Explained: How UK’s long-running Islamophobia problem led to far-right riots

One of the better explainers:

More ugly scenes have unfolded on the UK’s streets on Saturday, as police continue to grapple with a wave of far-right disorder across the country.

Cities in England and Northern Ireland saw violent clashes involving anti-immigration demonstrators and counter-protesters, with police officers injured as objects such as bricks, chairs and bottles were thrown at them.

The far-right has drawn condemnation from MPs across the political spectrum after disorder in London, Manchester, Southport, Hartlepool and Sunderland over the past week, many of which have seen mosques and other Muslim religious buildings targeted.

With more marches planned in the coming days, experts have warned such demonstrations are being driven by deep rooted Islamophobic sentiment among some sections of the population.

The catalyst for the wave of unrest was the killings of three young girls at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport, Merseyside, on Monday.

Axel Muganwa Rudakubana, 17, who was born in Cardiff and lived near Southport, is accused of the attack, but false claims spread online the suspect was named “Ali al-Shakati” and was asylum seeker of Muslim faith who had arrived in the UK by boat in 2023.

Racial equality and civil rights think tank the Runnymede Trust warned that this “violent racism has long been simmering under the surface” of society.

“What is happening is the direct result of years of normalised racism and Islamophobia, enabled by politicians and the British media,” a spokesperson said.

There has been an upsurge in Islamophobic incidents and rhetoric in recent years. According to Home Office data, religious hate crime is at an all-time high and Muslims are the most targeted religious group.

There was a nine per cent increase in religious hate crime offences in the year ending March 2023 – where the victim’s religion was recorded, 2 in 5 of these offences were targeted against Muslims.

Yet, authorities stand accused of doing nothing to address this spike; it recently emerged that the previous Conservative government’s anti-Muslim hatred working group (AMHWG) was “on pause” for more than four years, from 2020 until the party’s general election loss, despite repeated promises from officials and an increase in hate crime.

The new Labour government’s strategy for tackling Islamophobia remains unclear and Sir Keir Starmer has been criticised for failing to engage enough with Muslim communities in the wake of disorder.

Writing on X/Twitter, the Muslim Association of Britain said: “@Keir_Starmer had no problem meeting @MuslimCouncil when he was in opposition.

“Now that he is in government, and Muslims are being attacked and Mosques have become targets, his government have no plans to meet the largest body representing Muslims in the UK. What changed?”

Recently, The Independent revealed that a Muslim political group was “inundated” with racist abuse and violent threats during the general election, resulting in a report being made to the police.

In March, Muslims in Britain reported that they are too scared to leave their homes after dark, as new figures from a London charity, Islamophobia Response Unit (IRU), showed the number of Islamophobic incidents skyrocketed by 365 per cent since the 7 October attack on Israel by Hamas.

Political discourse and dynamics have also fuelled anti-Muslim sentiment, campaigners have said.

In response to the unrest, Qari Asim, chairman of Mosques and Imams National Advisory Board, said Muslims around the country are “deeply worried and anxious about the planned riots by the far-right groups across the country”.

He said: “This intimidation and violence is the inevitable, devastating, outcome of rising Islamophobia that has been enabled to fester on social media, in parts of the mainstream media and by some populist leaders.”

Earlier this year, former Tory MP Lee Anderson’s remarks about the Muslim Mayor of London Sadiq Khan being “controlled” by “Islamists” led to his suspension from the party.

Despite this, Mr Anderson remained unapologetic about his comments, defected to Reform UK, and doubled down by saying “most of the public agree with him”.

A independent review led by Professor Swaran Singh in 20121 found that “anti-Muslim sentiment remains a problem” within the Conservatives and although an updated report in 2023 found the party had made progress, it also warned it had been slow to implement some of his recommendations.

A report by the Labour Muslim Network (2020) highlighted consistent experiences of Islamophobia among Muslim members and supporters and a number of MPs, including Zarah Sultana, have called for the party to launch an inquiry into the issue.

Sections of the media have also been accused of peddling Islamophobia and risking the safety of Muslims around the country in the process.

Examining over 10,000 articles and clips referring to Muslims and Islam in the winter period of 2018, a 2021 report from the Muslim Council of Britain’s Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) found that the majority (59 per cent) of all articles associated Muslim people with negative behaviour, over a third of all articles misrepresented or generalised about Muslim people and terrorism was the most common theme.

Source: Explained: How UK’s long-running Islamophobia problem led to far-right riots

Phillips: A federal minister wanted Canadian soldiers to serve as props at a pop concert. It’s just the latest way the Trudeau government has treated national security as a joke

Really wonder what they are thinking (or not thinking):

You can’t be too careful these days. With all the fake news, misinformation and AI-generated “deep fakes” out there you can’t take anything at face value. You have to be on your guard.

Which is why when I saw a headline this week saying a federal minister had lobbied for 100 Canadian soldiers to act as “backdrops” for a concert by an Indian pop star, my first thought was it must be one of those fakes. Or perhaps someone’s idea of a joke.

But no. It turns out a minister in the Trudeau government, Harjit Sajjan, really did try to convince the military to supply soldiers to be, in effect, props for a performance in Vancouver by one of India’s most popular singers and actors, Diljit Dosanjh.

Sajjan, the minister of emergency preparedness and a former defence minister, sent the request to the current defence minister, Bill Blair. Blair apparently passed it on to whoever’s in charge of these things in the Canadian Armed Forces and fortunately sanity prevailed. The military replied that “this request would not be feasible due to the tight timeline and personnel availability.”

This is a story that might well just slip by, especially in the depths of summer when no one’s paying attention. But it shouldn’t. It underlines this government’s fundamental lack of seriousness on issues of national security and, just as bad, its habit of playing diaspora politics rather than focusing on the national interest.

Sajjan isn’t having any of this. After the Globe & Mail reported his request for soldiers he didn’t apologize or back down. On the contrary. He defended the idea as “a good opportunity for the Canadian Armed Forces to engage with and expand connections to a diverse community of young Canadians.”

But this wasn’t an event with broad public connections like a Canada Day concert, a Grey Cup halftime show or a multicultural festival. It may well be appropriate for the military to have a presence at such events to, quite literally, show the flag.

This was a private, commercial concert by a very popular singer from another country. You might as well ask the air force to do a flyover at a Taylor Swift concert. The military, to state the obvious, isn’t there to serve as props for pop stars – however popular.

Now, it’s impossible to miss the fact that Dosanjh is a mega-star who was born in Punjab and makes much of those origins. He’s hugely popular in India and is reaching out to other countries; his Vancouver event was reportedly the biggest Punjabi music concert ever outside India.

Does any of this escape the Liberals? Of course not. They’re acutely attuned to currents in diaspora communities, including those from India and especially Punjab, the only Sikh-majority state in India. Sajjan himself was born in Punjab and is one of several ministers with origins in India. Nothing wrong with that – but there is something wrong with trying to use the military in a way that may bring political benefits.

