Note: This is a computer-generated transcription. If you find any error, please signal it to andrea.rota@ikos.uio.no
Andrea Rota: Hello everyone and welcome to the IKOS – Religion and Politics podcast. My name is Andrea Rota and our guest today on the podcast is Ricarda Stegmann. Ricarda is a lecturer in the study of religion at the University of Fribourg in Switzerland, where she returned after a two-year research leave as a Marie Curie Fellow at the University of Aarhus in Denmark. Ricarda’s work touches upon numerous aspects of contemporary Islam in a global perspective and extends back in history to the colonial and post-colonial periods. Her current research project deals with contemporary Sufi teaching across borders. Furthermore, Ricarda is also interested in theoretical approaches to the study of religion. Today we will have the opportunity to discuss with her the analytical perspective known as entangled history. And we will do so by drawing on a fascinating case study, namely the Grand Mosque at the heart of the French capital Paris. Ricarda, thank you for joining us on the podcast.
Ricarda Stegmann: Thank you for inviting me.
Andrea Rota: Before we enter into the more theoretical questions, can you paint for us a picture of the object of your research, the Grand Mosque of Paris? What does it look like today?
Ricarda Stegmann: Well, first of all, the Grand Mosque of Paris is much more than a mosque. It is situated in the Latin Quarter, which is one of the oldest neighborhoods in Paris where all the prestigious educational institutions are located. And it contains prayer halls, washing rooms, conference rooms, carefully designed gardens, a religious school, the Institut El Ghazali, which has the aim to train Imams. But it also includes a hammam, a big tea room, a restaurant, a shop. So, it is a touristic center. The restaurant, the hammam, the tea rooms are mainly visited by tourists. But it is also an important religious center, which presents itself as the representative for a traditional Maliki Islam. And as such, it welcomes several thousands of Muslims from all over France for Muslim holidays, for example. It welcomes many Muslims each week for Friday prayers and the Friday sermons. There is a big staff of Imams and religious teachers and also an administrative staff who organize public conferences on topics related to Islam. And there is also the Fatwa Council, where Muslims living in France can send in a question related to Islamic life in France. And then they get a response in what would be the correct religious behavior. And then last but not least, the Grand Mosque of Paris is also a very political space. So it’s a place where the Algerian state is very present, but also a place where French presidents and ministers to the present day regularly go to speak to the Muslim community in France.
Andrea Rota: It seems you are describing a very complex institution from the architectural and from the intellectual point of view. This configuration did not arise by chance and has a long history going back to the foundation of the Grand Mosque in the 1920s. What is the story behind the creation of this magnificent structure?
Ricarda Stegmann: Well, there’s an official narrative on the one hand. And this official narrative is that the Grand Mosque of Paris has been built in order to thank and in order to commemorate Muslim soldiers who fought for France as part of the French army during the First World War. And this is a narrative which is upheld to this day. This narrative refers to the Grand Mosque of Paris as a visible proof of French Muslim friendship that culminated in the joint defense of France during the World War I. But this is of course not the whole truth. Because first of all, the majority of Muslim soldiers who fought for France during the First World War did not do so voluntarily, but they were forced to do so. And then of course, if you look at the whole story, you can see that there have been some political reasons which led to the construction of this mosque. And the main reason is that there have been problems in the colonies and protectorates that began to increase during and after the First World War. So, you see at this time an increasing critique of colonies and of colonialism within France. But you also have growing independence movements in North Africa. And you have independence movements led by Algerians, Moroccans, which are based in Paris and which try to mobilize Muslim immigrants in France. And the French state was in great concern about all this. That is one point. And then another thing is that there has been a big competition with other powers like Germany, who already had mosques in their countries as well. Germany had built a mosque during the war. Great Britain already had built a mosque at the end of the 19th century. And they planned to build a big mosque in London, which they also opened in 1926. The Grand Mosque of Paris was also opened in 1926. And these other countries like Germany and Great Britain constructed themselves through this building of mosques as an Islamophile superpower. And so, France wanted to do that too. And you can say that in general at the time French politicians had a double strategy. They first wanted to implement a Muslim infrastructure, which is under their control. And second, they wanted to display France as an Islamophile colonial power. And the Grand Mosque of Paris did both. So, it was under French control. And it was meant to show the world and also to show the Muslims, look we protect you, we protect the beautiful oriental world, it belongs to France. And that’s why not just a mosque has been built, but this mosque has really been designed as an oriental city or as a Muslim city even. In a small space, but which contains everything that you find in a real oriental city, like a hammam and restaurant and shops, etc. So, the Grand Mosque of Paris is clearly a colonial project built to consolidate the colonial power. And meant to show a non-political, beautiful and easily controllable Islam, centered on prayer and folklore, but not on politics.
