The Islamic Republic of Holland: how one nation deals with a revolutionary problem

National Review, July 18, 2005 by John O'Sullivan

The Dutch public was particularly alarmed by this case because, outwardly, Bouyeri seemed a model of assimilation and acceptance. If he was a jihadist, anyone might be. A subsequent poll showed that 40 percent of Dutch respondents "hoped" that Muslims would no longer feel at home in Holland. There have accordingly been a few attacks by Dutch hooligans on mosques. With each such incident Muslims feel anxieties not dissimilar to those of their Protestant neighbors. Before long, nobody feels safe.

Dutch governing authorities, being Dutch, have reacted to these various threats with a mixture of moderation and social engineering slightly tilted in favor of the Muslims. Thus, when an imam complained about the graffito Thou Shalt Not Kill painted near a mosque not long after van Gogh's murder, Dutch police sent in city workers to sandblast the graffito off. The police subsequently apologized. Still, it had been the instinctive reaction of a politically correct police force to prefer artistic censorship to offending a minority.

I saw some of this recently when I visited Rotterdam as part of a conference examining Muslim immigration into Europe, jointly organized by the New Atlantic Initiative and the Edmund Burke Foundation. Rotterdam authorities have sought to overcome the "us and them" mentality that divides their city ethnically and religiously by fostering mixed neighborhoods, supporting responsible mosques, and holding open public debates with ordinary citizens from both communities on how the city can improve community relations. The proposals that emerged were all highly reasonable. But it is noticeable that actions to soothe Muslim concerns--such actions as the promotion of cultural diversity and the enactment of anti-discrimination rules--were higher priorities than those aimed at mollifying the native-born, such as making Dutch the language used by all in public.

A MUSLIM DUTCHMAN

In Rotterdam, officials denied that "assimilation" was their aim; what they sought was "cultural integration." But this distinction turns on a misunderstanding of "assimilation" as it is understood in the U.S. They seemed to suggest that asking Muslims to assimilate would be almost like asking them to convert to Protestant Christianity. That would indeed be unreasonable--and futile. But is Protestantism an essential part of Dutchness? Many Dutch natives manage to be loyal citizens without being observant Protestants. Dutch identity is now primarily cultural, historical, and political rather than religious, so there should be no explicitly religious barrier to the concept of a Muslim Dutchman. In these circumstances, assimilation and cultural integration amount to much the same thing.

That does not mean to say, however, that there are no genuine obstacles to Muslim adoption of a Dutch identity. The first is the nature of the Muslim identity itself--which is cohesive, strong, and resistant to assimilation. Not just in Holland but throughout Europe, Muslims form strong communities built around mosques with their own "self-help" social institutions. These bodies are highly effective and guide new arrivals to find work, accommodation, financial assistance, and other services. Their efforts help explain why poor Muslim laborers often own their homes outright; they also ensure, however, that new immigrants remain in a Muslim environment and participate only marginally in the rest of society.