Sajjan came under fire recently for telling the armed forces to mount a rescue operation for 225 Afghan Sikhs during the fall of Kabul in August 2021. The suggestion was that Sajjan, defence minister at the time, diverted resources from others desperate to get out before the Taliban took over.

In light of that you’d think he’d be extra cautious about doing anything else that might be interpreted as pandering to Punjabi-Canadian voters. But apparently not.

There’s a bit more spill-over from all this. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau himself dropped in at another concert by Dosanjh in July at the Rogers Centre in Toronto and referred to the singer as “a guy from Punjab.” 

That sounds banal but given the tense state of relations between India and Canada it created a minor storm. The national secretary of the ruling party in India, the BJP, accused Trudeau of “deliberate mischief through wordplay” by emphasizing Dosanjh’s Punjabi identity, rather than his Indian one.

If the government is serious about repairing relations with India, shouldn’t it avoid even small missteps that feed India’s narrative about Canada being a hotbed of Sikh separatism? Unless, of course, it prefers to play for partisan advantage.

Source: A federal minister wanted Canadian soldiers to serve as props at a pop concert. It’s just the latest way the Trudeau government has treated national security as a joke

Nicolas: Décivilisation


Good piece:


« Il faudrait d’abord étudier comment la colonisation travaille à déciviliser le colonisateur, à l’abrutir au sens propre du mot, à le dégrader, à le réveiller aux instincts enfouis, à la convoitise, à la violence, à la haine raciale, au relativisme moral, et montrer que, chaque fois qu’il y a au Vietnam une tête coupée et un oeil crevé et qu’en France on accepte, une fillette violée et qu’en France on accepte, un Malgache supplicié et qu’en France on accepte, il y a un acquis de la civilisation qui pèse de son poids mort, une régression universelle qui s’opère, une gangrène qui s’installe, un foyer d’infection qui s’étend et qu’au bout de tous ces traités violés, de tous ces mensonges propagés, de toutes ces expéditions punitives tolérées, de tous ces prisonniers ficelés et interrogés, de tous ces patriotes torturés, au bout de cet orgueil racial encouragé, de cette jactance étalée, il y a le poison instillé dans les veines de l’Europe, et le progrès lent, mais sûr, de l’ensauvagement du continent. »

Vous m’excuserez la longueur de la citation. C’est que cette phrase-monument contient en elle seule une thèse entière, un coup de poing à la face du monde qui a toujours le pouvoir de nous couper le souffle aujourd’hui. Aimé Césaire l’a publiée en 1955 en guise d’ouverture de son Discours sur le colonialisme.

1955, c’est cette année charnière qui marque la fin de la guerre d’Indochine et les débuts de la guerre d’Algérie, alors qu’une grande partie du monde se trouve toujours sous contrôle européen. On comprend le contexte, le temps d’où les mots de Césaire nous parviennent. On aurait souhaité qu’avec le passage des années, la thèse de l’écrivain s’empoussière, que le « progrès » en étouffe la flamme. Mais non.

En début de semaine, une foule a fait irruption au tribunal militaire de Beit Lid, en Israël, pour dénoncer l’arrestation de neuf soldats qui auraient torturé et violé un prisonnier palestinien. Plus précisément, les réservistes de l’armée font face à des accusations de sodomie aggravée, d’avoir causé des lésions corporelles dans des circonstances aggravées, d’avoir infligé des sévices dans des circonstances aggravées et d’avoir eu un comportement indigne d’un soldat.

À la suite de cette arrestation, des centaines de manifestants de l’extrême droite israélienne ont donc pris d’assaut la base militaire de Beit Lid, forçant des confrontations avec des soldats. La scène n’est pas sans rappeler l’attaque sur le Capitole du 6 janvier 2021, à Washington. La ressemblance avec la déchéance politique américaine s’amplifie encore lorsqu’on comprend que des élus, et même des ministres israéliens, ont participé à la mobilisation et encouragé les manifestants. Tant dans la foule que chez les politiciens les plus radicaux, on s’est insurgé de « l’ingratitude » envers les soldats ainsi accusés. D’autres, dont le premier ministre Benjamin Nétanyahou ainsi que des élus plus progressistes, ont vivement condamné le mouvement de foule.

Les questions sous-jacentes à cette suite d’événements extraordinaire sont lourdes. Pourquoi un « terroriste » aurait-il des droits ? Quels sont les motifs suffisants pour enquiquiner des hommes qui servent avec bravoure la Nation, affrontent son Ennemi ? La torture, la sodomie sont-elles des chefs d’accusation adéquats pour embêter des Héros ? Pourquoi s’empêtrer dans la moralité alors que nous sommes en guerre ? Serait-ce là, implicitement bien sûr, les questions qui divisent profondément les membres de la Knesset cette semaine, au point de devenir un véritable point de clivage politique ?

Les horreurs ont continué à se succéder à Gaza dans les dernières semaines, ou plutôt les derniers mois. Comme si ce n’était pas assez, la catastrophe humanitaire de Gaza vient elle-même faire ombrage aux assassinats, arrestations arbitraires et colonisations accélérées en Cisjordanie, et à la maltraitance de nombreux prisonniers palestiniens en Israël même. Et puis, il y a le conflit avec le Hezbollah qui a repris de plus belle à la frontière sud du Liban. La dernière attaque israélienne sur Beyrouth fait craindre une accélération du conflit et une implication directe de l’Iran, voire des États-Unis.

Ça faisait déjà un moment que je n’avais plus écrit sur Gaza et Israël. Non pas parce que les horreurs ont cessé, mais parce qu’à force, on est à bout de souffle. On ne sait plus quoi dire de plus. Je sais que je ne suis pas seule, ici.

Sauf que l’émeute de Beit Lid vient cristalliser, symboliser quelque chose de particulièrement important, qu’il faut nommer. Et ce, même si les questions de maltraitance des prisonniers palestiniens sont loin d’être nouvelles, et qu’elles ont été largement documentées par plusieurs organisations de défense des droits de la personne, étrangères comme israéliennes. Que des accusations de violence sexuelle puissent susciter un débat — oui, vraiment, un débat — entre représentants politiques dit beaucoup de choses sur l’état actuel du droit, des institutions et peut-être surtout de la morale dans cette fameuse « seule démocratie du Moyen-Orient ». Après près de dix mois de guerre, certes, mais aussi après des décennies de colonisation illégale de terres palestiniennes.

