Camilla Portinaro*
On 15 March, the international community observes the International Day to Combat Islamophobia, a date designated by the United Nations General Assembly in Resolution 76/254 to promote a global culture of tolerance, dignity, and peace. The date is also deeply symbolic: it marks the anniversary of the Christchurch Mosque shootings, a horrific act of violence that shocked the world and exposed the lethal consequences of dehumanising rhetoric and far-right extremism. While the attack triggered widespread condemnation and renewed conversations about hate crimes, it also revealed a broader and more uncomfortable reality. Anti-Muslim hostility did not begin with Christchurch, nor did it disappear after the tragedy. In fact, the years following the 9/11 attacks have seen suspicion toward Muslims intensify across many parts of the world. According to UN experts, discrimination against Muslims has reached “epidemic proportions”.
In Europe, these dynamics have gradually moved from the margins into the mainstream. Islamophobic narratives are no longer limited to extremist groups but increasingly appear in public discourse, political debates, and policy discussions (see here, here and here). For the estimated 25.8 million Muslims living in Europe, the ability to fully exercise fundamental rights is often overshadowed by a climate of securitisation, suspicion, and social exclusion. Against this backdrop, reflecting on 15 March is not only about remembering past tragedies. It is also an opportunity to examine how Islamophobia has evolved into a structural challenge affecting migration debates, integration policies, and the protection of fundamental rights across Europe.
Understanding this issue begins with clarifying what Islamophobia actually means. The term is often used to describe individual prejudice or hostility toward Islam. However, many scholars and human rights organisations argue that the phenomenon is far broader. Islamophobia can be understood as a form of racism, often referred to as anti-Muslim racism, that targets expressions of “Muslimness” or even perceived Muslim identity. This means discrimination does not only affect practicing Muslims. Individuals who are assumed to be Muslim based on their name, appearance, clothing, or cultural background can also become targets. In this sense, Islamophobia operates through the racialisation of religion: religious identity becomes associated with fixed cultural or physical characteristics that are treated as markers of difference or inferiority.
Such perceptions are reinforced through processes of “Othering,” in which Muslims are portrayed as fundamentally incompatible with Western societies. In public discourse, Muslims are often depicted as a homogeneous group characterised by violence, extremism, or resistance to democratic values. Over time, these narratives produce symbolic hierarchies in which Islamic identities are framed as alien or threatening. Importantly, these stereotypes intersect with broader debates about migration. In many European contexts, the word “Muslim” is frequently associated with terms such as “migrant,” “refugee,” or “security threat.” As a result, Islamophobia does not simply target religion; it also shapes how migrants and asylum seekers from Muslim-majority countries are perceived and treated.
To understand why these perceptions remain so persistent, it is necessary to look at the historical context. The relationship between Europe and Muslim societies has long been shaped by colonial encounters and Orientalist representations that depicted the “East” as irrational, primitive, or inherently violent. These narratives helped justify colonial domination while simultaneously constructing Europe as modern and superior. After the Second World War, migration policies in several European countries changed significantly. Nations such as France, Germany, and the United Kingdom recruited foreign labour to support economic reconstruction. Many migrants from North Africa, Turkey, and South Asia arrived through “guest worker” programmes, which were originally intended to be temporary. Yet many of these workers eventually settled permanently, forming communities and raising families in Europe. As these communities grew, however, the perception of migrants began to shift. What had initially been framed as temporary labour migration was increasingly portrayed as a long-term cultural challenge. Muslims were often cast as “permanent outsiders,” even when they had lived in Europe for generations.
The attacks of 9/11 intensified these dynamics dramatically. Security concerns reshaped migration and integration debates across Europe, reinforcing the image of the “Islamic terrorist enemy” as a threat both abroad and within national borders. Later events, such as the so-called 2015 refugee crisis, further fuelled these anxieties. Even though many people arriving in Europe were fleeing conflict zones like Syria and Afghanistan, political rhetoric often framed the situation as a “Muslim invasion.” These narratives have had tangible consequences for everyday life. Recent data from the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) illustrates the scale of discrimination faced by Muslims across the European Union. According to its 2024 report, nearly one in two Muslims (47%) report experiencing discrimination in their daily lives, a significant increase from 39% in 2016.
