By  Nadia Ahmad

As a visibly Muslim woman and tenured law professor, I’ve faced my share of discrimination. However, nothing prepared me for the chilling reality I encountered at the 2024 Democratic National Convention.

While I was serving as co-chair of the DNC’s Interfaith Council and on the executive committee of the DNC’s Women’s Caucus, I became a victim of a violent assault at the convention. This attack laid bare the pervasive nature of Islamophobia in our society, but what followed was even more disturbing.

The complete institutional failure following my assault—manifested in the Democratic Party’s silence, my academic institutions’ indifference, the legal system’s impotence and the overall lack of support for a victim of political violence—revealed a disturbing truth: Even in spaces that champion diversity and inclusion, Muslim voices remain expendable.

As I stood in the bustling convention hall at the United Center in Chicago, holding a cloth banner that read “Stop Arming Israel,” I never imagined that my act of peaceful protest would end in violence. Yet, within moments, three white men wielding campaign signs with wooden planks inside repeatedly struck me on the head. The physical pain was immediate, but the emotional aftermath—a concussion, trauma and a profound sense of betrayal—would linger far longer.

While some organizations swiftly issued statements condemning the attack as political violence and demanding justice, the universities I am affiliated with remained silent. This institutional indifference underscores a larger problem: The disconnect between well-intentioned diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and the lived realities of Muslim faculty and staff, particularly those who are visibly Muslim, Black, Latino/a or from other minority groups.

In my years navigating academia, I’ve witnessed firsthand how corporatized, apolitical DEI programs fall short for those of us at the margins. They tend to focus on secular and liberal perspectives, emphasizing concepts like religious practices and holidays. While these are important, they fail to address the daily microaggressions and systemic biases that shape our experiences.

As one of the few tenured, visibly Muslim women in legal academia, I face an average of 500 micro- and macroaggressions annually. The mental toll of deciding which handful of incidents to address is exhausting, constantly pulling my focus from teaching, research and service. This burden of representation and advocacy weighs heavily on visibly Muslim women in academia. We’re often tokenized, expected to be the voice for all Muslims, which places an unfair burden on individuals and perpetuates the myth of a monolithic Muslim experience.

Moreover, current DEI approaches often prioritize male and Arab voices, inadvertently sidelining the perspectives of women, Black Muslims, Latino/a Muslims, Indigenous and other minority groups within the Muslim community. A panel on Islamophobia might discuss the impacts of fasting during Ramadan and the need for prayer spaces, but neglect to address the foreign policy landscape or the systemic racism and unique challenges faced by Black or Latino/a Muslims in academia.

The personal toll of traversing these spaces is immense. The constant code-switching, the exhaustion of being valued for expertise in one’s field while simultaneously unsupported when speaking about personal experiences with discrimination—it all breeds cynicism and burnout. My assault at the DNC and the subsequent lack of support from institutions I once believed in have profoundly impacted my sense of safety and belonging in academic and political spaces.

When I’ve complained about disparities and inequities, I am often met with shoulder shrugs and labeled a troublemaker. It is difficult for me to serve as a council member of the American Bar Association’s Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice while watching students being arrested, harassed and assaulted on university campuses like Yale University, Barnard College, the University of California, Berkeley, and Northwestern University, institutions run by people I once admired and trusted. The American Bar Association can do nothing but create a Task Force to Combat Islamophobia and hold webinars, doing nothing in response to the campus free speech issues other than talk about them.

Yet, we must channel this pain into constructive action. Based on my experiences, here are some recommendations for institutions looking to create more inclusive and effective anti-Islamophobia initiatives.

1. Audit policies and practices for Islamophobia
Review hiring and promotion practices for subtle and overt biases. Examine whether Muslim faculty are less likely to receive tenure due to research areas perceived as “controversial” or due to stereotypes about Muslim scholarship. Revise policies that marginalize Muslim faculty and fail to promote them.

2. Broaden representation in leadership and curriculum
Actively recruit Muslim faculty and staff, especially visible Muslim women, and include them in leadership roles. Establish fellowships specifically for Muslim scholars to contribute to curriculum development and other initiatives.

3. Apply an intersectional lens to DEI programs
Design DEI programming that addresses the unique challenges faced by visibly Muslim women, Black, Latino/a and Indigenous Muslims. Host panels that discuss both racial and religious discrimination and include speakers who can address anti-Blackness within Muslim communities as well as Islamophobia as state policy.

4. Diversify anti-Islamophobia training leadership
Engage trainers from different Muslim backgrounds to lead DEI workshops. Ensure participation from all university levels to promote a comprehensive understanding of diverse Muslim experiences, and include bystander intervention training.

5. Implement robust reporting and accountability mechanisms
Establish confidential reporting for Islamophobic incidents with guaranteed follow-up. Ensure that any report of Islamophobia results in a clear process with potential outcomes such as mandated sensitivity training, formal apologies or, in severe cases, suspension. Publicize these measures to build trust within the Muslim community and ensure transparency.