J’en reviens donc à l’ouverture du Discours sur le colonialisme d’Aimé Césaire, qui me travaille au corps pendant que j’absorbe les dernières nouvelles sur l’état du monde. Césaire parlait de « décivilisation ». C’est là un mot qui resurgit dans toute son actualité pour parler du débat public à l’ère des guerres de Benjamin Nétanyahou et des frasques de Donald Trump, dont le dossier criminel vient aussi banaliser la question de la violence sexuelle dans l’espace politique ; à l’ère de trop d’émules encore. Une ère où on doit poser avec le plus grand sérieux du monde des questions qui relèvent de l’absurde.

Le viol, est-ce si grave ? Vraiment, oui, on est dans l’absurde. Le théâtre de l’absurde, par ailleurs, est aussi un mouvement artistique qui a pris son envol à la même époque où Césaire écrivait son Discours — une manière de garder son humour, et donc son humanité, dans un monde qui avait perdu la tête. Décidément, pour faire sens de la dégradation politique qui nous entoure, il nous faudra renouer avec plusieurs classiques.

Source: Décivilisation

“We should first study how colonization works to decivilize the colonizer, to dumb him in the true sense of the word, to degrade him, to wake him up to buried instincts, to lust, to violence, racial hatred, to moral relativism, and show that, every time in Vietnam there is a cut head cut and a flat eye and that in France we accept, a girl raped and that in France we accept, a Malagasy tortured and that in France we accept, there is an achievement of civilization that weighs on its dead weight, a universal regression that takes place, a gangrene That is settling in, a focus of infection that is spreading and that at the end of all these violated treaties, all these lies spread, all these tolerated punitive expeditions, all these prisoners tied up and interrogated, all these tortured patriots, at the end of this encouraged racial pride, this spread jactance, there is the poison instilled in the veins of Europe, and the slow but sure progress of the enrage of the continent. ”

You will excuse me for the length of the quote. It is because this monument-sentence alone contains an entire thesis, a punch in the face of the world that still has the power to take our breath away today. Aimé Césaire published it in 1955 as the opening of his Discourse on Colonialism.

1955, it is this pivotal year that marks the end of the Indochina War and the beginning of the Algerian War, while a large part of the world is still under European control. We understand the context, the time from which Césaire’s words reach us. We would have liked that with the passing of the years, the writer’s thesis would get dusty, that “progress” would stifle its flame. But no.

Earlier this week, a crowd broke into the military court in Beit Lid, Israel, to denounce the arrest of nine soldiers who allegedly tortured and raped a Palestinian prisoner. More specifically, army reservists face charges of aggravated sodomy, causing bodily injury in aggravated circumstances, inflicting abuse in aggravated circumstances and having behaved unworthy of a soldier.

Following this arrest, hundreds of Israeli far-right demonstrators stormed the Beit Lid military base, forcing confrontations with soldiers. The scene is reminiscent of the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, in Washington. The resemblance to the American political decline is further increased when we understand that elected officials, and even Israeli ministers, participated in the mobilization and encouraged the demonstrators. Both in the crowd and among the most radical politicians, there was “ingratitude” towards the soldiers thus accused. Others, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and more progressive elected officials, strongly condemned the crowd movement.

The questions underlying this extraordinary sequence of events are heavy. Why would a “terrorist” have rights? What are the sufficient reasons to worry men who bravely serve the Nation, confront its Enemy? Are torture and sodomy adequate charges to annoy Heroes? Why get entangled in morality when we are at war? Could this be, implicitly of course, the issues that deeply divide the members of the Knesset this week, to the point of becoming a real point of political cleavage?

Horrors have continued to follow one another in Gaza in recent weeks, or rather the last few months. As if that were not enough, the humanitarian disaster in Gaza itself overshadows the assassinations, arbitrary arrests and accelerated colonizations in the West Bank, and the mistreatment of many Palestinian prisoners in Israel itself. And then there is the conflict with Hezbollah, which has resumed at the southern border of Lebanon. The latest Israeli attack on Beirut raises fears of an acceleration of the conflict and direct involvement of Iran, or even the United States.

It had already been a while since I had written about Gaza and Israel. Not because the horrors have stopped, but because by force, we are out of breath. We don’t know what more to say. I know I’m not alone here.

Except that the Beit Lid riot crystallizes, symbolizing something particularly important, which must be named. And this, even if the issues of abuse of Palestinian prisoners are far from new, and they have been widely documented by several human rights organizations, both foreign and Israeli. That accusations of sexual violence can provoke a debate – yes, really, a debate – between political representatives says a lot about the current state of law, institutions and perhaps especially morality in this famous “only democracy in the Middle East”. After nearly ten months of war, of course, but also after decades of illegal colonization of Palestinian lands.

So I come back to the opening of Aimé Césaire’s Discourse on Colonialism, which works on my body while I absorb the latest news on the state of the world. Césaire spoke of “decivilization”. This is a word that resurfaces in all its current events to talk about the public debate in the era of Benjamin Netanyahu’s wars and Donald Trump’s escapades, whose criminal file also trivializes the issue of sexual violence in the political space; in the era of too many emulators yet. An era where we must ask with the greatest seriousness in the world questions that are absurd.

Is rape so serious? Really, yes, we are in the absurd. The theater of the absurd, on the other hand, is also an artistic movement that took off at the same time when Césaire wrote his Speech – a way of keeping his humor, and therefore his humanity, in a world that had lost its head. Decidedly, to make sense of the political degradation that surrounds us, we will have to reconnect with several classics.

Idées | Le profilage racial et l’éternel virage vers le statu quo

Pandemic issue for the SPVM, remember well from some of the files I dealt with more than 10 years ago:

La lutte pour mettre fin au racisme policier à Montréal se trouve dans une impasse. Nous n’avons jamais eu autant de preuves de l’existence de racisme au sein des forces policières à Montréal ni une meilleure compréhension des mesures à prendre pour le combattre. Pourtant, le Service de police de la Ville de Montréal (SPVM) et l’administration de Projet Montréal s’entêtent à rejeter les recommandations formulées par des groupes communautaires et des chercheurs et ressuscitent plutôt des réformes éculées et inefficaces.

De nombreuses preuves empiriques sur le racisme policier ont été accumulées depuis les premières enquêtes gouvernementales, réalisées dans les années 1970. En 2019, par exemple, une équipe de chercheurs indépendants a publié une étude recensant les interpellations policières effectuées entre 2014 et 2017, qui montre que les personnes noires et autochtones sont interpellées par la police de Montréal quatre fois plus souvent que les personnes blanches.

L’an dernier, l’équipe de chercheurs a publié une étude de suivi portant sur la période de 2018 à 2022, et a constaté que les iniquités raciales, loin de s’atténuer, étaient en fait encore plus marquées.

En réaction à ces rapports, des groupes communautaires et des chercheurs ont exigé la mise en oeuvre de plusieurs solutions éclairées et efficaces. Une coalition de 80 groupes communautaires a demandé la réaffectation d’au moins 50 % du budget du SPVM à des programmes communautaires, et 85 groupes ont exprimé leur soutien à l’abolition des interpellations policières et des interceptions routières.

