|
Frank
|
On May 1, 2026, the Swedish government announced its intention to abandon the term “Islamophobia” and is now seeking to gradually eliminate this notion within the European Union and the United Nations.
“The concept of Islamophobia is problematic,” declared Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard. According to her, the word “phobia” refers to irrational individual fears rather than concrete acts of discrimination or violence. Above all, this notion risks being confused with the legitimate criticism of the Islamic religion.
The Swedish government now favors the expressions “anti-Muslim racism” or “anti-Muslim hatred.” This evolution partly aligns with the position long defended by the European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ): human rights protect persons, not religions themselves. Everyone must be able to practice their religion freely without suffering violence or discrimination. But everyone must also be able to debate, criticize, caricature, or challenge a religion, including Islam, without risking prosecution for disguised blasphemy.
The term “anti-Muslim racism” itself, however, also rests on a major ambiguity, for how does one define a “Muslim”? Does it refer to a believer practicing Islam, or to a person perceived as such because of their name, origin, or appearance? This term thus tends to merge religious affiliation, cultural origin, and ethnic perception, with the same risk of maintaining confusion between the protection of individuals and that of a religion. As for “anti-Muslim hatred,” it is not the feeling itself that can be condemned in a society attached to freedom of conscience and opinion, but rather its expression through acts or speech involving discrimination, hostility, or violence.
Behind the Words, the Return of the Crime of Blasphemy
But fundamentally, Stockholm must go beyond this terminological battle. Changing the words will not alter the underlying dynamic consisting in making Islam legally and politically untouchable, something observable in several European countries and within international institutions. This dynamic is particularly visible in the United Kingdom. During “Islamophobia Awareness Month,” Labour MP Tahir Ali called in November 2024 on Prime Minister Keir Starmer to prohibit the “profanation” of religious texts and the prophets of the Abrahamic religions. Denmark has already taken this step with its “Quran law,” adopted in December 2023, which prohibits certain treatments deemed inappropriate toward sacred religious writings.
These developments are part of the direct continuation of the resolution adopted in July 2023 by the United Nations Human Rights Council explicitly condemning the “desecration of the Holy Quran.” Presented as a measure to combat religious hatred in the context of Quran burnings in Sweden and Denmark, this logic in reality leads to the direct reintroduction of forms of blasphemy laws.
The danger is not theoretical. In several Muslim countries, particularly Pakistan, blasphemy laws are regularly used to persecute religious minorities, especially Christians. Mere accusations lead to lynchings, arbitrary imprisonment, or death sentences. The ECLJ has long warned about the risk of introducing this logic into international institutions under the guise of combating “Islamophobia.”
Behind the Words, the Return of the Crime of Blasphemy
But fundamentally, Stockholm must go beyond this terminological battle. Changing the words will not alter the underlying dynamic consisting in making Islam legally and politically untouchable, something observable in several European countries and within international institutions. This dynamic is particularly visible in the United Kingdom. During “Islamophobia Awareness Month,” Labour MP Tahir Ali called in November 2024 on Prime Minister Keir Starmer to prohibit the “profanation” of religious texts and the prophets of the Abrahamic religions. Denmark has already taken this step with its “Quran law,” adopted in December 2023, which prohibits certain treatments deemed inappropriate toward sacred religious writings.
These developments are part of the direct continuation of the resolution adopted in July 2023 by the United Nations Human Rights Council explicitly condemning the “desecration of the Holy Quran.” Presented as a measure to combat religious hatred in the context of Quran burnings in Sweden and Denmark, this logic in reality leads to the direct reintroduction of forms of blasphemy laws.
The danger is not theoretical. In several Muslim countries, particularly Pakistan, blasphemy laws are regularly used to persecute religious minorities, especially Christians. Mere accusations lead to lynchings, arbitrary imprisonment, or death sentences. The ECLJ has long warned about the risk of introducing this logic into international institutions under the guise of combating “Islamophobia.”
An International and European Institutional Architecture Dedicated to Combating “Islamophobia”
The terminological debate is therefore far from insignificant. Behind these words, a genuine European and international institutional architecture dedicated to combating “Islamophobia” is gradually being built with the aim of shielding Islam from criticism. States such as Turkey and Pakistan, as well as politico-religious movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood, have understood this well.
|
Forum
Pages: 
There’s No Such Thing as Islamophobia (Read 33810 times)
