Published 02 February 06
By Abigail R. Esman
World Defense Review columnist
Less democracy for security's sake?
"Take care," Theo van Gogh used to say when parting from family and friends. It is a phrase the mother of the slain Dutch filmmaker still quotes often when speaking about her son. But if Dutch Immigration and Integration Minister Rita Verdonk has anything to say about it, those words will soon be illegal, a violation of a recommended "code of behavior" requiring, among other things, that people speak Dutch – and only Dutch – "in the schools, in the workplace, and on the streets."
Most of us, especially Americans, perhaps, can empathize with the idea of making the native language the official one for businesses and schools. But in the streets? No more "take care" or "ciao" or "hasta la vista, baby," or "merci?" When my friend's fifteen-year-old niece Melanie, a Dutch citizen born and raised in the USA who speaks not a word of Dutch, pays a visit to her family, is she to be struck dumb the moment she reaches Schiphol airport? Or will the government, as another friend suggested only half-jokingly, issue badges to tourists on arrival, yellow stars emblazoned with a "V" for "visitor," say (or more likely, "B" for the Dutch word for "visitor," "bezoeker" – literally translated as "one who seeks")?
One need not seek far in this country these days to find the anger and the hate.
In fact, one has to wonder what advantages such a rule could offer.
Immigrant Muslim women, often horrifically abused in their homes, take a tremendous risk when they summon the courage to seek help from the Dutch community. Because they are often not allowed to leave their homes, or are forbidden by their husbands to learn Dutch in the first place, how much more reluctant will they be to reach out, thinking that in the very act of doing so, by speaking in their native language, they risk a confrontation with the law? More significantly, while it is hard to comprehend how forcing people to speak Dutch in public actually helps them to better "integrate," the fact is that the majority of those being investigated or tried for terrorist activities in the Netherlands are Dutch-born, fluent in the language and the "norms and values" of this country.
Unsurprisingly, then, reaction to Verdonk's proposal has been mixed, though most seem to have dismissed the idea out of hand as basically "unworkable," and even when Jeroen Adema, a junior member of the D66 party whose family comes from Germany, filed a lawsuit against her for discrimination, members of Verdonk's own party, the VVD, lent him support. But others have taken it quite seriously, and their opinions demonstrate the tension that is rising, not just in the Netherlands, but over all of Europe as it works to face the challenges of Muslim integration and extremism within its borders.
On the right, for instance, members of conservative anti-immigration party LPF have praised the suggestion as a "wise" move that will help discourage the "Arabization" of the country. Within the Muslim community, according to Ayhan Tonca, a spokesman for the Dutch Turkish community, few took the proclamation itself seriously, but are threatened by its tone. "It becomes clear," he says, "that she is not the 'Immigration Minister' but the 'Assimilation Minister,' and we are not interested in assimilation. We have Dutch values, but we also have our own values, and we won't give up those values."
He adds, "This makes working with her almost impossible, because we know that whatever she says, she has another agenda."
Others have suggested that restrictions like this only backfire: in a country where intelligence reports continue to show that radicalism is on the rise, experts in Islamic extremism have indicated that a part of this trend comes from a feeling of alienation among Dutch (and all European) Muslims – a sentiment likely only to be exacerbated by being told they may not greet their families in their mother tongues when in public. Moreover, as one young Muslim said in a panel discussion held by "Sen," a magazine for Muslim women in the Netherlands, the mood is increasingly defiant: the attitude, he says, is, "If you treat me like an extremist, I'll act like an extremist."
And non-Muslim immigrants? Their response has been little less than fury. "I'll speak whatever f***ing language I want," one wrote on an online bulletin board. "Another reason to leave the Netherlands," a fellow American ex-pat chimed in. This is not insignificant. Just last fall, a poll showed that some 77 percent of ex-pats living in the Netherlands wanted out, calling the country "unlivable." One can be sure that the number has increased in response to Verdonk's "code."
So this leaves us with a declining population of international academics, researchers, members of the international court, and others who contribute significantly to the intellectual, cultural, and economic strengths of this small country. (Even among the Dutch, according to a recent report by the Netherlands' Interdisciplinary Demographics Institute, emigration is the highest it has been in decades, with the majority of those leaving in the better-educated, higher-income bracket. The most-frequently cited reasons for leaving? "The crowdedness of the country" and "the current social climate.")
What remains, then, is a profoundly right-wing, restrictive force whose actions many believe only increase the tendency towards radicalization among Muslims, and those same increasingly radicalized Muslims themselves.
This is not, arguably, the best foundation for a safe and democratic society. And when a country becomes less democratic as a result of its response to Islamic extremism, and more extremist in response to its diminishing democratic values, who has really won the fight?
— Abigail R. Esman is an award-winning author-journalist who divides her time between New York and The Netherlands. In addition to her column in World Defense Review, her work has appeared in Foreign Policy, Salon.com, Esquire, Vogue, Glamour, Town & Country, The Christian Science Monitor, The New Republic and many others. She is currently working on a book about Muslim extremism and democracy in the West.
Visit Esman on the web at abigailesman.com.
© 2006 Abigail R. Esman
NOTE: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author, and do not represent the opinions of World Defense Review and its affiliates. WDR accepts no responsibility whatsoever for the accuracy or inaccuracy of the content of this or any other story published on this website. Copyright and all rights for this story (and all other stories by the author) are held by the author.