Religious Minorities and the Promotion of Shared Human Values

The term “minorities” remains prevalent in contemporary social discourse, despite its negative connotations. It implicitly reinforces the notion of a dominant majority and suggests numerical inferiority, often associated with weakness and marginalisation. This perception, historically rooted in cultural narratives, has psychological and social implications. However, in today’s world, numerical representation is no longer a definitive measure of influence or impact. Many minority groups exert significant influence within their societies, sometimes surpassing that of larger demographic groups—particularly in pluralistic civil systems where equal rights are guaranteed regardless of religious or ethnic identity.

In the context of Arab societies, division is not an inherent social characteristic, nor is religion inherently a source of discord. Most social and political fragmentation can be traced to broader political and economic challenges, both internal and external. Unfortunately, the issue of minority rights is often politicized, with some attributing the marginalization of religious minorities in the Arab world to Islamic teachings—a claim that gained traction after violent conflicts in Iraq and Syria and the rise of religious militant groups.

While it is necessary to acknowledge existing tensions among religious and sectarian groups in the Arab world, such differences must not be used to justify internal strife or external interference. Moreover, it is essential to recognize the interconnectedness of religious and sectarian minority issues, as well as the inseparability of religious freedoms from broader political freedoms. Both are fundamental components of human rights.

National belonging should not be determined by numbers or geography, but by the degree of commitment and loyalty individuals show to their country. This principle is reflected in the Prophet Muhammad’s statement regarding Mecca: “How noble and beloved you are to me. If my people had not expelled me from you, I would never have lived elsewhere.”

Recognizing the specific nature of religious minorities linked to distinct ethnic or national groups is also essential—such as Muslim communities in Russia, China, the Philippines, and Thailand. Regarding Muslim minorities in Europe, the terminology used—such as “communities” or “immigrant groups”—must be revisited, as it often implies foreignness or detachment. Muslims are integral members of Western societies, not external elements.

The successful integration of minorities depends largely on the justice, equality, and social cohesion fostered by the state. Integration is a national and humanitarian imperative. However, it must not entail the erasure of cultural or religious identity. Societies that embrace diversity are best positioned to thrive. While it is legitimate for Muslim minorities to demand equal rights, they must also fulfil their responsibilities and contribute positively to the social and economic fabric of their societies.

One of the major challenges facing Muslim minorities in Europe is the transference of political and social issues from their countries of origin, which often influences their relationships and status in their new homelands—illustrated by the experience of French Muslims, among others.

Religious minorities must understand that their faith should not isolate them from their broader society, nor hinder their pursuit of a better future. Being a minority in a stable, prosperous nation often offers more dignity and opportunity than being part of a majority in a fragile or unjust state.

Claims that religious identity must supersede national or civic identity reflect a problematic understanding of both concepts. The phrase “A Muslim’s nationality is his faith” is particularly contentious and requires critical analysis. A universal, inclusive faith does not contradict loyalty to one’s homeland. In fact, the Islamic worldview affirms a broad and inclusive relationship with the world, which stands in contrast to exclusivist ideologies that link religious identity to a singular, sacred geography.

Classical Islamic jurisprudence has historically provided frameworks for coexistence, such as the concept of Ahl al-Dhimma, which offered protection in exchange for taxation. However, these frameworks no longer align with modern principles of citizenship, pluralism, and human rights. Therefore, traditional legal opinions that discourage Muslims from residing in non-Muslim-majority lands—labelling them as Dar al-Kufr—must be revisited and re-evaluated.

Defending persecuted and marginalized minorities is a moral and universal obligation—whether they are Muslim minorities in non-Muslim contexts or non-Muslim minorities in Muslim-majority societies. This includes upholding their rights to build places of worship, freely practice their faith, and access independent religious legal systems. Traditional jurisprudential views that prohibit non-Muslims from building places of worship in Muslim-majority countries—while simultaneously advocating for mosque construction in non-Muslim societies—reflect a double standard that undermines credibility and justice.

A new ethical foundation must be established to guide interactions with both religious and non-religious minorities. Societies should be measured by the degree to which they uphold justice, inclusion, and human dignity. It is imperative that we build a shared human identity that honours individual rights, religious freedom, and cultural uniqueness. Success in this endeavor allows for the flourishing of complementary and cooperative sub-identities.

Historically, Arab societies have demonstrated a capacity for religious and ethnic pluralism, hosting diverse communities—Muslims, Christians, Jews, Sabians, Sunnis, Shiites, Druze, and Alawites—within a relatively harmonious social fabric. Major disruptions emerged only with the advent of modern colonialism, which manipulated demographic and political realities to deepen divisions.

Colonial powers actively exploited minority grievances as points of vulnerability—such as their manipulation of the Sikh minority in India. Even in the post-colonial era, major powers continue to assert influence through instruments like religious freedom reports, which often serve as political tools under the guise of human rights advocacy.

Framing Western civilization as exclusively “Judeo-Christian” marginalizes the contributions of other cultural and religious groups—particularly Muslims, who now number over 45 million in Europe and constitute the second-largest religious group after Christians. Despite the significant intellectual and scientific contributions of Islamic civilization to the modern West—widely acknowledged by scholars—many Western institutions continue to deny or overlook these historical realities.

In conclusion, human rights must not be conditional upon religious or ethnic identity. Every person is entitled to dignity and freedom simply by virtue of being human. The true measure of any society lies in its ability to uphold and activate shared human values that transcend religious, cultural, and ethnic boundaries.