Straw Unveiled

A visible statement of separation and of differenceIt began with Jack Straw’s comments that the veil was "a visible statement of separation and of difference" but then it descended into a government attack on British Muslims under the pretext of social cohesion. Straw’s comments were banal and bordering on imbecilic; of course it is a visible barrier – that is what a veil is - yet it is a barrier between Muslim and non-Muslims, it is a barrier between male and female, like other garments of clothes. It is a personal choice that affected him not in the least. In fact, wearing the veil could not be a more non-injurious to others. The claim that this is a barrier to social inclusion is pure sophistry; for most British Muslims, the tone of their skin is a veil. Discrimination, compounded by legal inequalities, is not limited to women, who wear the veil; it is a pervasive British Muslim experience.

Jack Straw has been feted for bring the debate to the forefront, yet is far from clear what this "debate". It cannot be the debate as to whether Muslim women ought to be allowed to observe the veil, since the government has categorically stated that it has no intention of introducing any proscriptive legislation in this regard. So what is this debate about?

The government voicing its disproval of the veil is not a debate, particularly when the government are committed to women having the choice whether they veil or not; it is nothing more, than a thinly veiled pretext for a staunchly anti-Islamic government, to yet again criticise the "British Muslim community". Whether a small minority of Muslim women choose to wear the face veil makes not a jot of difference to social cohesion and integration.