Andrea Rota: So, the Grand Mosque of Paris is now about 100 years old. How did the role of the Grand Mosque evolve throughout the 20th century?
Ricarda Stegmann Well, for a long time, the mosque remained under control of the French state, or of the very Francophile rector of the mosque, the first rector, Si Kaddour Benghabrit, a Nigerian who was elected by France and who cooperated with France. In 1954, after the beginning of the Algerian War of Independence, there was a successor, Ahmed Benghabrit, who became rector for two years, who allowed some Moroccan and Algerian activists to spread propaganda at the mosque against French colonialism, which is why he was replaced by another rector, Hamza Boubacar. So, the French tried to re-establish French control of the mosque. Hamza Boubacar was initially very loyal to France, but he was also a character who was searching for personal advantages. And so, at one point, from the late 1970s onwards, he began to negotiate with Algeria. Algeria, the Algerian state, promising him a number of benefits, such as a good salary, the return of properties that had been taken from him and his family in Algeria after the War of Independence. And in return, he changed the statutes of the association that manages the Grand Mosque of Paris, so that control passed to the Algerian state. That is, officially, the legal changes that he has done are not recognized by the French state, and they are still considered as unresolved today. But de facto, the Algerian state controls the Mosque of Paris since the 1980s and until the present day. Which means that Algeria is responsible for the biggest part of the finances, as the final say in the election of the rector. It decides on the study programs at the Imam Training Institute, the Institut El Ghazali, and on the staff there. They have, for example, replaced part of the staff some years ago. So, it is under Algerian control now.
Andrea Rota: So, the picture that you are painting of the Grand Mosque is one of an institution that has close relationships with the French Republic, as well as with the Algerian state. But what are its relationships with the Muslims living in France?
Ricarda Stegmann: Well, the relationship with Muslims living in France is ambivalent, I would say. On the one hand, the Grand Mosque of Paris is not and has never been representative. That means Muslims have not felt represented by the Grand Mosque. And there are several reasons for that. On the one hand, there were other organizations which were much more efficient in linking up with issues that Muslims in France were concerned with, answering questions like how it is possible to construct a Muslim identity in France. And also in organizing an educational offer, organizing the pilgrimage to Mecca, and other things. The Grand Mosque of Paris did not really help so much in organizing Islamic issues in France. And in addition to this, there is always this typical skepticism among many Muslims in France about mosques that are not independent, but that are administered by another state, and whose Imams are also sent by another state. But on the other hand, it has to be said that many Muslims in France turn nevertheless to the Grand Mosque of Paris. Mainly for advice also on religious questions, because they are unsecure nowadays, because there is a multitude of Islamic preachers, there are many Salafi positions. Many Muslims do have a lot of questions concerning Islamic normativity, so on how to live correctly as a Muslim in France, and which rules to follow. And then the Grand Mosque of Paris, despite its ties to the Algerian state, is considered to be one of those institutions whose scholars have a good education and provide answers which are according to the traditional orthodox Islam. And it is considered to be a place where one can be sure to not become a victim of so-called Salafi answers. So, it’s ambivalent, I would say.
Andrea Rota: Now, we have seen that this Grand Mosque of Paris is a kind of hub at the intersection of many actors, the French Republic, the Islamic State, the French Muslims. What does it mean to study these relationships following the approach of entangled history?
Ricarda Stegmann: This entangled history’s perspective means globalizing your perspectives, it means further de-essentializing conceptions and debates, and no longer understanding them as products of single geographical contexts, but as products of contacts that may have taken place outside Europe or inside Europe, that may have taken place with non-European actors or different European actors, as products of contacts that have produced lasting commonalities or also demarcations from each other, and thus have become entanglement. I mean, there are many studies on Islam in Europe, and many of them are really very, very interesting and helpful, but they implicitly ask this question about how do Muslim practices and convictions change when Muslims move to Europe. And that includes the question of how Islam adapts in Europe. And, of course, practices, forms of organizations and beliefs, etc. emerge in reaction to local structures and debates. But to speak of integration and adaptation also means to assume something typically European, or something typically German, French or English, to which one can adapt. And the entangled history approach focuses more on showing, look, practices or concepts, they don’t just adapt to something European, but they are products of contacts between various political religions and other actors from various parts of the world, so from contexts that can be very global. And that de-essentializes these conceptions and ideas.
Andrea Rota: This perspective is very interesting, but could you provide us a practical example how such an analysis works?
