9/11 at 25: How the ‘War on Terror’ helped mainstream Europe’s far right

Twenty-five years aft the September 11 attacks, the governmental bid built successful their aftermath continues to signifier Europe. The Global War connected Terror (GWOT) helped acold close parties successful Europe summation governmental prominence they had agelong been denied. Islamophobic narratives that shaped planetary argumentation aft 2001 legitimised an anti-Muslim racism that had already been gathering wrong Europe’s acold close for years.

Before September 11, acold close parties successful Europe had been mostly marginalised wrong the continent’s multi-party systems. Even wherever immoderate won important electoral support, galore remained politically stigmatised oregon excluded from power, and were amended known for anti-Semitism and unfastened nostalgia for their fascist origins than arsenic credible contenders for government.

But the crushed was already shifting earlier the towers fell. After the illness of the Soviet Union, the acold right’s long-standing racism began to sharpen its absorption connected Islam specifically. Parties specified arsenic the French Front National (now the Rassemblement National) and the Austrian Freedom Party discovered Islam arsenic their caller “enemy within”: Arabs and Black communities successful France became, successful far-right rhetoric, simply “Muslims.” So did Turks successful Austria. The People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) was arguing arsenic aboriginal arsenic 1991 that Islam posed a menace to wide ideology and stood successful the mode of migrant “integration.” By the precocious 1990s, Pim Fortuyn had written a publication titled Against the Islamisation of Our Culture, introducing a cruder, much overt strain of Islamophobia to Dutch politics.

Then came September 11, which handed the acold close an opening it hadn’t had to physique for itself.

When 19 al-Qaeda hijackers crashed 4 planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a tract successful Pennsylvania, sidesplitting 2,977 people, President George W. Bush declared a ‘Global War connected Terror’. The acold close nary longer needed to manufacture anti-Muslim sentiment connected its own; governmental speeches, media sum and wars waged crossed Muslim-majority countries did overmuch of that enactment for them.

Bush insisted the combat targeted “terrorists” who had perverted the connection of Islam, not Islam itself. But the rhetoric and argumentation that followed routinely treated each Muslims arsenic suspects, casting the religion itself arsenic inherently convulsive — a framing that helped mainstream and globalise Islamophobia implicit the people of the ‘War connected Terror’.

Bush’s declaration that “either you are with america oregon you are with the terrorists” near European governments with small country to manoeuvre. More than 13 European countries joined the US-led penetration of Afghanistan, with British forces astir straight engaged successful combat. Twelve joined the penetration and concern of Iraq; the UK and Poland took connected large combat roles, portion France and Germany, this time, opposed the war.

Blatantly Islamophobic media sum crossed the continent accompanied these campaigns, reinforcing an representation of the violent, threatening Muslim. Attacks by al-Qaeda affiliates successful Madrid and London deepened the consciousness that the force was already “within,” casting suspicion connected immoderate Muslim arsenic a imaginable threat. Meanwhile, European governments — with the acold close inactive mostly excluded from powerfulness — enacted their ain Islamophobic policies: countering convulsive extremism and deradicalisation programmes, including the UK’s Prevent strategy. They besides cooperated successful hosting concealed CIA ‘black sites’ and facilitating rendition flights to Guantanamo Bay and different torture sites. These programmes rested connected the premise that Muslim spiritual content was itself a benignant of dormant threat, ever susceptible of being “activated” into unit against the West. Guantanamo Bay became the era’s astir infamous awesome of this logic — a lawless tract wherever guiltless Muslims were shipped and held connected unfounded suspicion, without ineligible grounds.

Self-styled experts connected “extremism” and “terrorism” — Pamela Geller, Frank Gaffney, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer — built careers legitimising this model for American audiences and soon forged connections with Europe’s strengthening far-right movements. Together they formed the self-described “Counter-Jihad Movement”, a transatlantic web of anti-Muslim organisations, governmental parties, writers, bloggers and activists agreed by the assertion that “Western civilisation” is nether onslaught by Islam. Beginning successful 2007, the question utilized the OSCE’s yearly Human Dimension Implementation Meeting to dispersed its ideology wrong European and North American argumentation circles. Far-right leaders from Austria, Belgium, England, the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and Norway convened astatine yearly counter-jihad conferences held successful cities crossed the continent.

Years earlier Pamela Geller mobilised against the falsely named “Ground Zero Mosque” successful New York successful 2010, her European counterparts were already organising transnationally against mosque construction. In 2008, the Cities Against Islamisation inaugural brought unneurotic far-right leaders from the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Austria, France and Italy, marching alongside anti-Muslim activists from the United States.

Slowly, anti-Muslim mobilisation proved electorally successful. As absorption parties, far-right movements gained crushed — archetypal by pressuring mainstream rivals into adopting their rhetoric, past by becoming conjugation partners successful nationalist governments from Austria to Bulgaria, Hungary, the Netherlands, Italy, Norway, Poland, and Finland. In Denmark and Sweden, they became kingmakers instead, shaping argumentation from extracurricular the cabinet.

Anti-Muslim argumentation has lone expanded since. Far-right parties, and mainstream governments pressured by them, person passed a increasing database of restrictions connected Muslims’ spiritual freedom: bans connected the full-face veil successful respective countries, bans connected the hijab for teachers, students, oregon nationalist employees successful others, and terrible restrictions — successful immoderate places outright bans — connected mosque construction. Muslims, who marque up a disproportionate stock of Europe’s moving poor, person been pushed further to the margins arsenic a result.

Even arsenic much Muslims prosecute acquisition and nonrecreational advancement, a securitised sermon — built connected the logic of the GWOT and fused with far-right “great replacement” conspiracy theories — has adapted to conscionable them. The aged accusation that Muslims garbage to integrate has fixed mode to a newer one: that Muslims who win airs an adjacent greater risk, secretly moving to subvert Western societies. It is the aforesaid relation historically assigned to Jews — the “enemy within” who tin ne'er beryllium trusted.

Several governments person institutionalised this suspicion by targeting Muslim-led civilian nine organisations. Strict surveillance of mosques and NGOs, paired with curtailed civilian liberties, has go modular signifier crossed galore European states — framed variously arsenic combating “political Islam” (Austria), “Islamist separatism” (France), oregon “legalistic Islamism” (Germany). In each case, the tolerated Muslim is the invisible one: the idiosyncratic who does not assertion a spot astatine the array oregon protestation injustice.

The connection and infrastructure built by the ‘Global War connected Terror’ allowed each of this to instrumentality basal and grow mostly unchallenged. With overmuch of Europe inactive unwilling to reckon with its ain histories of colonialism, racism and fascism, Islamophobia has go a broadly accepted governmental presumption — 1 the acold close did not simply exploit, but actively cultivated into its ain success.

The views expressed successful this nonfiction are the author’s ain and bash not needfully bespeak Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.