Gwynne Dyer: France's move to ban burqas all politics

Eight months ago (and ten months before regional elections were due to be held all over the country), French president Nicolas Sarkozy raised a vital issue before the French parliament. Not the financial meltdown that was undermining the world’s economies, or the threat of climate change, or even the rash of bike thefts in Paris. He wanted to ban the burqa.

"The problem of the burqa is not a religious problem,” he told French legislators in June of last year. “This is an issue of a woman's freedom and dignity. This is not a religious symbol. It is a sign of subservience....I want to say solemnly, the burqa is not welcome in France." The next day parliament created a 32-member cross-party committee to investigate whether wearing the burqa violates the principles of the French constitution.

The burqa is a shroud-like full-body covering worn in public by some Muslim women who take (or whose husbands or fathers take) an extremely conservative view on the need for female “modesty.” The wearer sees the world only through a narrow grill of cotton threads sewn into the front of the garment, or, in the case of the variant called the niqab, through an open slit that reveals only the eyes.

The parliamentary committee discussed the issue of the burqa for six months, and delivered its conclusions two weeks ago. It did not propose to ban the burqa entirely, but recommended that women wearing burqas be forbidden to enter schools, hospitals, and government offices or to use public transportation. Thus a bus-driver, for example, could refuse to let a burqa-clad woman board the bus to collect her children from school.

What useful purpose could such a law serve? Some of the women wearing burqas presumably do so of their own free will, while others are forced to do so by their male relatives. An anti-burqa law would violate the rights of the first group, and increase the likelihood that the second group will be entirely confined to their homes.

But the proposed law is not really designed to liberate some Muslim women from their burqas. It is meant to appeal to anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim voters, who are mainly on the right in France, by demonstrating the government’s determination to force the country’s Muslim minority to integrate with the rest of the population.

The French parliament cannot move fast enough to pass such a law before the regional elections are held in March, but the committee’s report ensures that an ugly debate about immigrants will be raging during the election campaign. It is part of the same disturbing trend in Europe that saw Swiss voters ban minarets in a referendum last year, and Dutch legislators vote in favour of banning the burqa in 2005. (The Dutch government lost an election before a law was passed.)

It is estimated that between 3 and 6 million (5 to 10 percent) of France’s 64 million people are Muslims. It is also estimated that only 1,900 women in France wear burqas, mostly in the immigrant suburbs around Paris and other big French cities. That is less than one Muslim woman in a thousand.

This is not really about burqas (which almost half of the French population say that they never see). It is about mobilising right-wing voters – and to energise them even more, Sarkozy declared a “great debate” on French identity last November. His motives are cynical and his methods are manipulative – but since he has raised the issue, what about it? Is wearing a burqa compatible with being the citizen of a modern democracy?

The “republican” tradition of revolutionary France says no. Citizenship is defined not so much by individual rights, as in the Anglo-Saxon tradition, as by public participation in the political process. Since the burqa is specifically designed to cut the wearer off from the public sphere of life, it violates the republican tradition. But this isn’t really about political theory.

If you have not been accustomed to it since childhood, there is unquestionably something disturbing about encountering masked people (for that is what the burqa and niqab produce) in a public space. The wearers’ gender and your own common sense will tell you that they are not dangerous people, but they are and will remain apart, almost alien, rejecting the common society that everyone else shares.

That is not ideal, but it must be tolerated in societies that accept and embrace every other kind of diversity. Fadela Amara, a Muslim-born women's rights campaigner and a minister in Sarkozy’s government, has called the burqa “a kind of tomb for women,” but she has no right to impose her view on those who freely choose to wear it.

That does not take account of the other women (probably a majority) who wear it only in obedience to their men, but this is not a matter on which legislation can be effective. Ban the burqa, and those women will simply become full-time prisoners in their own houses. Besides, Sarkozy is not really trying to free those women. He is just trying to win the regional elections by stirring up anti-Muslim feeling.