Le SPVM a écarté chacune de ces recommandations. Ainsi, lorsque les auteurs du rapport de 2023 ont demandé un moratoire sur les interpellations, le chef du SPVM, Fady Dagher, a rejeté cette demande, affirmant qu’un « virage culturel » au sein de l’institution suffirait à résoudre le problème. L’administration de Projet Montréal a donné son soutien au plan de Fady Dagher et n’a fait aucune autre déclaration sur le sujet.

Le 23 juillet dernier, une enquête du Journal de Montréal a révélé que le SPVM s’était ingéré dans une étude « indépendante » sur les interpellations afin d’en réduire la portée. Parmi les tactiques employées, le SPVM a tenté d’obtenir la transcription d’entrevues confidentielles de ses policiers qui dénonçaient les pratiques racistes du service et a fait pression sur les chercheurs afin qu’ils s’abstiennent de recommander un moratoire sur les interpellations.

Il est facile de comprendre pourquoi le chef Dagher et Projet Montréal balaient du revers de la main les demandes des groupes communautaires et des chercheurs et font plutôt la promotion d’un « virage culturel ». Le SPVM a déjà amorcé ce virage il y a des dizaines d’années, en adoptant une politique sur les relations communautaires en 1985 et en mettant en oeuvre un ensemble de politiques visant à mieux former les policiers pour éliminer les préjugés, à embaucher plus de policiers racisés et à établir des liens avec les communautés noires, autochtones et racisées.

Depuis les années 1980, ces mêmes politiques sont ressuscitées chaque fois qu’une crise survient — ce qui est stratégique. Présenter des politiques qui ont échoué comme de « nouvelles » solutions permet au SPVM et à l’administration municipale de donner l’impression qu’ils prennent le problème à bras-le-corps. Pendant ce temps, les disparités raciales dans le maintien de l’ordre demeurent aussi marquées, sinon plus, qu’en 1985.

De vraies solutions au racisme policier

Il existe de nombreux moyens efficaces d’éliminer le racisme policier, mais ils se fondent sur une conception très différente de la sécurité publique. Nous appuyons trois de ces mesures.

Premièrement, comme l’exigent depuis longtemps les groupes communautaires et les chercheurs, les interpellations et les interceptions routières doivent être abolies, et des excuses doivent être présentées aux communautés auxquelles cette pratique de longue date a porté préjudice.

Par nature, les interpellations et les interceptions n’exigent aucune preuve préalable que la personne visée a contrevenu à la loi — il suffit que la policière ou le policier « soupçonne » que ladite personne a commis une infraction ou est susceptible de le faire. Les interpellations arbitraires n’ont aucun fondement juridique, nuisent à la sécurité publique plutôt que de l’améliorer et laissent à la police un pouvoir discrétionnaire qui donne lieu à des comportements abusifs et à une discrimination raciale à grande échelle.

Deuxièmement, les règlements municipaux sur les « incivilités » doivent être abrogés. Ces règlements prévoient des pénalités en cas de comportements non menaçants comme s’allonger au sol, uriner sur la voie publique ou « flâner ».

Lorsque le SPVM a commencé à sévir contre ce qu’il appelle des « incivilités », en 2003, nous avons assisté à une augmentation considérable des cas de harcèlement envers les personnes marginalisées, notamment les personnes noires, autochtones et itinérantes de toutes origines, de même qu’à un accroissement du nombre de contraventions remises à ces populations. Projet Montréal a reconnu ce problème en 2018 et a mis sur pied un comité constitué de groupes communautaires chargé d’examiner et de supprimer les règlements les plus discriminatoires. Ces règlements abusifs sont toujours en vigueur six ans plus tard.

Troisièmement, les fonds publics investis dans les forces policières doivent être redirigés vers des programmes qui améliorent de façon tangible le bien-être et la sécurité des populations marginalisées et racisées. Depuis des décennies, la police est vue comme la solution à tous les problèmes sociaux qui retiennent l’attention du public, qu’il s’agisse de violence armée ou d’itinérance. Il en résulte un cercle vicieux où l’échec prévisible des forces policières à résoudre des problèmes systémiques se traduit par des appels renouvelés à une plus grande présence policière.

Ce sont ces mesures — et non un autre « virage culturel » vers le statu quo — que le SPVM et Projet Montréal doivent mettre en oeuvre s’ils veulent lutter contre le racisme et la violence des forces de l’ordre.

Source: Idées | Le profilage racial et l’éternel virage vers le statu quo

Privy Council Office workers face culture of ‘racial stereotyping’: internal report

Took a look at the Public Service Employee Survey results for PCO. In most cases, broadly comparable to the public service as a whole, with some exceptions. But interestingly, some slippage between the 2020 and 2022 surveys results in harassment and discrimination, perhaps reflecting a mix of greater awareness following the Clerk’s Call to Action and the broader social context.

19.2 percent of PCO are visible minorities, 3.0 percent Indigenous peoples, broadly comparable to other departments. Unfortunately, don’t have desegregated data by visible minority and indigenous group.

As to the Zellars report, based on interviews, we see a similar pattern in that the surveys indicate that there are issues, a consultant with experience in diversity issues is engaged, has discussions with a number of employees, many who feel aggrieved by remarks and/or treatment. But the nature of such consultants, given their career, is to have an implicit bias of highlighting discrimination and prejudice rather than a more neutral approach. Doesn’t mean of course findings are not valid but need to be assessed accordingly.

And of course the usual groups of organizations and activists use the survey to further their political aims:

Black, Indigenous and racialized employees in the Privy Council Office are regularly subjected to a culture of “racial stereotyping, microagressions and verbal violence,” according to the findings of an internal report.

The damning report — obtained by the Coalition Against Workplace Discrimination through the Access to Information Act and released by the coalition Monday — said the office does not have a grasp on the scope or impact of the discrimination that those employees face.

There are also “significant material barriers to meaningful representation and inclusion” in the workplace, it says.

The Privy Council Office’s 1,200 employees make up the lead branch of the civil service, providing support for the prime minister and cabinet in executing policy directives across the federal government.

According to the report, Black employees reported managers using the N-word “comfortably in their presence” and later expressing surprise at “not knowing” it was a pejorative term for Black people.

Report on discrimination at Privy Council Office ‘shocking’

The report also says managers made Islamophobic remarks and “feigned innocence when white employees have unfairly advanced at their expense.”

The report’s author, associate professor and researcher at St. Mary’s University Rachel Zellars, said one of her key findings was a culture that “discourages reporting,” with employees widely noting that “accountability mechanisms are currently non-existent.”

Zellars compiled her report after speaking with 58 employees in the office from November 2021 to May 2022.

“When we received this report, it was shocking,” said Nicholas Marcus Thompson, president and CEO of the Black Class Action Secretariat, at a Monday news conference after the report was released.

