Category: Europe

Russia Against The World

The main news event of the past week has been Russia’s attack on Ukraine, which seems to be a premeditated plan executed after years of preparation. It is clear that Russia has maintained a high level of interest in Ukraine since it annexed Crimea back in 2014, in retaliation for ousting the pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych. The motivation behind this major military assault is the perceived threat Ukraine might pose to Russia should it join NATO. For Putin, this would be unacceptable as it would allow NATO to acquire territories bordering Russia and therefore infringe on Russia’s sphere of influence. 

There have been numerous attempts at diplomatic talks between Russia and Western leaders in an effort to de-escalate the conflict that has long been brewing, which were evidently unsuccessful. Western leaders such as French and American presidents, Emmanuel Macron and Joe Biden, held talks with Putin to negotiate a peace deal, but were never able to come to terms with Russia’s demands. The talks with Macron initially showed promise, but were unable to dissuade Putin from invading Ukraine which he declared in a televised speech as an act of self-defence.

Putin has advised Ukrainians not to interfere with the Russian mobilisation in the Donetsk region, and has threatened that all foreign countries who intervene will be met with a swift and unprecedented response. On the other hand, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, has urged his people to defend their country at all costs, stating that Ukraine is their home and does not belong to anyone else. He reiterates, to domestic and international audiences, that Ukraine is a sovereign state and that the invasion violates international laws and threatens global peace. While much support has been pledged by international bodies, such as the United States and the European Union, in the form of arms and aid funding, Ukraine’s military stands alone in its defence against a much stronger opponent.

As of the 27th February 2022, Russia has placed its nuclear forces on high alert, signalling to international audiences that it has not ruled out the use of nuclear weapons. While many see this as a deterrent to other actors assisting Ukraine in its fight against Russia, it has increased tensions internationally. Any nuclear escalation presents a significant threat to global security.

Practical support for the Ukrainians has been provided through non-military methods, which the Ukrainian president has deemed inefficient in providing immediate support against the assault. Military intervention is being requested on top of the sanctions placed by the US and European states, the same sanctions that have dropped the Russian currency to a new low and has increased oil prices.

The Russian assault on Ukraine is dominating  the media, and protests have erupted worldwide in opposition to Russia’s actions. The ICC has even initiated an investigation into the allegations of Russia committing war crimes against Ukrainian civilians. Only time will tell what plans Putin has in store, and how this act of aggression in Ukraine serves Russia’s interests. The invasion of Ukraine has polarised the international community and seemingly left Russia without allies, with the possible exception of China, which is now under pressure to act as mediator; Israel agreed to act as a mediator at the moment with Prime Minister Naftali Bennett travelling to meet President Putin and Zelensky. The stakes for mediation are high: commentators recognise this is the most significant military event to occur in Europe since the Second World War and caution that further escalation could mark the start of the third.

Women should stop working now!

Since the 3rd of November 2021 at 9.22 am women in France have been working for free. This year, the pay gap between women and men is estimated to be around 16.5% and has worsened since 2020. Women are also in more precarious jobs since they are 83% of the part-timers. Generally in the OECD, the average pay gap is 15%. In the UK eight companies out of ten pay women less than men.

Additionally, a report by PWC shows the pandemic has also impacted women greatly since women have been losing their jobs faster than men. These inequalities are also obviously intersectional as this gap is worse for people and women of colour. For instance, NHS data reveals that black men are paid 84p for every £1 earned by their white male counterparts. Women of colour are also less likely than white women to receive a higher education certificate, which means that from the start they are disadvantaged when it comes to equal opportunity and higher salaries.

This concept of equal opportunity is better understood with the idea of the glass-ceiling, a term coined by Marilyn Loden in 1978 which plays a significant part in society today, as women are far from receiving salaries and positions equal to their male counterparts. Indeed, it is not only the pay gaps that matter, but the opportunities women have and how women perceive themselves in the working environment. It is not only the patriarchal system that slows us from accessing equal pay, but also psychological barriers that restrain us from seeing ourselves at the top.

This notion is very much intertwined with a problem of representation in pop culture among other things. Women are less often in positions of power and are too often sexualised. For instance, in over 1300 movies in 2019 women and girls represented only 34% of the speaking characters. In the top 100 films, 68% of female characters were white and 94% of these films had no female-identified LGBTQ characters.

We are also used to identifying with male characters in movies and series because women are still very much invisibilised* in mainstream movies and series. I recently came across the work of Jennifer Padjemi, a French journalist who explains the difference between the visibility (visibilité) and representation concept in pop culture. She sees a difference in how movies and series often make minorities visible but less often represent them in detail by giving them a back story and a real voice. I think this process of increasing the representation of people of colour and women in pop culture is needed in today’s world. We can give as much data as we want on how women and minority groups get paid less than white cis-het men but if we do not show that everyone can do the same job,  how are we even supposed to understand that we can do it?

