The journey between the first book translated into Arabic by academic "François Burgat", "Political Islam .. Voice of the South" and "Understanding Political Islam" spanned nearly 3 decades, during which time he was busy trying to understand Islamic political movements. This process was based on A long history of living within the region in many countries. It has gone through different experiences of dealing with Islamic political movements, at the level of challenging the authority or at the internal level of the movements.
Burga spent 7 years in Algeria, during which he studied at the Faculty of Law, then 5 years in Egypt, then 6 years in Yemen, then 5 years in both Syria and Lebanon, and this country diversity gave a broad horizon for understanding the interactions of Islamic movements on the one hand, and the most importantly understanding of religious culture Among Muslims in general.
During the escalating French attack on Islam, it seemed that there was a unilateral voice in French society, and this voice supported the reinforcing trend of the official discourse and the hard-right discourse, and a question arose about the existence of other voices, and if they existed, why were they absent from the French scene?
Al-Jazeera Net, a professor of political science and a researcher at the French National Authority for Scientific Research in Aix-En-Provence, southeastern France, talks about the consequences of Macron’s speech in the Islamic world, and its causes, and whether there is a role for Arab countries in Strengthening this discourse, and other issues, to the dialogue:
The growing phenomenon of Islamophobia has become a feature of public discourse in France, especially with the official participation of the French President and the Minister of the Interior .. What are the roots of this speech, and is it related to cultural or political factors or a combination of several factors?
Of course, there are several factors for this, but the main factor may be that there is a race between President Macron and the hard-right right, to prepare for the presidential elections expected in May 2022.
As you know, Macron was elected in May 2017 from a left-center crowd, but this group moved away from him due to his liberal policies, as his reaction to the "yellow jackets" movement was evident.
If Macron wants to win the next elections, he must polarize both the right and the extreme right to win over his rival, Marine Lupine, who represents that right.
And if we say this, we must take into account that the existence of this competing bloc, which is an important bloc - its existence and inflation - is evidence that French society is experiencing a crisis of isolation and rejection of the rest of the immigrant cultures, which explains this slide into racist categories.
Where do French intellectuals stand against the danger of being hostile to followers of an entire religion and not just citizens of a state, and what is the impact of that on the stability of society?
Allow me here to make a positive point. I am convinced that the majority of French academics are against this trend. I mean the direction of hostility to the followers of Islam, as the intellectuals who support Islamophobia represent only a minority.
Professors and researchers who work in the fields of social sciences, the majority of them reject this tendency of the extremist right and the semi-racism against Islam and Muslims.
If we choose, for example, a central figure like Gilles Keppel - who is the representative of the "neoconservative" movement in France - and we also see those who follow his opinion, we can simply know that they are a tiny minority of the academic community.
However, the interference of the media and the state's discourse obscure this reality, so this margin in the academic milieu occupies the entire media scene, and it has visual media that is very inflated compared to its real size.
The rhetoric of power, for example, expressed by the current Minister of Education, John Michael Plunker, clearly criticizes the majority of researchers whom he describes as "left Islamists", and this discourse repeats the margins of researchers visible in the official media.
Major French media outlets, including TV news channels, also contribute to spreading this discourse through a number of "experts in everything," including a number of "philosophers", who claim in the media to represent fields that they have never practiced or learned.
But doesn’t the popular reactions also appear to be lackluster towards what is happening against Muslims? Has anti-Muslim rhetoric become accepted in popular circles as well?
After the positive point that we talked about in the position of researchers, there is a negative point, which is that President Macron's strategy to lean towards the hard-line and racist right depends on an accurate understanding of the general popular atmosphere on this subject, which is characterized by a lack of tolerance for difference, and also there is the rise of populist nationalism, which rejects the presence of anyone. The components of the French fabric, I mean its rejection of the French Muslims.
This rejection has several roots, one of which is class, as the majority of the new generation of Muslims belong to the modest classes economically and socially, but in my estimation the main aspect of the motivation for this transformation is a historical aspect linked to the colonial past of the history of France, as these Maghreb Muslims were under colonial domination, for more than A century, therefore, we consider the demand from them or their children for their basic civil rights is absolutely unacceptable, and in a much more severe way than the refusal to accept union rights in the past.
Is there a role that supports Islamophobia discourse on the part of Arab countries hostile to Islamic political movements, and what is its nature if it exists?
Your question, in my estimation, is very important, as it is essential to remind that this racist discourse is not only a French industry, but rather a joint international industry among the authoritarian regimes in the Arab world, and its tangible political goals are to withdraw the legitimacy of their opponents, even the most moderate ones internally and internationally, and part of This industry hates and misunderstand the French and Western young political generation of representatives of what was previously considered a "Third World".
