In his seminal work “Orientalism,” Edward Said (d. 2003) argues that European colonial domination over the Orient depended on the discourse about the Orient or how the Orient was conceptualized, researched and talked about in Europe.[1] The term “Orient” in Orientalism refers to the East of Europe and is contrasted to the “Occident” which refers to Europe itself. These two terms together form a conceptual binary that informs in succinct way, not only the geographical reference, but also contrasting and mutual exclusive cultural values and moral conduct.[2] This conceptual binary can best be captured in Rudyard Kipling’s poem, The Ballard of East and West, “East is East, and West is West, and never shall the twain meet.”[3]

                   According to Edward Said, this particular way of thinking is what constitute Orientalism, which is also the academic discipline and the corporate institution for dealing with the Orient.[4] The Orient was imagined not only as the lands of the Middle East and East Asia, but also as the “Other” of the European Self. In this way of binary thinking, if the Occident represents the pinnacle of civilization, which is what the Europeans project themselves, the Orient represents exactly the opposite – the depth of barbarism, and cultural and moral depravity. In this reflective journal, two contemporary scenarios on the relationship between Islam and the West are presented here as examples of Orientalism at work. One on recent statement of French President Emanuel Macron on Islam and French Muslims, and one on 2009 Swiss vote on the ban of minarets.

On October 2, 2020, French President Emmanuel Macron delivered a long speech titled, “fight against separatism and radicalism” before French officials and politicians in Les Mureaux, the town of those accused of perpetrating the 2015 “Charlie Hebdo” murders, and it was timed to coincide with their trial.[5] Macron said, “Islam is a religion that is currently in crisis all over the world.” He then unveiled a long-term plan to confront and eradicate “separatism and radicalism” that include far-reaching “reform of Islam”[6] in France to make it compatible with French “enlightenment values.” An “enlightened Islam,”[7] he said, is Islam such that the faith structures itself to agree to France’s secularism (Laicite), which includes the right to blaspheme.[8] Enlightenment has come to describe loosely European culture “gifted” to the world such as rationality, human rights, democracy, gender equality, scientific revolution, and industrialization. In this context, Macron’s call for reforming Islam is flawed, because Islam may have arrived a millennium prior to European enlightenment, but that doesn’t mean Islam is not enlightened religion. Muslims treaded different path with religion. They never conceived of a conflict between faith and reason or between religion and science.[9] They also built a civilization that was based on rational enquiry and science for a millennium before the European rise, which helped their enlightenment. While enlightenment yielded some positive elements, it has also brought disaster to mankind. The 18^th century deism gave way to pervasive atheism and agnosticism. The 19^th century saw brutal colonialism. The 20^th century was disastrous with communism, fascism, Nazism, two world wars, use of chemical and nuclear weapons, environmental disasters, and continuous use of military force. The 21^st century is witnessing Europe drifting towards medieval intolerance, racism, and violence against minorities and immigrants. Discourse on the alleged problem of Islam in France confuses between Islam as a faith and Muslims, between peaceful Muslims and radicals, between religious observance and extremism, between the need to protect freedom of speech and urging people passionately to blasphemy. In fact, Western discourse about Islam has followed Edward Said’s revelation of Orientalism. It is always symbolized by distorted narratives and denigration of Prophet Muhammad’s life and his teachings. It is more about the European “self” than about Islam – an attempt to define the elusive European identity as “enlightened” against Islam “barbarism.”

                   On November 29, 2009, Swiss voters adopted a ballot initiative introducing a constitutional ban on the construction of minarets by a majority of 57.5 percent.[10] The supporters of the initiative had argued that minarets were not a religious symbol, but a token of power and conquest and banning them would halt the creeping Islamisation of Switzerland. The ban’s opponents had warned that the ballot initiative violated national and international provisions on non discrimination and freedom of religion.[11] However, mosques and minarets also cause controversies elsewhere in the West. The phobia that fuelled the prohibition of minarets in Switzerland are widespread in Europe. Hostility to Islam and Muslims is partly rooted in historical traditions of Crusades and Reconquista, and partly due to disagreement over allowing Muslim migration to Europe and how to integrate them into Western society.[12] The Swiss People’s Party and the Democratic Union Party which had launched the initiative of the vote, had preceded their deliberation by a very effective campaign focusing on the alleged spread of political Islam in Switzerland, warning of the slow and subversive ascent of an alien Muslim community to prevalence and, eventually, dominance. A minaret ban, its proponents argued, would be an effective way to protect the Swiss constitutional order, safeguard fundamental rights, and halt the spread of Shari’ah Law in Switzerland. The age-old Orientalists’ narratives and stereotypes of Islam and Muslims as being misogynistic and violent were invoked in the campaign to appeal to the emotions of men and women voters. As can be seen in the official poster showing minarets protruding through a Swiss flag in a form of “reminiscent missiles” and a woman wearing a black abaya and niqab as a symbol of oppression of women. With a very small Muslim population of hardly 400,000, and at the time of the ban, Switzerland had only four minarets, yet right-wing politicians and supporters of the ban were speaking of Islamization of Switzerland. Speaking to a TV reporter, a member of Swiss People’s Party, Ulrich Schuluer,[13] talks about the need to stop the influence of political Islam and Shari’ah Law in Switzerland especially the Shari’ah Law is contradictory to the Swiss law when it comes to the rights of women.[14] He accuse Shari’ah Law allows forced marriages, men to beat their wives, and women are oppressed.[15] He even quotes existence of over thirty thousand cases of forced marriage in Switzerland, but without giving any reference.[16] Quoting the 19^th century British Orientalist and lexicographer who is known for his Arabic-English Lexicon and translation of Selections from the Qur’an, Edward William Lane (d. 1876), “The fatal point in Islam was degradation of woman.”[17] Lane’s statement that was meant to serve the British colonial empire, has been echoed until today by intellectuals, politicians, media and ordinary people as if it’s a fact. This erroneous and prejudiced statement has contributed shaping the view of people like Ulrich Schuluer that Islam as misogynistic.

Bibliography

Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism. London: Penguin Book.

El-Affendi, Abdulwahab. 2010. About Muhammad: The other Western Perspective on the Prophet of Islam. London: Legacy Publishing.

Teo, Hsu-Ming. 2013. “Orientalism: An Overview.” Australian Humanities Review 54: 1-20.

Salama, Mohammad R. 2011. Islam, Orientalism and Intellectual History: Modernity and the Politics of Exclusion. London: I. B. Tauris.

Briffault, Robert. 1928. The Making of Humanity. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

Bevir, Mark. 1999. “Focault, Power, and Institutions.” Political Studies XLVII: 345-359.

Lane, Edward William. 1879. Selections from the Kur`an. London: Trubner.

Langer, Lorenz. 2010. “Panacea or Pathetic Fallacy? The Swiss Ban on Minarets.” Vanderbil Journal of Transnational Law 1-65.