“This is the head of the public service. This is the Privy Council Office that directed the entire federal public service to address racism,” he said. “While it is shocking, it is what we’ve seen across the public service, across all departments and agencies.”

In January 2021, Ian Shugart, the former clerk of the Privy Council, secretary to the cabinet and head of the federal public service, called on leaders across the public service to take actions to advance anti-racism initiatives and foster systemic change.

The office commissioned the work that resulted in the internal report as part of this 2021 call to action. Thompson said Monday that Shugart’s call has been ignored.

“Despite a call to action from the clerk himself for the public service to take specific and meaningful actions to address racism, equity and inclusion, the report identified the PCO’s own corporate services as a key barrier to that call to action,” he said.

The coalition is calling for the resignation of two members of the office’s leadership for failures to address issues outlined in the report, including the deputy clerk in charge of the discrimination file.

Additionally, the coalition is calling for the government to settle the Black employees’ class action lawsuit.

‘Double standards’

Black employees interviewed by Zellars reported “double standards” in the career advancement opportunities afforded to them — like access to French-language training, something that’s been identified as a key factor for moving up at the Privy Council Office.

They also shared stories of being “discouraged” from taking part in diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) work. Black employees said the messaging they got was that it would be a conflict with their non-partisan commitment as civil servants and could “detract from their real 9-5” work.

Non-black racialized employees reported seeing instances where career advancement for Black employees was hindered by managers and other employees.

Indigenous employees called on the office to define what reconciliation means for the department and for management to identify tangible initiatives they can achieve.

“White employees and executives detailed personal experiences and career-advancing opportunities that were in stark variance from Black, Indigenous and racialized employees,” the report said.

4 pages of recommendations

The report includes four pages of recommendations for how the office’s leadership can address some of the concerns.

The recommendations include modifications to hiring and promotion practices, including “name-blind screening” where applicable.

The report also emphasizes the importance of building trust in employees when it comes to DEI work. It calls on leadership to implement programs aimed at building a better understanding of the historical context around the Black Canadian experience.

In a July 26 letter to Thompson and shared Monday by the coalition, deputy clerk Christine Fox said leaders are committed to bringing change across the civil service and within the office.

Those measures include sharing quarterly “employment equity dashboards” aimed at identifying representation gaps and setting goals on recruitment and promotions, appointing a chief diversity officer that reports to the clerk of the Privy Council, and establishing new tools people can use to report issues without fear of reprisal.

“I would like to reassure you that the clerk and I, and the entire management team at PCO, are committed to action and results that remove barriers and ensure that Indigenous employees, Black and racialized employees fully benefit from the opportunities and experiences PCO offers,” Fox wrote.

In a separate statement to CBC News on Monday, Privy Council Clerk John Hannaford reiterated much of what Fox wrote in her letter.

“The entire management team and I are committed to taking continuous action to identify and address any barriers that may exist in the federal public service,” Hannaford said in his statement. “We can best serve the government and Canadians when employees feel heard, valued, respected, and included.”

Despite the assurance, Thompson said he doesn’t have confidence in the Privy Council Office’s ability to implement change by itself.

“We are witnessing a scenario where those who have been perpetrators of harm are now tasked with carrying out the solutions. We have seen time and again that this simply does not work,” Thompson said.

“The public service has historically proven to be incapable of policing itself on systemic discrimination.”

Source: Privy Council Office workers face culture of ‘racial stereotyping’: internal report

Ibbitson: Pierre Poilievre makes his case for dismantling what the Trudeau government has built

Of note and very likely (employment equity excerpt):

…Mr. Poilievre said he wanted to live in a country where people pay lower taxes and are burdened by fewer rules, but also where they “have freedom of speech, where they’re judged on their merits, not their ethnicity, gender, sexuality, etc., where parents have ultimate authority over what their kids learn about sexuality and gender, where we go after criminals not after hunters and sport shooters, where we rebuild our military to have strong standing in the world.”

The Liberal agenda of promoting diversity within the public service – gone. Protections for gender-diverse youth – gone. Efforts to combat discrimination in the criminal justice system – gone.

Pretty much every major element of the Liberal environmental, social and justice agenda – gone….

But there is a reason the Conservatives are so far ahead in the polls. Things don’t feel right. Even the most fervent supporter of open immigration (and I am one) is alarmed by the out-of-control flood of people coming into the country. Inflation and high interest rates have lowered the standard of living for millions of people. The regulatory environment has become far too complex. And the Liberals have failed to persuade most of us that they get all this and are working to fix it….

Source: Pierre Poilievre makes his case for dismantling what the Trudeau government has built

Ten years on, many Yazidis uprooted by Islamic State onslaught struggle to find stable homes

Good long read:

When Rihan Ismail returned to her family’s home in the heartland of her Yazidi community, she was sure she was coming back for good.

She had yearned for that moment throughout long years of captivity.

Islamic State militants had abducted then-adolescent Ismail as they rampaged through Iraq’s Sinjar district, killing and enslaving thousands from the Yazidi religious minority.

As they moved her from Iraq to Syria, she clung to what home meant to her: a childhood filled with laughter, a community so tight knit the neighbor’s house was like your own. After her captors took her to Turkey, she finally managed to get ahold of a phone, contact her family and plan a rescue.

“How could I leave again?” Ismail, 24, told The Associated Press last year, soon after returning to her village, Hardan.

Reality quickly set in.

The house where she lives with her brother, a police officer, and his wife and toddler, is one of the few still standing in the village. A school down the street houses displaced families who have nowhere else to go.

Her father and younger sister are still missing. In a cemetery on the village edge, three of her brothers are buried along with 13 other local men and boys killed by IS and discovered in a mass grave. 

Ismail passes it every time she has an errand to a neighboring town. 

“You feel like you’re dying 1,000 deaths between here and there,” she said.

Deep connections persist for a homeland changed by horrors

A decade after the IS assault, members of the Yazidi community have been trickling back to their homes in Sinjar. But despite their homeland’s deep emotional and religious significance, many see no future there.

There’s no money to rebuild destroyed homes. Infrastructure is still wrecked. Multiple armed groups carve up the area.

And the landscape is haunted by horrific memories. In August 2014, militants stormed through Sinjar, determined to erase the tiny, insular religious group they considered heretics. They killed men and boys, sold women into sex slavery or forced them to convert and marry militants. Those who could, fled. 

It has been seven years since IS was defeated in Iraq. But as of April 2024, only 43% of the more than 300,000 people displaced from Sinjar had returned, according to the International Migration Organization.

Some fear that if Yazidis don’t return, the community may lose its identity. 

“Sinjar is the Yazidi center of gravity,” said Hadi Babasheikh, the brother and office manager of the late Yazidi spiritual leader who held the position during IS’ atrocities. “Without Sinjar, Yazidism would be like a cancer patient who’s dying.”

