
Footballer, journalist, fashionista: whatever French Muslims do, we're treated as the enemy within
In January 2015, for example, I was as profoundly shocked as everyone else in France by the massacre of the Charlie Hebdo journalists in Paris. As the country mourned, I was invited by a major radio station to comment, but was first asked, live on air, to 'dissociate' myself from the attackers.
I had been critical of Charlie Hebdo's publications in the past, but my comments always fell within the scope of legitimate political debate. Nevertheless, as a Muslim, I was now treated as if I was under suspicion. In order to be tolerated on the airwaves, I had to profess my innocence: state publicly that I had nothing to do with the violence.
I couldn't hold back my tears – because, even with a media profile, I was reduced to the most racist perception of my identity. I was strongly defended that night by others who took part in the show, and received much support online, but I couldn't help thinking of the millions of French Muslims who, unlike me, would have no microphone to defend themselves against vile accusations.
Some years later I was invited to take part in a TV debate on the thesis: is the white man always guilty. I was expecting a conversation about gender and race. But my opponent, the philosopher Pascal Bruckner, immediately took me to task, claiming that I had used my status 'as a Black, Muslim woman' to incite hatred against Charlie Hebdo. He claimed that I had, in effect, blood on my hands, that my words had 'led to the murder of 12 people at Charlie Hebdo'. I immediately protested, stating as firmly as I could, that I had 'absolutely no responsibility for any terrorist attack'.
But Bruckner wouldn't let go. He attacked me for having signed a joint statement in 2011, following a night-time petrol-bomb attack at the Charlie Hebdo premises that caused, fortunately, only material damage. Nothing in the statement – which I did not draft and was co-signed by 20 other academics and activists– had called for hatred or violence. It had been critical of the disproportionate media treatment of the fire at Charlie Hebdo when vandalism of Muslim places of worship featured rarely in the news. Signatories had expressed dismay at the selective nature of French national outrage, highlighting the indifference shown after an arson attack on a Paris building inhabited by Roma people, in which a man died.
But Bruckner repeated his accusations in an interview the next day, claiming without any evidence that he had simply 'reminded Rokhaya Diallo of her involvement in political Islam' adding – as if it were a crime – that I had 'criticised Charlie Hebdo by calling them Islamophobic and racist'.
I felt I had no option but to file a defamation lawsuit against Bruckner, believing the accusation to be not just outrageous and insulting, but influenced by my origins and my faith. But defending myself was viewed as another provocation.
Le Figaro, the leading conservative daily, published a highly offensive article on the eve of the trial, which, without even bothering to interview me, stated: 'Inspired by the Muslim Brotherhood, 'anti-racist' activists like Rokhaya Diallo are multiplying lawsuits to silence critics of Islamism.' Taking legal action as a Muslim woman was framed as a 'jihadist' political plot.
This kind of smear tactic is used again and again to discredit any Muslim who calls out Islamophobia. When the footballer Karim Benzema spoke in support of the people of Gaza in October 2023, the then interior minister Gerard Darmanin declared – without a shred of evidence – that the player had 'well-known ties to the Muslim Brotherhood'.
In May, a report commissioned by the interior ministry into the Muslim Brotherhood fuelled suspicion of all French Muslims by recycling conspiracy theories around supposed 'infiltration'. The report was as the the socio-anthropologist Hamza Esmili put it, 'intellectually impoverished'.
Yet Bruno Retailleau, the current interior minister, used alarmist conspiracy tropes to describe its conclusions, claiming it had identified 'a very clear threat to the republic and to national cohesion' and 'a quiet form of Islamist infiltration whose ultimate goal is to bring all of French society under sharia law'.
But even the report stated unequivocally: 'No recent document demonstrates any intent by Muslims of France to establish an Islamic state in France or to enforce sharia law there.' It added that the Brotherhood's members in France today are estimated to number 'between 400 and 1,000 people'.
As Esmili argues, French Muslims present a paradox: we are part of every social sphere, yet many of us have not given up our cultural specificities. And that is precisely what we are blamed for – integration without assimilation. This is why the same government can claim it uses the law to fight against Muslim 'separatism' while denouncing the threat of Muslim 'infiltration'. Muslims can't win: we are blamed for being part of the national community and for being outside of it.