*This word is here to understand the notion of visibility/invisibility, the notion was coined by J.Padjemi, even though it is not a proper English word it is important to use it to understand her argument. 

Image: Wikicommons

Everyday Islamophobia: Is France still a country of Human Rights?

As a child in France, you grow up with the patriotic idea that France is a great country doing all she can to protect human rights internationally.

Ever since our famous revolution, when we created the so-called universal declaration of Men’s rights, it is our universal duty to protect others. In this declaration, the word Men, Homme in French, was preferred to the gender-neutral Human, Humain, which in itself shows that the declaration in its essence was not made to be totally universal. 

After leaving France 5 years ago, I became disillusioned with this national propaganda. I truly believe that our poor human rights situation in France is deeply intertwined with the bad treatment of its Muslim population. This article will draw on the problems of French colonisation to explain the current climate of tension around the French Muslim community.

So let’s start with colonisation. It is useless to say that this was problematic, because of torture, oppression, repression and so forth. The decolonisation period was as brutal. Let’s take the most extreme example, the Algerian war, where French perpetrators of torture remain unpunished today. This war showed another facet of France to the world. It showed that France was able to torture and censor for the good cause of human rights. Films like the Bataille d’Alger, demonstrating the widespread use of colonial torture, remained censored in France until 2004. Is a country that tortures and censors a country of human rights? 

The consequences of the decolonisation wars in France were varied, including heavy flows of migrants to France from former colonies. These migrants who became French remain marginalised, in part because of insufficient integration strategies being implemented by the French government.

Consequently, migrants are relegated to colossal, precarious buildings on the city outskirts; the infamous banlieues.

This marginalisation of migrants, along with a deeply entrenched sense of injustice, appeared with the end of colonisation for some French, and many other factors led to an increase of racism.

A good example of the national rise of racism in the decolonisation period is the creation of the Front National (FN) in 1972. The party was conceived by Jean-Marie Le Pen, a former general of the Algerian war who was known to have used torture against Algerian freedom fighters. This party is known to be negationist, populist, extremist and to gather many racist, antisemitic and islamophobic members and supporters.

As stated in Hanna Uihlein’s piece, racism and Islamophobia are two distinct but often intertwined concepts. Islamophobia in France is inextricably linked to racism towards people originally from the Magreb. But Islamophobia is also problematically linked with our state, our laws, and our concept of secularism.

The legal separatism of Church and State in 1905 resulted in strict secular laws. In the French concept of laïcité, religion is strictly personal and should not be visible to others. It has resulted in the headscarves being banned in some public spaces such as schools, but also for teachers and journalists who have to choose between wearing their headscarf or practising their jobs.

This lack of religious freedom in the public sphere also creates a climate of tension and hate, as erasing Muslims women wearing headscarves from public spaces others them. This climate of otherness can also be felt by the rest of the population as it is a well-known fact that police heavily uses ethnic profiling when arresting people in the street.

Hence, when French Muslims express their view on caricatures being problematic, maybe displaced, they do not really complain about these cartoons, it is the general feeling of Islamophobia in French society that they decry.

They protest the systematic discrimination, their marginalisation, unequal violent police treatment. They complain about France being racist and Islamophobic.

This is an historical problem and the questionable situation of human rights in France is directly linked to the mistreatment of the Muslim population.

To the question of whether France is still a country of human rights, I respond: has it ever been one? Is a country that is sexist, racist, Islamophobic a country of Human Rights? Is a country that only considers white men’s rights as human rights able to claim the role of protecting human rights universally? 

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Why Islamophobia is more than a European Crisis

When Islamophobia is discussed in the media, the focus is usually on European anti-Muslim discrimination, especially in France. However, it is equally important to reflect on the way we talk about Islamophobia, what we consider as Islamophobic, and which types of anti-Muslim discrimination exist. Four issues are too often overlooked when we talk about Islamophobia.

1. Islamophobia is global

Islamophobia is heavily discussed in Western discourse as a European crisis, despite recent cases reflecting animosity towards Muslim populations across the globe. The persecution of Uyghur Muslims in the region of Xinjiang in China, where Uyghurs are being detained en masse in Chinese “re-education camps” and facing severe human rights violations, the accusations against the Muslim population in India for the spread of COVID-19 in the name of “CoronaJihad”, last year’s Christchurch mosque shootings in New Zealand, and the targeted killing and displacement of Myanmar’s Rohingyas highlight that Islamophobia is not only a European crisis. It is global.