Comments

13 Comments

AUSSI

Feb 10, 2010 at 1:20pm

DYER'S RIGHT, IT'S ALL A RIGHT WING PLOT!

0 0Rating: 0

Jess

Feb 10, 2010 at 4:29pm

Maybe Sarkozy is trying to win elections, but who cares what the intent is. All politicians are liars, and he's no exception. Remember when Bush said he wanted to free the women of Afganistan?!! They're all liars.

I say get those burqa wearing women off the street. No young girl should ever see a woman covered head to toe. It's ridiculous. Canada should follow suit.

What I don't understand is why these fundamentalists want to live in countries run by infidels anyway. They should follow our customs and traditions... not the other way around.

0 0Rating: 0

foodi

Feb 10, 2010 at 8:17pm

Jess, our "customs" and "traditions" include the freedom to wear whatever one chooses to. Your subjective opinions are completely clouding your ability to construct a legitimate argument.

What is the problem if a few people decide to dress in a different manner, even if it be radically so? They have the right to the choice. That is the sign of an enlightened, free society.

Personally, the blinders you seem to have on are much more offensive to me than if you were wearing a burqa.

0 0Rating: 0

adelfia

Feb 11, 2010 at 1:16pm

When someone immigrates into another Country,it is only fitting that they should follow,abide,by the laws of the nation.behind closed doors as long as you're not hurting anybody you can practice what ever custom you want...

0 0Rating: 0

Heath_er

Feb 11, 2010 at 3:18pm

Seeing a woman in a burqa does honestly make me uncomfortable what with he fact that someone (husband, religion etc...) is telling them that they should hide themselves away and be ashamed of their bodies. I could never go to a country that would require me to wear one, i would feel absolutely ashamed that I have to be "protected" from the stares of other men and that the people could not handle the face, and arms of a woman being visible.
That being said I could NEVER in a million years walk up to someone wearing a burqa and tell them that they shouldn't be wearing it and that they are wrong in their thinking. That goes against a woman's right to wear whatever she pleases whether it's a thong bikini or a burqa (equally as disturbing in my mind!). So I could never agree with passing a law that forbids it in public. I do agree that with the right provisions that voting women wearing burqa's should have to show their face. Otherwise I might have to bite the bullet, buy a burqa and repeatedly vote using other people's id's. I'm not saying that burqa wearing women would do that (or not) but it is not a practice of equality for me to show picture ID and have it checked against my face and for someone else to be able to waive that rule in the name of religious freedom.

0 0Rating: 0

Roslyn Cassells

Feb 12, 2010 at 5:16pm

If we respect Muslim women, we will ask them what is their opinion on this issue, and support their self-determination any way we can. So I call on Muslim women to tell us how we can show our solidarity with them at this moment in herstory.

0 0Rating: 0

McRocket

Feb 13, 2010 at 2:12am

People should be free to wear whatever they like (assuming it is not too 'showy', I guess).

A better rule (though probably unenforceable) would be to make it illegal to force someone to wear an article of clothing outside of work related activities.
At least then these women that are being forced and don't want to wear them can always hold over their male family member heads the thread of going to the police with claims they were being forced to wear these 'outfits'.
I realize little would probably be accomplished. But at least it would send a message to those that are being forced to wear these things against their will that their country is with them.
They are not alone.

0 0Rating: 0

ceolmor

Feb 13, 2010 at 12:17pm

When my 9 year old blond Grandson has to obey security rules at our airports why does an anonymous shrouded masked individual not have to do the same? it is not a right wing plot but a common sense plot!

0 0Rating: 0

buzz

Feb 17, 2010 at 7:46pm

Gwynne Dyer is always full of bs. She needs to actually investigate what she talks about.

0 0Rating: 0

Al

Feb 18, 2010 at 12:08pm

Buzz: You need to investigate on Gwynne's gender.

Ceolmor: They too go through a security screening, checked by a female security guard.

0 0Rating: 0