Thus, no matter what level we reach in the social pecking order, being Muslim always carries the suspicion of association with a radical and dangerous ideology: of being the enemy within.
Sign up to This is Europe
The most pressing stories and debates for Europeans – from identity to economics to the environment
after newsletter promotion
So when Léna Situations, a major fashion influencer in France, appeared on the Cannes film festival red carpet wearing a long dress with a headscarf, a senior official in Emmanuel Macron's party suggested on social media that she was practising a form of religious 'infiltration'. As if an outfit was in itself proof of extremism. The influencer never mentioned her religion but it made no difference – her Algerian heritage alone was enough to disqualify her.
Even non-Muslims who take a stand against this hostile climate are subjected to similar accusations. Emile Ackermann – a rabbi vocal on Islamophobia – was accused by a self-proclaimed academic 'expert' of being inspired by a 'Brotherist' discourse. Such absurd accusations would be laughable if the situation weren't so volatile, with Islamophobic crime on the increase. Take the case of the hairdresser Hichem Miraoui, killed in June in the south of France, in what investigators are treating as a racially motivated act of domestic terrorism. Miraoui had been the target of racist rhetoric posted on social media by a neighbour who also denounced the French state as 'incapable of protecting us from Muslims'.
Yet, the very same state constantly fuels a narrative portraying Muslims as a problem.
During the defamation lawsuit I launched against Bruckner, and its appeal, my accuser and his lawyer leaned into these cliches. While the philosopher repeated his accusations and suggested that I was funded by 'foreign powers', his lawyer told the court that, given that Charlie Hebdo's case files amounted to several tonnes of documents, no one could say for sure whether my name was not mentioned in them.
Elyamine Settoul, a political scientist and expert on jihadism, testified, however, that terrorists are radicalised through direct contacts and in no way rely on intellectual debates or interventions.
And the expert and former Islamic State hostage Nicolas Hénin testified that my name appeared 'neither in the legal proceedings concerning the January 2015 attack, nor in the research conducted on the subject'. He told the court that 'the jihadist sphere holds nothing but contempt' for people like me because of my 'multicultural progressivism, which aligns with none of their religious doctrines'.
Bruckner was acquitted in the first instance on the grounds that he had attributed to me only 'purely moral responsibility' and invited me to 'take ownership of the weight of my words and commitments'. The appeal court overturned the initial judgment, recognising the defamatory nature of Bruckner's remarks, yet still acquitted him on the grounds that he had made his statement 'in good faith'.
Just like the 'yellow peril' once attributed to east Asians, or the supposed 'cosmopolitanist' trope used about Jews, the image of an allegedly foreign group secretly infiltrating France's circles of influence is once again thriving, in a sadly familiar strain of dangerous racist rhetoric.
Rokhaya Diallo is a Guardian Europe columnist
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
3 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Conor McGregor invites Donald Trump to try 'the best Coke in Ireland'
Troubled ex-UFC star bizarrely invited Donald Trump to visit his Dublin pub to try the 'best Coke in Ireland.' McGregor, who has recently been embroiled in a string of scandals, including a civil rape case, was invited to the White House earlier this year and now he wants to return the favor and give the president a 'unique, true, IRISH EXPERIENCE!' at the Black Forge Inn. On X the fighter wrote: 'See you in November Donald, at Irelands greatest public house, the multi time award winning, @blackforgeinn!' McGregor wrote on X. SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO See you in November Donald, at Irelands greatest public house, the multi time award winning, @blackforgeinn! We look very forward! 🥘🥤 Ireland's friend @realDonaldTrump, we have the best Coke in all Ireland for you to try! Sparkly fizzy, and on the rocks. With Irish lemon… — Conor McGregor (@TheNotoriousMMA) August 4, 2025 Conor continued: 'We look very forward! Ireland's friend @realDonaldTrump, we have the best Coke in all Ireland for you to try! Sparkly fizzy, and on the rocks. With Irish lemon and lime, also! For adding. ICE COLD! 