Institutional leaders must step up in setting the tone for how Islamophobia is addressed on campus. They must make public, unequivocal statements condemning Islamophobia and supporting Muslim members of the academic community. They need to stop criminalizing antiwar protesters and brutalizing their own students. Allocating significant resources to anti-Islamophobia initiatives, including funding for Muslim student organizations and research on Islamophobia in academia, is crucial.

Regular policy reviews are essential to ensure protection for Muslim students and faculty from discrimination, with clear consequences for Islamophobic behavior. Promoting Muslim-led interfaith dialogue and developing robust crisis response protocols are also critical steps. As we strive for progress, it’s important to note that the burden of education and advocacy does not fall solely on the shoulders of Muslim academics. Allies in positions of power must step up, speak out and take concrete actions to create truly inclusive academic spaces.

My experience of assault at the DNC and the subsequent lack of institutional support is a harrowing reminder of how far we still have to go. It underscores the need for a comprehensive approach to combating Islamophobia that goes beyond superficial diversity initiatives and addresses the deep-seated biases in our institutions. Only by working together—Muslim and non-Muslim, faculty, staff, and administration— can we create academic environments that are truly inclusive and free from the scourge of Islamophobia. The path forward is clear, but it requires courage, commitment and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths. Are we ready to take that step?

Source: Inside Higher Ed

The Muslim community has been grappling with the increase of Islamophobia in the EU, including Germany– where physical attacks against Muslims and vandalism against mosques persist.

German parliamentary leader Raed Saleh is pushing for the inclusion of anti-Islamophobia laws into the state constitution. Saleh, who is the leader of the Social Democratic Party, emphasized the need for Germany to have its constitution forcefully showcase the country’s willingness and commitment to fight against antisemitism, Islamophobia, and racism. The topic is set to be discussed in a study commission planned by the ‘black-red’ (CDU-SPD) coalition.

“I can well imagine us in Berlin saying that in our diverse city, we will enshrine the fight against Antisemitism, the fight against Islamophobia and against racism in the constitution. We will not tolerate Antisemitism in our city. And anyone who [crosses the line] will have to deal with a robust democracy… We don’t tolerate Islamophobia. We don’t tolerate racism.” Said Saleh.

The remarks come amid a rapid and alarming increase in Islamophobic attacks in Germany and much of Europe, with reports indicating a surge in actions targeting Muslims and Islamic institutions like mosques.

The Muslim community in Germany and Europe at large has in recent years grappled with Islamophobia coming not only from ordinary citizens but also from elected politicians and other people in positions of authority.

According to recent converging reports, police recorded 258 Islamophobic crimes during the first half of 2023. Between January and June last year, more than a dozen mosques witnessed acts of Islamophobia. Muslims have also experienced physical attacks or verbal harassment on the street or in other public places throughout Germany, and 17 people have been said to have sustained injuries in such anti-Islam acts.

Source: The Berliner

March 15, 2024

In the Name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful

In recent years, Muslims have witnessed an alarming increase in Islamophobia in the West, manifested through despicable acts like the vandalization of mosques, anti-Muslim rhetoric, and hate crimes. Muslims have endured targeted attacks, discriminatory policies, and systemic marginalization, jeopardizing their fundamental rights, safety, well-being, and sense of belonging.

For example, in 2019, a tragic event unfolded in Christchurch, New Zealand, where an individual attacked two mosques, resulting in the loss of 51 lives. Similarly, an appalling incident took place in Quebec City, Canada, in 2017, where an attack on a mosque claimed six lives. The senseless killings of three young American Muslims in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, in 2015 highlighted the severity of Islamophobia. Moreover, the sharp rise in Islamophobic attacks on mosques and individuals in the UK, and the desecration of Islamic symbols in Sweden and Denmark – like burning the Quran – serve as further illustrations of this troubling trend.

Equally disquieting are the Islamophobic policies enacted or suggested by Western governments in recent times. Examples include the Muslim Ban in the US (2017), the Anti-Separatism Law in France (2021), bans on full-face veils in countries like Switzerland and Austria, the Prevent strategy in the UK, the French bans on hijab for athletes (2024) and students (2023), and the call for Muslim immigration bans by an Australian senator (2017).

The detrimental role of the mainstream media and certain institutions in perpetuating Islamophobia by erroneously linking extremist actions performed in the name of Islam by groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS with the authentic teachings of the faith is deeply concerning. Such misrepresentations not only reinforce stereotypes but also contribute to the continuation of fear and prejudice against Muslims.

Confronting the harsh realities of Islamophobia, the Islamic Research and Information Center (IRIC) emphasizes the necessity of enacting anti-hate-crime legislation and implementing measures to prevent and prosecute hate crimes targeting Muslims. We advocate for the establishment of robust legal frameworks that guarantee the protection of the rights and dignity of individuals and communities affected by Islamophobic incidents. Additionally, IRIC is committed to establishing interfaith dialogue and conducting public awareness campaigns that challenge prejudices, debunk myths, and cultivate an accurate understanding of Islam and the Muslim community.

