Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was shot and stabbed repeatedly Tuesday on an Amsterdam street. His most recent film, a TV short called “Submission,” featured the stories of Muslim women who had been assaulted, raped, forced into marriage and subsequently beaten and punished for adultery, and who were asking God for help. Over the course of the ten-minute film, the women’s gowns gradually become transparent to reveal lines from the Qur’an (describing the punishment of “misbehaving” women) written across their skin.
Van Gogh was a longtime critic of fundamentalist Islam’s treatment of women and homosexuals, and an author of books with titles like “Do I Beat My Wife Hard Enough?” He clearly wasn’t looking to make friends among the Netherlands’ one million Muslims (who make up nearly 6% of the population) with the film, produced in collaboration with Somali-born parliamentarian Ayaan Hirsi Ali, herself an outspoken critic of the treatment of women within traditionalist Islam. At the time of the writing of this article, the Dutch national security service (AIVD) has ruled out the possibility that van Gogh’s suspected murderer was a terrorist, but the suspect, a 26-year old of dual Dutch and Moroccan citizenship, had already been known to the AIVD for his contacts with fundamentalist Islamic organizations in the Netherlands.
Figures from all walks of Dutch life — from right-wing politicians to Muslim community leaders — have expressed outrage at the fact that van Gogh was killed merely for offending others through expressing his beliefs. But the killing is a flashpoint in a fierce — though often unspoken — debate about Muslim immigrants in Dutch society. The Dutch pride themselves upon being a tolerant and open nation, and yet the presence of large numbers of Muslim immigrants and asylum seekers is a source of concern to many who view Islam as rejecting the tenets of tolerance and free expression that are ensconced within the Dutch constitution. The conflict, in many people’s eyes, is about whether or not a tolerant nation ought to tolerate the presence of a group whose perceived intolerance threatens the very identity of that nation.
In 2002, Pim Fortuyn, a popular and openly gay politician who was sharply critical of Islam’s treatment of homosexuals and running on a platform of highly restricted immigration, was assassinated. Fortuyn’s killer, however, was not a North African Muslim but a Dutch animal rights activist, Volkert van der Graaf, who was worried that Fortuyn’s polarizing effects in Dutch politics would marginalize vulnerable groups such as Muslims.
The fact that Fortuyn was felled not by a Muslim fundamentalist but a left-wing countryman illustrates the difficult discussion brought to new prominence by van Gogh’s killing that the Dutch face about the future direction of their nation. Van Gogh and Fortuyn were unafraid to violate the taboos governing the discussion of Islam and immigration, and their deaths have served to catapult those topics to the forefront of Dutch national consciousness.
The Netherlands is entering a crucible not unlike the one our own nation was in during the Civil Rights Movement, which involved a difficult national dialog, featured more than a handful of politically-motivated killings, and sought goals that have yet to be fully realized. Much as Americans had to address the deep contradictions of systematic racist discrimination in a democratic society, the Dutch must now decide how to address the issues raised by a minority which many Dutch regard as insufficiently assimilated — even though that group is prevented from fully assimilating by the very uneasiness that so many Dutch have about them.
Articles I and VII of the Dutch constitution mandate strict nondiscrimination and a vigorous protection of free speech. Non-Muslim Dutch are caught between the desire to promote tolerance and welcome Muslim immigrants, and the need to protect personal freedoms that allow for behavior that is deeply offensive to many Muslims. At the same time, Muslim immigrants have every right to enjoy those same freedoms in their own lives. It now falls to the Dutch — Muslim and non-Muslim alike — to figure out how to live together in a society that unfailingly protects freedom of conscience without allowing deep differences of opinion to make the leap from mere politics to deadly violence. If our own experience is any indication, it will be a long and difficult journey for the Dutch, but it is nevertheless one worth taking.
Rob Hunter ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in political science and philosophy.