'Our Coca Cola factory is just 5 minutes away on the long mile road, walking distance, from the black forge inn! ''GIVE THAT BOY A CAN OF COKE!' You are going to LOVE IT! The unique, true, IRISH EXPERIENCE!' Alongside the social media message, Conor included an AI image of himself and Trump dressed as medieval knights around a table of meat and potatoes. In the image, Trump is drinking a can of Coca Cola. The fighter's pub was recently set on fire, with authorities treating the blaze as criminal damage. Meanwhile last week the ex-MMA star lost his attempt to overturn a jury's order that he compensate a woman who accused him of raping her. The court rejected the appeal in its entirety. Nikita Hand alleged that Conor sexually assaulted her on December 9, 2018. He was found liable in November and three Dublin judges rejected all five grounds of the MMA fighter's appeal. Conor was ordered to pay nearly €250,000 ($290,000), plus costs after Hand accused him of raping her at a hotel in Dublin in 2018. He denied the allegation and said he had 'fully consensual sex'. He also denied causing bruising to the plaintiff. Conor was not present for last week's decision, with Hand claiming she had been 'retraumatized' by the appeal. She said: 'To every survivor out there, I know how hard it is but please don't be silenced. You deserve to be heard. You also deserve justice.' Trump hosted the Irish MMA star and his family in the Oval Office on St Patrick's Day, with McGregor even vowing to raise concerns over immigration in Ireland with the president. The star, who also attended Trump's inauguration in January, praised the president's 'inspiring' work ethic.


Daily Mail
4 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Conor McGregor launches campaign to become Ireland's president and calls on law change to boost his chances… days after losing civil rape case appeal
Conor McGregor has launched his bid to become the next president of Ireland, just days after losing a high-profile civil rape case appeal. The former UFC champion, who has hinted at his ambition since March, officially declared in a social media post. To boost his chances, he said he wants to change Ireland's election laws to 'ensure' he appears on the ballot. McGregor, 37, said the current rules make it too hard for ordinary people to run and called on his supporters to sign a petition demanding reform. In a lengthy post accompanied by a picture of his family on Monday evening, he wrote: 'To the esteemed citizens of Ireland and the Irish diaspora, I, Conor McGregor hereby declare my intention to seek the esteemed office of President of Ireland. 'The current constitutional framework however, presents a significant barrier to democratic participation. 'The existing regulations mandate that a candidate must secure nominations from either twenty members of the Oireachtas or four county councils to be eligible for the ballot. 'This system, while intended to ensure a degree of political influence among candidates, inadvertently restricts the direct voice of the Irish electorate. 'In light of this, I propose a petition advocating for a modification of the nomination process to allow my name be included on the ballot.' He added: 'I contend that the citizens of Ireland, both at home and abroad, should have the unhindered right to determine the candidates who appear on the presidential ballot.' McGregor then shared a link to his millions of followers across social media to sign a petition in support of his mission. As of Tuesday morning, the petition labelled 'Let the People Decide' had garnered over 7,445 verified signatures. The post came just four days after Ireland's Court of Appeal dismissed McGregor's challenge to a civil ruling that found he sexually assaulted a woman in December 2018. Three judges ruled on July 31 that his appeal failed on all five grounds and upheld the previous decision ordering McGregor to pay damages to Nikita Hand. The civil trial concluded in November 2024, when a jury found McGregor liable for assault and awarded Hand €248,000 in compensation. She has since launched further legal action following the failed appeal. In her latest filing, she is suing him and two other people for damages, claiming they were involved in malicious abuse of court processes. McGregor speaking at the White House in March. He has said that said the current rules in Ireland make it too hard for ordinary people to run and called on his supporters to sign a petition demanding reform Currently, McGregor is not affiliated with any political party and has no elected office experience. Even if he were to become president, the seven-year role in Ireland is mostly ceremonial. The president cannot propose or pass laws. They cannot also hold referenda on their own initiative. In March, he sparked outrage when he first announced that he was planning to become president. Speaking at the White House, he said 'illegal immigration racket ravaging our country', adding the nation was losing its 'Irishness '. A poll of 134 politicians found that every respondent rejected his plan. One retorted: 'He's a misogynist and a thug. On behalf of the women of Ireland, he can f*** off.'