An example of the last example is the visit in which Macron hosted the former Saudi Minister of Justice (here justice becomes repressive), who declared that he came to President Macron to help and encourage him to fight "political Islam."
We also add that the Islamophobic discourse also has roots in North Africa, with its Maghreb branch like the Algerian generals and the Ben Ali regime and its elites.
And the new representatives who have recently joined this trend, I mean Field Marshal El-Sisi in Egypt and retired Major General Haftar in Libya.
France's biggest problem is not that it sells weapons to Sisi or the Emirates, which they use to oppress the peoples of the region, but rather its biggest problem is that it buys from them their understanding, vision, and narrative of the movements and political transformations in the Arab region.
French academic and researcher Francois Borga considers the attack on the weak side a usual argument in Europe (Al-Jazeera)
In your opinion, will the project of equipping imams "who respect the values of the republic" be a solution to the crisis, or will it deepen it?
Unfortunately, I am convinced that this strategy is closer to pouring gasoline on the fire, because instead of bearing its responsibility, the West approaches the crisis with a cultural approach. I mean, it blames the culture of the other, and holds the responsibility for the crisis in the religion of the other, and thus (the West) aims to try to absolve oneself of its responsibilities. .
The problem is not adopting the French understanding of secularism, and not only the issue of respect for religions, or "French values." The problem is precisely the inability of France to respect the values and slogans that preach it. There is no doubt that freedom of expression is one of the most important universal values, but France's practice in this The topic differs from one freedom of expression to another, according to the person practicing that freedom.
In the offices of "Charlie Hebdo" newspaper, which is referred to as a symbol of this kind of freedom of expression, which is said to be without limits, the cartoonist famous "Sini" was dismissed from his work, when he was accused of sarcasm that was described as anti-Semitic!
The ruling elite in France accepts and encourages the freedom of the expression "Charlie Hebdo" in attacking Muslims, but at the same time is preparing to ban "the gathering against Islamophobia in France", which the state is supposed to encourage because they defend part of its fabric and warn it of the dangers of racism against Muslims, but the state Instead of encouraging him, the French are campaigning against him and wanting to ban him!
Freedom of expression is fragmented in France, due to double standards.
Although the official French rhetoric tries to claim and exhort the world that France is the source and mother of "freedom of expression".
France holds the responsibility for any crisis it causes to others in general, and to Muslims in particular.
What is described as "Islamic terrorism" is, in fact, the result of various complex mechanisms in which France, whether state or society, plays a fair part of the responsibility.
However, it refuses to accept its responsibility, and refuses to approach this type of crisis from a political perspective.
Instead, it prefers to blame the culture of the other, even though the culture of the other is not the point of the mill.
Has Europe lost its ability to assimilate diversity, and is anti-Muslims a rear gateway to hostility against immigrants in general?
Attacking the more fragile end of societies is an old argument in Europe, as elsewhere, when political populism dominates.
Today they are attacking Muslims, and yesterday Nazi Germany attacked the Jewish minority.
Al-Sisi blames the Muslim Brotherhood for his failure, as this is a stupid argument used by failed regimes, especially in periods of political and economic decline when this type of voice is loud.
Returning to your question, about the attack on Muslims and being a rear gateway to hostility to immigrants, yes, especially since young French Muslims possess the motivation of young people and the energy that makes them demand their rights, and the first of those rights is the right to political representation through associations, and representation in the French media away from the fabricated elite that Today she speaks for them.
They do not want to accept being second-class citizens as before.
Are cultural assimilation processes or secularisation related to the demands of individuals to give up religious teachings such as the veil, are the convictions of coexistence and respect for the other not sufficient, or should this other be reproduced?
Unfortunately, official France today wants the "typical Muslim immigrant" to be roughly a Muslim who has abandoned his religion.
The last paragraph in this process took place through the speech in which Macron spoke of "separatism" or "support for secularism". For the first time in the contemporary history of France, the head of state adopted the Islamophobia discourse that was limited to the hard right and his speech became an official speech from the state summit.
The result is that the war rhetoric targeting the margin accused of extremism or terrorism was added to it - without real justification - 95% of the ordinary believers who described them as an "eco system islamiste).
In your opinion, does extremism spread among Muslims to the point where this spread is considered a threat to social security, which calls for attacking them in the media a lot?
Terrorist operations and their perpetrators remain very limited, but arousing fear of the other is the goal, not understanding and absorbing the other, and the media is now trying to ride the wave and amplify it, while arousing a sense of guilt among Muslims and holding them responsible.
I think that the fruit of that policy in the short term may be beneficial to Macron or its various competitors, but this is very dangerous for the French social fabric at the medium and long term, and this is true and applies to the rest of the world.