2. Definitions of Islamophobia are fundamental but not ultimate  

Islamophobia is global – ok, but so is racism, sexism, and xenophobia. So, why do we address Islamophobia separately and who gets to define the term in the first place? First, it is important to define Islamophobia as a separate term, since anti-Muslim prejudice has increased markedly in recent decades. By naming this form of discrimination, it acknowledges its victims, raises awareness of their specific struggle, and prevents denial of widespread prejudices. However, as important as the very existence of the term is, we must ask ourselves what definition of Islamophobia is being discussed in politics and the media. In Britain, the Conservative Party claimed in 2019 that ‘Islamophobia’ cannot be defined in a meaningful way, which raised questions about the legitimacy of the state in defining (or failing to define) the term. For that reason, it is important to question the definition used in public discourse and to keep in mind that some definitions can do more harm than support to Muslims, especially when they incorporate negative connotations and lead to even more discrimination. 

3. Islamophobia occurs at different levels

While Islamophobia is a global issue and is relevant to discuss as a specific form of discrimination, it is equally important to stress its different levels. The media often portrays large-scale Islamophobic incidents such as the current situation in France, India, China, and Myanmar. While it is key to discuss these severe forms of discrimination, Islamophobia cannot be regarded as an issue which occurs only in such high profile cases. It happens everywhere and all the time. Whether Islamophobia  takes the form of extreme violence, discriminatory comments in public spaces, or in a feeling of constant insecurity for Muslims –it is ever present. At the same time, Islamophobia is reproduced institutionally through counter-terrorism initiatives especially after 9/11. In this context, when Barack Obama called on the Muslim community to speak out against terrorism, we must ask ourselves why Muslims as believers need to dissociate from acts of terrorism from Islam in the first place.

4. Islamophobia is not genderless

After having discussed different levels of Islamophobia, we must also tackle the issue through a gendered lens. Islamophobic rhetoric portrays Islam as a misogynistic religion that oppresses women. While religion must always be examined critically with regard to gender roles, stressing women’s invisibility within Islamophobic discourse is highly discriminatory and dangerous. “The obsession with Muslim women’s plight” reflects colonial thinking as well as it puts them in the center of Islamophobia by stressing their passive victimhood. Therefore, the narrative of oppressed women not only deprives women wearing hijab of their agency as feminists, but also victimizes women disproportionately by Islamophobia. This gendered Islamophobia must be detected and replaced by a constructive discussion about gender roles beyond religion, race, and culture.  

With these four issues in mind, we should return to the current Eurocentric discourse and ask ourselves how Islamophobia in Europe connects to Islamophobia in other parts of the world, who suffers in particular from this anti-Muslim prejudice, and from whose perspective Islamophobia today is being discussed. Only then can we do justice to this issue and tackle it holistically.  

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Justice Pour Adama: Covering the Protests in Paris

In the wake of protests against police brutality in the United States brought on by the killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, anti-racists protests emerged around the world during the summer of 2020, including in the United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan. In this photo essay, SOAS postgraduate Canela Laude offers a window into the “Justice pour Adama” protests against police brutality in France during June and July of 2020.

In June, anti-racists protests in France sparked in response to the death of George Floyd in the US and the protests that ensued across America. In France, the response was led by Assa Traoré, the sister of Adama Traoré, a young black man killed by the police by suffocation in 2016, and whose death circumstances are still under investigation.

Assa Traoré has been pushing for a new autopsy in order to unveil the true circumstances of her brother’s death, while connecting with other families who lost family members due to police violence, in order to lead unprecedented anti-racist and anti-police violence protests in Paris and all over the country. Soon after the French lockdown ended, 20,000 people were out in front of a Paris courthouse protesting alongside the family of Adama Traoré and chanting “Justice pour Adama.”

A protest sign reading “From Minneapolis to Beaumont sur Oise”, respectively the cities where George Floyd and Adama Traoré were killed, summarized the general feeling of international interconnection in the struggle against police violence. A second protest, 11 days later, saw the same renewed energy, with 15,000 people out in the streets on Paris’ Place de la République.

As summer in France rolls on, the movement has continued with a third protest on July 18th in Beaumont sur Oise, where part of the Traoré family lives and where Adama was killed.

“We are Black Lives Matter,” said Assa Traoré in an interview for the New Yorker. “The two fights echo each other, so that we’re pulling back the curtain on France, in saying, ‘People of the whole word, look what’s happening here.’ ”

Can Sinn Fein Move Beyond the IRA? The Future of Ireland’s Republican Party

In 1981, Provisional Irish Republican Army member Bobby Sands – made famous as one of ten men to die during a hunger strike protesting the British government’s refusal to allow IRA members Prisoner of War Status — became the first Irish Republican to win election to the British Parliament. HIs victory, and subsequent death, opened the doors for an upwelling of political support for the IRA’s political wing, Sinn Fein. In 1983, Sinn Fein began to run for Northern Irish and British seats, even as the militant wing of the IRA continued to perform acts of violence — a strategy known as “The Armalite and the Ballot Box”. 