As the Holy Quran reminds us: “O mankind! Indeed, We created you from a male and a female and made you nations and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you.” (The Holy Quran, 49:13). This verse underlines the essence of our shared humanity and the beauty of diversity ordained by the Creator. It is our duty to nurture mutual understanding, respect, and harmony among all individuals. By recognizing our shared humanity and upholding the values of compassion and empathy, we can overcome the barriers of ignorance and intolerance fueling Islamophobia.

On the International Day to Combat Islamophobia, IRIC extends its solidarity to communities worldwide in condemning all forms of bias, discrimination, and animosity towards Muslims. As proponents of social justice and intercultural understanding, we stress the imperative of combating and eradicating Islamophobia. To observe this significant day, here are several practical suggestions:

1. Actively commemorate the day by engaging in meaningful discussions, events, and activities that raise awareness about Islamophobia and promote dialogue.
2. Encourage Western media outlets to invite intellectual Muslims for interviews, articles, or reports, providing platforms for sharing their perspectives and fostering a more nuanced understanding of Islam and Muslims.
3. Develop media campaigns and educational materials aimed at dispelling myths and addressing the harms of Islamophobia within communities.
4. Organize lectures, seminars, or workshops in educational institutions to educate students and faculty about the impact of Islamophobia and effective counterstrategies.

By implementing these practical suggestions, we can progress towards building bridges of empathy and eliminating misconceptions.

In conclusion, we call upon governments, civil society organizations, religious institutions, and individuals globally to unite in combatting Islamophobia and supporting initiatives that promote intercultural understanding and mutual respect. Let us collaborate in creating a future where Islamophobia is eradicated, and where unity and compassion guide our interactions with one another. May Allah illuminate our hearts and minds with righteousness, granting us the wisdom and fortitude to confront injustice and ignorance wherever they may arise.

Islamic Research and Information Center (IRIC)

www.IRIC.org

“In accordance with the instructions of the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister, I have notified the officials of the CCIF of the intention to initiate the dissolution of their organization,” Gerald Darmanin said in a tweet yesterday. He specified that those in charge of the collective “now have 8 days to make their observations known.” In response, the CCIF leadership said it had nothing whatsoever to do with the attack against Samuel Paty and it has been slandered by the French establishment.

“For the last week the CCIF has been slandered without interruption and in many media a real hatred has been expressed against our association, accompanied by thousands of messages of insults and threats on social networks, without the slightest reaction from the government. Although we have always been attacked in public debate, even by political figures, the defamation and false accusations which are today brought against us mark a real turning point in the process of destabilization of human rights defenders…The CCIF also vowed to continue its work outside of France.

Source: 5pillars

They called on member states and policymakers to play a more active role in the fight against Islamophobia and strengthen legal procedures on the issue.

The project reviews dominant anti-Muslim narratives and compares counter-narratives in eight EU members states of France, Germany, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Portugal, Greece, and the U.K.

It outlines 10 counter-narratives that must be prioritized in Europe.

Continue reading at: Anadolu Agency

Not long after an attack on a Quebec mosque in late January, the motion is now being debated in the House of Commons. It calls on the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to undertake a study on what the government could do to reduce or eliminate systemic racism including Islamophobia and to present its findings no later than 240 calendar days from the adoption of the motion.

The motion has generated passionate debate between supporters and opponents, and has raised at least five serious points of contention:

1. The motion is based on the unsubstantiated assumption that anti-Muslim sentiment is growing in Canada
2. The motion fails to identify or define “Islamophobia”
3. The motion threatens to curb free-speech
4. The motion illogically prioritizes one sort of religious freedom over others
5. The motion falls into the errors of hate-crime and hate-speech legislation

These and other arguments would suggest that the best way for government to counteract violence against groups or individuals is not by stifling debate or trying to sway public opinion, but by making it clear that certain behavior will not be tolerated, regardless of one’s motives or intentions.

Source: Breitbart News Network

It was endorsed by the National Council of Canadian Muslims that previously called on Members of Parliament to support the motion in light of the recent shooting at a Quebec City mosque where six were Muslims were killed and 19 injured, CTV television news reported. The motion is non-binding, meaning it is not enshrined in law and is more of a guideline, but is an important symbolic rejection of “discrimination and prejudice against Muslims”, said Conservative MP Michael Chong.

But Chong’s Conservative colleagues were worried the motion could lead to infringement on free speech, that the motion does not define “Islamophobia” and might also prove problematic to Canada’s ability to denounce terrorism.

“Motion 103 will not prevent anyone from criticizing Islam or radical Islamic terrorists,” Chong said, as reported by CTV. There is also criticism that one religion is being singled out for special treatment.

Conservatives want to replace Islamophobia to include “Muslims, Jews, Christians, Sikhs, Hindus and other religious communities,” the Ottawa Citizen newspaper reported Thursday. But Khalid said the motion tackles more than just Islamophobia and by passing the motion, the government recognized the need to speak out.

Source: The Muslim News