A fairytale land?

The turmoil following the “Prophet cartoons” case has generated unprecedented publicity for Denmark, and turned many people’s perception of the little country on its head. It is not without reason that the current situation is called Denmark’s worst crisis in 50 years. If anything the conflict proves just how far the present Danish society and its model is from the Anglo-Saxon and American models. Many recent commentaries on Denmark have highlighted the difficulty outsiders have in grasping the complexities or depth of the “clash” taking place in continental Europe and particularly in Denmark.

So was this case, as some people suggest, an isolated incident perpetrated by a few idiots? Are Danish politicians and opinion makers innocent in this, and are Muslims themselves largely to blame for the current crisis for not having reached out to non-Muslims, or even alienated them? Or is this a view that might have been true if the crisis had occurred 20 years ago, not today?

To answer all these questions, it is important to dig deeper and assess the origins of the current situation in all its facets and understand the dynamics within the Danish society. 

“My Team”

“Because it isn’t Denmark, and at least they’ve got Ibrahimovic [the Bosnian player]. How many Muslims or even immigrants do you see on the Danish team?”

This was the reply when my friend complained that 11 out of the 12 Danish citizens of immigrant origins who were watching a football (soccer) match between Denmark and Sweden during the Euro 2004 competition supported Sweden. This example highlights a fundamental difference between Denmark, my country of birth, and Britain, my “adopted country.” When British Muslim friends traveled to Portugal to support the English team, my “Danish” friends supported teams that were either not Denmark or at least had immigrant players.

Norman Tebbit, a veteran British Conservative politician, is famous for devising “the cricket test” in 1990. He argued that Indians and Pakistanis in England who supported their “home” teams over the English could not be considered truly British. 
However, the support in the above example was not for their “home” countries, but for another European country, a failure of the “cricket test” taken to a new level.

Of course, there are second-generation immigrants in Denmark who would support the Danish team, but the above example is by no means uncommon and it sums up two important points regarding Muslims in Denmark:
1) A lack of attachment is felt by even well-educated second-generation immigrants, and
2) A very strong cross-cultural and cross-national bond is felt by immigrants and Muslims in particular.
This situation is the product of several factors that have made the Danish experience unique with respect to other European countries.

The first of these factors is the historical background and pretext for immigration.  Although immigrants started arriving in the 1960s and 1970s, there was no massive influx from the country’s former colonies for the simple reason that Denmark never had any of importance. Therefore, the Danish immigrant and Muslim population is one of the most multiethnic in Europe, without dominant groups as seen in Britain, France and Germany. (see table)

The absence of a significant colonial history meant that immigrants arrived without knowledge of Danish society or without the built-in admiration for European culture often found among immigrants from former British and French colonies. The absence also meant that there were few individuals in Denmark with knowledge of foreign cultures. When immigrants began to arrive, they found a country that was 99% Protestant and virtually ethnically homogenous.  Now less than 40 years later, 6% of the Danish population is of “non-Western” origin; two thirds of these (4% of the total population) are Muslims. In a country with no tradition for ethnic diversity, this has been a significant change in a short span of time.

Secularism, Christianity or plain xenophobia?

“Not all values are equally valid and our society is superior. Medieval Islamic culture can never be as valid as ours.” These are the words of Danish Cultural Minister Brian Mikkelsen in a speech last year regarding the “cultural battle” he sees between “Danish” and “Muslim” values. These views, far from being extreme, sum up the stance pushed by Danish politicians and opinion makers across the political spectrum. The Danish perception of nationhood and national identity is very different from an openly multicultural society such as Britain, or an immigrant country such as the United States.

To readers unfamiliar with Danish politics, Mikkelsen’s position may seem somewhat extreme. But quotes by various members of the Danish parliament over the last 10 years illustrate how deeply ingrained the view is that immigrants and their cultures are an inferior alien element:

“Many immigrants think that the Muslim culture is equal to the Danish, and expect us to accept this position.” Karen Jespersen, former interior minister (Social Democrats)

“In 1900, they would not have been able to imagine that so many neighborhoods in Copenhagen would be inhabited by people from a lower level of civilization.” Pia Kjaersgaard (head of the Danish People’s Party, which is anti-immigration)

“Denmark is not multiethnic and will not be multiethnic.” Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, former prime minister (Social Democrats)

“Muslims should be interned in camps, better to be safe than sorry.” Inge Dahl-Soerensen  (Liberal Party)

“Muslim youth consider it a right to rape Danish girls…and are like a cancer that should be surgically removed.” Louise Frevert (Danish People’s Party)

It is worth noting that the Danish People’s Party is not a fringe party, but the third largest in parliament with 14% of the votes. Louise Frevert also admitted to forwarding text messages calling for a boycott of Danish Muslim shops in response to the recent boycott of Danish goods in the Middle East.