Ricarda Stegmann: So, let me take the example of moderate and radical Islam and the debates about moderate and radical Islam in Algeria and in France. France has experienced the first big national debates on the compatibility of Islam and French identity in 1989. And then some years later, in the early 1990s, there have been some terrorist attacks, which were carried out in France by Islamist terrorist groups. And then France experienced really this extremely mediatized debate about the danger of radical Islamism and also about the danger of radical Imams who incite young people in the banlieues to violence against the Republic. And then in the process, there was also the counter-image of a moderate Islam that has been created, an Islam that accepts the Republic and its constitution, its basic principles and values. It is religiously tolerant, it rejects violence, it rejects political forms of Islam. And there also has been this tendency among French politicians to say we must motivate Muslims to train moderate Imams in France, so that they form a counterweight to the influence of the radical Imams. And these moderate Islams, of course, should be religiously tolerant, reject violence and political forms of Islam, they should have a good education and a degree, etc. And then in the middle of these debates, we have Dalil Boubakeur, who is rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris from 1992, and who will appear in the political debates and in the media from the 1990s, and who will really reassure the French population and politicians by promising to offer precisely that Islam that the French Republic and society need and want. So, he really manages to be recognized, at least by the media and the public, as the representative of an integrated moderate Islam that is compatible with France. And he speaks about the Mosque of Paris and about Imams at the Mosque of Paris, who can guarantee that there is an Islam which rejects politicized forms of Islam, which is standing up for social justice and solidarity, which is tolerant, engaged in interreligious dialogue, which preaches peace and non-violence, respects the Republic and law, etc. And so one could say, yes, this is a true adaptation and reaction to the French context and its debates. The only problem is, this is not the whole truth. Because the rhetoric of Dalil Boubakeur, they correspond to French demands, yes, but they also correspond to Algerian demands and debates. So, one has to look at the Algerian context as well to understand this. And there we can see that during the 1980s, already before the debates take place in France, there are a lot of supporters of a re-Islamization of Algeria that are against the current regime of Algeria. And they became a threat to the Algerian state. And so, the Algerian Ministry of Religion increased its control over the mosques more and more, and propagated also that the state should train more Imams, which have a degree. And of course, they wanted to propagate their own Imams trained in Algeria State Islamic faculties. And then they also talked about sending these Imams to the problematic districts in order to prevent the politicization of the young people who live in poverty. Said that educating Imams is a good way to promote a moderate Islam, which is not political, which respects the values of the Algerian Republic and its constitution, which promotes tolerance towards other religions, which is peaceful, respects human rights, etc. So, you can see that Dalil Boubakeur’s rhetoric is not just a response to the French context, but also very much to the Algerian one. And one can say that contacts in the past between different French, Algerian, between religious and political actors have led to exchanges, to creative and sometimes also partial appropriation of strategies and conceptions. And these exchanges, this history of entanglement has produced these parallels in the debates. I mean, this is now too complex to reproduce it in a few sentences, but reform Islam has partly appropriated, not simply adopted, but selectively appropriated also French colonial programs for training Imams, for conceptualizing what an Imam is. And also some French positions were later also appropriated for the administration of Islam by the independent Algerian state. So, these contexts have produced commonalities, but also demarcations from each other. But what is important here, however, is that Boubakeur can play a tactical game and can use a rhetoric that satisfies and reassures the French Republic, but that also complies with the Algerian debates. It also connects to Algerian ways of doing and it finally serves Algerian interests also. And the fact that Dalil Boubakeur can do this is only possible because of this history of entanglements.
Andrea Rota: Boubacar resigned as the director of the Grand Mosque in 2020. What does this mean for the future of this institution and how can the perspective of entangled histories help us understand the next developments?
Ricarda Stegmann: Well, that’s a good question. The new rector, Chems-Eddine Hafiz, until now is not so different from Dalil Boubakeur. He also has the same political function to promote an Islam that is compatible with French values and with the French Republic. And he does so. He also speaks about the values of the French Republic, about liberty of expression, religious tolerance, laïcité, and tries to explain that Islam is perfectly compatible with the core values of the French Republic. So, he does a little bit the same thing. I think the important question is also how the role of the Grand Mosque of Paris within the administration of Islam in France will evolve. And here we can clearly see that its importance has declined. It is now one player among many others and it will be important to see how this will further evolve and what it has to do with the relations between Algeria and France as well. I don’t know how the debates and conceptions and practices will evolve in the future. But I think that as the world has not become less global in the past decades than it has been before, it is even more important to consider that conceptions, debates, political strategies, but also religious practices are not products of local context. But in order to really understand them, we have always to put them in a global perspective and ask how and by whom have they globally been negotiated.
Andrea Rota: Thank you very much, Ricarda, for helping us understand this fascinating theoretical perspective of entangled history and for your insights into the complex history of the Grand Mosque of Paris.
Ricarda Stegmann: Thank you.
This brings us to the conclusion of this episode of the podcast. You can read more about Ricarda’s research in her book Verflochtene Identitäten. Die große Moschee von Paris zwischen Algerien und Frankreich. Or if you prefer to read something in English, in the article mentioned in the notes to the podcast. Goodbye.