Estrosi has blocked the construction of a mosque in Nice, with or without a minaret. It’s not a big jump to see the link. The Swiss vote was the perfect metaphor: no minarets in our landscape means no Islam in our national identity. And that is exactly what the French debate on national identity has turned into, the question is no longer what it means to be French but is being Muslim compatible with being French?

National identity is not a national monument. It is not physical and concrete; it cannot be reduced to singing the national anthem or dressing in a certain way. It is a construct, something that is constantly evolving.

National identity is a product of the people that make up a nation, of the nation’s history and geography and of the times in which they live. It cannot be defined solely by the past or be forced upon people like a uniform.

As the physical and social make-up of a country changes, so does its national identity. There are over five million Muslims in France, representing a sizeable 7.5 per cent of the French population. They now form a solid part of French identity; it is irrefutable!

But they are not really French I hear you say, they’re immigrants. This aspect of national identity has long fascinated me. In the US, you will hear people proudly proclaim that they are American and then list the percentages that make up their ancestry. Their whole nationhood is built on a history of migration. But elsewhere there seems to be an assumption that if your parents or grandparents were born in a foreign land, you remain a foreigner.

When Algeria qualified for the World Cup a few weeks ago, men and women flocked to the streets of France in celebration. They waved Algerian flags and draped themselves in green. Yet these were French citizens. Does it make them any less French to also express love for the country of their parents or grandparents? Are Irish Americans who parade on St Patrick’s Day waving Irish flags any less American for doing so? Those who answer ‘yes’ remind me of the eight quarters rule in Vienna.

In order to be received at court during the time of the Hapsburgs you had to prove that all eight of your great grandparents were members of the Austrian aristocracy. Is that the definition of nationality we should use? That you are only truly French, or American, or Saudi if your bloodline over three generations is 100 per cent French, or American, or Saudi? Is that not just a little bit racist? Is defining nationality purely in terms of blood not akin to turning nationality into a race?

I have some sympathy for French fears over the erosion of their national identity. Globalisation is slowly destroying the very essence and beauty of French culture. The French language has been under assault by the supremacy of English for decades now. Walk down the centre of Paris and you will see as many Starbucks and McDonalds as traditional French bistros. But. if you define Muslims by those regularly seen in the news, namely the extremists, the beardies and other zealots, Muslim identity is both salient and at odds with French republican values. It could feel threatening to have a population of 5 million such ‘aliens’ in your midst. But that is not the case. French Muslims are mainly second or third-generation French citizens and they are fairly well integrated. The exclusion is not a religious one but a social one. The bulk of immigration from North Africa came during the 1960s and the 1970s. France needed the labour to build its industrial base. It is being unemployed and disadvantaged that leads to young men burning cars and other such violent events. The fact that these young men may be Muslims is irrelevant. It does not mean that being a Muslim should be equated with violence. Once again it is the news-worthiness of such events that draws a picture of Muslims that is at odds with reality.

President Sarkozy has sought to reassure Muslims that they are welcome in France and that he will do his utmost to protect their rights as French citizens. But he also calls on Muslims to practise their religion with ‘humble discretion’. Is Sarkozy not simply asking French Muslims to tone down their Islamic identity in order to blend with French national identity?

Iman Kurdi is an Arab writer
based in London. For feedback,
write to opinion@khaleejtimes.com