This strategically located remote corner of northwest Iraq near the Syrian border has been the Yazidis’ home for centuries. Villages are scattered across a semi-arid plain dotted with sheep, a cement factory and the occasional liquor store. 

Rearing up from the flatland are the Sinjar Mountains, a long, narrow range considered sacred by the Yazidis. Legend says Noah’s ark settled on the mountain after the flood. Yazidis fled to the heights to escape IS, as they have done in past bouts of persecution. 

In Sinjar town, the district center, soldiers lounge in front of small shops on the main street. A livestock market brings buyers and sellers from neighboring villages and beyond. Here and there, reconstruction crews work among piles of cinder blocks. 

But in outlying areas, signs of the destruction — collapsed houses, abandoned fuel stations — remain everywhere. Water networks, health facilities and schools, and even religious shrines have not been rebuilt. Sinjar town’s main Sunni Muslim district remains a stretch of rubble; the occupants have not returned, facing hostility from their former Yazidi neighbors who view them as IS collaborators. 

The central government in Baghdad and authorities in the semi-autonomous northern Kurdish region have been wrestling over Sinjar, where each backed a rival local government for years.

That dispute is now playing out in a debate over the displacement camps in the Kurdish region housing many of those who fled Sinjar.

Camp closures loom, leaving Yazidis torn on whether to stay or go 

Earlier this year, Baghdad ordered the camps to be closed by July 30 and offered payments of 4 million dinars (about $3,000) to occupants who leave. 

Karim al-Nouri, deputy minister for the displaced, said this month that difficulties in returning to Sinjar “have been overcome” and that getting the displaced back is “an official, humanitarian and moral imperative.”

But Kurdish authorities say they won’t evict the camp residents. 

Sinjar “is not suitable for human habitation,” said Khairi Bozani, an advisor to the Kurdish regional president, Nechirvan Barzani.

“The government is supposed to move people from a bad place to a good place and not vice versa.”

Khudeida Murad Ismail refuses to leave the camp in Dohuk, where he runs a makeshift store selling eggs, instant noodles, pacifiers and hair henna. Leaving would mean losing his livelihood, and the payout wouldn’t cover rebuilding his house, he said.

If the camps shut down, he said he would remain in the area, rent a home and look for other work.

He acknowledged that if many Yazidis stay away from Sinjar, other groups will likely populate their areas. That saddens him, he said, “but there’s nothing I can do.”

But the camp closure order and relocation payments have prompted an increase in returns. 

On June 24, Barakat Khalil’s family of nine joined a convoy of trucks piled with mattresses, blankets and household goods, leaving the town in Dohuk that had been their home for nearly a decade.

They now live in a small, rented house in Sinjar town. They fixed its broken doors and windows and are gradually furnishing it, even planting geraniums. 

Their old home, in a nearby village, is destroyed. A humanitarian organization removed the rubble, leaving nothing but the foundation, but couldn’t help them rebuild. Khalil had spent seven years building the house, gradually saving money from his work in construction. 

“We stayed in it for two months and then they (IS militants) came and blew it up,” he said. 

Now, “it’s a totally new life — we don’t know anybody here,” said Khalil’s 25-year-old daughter, Haifa Barakat. She’s the only family member who is working, in the pharmacy of the local hospital.

Although life in Sinjar is tolerable for now, she worries about security.

Tensions among various militias in Sinjar raise safety concerns

Different parts of the territory are patrolled by the Iraqi army and Kurdish peshmerga forces, along with various militias that came to fight IS and never left.

Prominent among those is the Sinjar Resistance Units, or YBS, a Yazidi militia that is part of the primarily Shiite Popular Mobilization Forces.

Turkey regularly launches airstrikes against its members because it is aligned with the Kurdistan Workers Party’ or PKK, a Kurdish separatist group that has waged an insurgency in Turkey.

At the YBS headquarters near the Syrian border, the group’s then-acting commander, Khalid Rasho Qassim, also known as Abu Shadi, said in an interview last year that his group had fought IS when official forces fled.

“The young people are joining because they saw that we defended them,” he said.

Less than a week later, he was killed by a Turkish airstrike, the same fate his predecessor had met. 

The presence of armed groups has also sometimes complicated rebuilding. In 2022, a damaged school in Sinjar was rehabilitated by a Japanese NGO called IVY, hoping to relieve overcrowding in the area’s few functional schools. Instead, Japanese officials complained that a militia took over the renovated facility.

When AP reporters visited the school last September, no classes were in session, but a few young men and women were in the entry hall, where bookshelves were stocked with revolutionary texts. Staff said the school director was not available.

IVY later said it was told that the building had been vacated. But when an AP team returned this month, it found the same young men who had been there before. They asked the journalists to leave.

This month, the Nineveh provincial council finally voted to appoint a single mayor for Sinjar, but disputes have held up his confirmation.

The would-be mayor, school administrator and community activist Saido al-Ahmady, said he hopes to push for the restoration of services so more displaced will return. 

“Sinjar has always been the center of Yazidis and we will preserve it that way,” he said.

But many of those who have come back say they are thinking of leaving again. 

In the village of Dugure, on a recent evening, children rode bicycles and women in traditional robes chatted at sunset in front of their houses. 

“In the end we have to return” to Sinjar said Hadi Shammo, whose family left a camp last month. “This is part of our identity.” 

But when prodded, Shammo acknowledged, “If I’d had a chance I would have left Iraq a long time ago.” 

Rihan Ismail, who once spent her days dreaming of a return to Sinjar, now wants to get away.

“Even if you went somewhere else, you wouldn’t be able to forget. But at least every time you come or go you wouldn’t have to see your village destroyed like this,” she said. 

A photo of her missing father gazed down from the wall. In the corner was a small replica of Lalish, the most holy Yazidi temple, and a snake, a sacred symbol of protection.

“You can’t forget what happened, but you have to find a way to live.” 

She has now pinned her hopes on joining her mother and other relatives who have resettled in Canada.

Source: Ten years on, many Yazidis uprooted by Islamic State onslaught struggle to find stable homes

McWhorter: We’re Asking the Wrong Question About Harris and Race

From mixed to biracial, as more and more people have blended or composite ethnic and racial origins:

In the wake of Joe Biden’s endorsement of Kamala Harris, a great deal of attention has focused on whether America is ready for a Black female president. Unmentioned is a question of equal complexity: Why is Harris Black? Hear me out.

As she has proudly recounted, the vice president is the product of an interracial, intercultural marriage between a mother who emigrated from India and a father who emigrated from Jamaica. So in terms of her ancestry, she is as much South Asian as she is Black. By widespread convention, however, people refer to her not primarily as a South Asian presidential candidate, nor even a mixed-race candidate, but rather a Black candidate.

