What impact have security and counter-terrorism policies On fieldwork?

Vincent Geisser - CNRS

 

Muslims in Europe, and more particularly in France, are subject to systematic surveillance procedures. For this reason, researchers and academics are sometimes viewed with suspicion. Some Muslim actors even perceive researchers as collaborators or informants of intelligence services.

In my fieldwork, I often observe that the relationship of trust between researchers and Muslim citizens has deteriorated. Facts are clear: it is increasingly difficult to develop social science research on Muslim citizens or leaders who perceive themselves as being hunted. This obstacle comes from the ambivalent attitude held by political and security institutions towards Muslims. Researchers specializing in Muslim mobilizations are sometimes perceived by the security authorities as sympathizers of the Islamist cause. It is common for social scientists to be accused of collusion and complicity with Muslim organizations. We are often accused of being “useful idiots” (idiots utiles in French) by the mainstream media. In the case of France, you have no doubt heard of the controversy around Islamo-leftism (islamo-gauchisme) at university. The Minister of Higher Education and neo-con intellectuals have accused some scholars and scholars of introducing and strengthening the influence of Islamism in the university. This national controversy over Islamo-leftism has reinforced the climate of suspicion towards Muslims but also towards researchers developing studies on Islam and Muslims in France.

Personally, I have been conducting sociological research on Islam and Muslims in France for 20 years. I will briefly try to report on the situations I have experienced since the terrorist attacks of 2015. These situations are very contrasted according to the social, political and religious status of Muslim citizens. T

 

1/ First situation: The acceptance of the survey = how Muslim actors use the researcher as a mediator and spokesman to express a uncomfortable feeling

 

In the post-terrorist context, some local and national Muslim leaders have perceived sociologists as a kind of mediator. I have identified this type of reaction of acceptance among the Muslim leaders of the older generation (the “blédards”, born and socialized in Arab countries). Generally, they were happy to welcome researchers to send a message to the political and security authorities. The content of this message is simple: Muslim organizations are against terrorism and denounce jihadist propaganda.

For this reason, I had no problem coordinating surveys and conducting semi-structured interviews with the leaders of the main Muslim organizations in France. They helped me in my research on the impacts of terrorism in Muslim communities. These Muslim leaders have themselves used researchers and scholars to publicize their own positions against terrorism and radical Islam.

 

2/ Second situation: the expression of "Muslim anger" against the political and security authorities

 

Without necessarily refusing surveys and sociological interviews, some Muslim leaders took the opportunity to express their civic anger against the public authorities. This reaction is particularly widespread among Muslim leaders born and socialized in France. They adopt a very critical discourse on the perverse effects of the anti-terrorist policy: "abusive searches" (perquisitions), repression of Muslim organizations, police filing of militants suspected of radicalism (files S), etc. Generally, these Muslim leaders of the new generation born in France denounce state Islamophobia. 

Personally, I did not experience any particular difficulties in interviewing these Muslim leaders born and socialized in France. Most of these leaders were familiar with my writings and my public statements against Islamophobia. On the other hand, I was able to observe a phenomenon of saturation. The Muslims of the new generations are developing a very critical view of certain academics whom they accuse of collaborating with the intelligence services. I have noted a phenomenon of general mistrust among French Muslims, more particularly among committed and militant Muslims. The blunders and excesses of the fight against terrorism provoke reflexes of self-protection.

 

3/ Third case: Refusal of survey and distrust reactions

 

The anti-terrorism context fosters a general climate of paranoia among Muslims. They develop a strong distrust of social scientists and academics. They have no confidence in sociological investigations which they suspect of being police investigations. Social scientists are increasingly assimilated to police officers or collaborators of the intelligence services.

The excesses of the fight against terrorism have created real trauma among ordinary Muslims. They refuse sociological surveys to protect themselves (self-protection reflex). They fear that their speeches will be communicated to the security authorities. This distrust is particularly present among ordinary Muslim citizens who develop a real post-attack trauma. They believe that French society has become totally Islamophobic and that their interviews with social scientists could turn against them.

Personally, I experienced no difficulty in my fieldwork on French Muslim organizations and activists. But I can observe a real post-attack trauma among many ordinary Muslims: the fear of being “double victims”: victims of terrorist attacks and of Islamophobia. However, in my opinion, the law on "Islamic separatism" (adopted by the French Parliament in August 2021) has reinforced these perverse effects. This anti-separatism law has caused a real criminalization and stigmatization of all Muslim activists and militants who are perceived by the public authorities as Islamists, fundamentalists and radicalized people.

This context of intense stigmatization and criminalization of Muslim activists and militants forces us to rethink our methods of sociological investigation and our approach to the themes of radicalization and deradicalization.

I'll quickly present some ideas to overcome some of these cases of mistrust:

-       We must better explain our sociological approaches to Muslim respondents: we must be transparent about our scientific objectives, our institutional affiliations and the funding of our scientific programs.

-       We must make a moral commitment to return our results to the Muslim actors who participated in our sociological surveys.

- We must continue to deconstruct the common theme of radicalization/de-radicalization, showing that these notions have no real sociological relevance. They constitute concepts imposed by the political, media and security discourse.

-       Finally, we must promote a critical discourse on all these security themes, by trying to deconstruct on a sociological level: radicalization, de-radicalization, separatism, communitarianism, etc. You have to write in scientific journals but also publish in the mainstream media.

Previous
Previous

How do you study the impact of surveillance in over-scrutinized fields?

Next
Next

Re-imagining stories of technology