The Guardian
4 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Yvette Cooper says ‘crammed' small boats using shallow water launches behind rise in arrival numbers
Update: Date: 2025-08-05T08:43:24.000Z Title: Yvette Cooper Content: Good morning. Keir Starmer has invested a lot of effort in measures that will 'smash the gangs' and today the government is announcing the start of one of his big achievements in this area – a returns agreement, of sorts, with France. It is only a pilot, and the numbers are likely to be small, but the Conservatives never negotiated a deal of this kind when they were trying to stop small boat arrivals. (In fact, as a result of Brexit, they achieved the opposite.) Here is Jessica Elgot's story about the 'one in, one out' returns deal with France. And here is the Home Office news release. , the home secretary, has been giving interviews this morning. In media interviews, some politicians are keen to go on the offensive, by opening up new arguments or lines of attack. Cooper is the ultimate defensive player, smothering all awkward questions with splurge of officious, technocratic reasonableness. Journalists find it frustrating, because she tends to be a bit boring, but government spin doctors are happy because she never messes up. When Starmer and Emmanuel Macron announced the 'one in, one out' pilot last month, details about how it would work were sketchy. In her interviews this morning, Cooper did not reveal anything new about how the scheme would operate, arguing that, if she were to release this information, that might help the people smugglers evade the new regime. It has been widely reported that the scheme will start with about 50 people being removed per week, but Cooper would not even confirm this. On numbers, she told the Today programme: We are not putting an overall figure on this programme. Of course, it will start will lower numbers and then build, but we want to be able to expand it. We want to be able to increase the number of people returned through this programme. But Cooper did try to counter the key charge being thrown against the government – that all the 'smash the gangs' measures it is announcing are failing, because small boat arrivals are at record numbers. On the Today programme, when she was asked why arrival numbers have been soaring over the past year, Cooper cited two reasons. She said: What we've seen in the course of this year has been the change in tactics by the criminal gangs, and they've been doing two things. First of all, exploiting the French maritime rules, which have meant up until this summer, that the French authorities just could not intervene in French waters. That's why we've seen these disgraceful scenes of the loading of people into small boats in shallow waters, and then the French police unable to intervene according to their rules. And that's why it's so important that, as part of this agreement with France, France is changing their maritime rules, and that will be starting later this summer. The second reason is we're seeing [a] big increase in the overcrowding of the boats, so far more people being crammed into the boats. That is why we are seeking to change the law. We have the new border security bill going through parliament at the moment, bringing in the new offence of endangerment, so that people who are getting on overcrowded boats who are frankly putting other people's lives at risks, can themselves be prosecuted for getting on these overcrowded boats. Because it's those two factors that are particularly driving this. By citing these two factors as the explanation, and stressing that the government is addressing them, Cooper was implying that the government will be able to reduce arrival numbers. The Conservatives claim that she is wrong because only a Rwanda-style deterrent policy would work. In an overnight press notice, the party descibed the UK-France deal as the 'migrant surrender treaty' (using Boris Johnson's inflammatory Brexit rhetoric) and Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said: Returning just 50 illegal immigrants a week, and probably less, will make no difference whatsoever. This amounts to just 6 per cent of illegal arrivals. Allowing 94% to stay in the UK will be no deterrent at all. This is a gimmick which won't work. The Rwanda removals deterrent, under which 100 per cent of illegal arrivals would be removed, was ready to go last summer but Labour cancelled it just days before it was due to start with no proper replacement plan. As a result, this year so far has been the worst ever for illegal immigrants crossing the channel. Only removing all illegal immigrants upon arrival will provide the necessary deterrent to stop the crossings. This is the Conservative plan, but Labour is too weak to implement it and as a result they have lost control of our borders. It's August, parliament is in recess, and there is almost nothing in the diary for today. This morning the Home Office will publish the text of the 'one in, one out' returns treaty with France. And Kemi Badenoch is doing a visit in her North West Essex constituency, where she will be restating the Tories' opposition to what they call Labour's 'family farm tax'. If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm at the moment), or message me on social media. I can't read all the messages BTL, but if you put 'Andrew' in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word. If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @ The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary. I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can't promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.