Nearly 40 years after Sinn Fein’s first electoral victories, and 15 since the complete disarmament of the IRA in 2005, Sinn Fein’s historical association with IRA violence has continued to cast a long shadow, making the political party a pariah in Dublin and London even as it represents the largest Nationalist (pro-Irish Unification) party in Northern Ireland’s Assembly. Yet two recent elections in both the Republic and Northern Ireland might have forever changed this dynamic. As Sinn Fein witnesses a surge in political support, the question of whether the organization can ever move past its historical association with violence has come into focus, presenting larger questions as to the political normalization of groups previously associated with the terrorism label. 

Two Elections, One Party

In the last year, two elections shook the foundations of Ireland’s political scene. During the December 2019 UK General Elections, Irish Nationalist parties won a majority of the votes in Northern Ireland, the first time the Assembly has ever seated more Nationalists than pro-UK Unionists. More recently, In an electoral earthquake in February 2020, Sinn Fein landed the largest share of votes in Dáil Éireann, Ireland’s parliament, overtaking the two dominant center-right parties that have exchanged power since independence. 

Part of Sinn Fein’s newfound success may lie in the symbolic break from the past under a new generation of Republican politicians. Sinn Fein’s leader, Mary Lou McDonald, has never been a part of the IRA and joined Sinn Fein only after the Good Friday Agreement ended Provisional IRA violence in Northern Ireland. In the 2020 Irish Elections, Sinn Fein positioned itself not as the political heirs of armed resistance, but as a left-wing alternative to the more center-right politics of the two dominant parties, emphasizing fair housing prices over Irish Unification. But even under a larger generational shift away from the conflict, Sinn Fein’s historical baggage has caused Ireland’s two other major parties to reject a governing coalition with the party. Meanwhile, in Northern Ireland the nationalists’ victory has masked a loss in support for Sinn Fein as voters have migrated to less polarizing parties, such as the SDLP and Alliance Party.

On both sides of the border, Sinn Fein’s history has hindered it from forming cross-border political dominance that could lead to political unification of the island. Although the party has experienced electoral success that would have seemed unimaginable 40 years ago, the terrorism association remains a substantial obstacle — one that Sinn Fein may not be able to overcome. 

Escaping the Terrorist Label

Given these realities, Sinn Fein presents an interesting case for the question of if former terrorist or insurgent groups can successfully transition away from the stain of past violence in a political process. While Sinn Fein attempts to reposition itself along the lines of leftist politics rather than sectarian identity, the memory of the IRA has remained strong enough to prevent the party from being fully normalized. Fair or not, the terrorist label remains, 25 years after the conflict officially ended. 

In his 2004 paper “Terror, Terrorism, Terrorists”, Charles Tilly states that the “terrorist” label becomes defining for any group that commits acts of terror or terrorism, to the point that a group’s non-terrorism activities and goals become submerged by its acts of violence intended to cause terror. Once identified as “terrorists,” political compromise becomes untenable with organizations linked to acts of terrorism, even after such groups have abandoned violence. For Sinn Fein, while “The Armalite and the Ballot Box” strategy may have permitted electoral success, the strong memory of the Armalite – a weapon used for decades as the IRA’s preferred tool for assassinations – has for now closed the door to achieving political power. The terrorist label persists, years after the men and women who committed acts of terror have been replaced by a generation that hardly remembers the conflict. This reality extends beyond Northern Ireland, from the political toxicity of forming coalitions with Spain’s Basque and Catalan Nationalist parties to the ethically and politically fraught prospect of forming a Taliban power-sharing agreement in Afghanistan. 

Yet keeping formerly terrorist-linked parties out of government poses its own risks. In Northern Ireland, the dissident Real IRA has been linked to the nationalist political party Saoradh, which has capitalized on some nationalists’ discontent with the speed of the political path towards Irish Unification and has been connected to recent shootings and deaths, including of Northern Irish journalist Lyra McKee. Even as Sinn Fein is rejected in the Dáil Éireann for past violence, still more extreme organizations wait on the sidelines, prepared to return to violence to achieve their aims. 

It is of course up to the people of the island of Ireland to determine whether Sinn Fein can be separated from the terrorist label and be allowed to move past its historic support of violence. For now, the elections in both the North and South have shown that the debate over Sinn Fein’s legitimacy and normalization has not subsided, even as more and more Irish voters seem prepared to offer the political party a second look.

Photo Credit: Devin Windelspecht