It’s not just Harris. Barack Obama, with one Black and one white parent, is called Black. Imagine how strange it would be if someone called him white. Imagine how strange it would be if he called himself white. Harris often mentions the South Asian half of her heritage, but in traditional American discourse, it feels off to categorize her as simply South Asian — like Aziz Ansari or Mindy Kaling — and leave it there. Yet calling her just Black, as a kind of shorthand, feels right. Blackness is treated as blacking out, so to speak, whatever other race is involved. Most people default to this perspective — myself included.

This approach contradicts not just logic, but also itself. In contrast to the centuries-old “one-drop rule” that segregationists have invoked to describe the indelible ancestral stain of so-called Black blood, enlightened people are supposed to believe that race is purely a social construct, with no biological basis. If so, then why does having some Black forebears make you Black, regardless of the rest of the family tree?

People from other countries can find this perplexing. I’ve fielded questions from people from France to Japan about why Obama is considered Black, rather than both Black and white. The question always feels naïve to me at first, but if you imagine stepping outside our particular national framework, it’s the foreigner who is making sense and the American version that is weird.

A teacher from Russia I once had even genially but firmly insisted that I am not Black. Dark-skinned people she knew of, including a few rappers — they were really Black. Not me. My skin tone is brown but not chocolate.

My maternal grandfather was light enough that he could easily have passed for white. My mother was quite light-skinned, too. Yet I have never considered myself anything but Black, nor did my grandfather or my mother. To look at photos of the three of us and see three “Black” people makes perfect sense to me because I have never known anything else.

The conversation with my teacher took place in Russian, a language I spoke with the facility of a 2-year-old. Without access to the nuanced verbal machinery — the buzzwords and dutiful observations — we usually use, I had no way to explain the American way of seeing Blackness as the dominant heritage for any mixed-race people, because it makes no logical sense.

The novel and later musical “Show Boat” dramatized the tragic absurdity of the one-drop idea. The story begins in the Deep South in the 1800s, when laws banned miscegenation and classified people with one-eighth Black ancestry as “octoroons.” At one point a white man married to a woman of mixed race pricks her finger and drinks what comes out, announcing that the drop of Black blood he has inside of him legitimizes their marriage.

Today, those who express different ideas about racial identity often encounter serious resistance. When Tiger Woods, the child of two mixed-race people, announced himself to be “Cablinasian” — as a combination of Caucasian, Black, American Indian and Asian — he was mocked as not knowing who he is. The writer Thomas Chatterton Williams encountered skepticism when he said he couldn’t see his blond, blue-eyed child as Black.

One objection I hear is that resisting calling yourself Black, or feeling the need to modify your Blackness with some other racial attributes, can give the impression that you are ashamed of who you are.

I do think people make this assumption too quickly, but given how Black people have been denigrated throughout American history, the assumption hardly comes out of nowhere — and I have seen for myself, among people I know, that it is sadly sometimes correct.

Another objection I hear is that however dark-skinned people see themselves, the world will process them as Black. Their complex genealogy will not protect them from the effects of prejudice, discrimination and even possibly police violence. And if so, better that they learn to be realists about it — starting with the racial category they use to identify themselves.

I find this concern genuine but unconvincing. For one thing, should we let other people’s inability to see us plain be the basis of our identity? That would let them win. You can be quite aware of the risk of police violence and yet resist a belief system that says Black blood determines who you are.

And besides, as is so often the case, it’s a matter of degree. My children’s mother is white. One child is about my shade; the other is what used to be called high yellow. In their New York City lives, white kids are the minority. So many of the kids they know are, like them, shades of brown, hybrids of various kinds, that my children have a bit of trouble understanding why I sometimes ask “what” one of their friends “is.” Despite their differences, they all watch “Stranger Things”; the girls, whatever they look like, are all into Sabrina Carpenter.

I know that not all kids live in contexts in which racial distinctions can be so easily shrugged off. But all signs indicate that my children are growing up in a world that’s very different from the one I grew up in. I experienced plenty of passing instances of racism, even as a student at fancy private schools. But it’s been a half century now. Experiences of the kind Harris has recounted, of suburban white kids whose parents told them not to play with her because she was Black, have been alien to my girls so far.

If someday they decide not to define themselves as Black, it will not be because they are ashamed or in some kind of denial. It will be because the world has changed, and we should be thankful for that.

American discourse is, happily, becoming more amenable to the idea that a person who is half Black can be two things rather than just one. It’s been a while now since people started speaking of themselves as biracial, a term that is used with much more pride than its predecessor, “mixed,” used to be. But Kamala Harris will still be commonly described as Black. The talk will be of her having a chance of being the second Black president, when that first one was actually half Black like her.

What is most important is that Harris, Obama and other people of mixed racial heritage can now get as far as they have. As for our habit of processing Blackness as foundational — much as Strom Thurmond did — it will be ever more absurd as the races mix further over the coming generations. On this custom, history will look upon us in puzzlement.

Source: We’re Asking the Wrong Question About Harris and Race

International review of the Canadian Human Rights Commission can provide limited gains for anti-racism advocacy

Realism. More for political profile than substantive:

The Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions(GANHRI) has decided to conduct a special review of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC). A coalition of civil society organizations, including the Black Class Action Secretariat, Canadian Association of Public Employees, and others, requested the review.

As the international body that accredits national human rights institutions, GANHRI will evaluate the CHRC’s level of compliance with the United Nations’ Paris Principles that set minimum standards for national human rights institutions to uphold.

The review may draw attention to issues of racial discrimination at the CHRC and the coalition’s proposed reforms, but GANHRI’s record indicates that it will most likely decide that the CHRC is still complying with the Paris Principles at the highest level.A June 10 press conference by the coalition of organizations publicizing GANHRI’s decision to review the CHRC’s status.

Complaints of racism at the CHRC

Since 2020, the coalition has been raising concerns about racial discrimination in the CHRC’s workplace and how it fulfills its mandate of resolving complaints of discrimination against federally regulated entities. 

Initially, the coalition pursued domestic avenues for change. There were union-based grievance processes for several Black and racialized CHRC employees and a comprehensive Senate Committee on Human Rights study. In 2023, both the Treasury Board Secretariat and Senate Committee found racial discrimination was an issue within the CHRC. 

In response, the CHRC has been introducing a range of initiatives to address anti-Black racism, sexism and systemic discrimination. The coalition, however, wants the CHRC and Canadian government to pursue more sweeping reforms to the CHRC and its associated legislation. Key reforms would amend equity and non-discrimination legislation, and change the complaint procedure so individuals could directly access a tribunal, rather than go through the commission itself.

To generate international pressure for reforms, the coalition wants GANHRI to review the CHRC’s compliance with the Paris Principles, particularly the requirements for pluralism to reflect society and for promoting and protecting human rights without discrimination. It is hoping GANHRI will reassess the CHRC’s top-level accreditation status. 

How reviews of national human rights institutions work

Ironically, and seemingly reflecting its high status, the CHRC prepared GANHRI’s guide to how its accreditation committee works.

GANHRI’s committee gives national human rights institutions grades based on their compliance with the Paris Principles: A for full compliance, and B for partial compliance. The committee also may give them recommendations on how to better adhere to the Paris Principles.

Having A-status allows a national human rights institution to participate in the work of the UN Human Rights Council and other UN mechanisms. A downgrade to B-status indicates compliance issues and revokes those privileges. 

The committee normally reviews national human rights institutions every five years and just gave the CHRC A-status after its routine review in 2023.

Beyond this regular review cycle, civil society organizations can submit information to GANHRI if they feel an institution is not complying with the Paris Principles. GANHRI’s committee then decides whether to conduct a special review.

GANHRI’s committee decided to conduct the special review of the CHRC, planned for its next session in Fall 2024, after the coalition highlighted the Treasury Board Secretariat’s and Senate Committee’s recent findings of discrimination within the CHRC. 

The impact of reviewing the CHRC

To increase public pressure for action from the CHRC and Canadian government, the coalition has widely publicized its request for, and GANHRI’s decision to conduct, the special review.

In its press conferencethe coalition’s spokesperson saidGANHRI’s “landmark” decision puts Canada “among the ranks of nations like Russia, Iraq and Venezuela, who have faced a special review.” The coalition focused on states with weak human rights records to shame the CHRC, but national human rights institutions in states with stronger human rights records, like the United Kingdom, have also undergone special reviews.

The coalition also strongly emphasized how GANHRI could downgrade the CHRC’s status from A to B and, by extension, revoke key privileges. However, those familiar with GANHRI’s past practice will expect that it will maintain the CHRC’s top-level status. 

The vast majority of GANHRI’s members (90 out of 118) have A-status. Also, with the example of the UK’s national human rights institution, two special reviews did not produce any downgrade in status.

The CHRC’s response to GANHRI’s committee could detail how it has undertaken various initiatives on the issues of concern. While those initiatives might be inadequate for the coalition, they will probably be adequate for the GANHRI committee to maintain the CHRC’s A-status. 

Therefore, the coalition’s threats of a downgrade in status for the CHRC are unlikely to materialize. Still, the committee’s review may produce recommendations for improvements, which could more subtly assist the coalition’s advocacy.

Overall, the coalition’s turn to the international level has served its domestic agenda by drawing attention to issues of racial discrimination within the CHRC and the coalition’s desired reforms. However, GANHRI’s review will generate minimal international pressure for reforms if it maintains the CHRC’s top-level status as a national human rights institution, so the coalition will need to once again alter its advocacy strategy.

Source: International review of the Canadian Human Rights Commission can provide limited gains for anti-racism advocacy

Islamic paintings of the Prophet Muhammad are an important piece of history – here’s why art historians teach them

Follow-up to the earlier articles:

Hamline University in St. Paul, Minnesota, recently reached a settlement in a religious discrimination case with former adjunct faculty member Erika López Prater. She was dismissed in 2022 for showing two historical Islamic paintings of the Prophet Muhammad in her global survey of art history class, which some students described as disrespectful and Islamophobic.

While many Muslims today believe it is inappropriate to depict Muhammad, it was not always so in the past. Moreover, debates about this subject within the Muslim community are ongoing. Within the academic world, this material is taught in a neutral and analytical way to help students – including those who embrace the Islamic faith – assess and understand historical evidence.

As an expert on Islamic representations of the Prophet Muhammad, I consider the recent labeling of such paintings as “hate speech” and “blasphemy” not only inaccurate but inflammatory. Such condemnations can pose a threat to individuals and works of art.

The Prophet Muhammad has been represented in Islamic paintings since the 13th century. Islamic art historians such as my colleagues and me, both Muslim and non-Muslim, study and teach these images regularly. They form part of the standard survey of Islamic art, which includes calligraphy, ornament and architecture.

Comparing prophetic images

The 14th- and 16th-century images López Prater selected depict Muhammad receiving the beginning of Quranic revelations from God through the angel Gabriel. In Islamic thought, it is at that moment that Muhammad became a divinely appointed prophet.

The 14th-century painting is part of a royal manuscript, the “Compendium of Chronicles,” written by Rashid al-Din. It is one of the earliest illustrated histories of the world. The manuscript includes numerous paintings, including a cycle of images depicting several key moments in the Prophet Muhammad’s life.

The one that was discussed in López Prater’s class appears in a section on the beginnings of Quranic revelation and Muhammad’s apostleship. The painting depicts the prophet with his facial features visible as the angel Gabriel approaches him to convey God’s divine word. The event is shown taking place outdoors in a rocky setting that matches the accompanying text’s description.

The second image, made in Ottoman lands in 1595-96, is part of a six-volume biography of the prophet. Over 800 paintings in this manuscript depict major moments in Muhammad’s life, from his birth to his death.

In that painting, Muhammad is seen raising his hands in prayer while standing on the Mountain of Light, known as Jabal al-Nur, near Mecca. His facial features are no longer visible; instead, they are hidden behind a facial veil.

The Ottoman artist chose to depict the prophet’s purity through the use of white fabrics, and his entire being as touched by the light of God via the large flaming nimbus that encircles his body. Jabal al-Nur is shown, as its name suggests, as a radiant elevation. Above it and beyond the clouds, rows of angels hover in praise.

Key study questions

These two paintings show that Islamic representations of Muhammad are neither static nor uniform. Rather, they evolved over the centuries. During the 14th century, artists depicted the prophet’s facial features, while later artists covered his face with a veil.

Islamic art historians ask their students to compare these two paintings while encouraging them to slow down, look carefully, train their eyes to detect pictorial elements, and infer meaning. They also ask students to consider the textual content and historical context accompanying the paintings.

The key question students are prompted to think about through the juxtaposition of these two Islamic paintings is this: Why did the facial veil and flaming nimbus develop as two key prophetic motifs in Islamic depictions of Muhammad between A.D. 1400 and 1600?

The images help a teacher guide a collective conversation that explores how the prophet was conceptualized in more metaphorical ways – as a veiled beauty and as radiant light – over the course of those two centuries in particular.

This prompts a larger exploration of the diversity of Islamic religious expressions, including those that are more Sufi, or spiritualized, in nature. These paintings therefore capture the richly textured mosaic of Muslim worlds over time.

This historically sensitive, pictorial side-by-side is known as a comparative analysis or “comparandum.” It is a key analytical method in art history, and it was used by López Prater in her classroom. Now more than ever, a rigorous study of such Islamic paintings proves necessary – and indeed vital – at a time of sharp debates over what is, or is not, Islamic.

Source: Islamic paintings of the Prophet Muhammad are an important piece of history – here’s why art historians teach them