Discrimination occurs across multiple spheres of life. Muslims report unequal treatment in schools, workplaces, housing markets, and public services. What is particularly concerning is the extent to which such behaviour has become normalised. Many victims report that discriminatory incidents are dismissed as minor or unavoidable. Even more troubling is the scale of underreporting. The FRA estimates that 94% of anti-Muslim incidents go unreported to authorities. For many victims, this reflects a lack of trust in institutions and a belief that reporting discrimination would not lead to meaningful change. One area where these structural inequalities become especially visible is the labour market. Because access to employment is a crucial factor in successful integration, these barriers often lead to broader social exclusion. Yet, Muslims continue to face significant hindrances when seeking work. Research consistently shows that applicants with “Arabic-sounding” names receive fewer callbacks than those with local-sounding names, even when qualifications are identical. In many cases, these candidates must send three times as many job applications to secure an interview. For Muslim women who wear religious attire, the obstacles can be even greater. Many face what the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief (Ahmed Shaheed) has described as a “triple penalty” based on gender, ethnicity, and religion. Surveys indicate that 35% of Muslim women believe they were denied employment opportunities because of their clothing. Such discrimination often forces individuals to choose between professional opportunities and their religious identity, undermining the promise that education and hard work should lead to equal opportunities.
Media and political narratives also play an important role in shaping public attitudes. Scholars increasingly refer to an “Islamophobia industry” composed of far-right organisations, certain media outlets, and political actors who actively promote anti-Muslim narratives. In news coverage, the words “Muslim” and “Islam” frequently appear alongside terms such as “terrorism,” “radicalisation,” or “extremism.” Over time, these associations reinforce the idea that Muslims represent a threat to European societies. Political discourse often amplifies these fears. Conspiracy theories such as the “Great Replacement” portray Muslim migrants as a demographic force seeking to replace European populations. Right-wing populist parties have used such narratives to mobilise voters by framing politics as a cultural battle between “native Europeans” and Muslim communities.
Another arena where these tensions become visible is the debate over religious symbols. Across Europe, policies regulating religious expression are often justified in the name of secularism or institutional neutrality. France provides one of the most prominent examples through its strict interpretation of laicity (laïcité), which has led to bans on religious symbols in schools and certain public spaces. Similar debates have reached the European legal level. The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled in cases such as Achbita and WABE that workplace bans on visible religious symbols can be lawful under neutrality policies. Critics argue that such rulings disproportionately affect Muslim women, who are more likely to wear visible religious attire. In practice, these policies can push individuals out of certain professions or discourage them from participating fully in public life (see here).
The shrinking civic space for Muslim advocacy organisations further illustrates these challenges. In 2020, the French government ordered the dissolution of the Collective Against Islamophobia in France (CCIF), a civil society organisation that had long documented anti-Muslim discrimination and provided legal support to victims. Authorities justified the decision under a broad framework of “fighting separatism,” yet critics pointed out that no concrete evidence of imminent danger was presented. The closure had a chilling effect on civil society and left thousands without access to legal assistance. The CCIF case is part of a wider trend across Europe where Muslim civil society organisations are increasingly securitised and stigmatised. CSOs are frequently falsely labelled as “Islamists” or linked to political extremism, which is used to justify cutting their funding, increasing surveillance, or ordering their dissolution.
Why, then, does Islamophobia persist despite growing awareness? One reason is that many institutions continue to approach Muslim communities primarily through a security lens rather than a human rights perspective. Counter-terrorism policies, while addressing legitimate concerns, have sometimes reinforced the perception that Muslims represent a collective risk (see here and here). At the same time, the very concept of Islamophobia remains contested in political debates. Some commentators argue that the term might stifle free speech or protect religion from legitimate critique, while others emphasise that acknowledging anti-Muslim racism is necessary for protecting fundamental rights. The absence of a widely accepted definition can create legal gaps, allowing hate crimes to be recorded as general offences rather than acts of targeted discrimination.
Despite these challenges, there are also encouraging developments. The EU Anti-Racism Action Plan 2020–2025, adopted by the European Commission, explicitly recognises anti-Muslim hatred as a form of racism that requires targeted policy responses. The Commission has also appointed a Coordinator on combating anti-Muslim hatred to strengthen cooperation with civil society organisations. Local initiatives are also emerging. For example, the Barcelona Municipal Plan to Fight Against Islamophobia includes public awareness campaigns, education programmes, and legal support for victims of discrimination. Civil society organisations such as Tell MAMA in the United Kingdom and the Documentation Centre for Anti-Muslim Racism in Austria continue to document hate incidents and advocate for stronger protections.
Ultimately, addressing Islamophobia is not only about protecting Muslim communities, it is about strengthening democratic societies. Integration should not require individuals to erase their religious identity. Instead, it should enable diverse communities to coexist within a framework of equal rights and mutual respect. As we mark the 15th of March, the International Day to Combat Islamophobia reminds us that the fight against discrimination requires more than symbolic gestures. Combating anti-Muslim racism means challenging harmful narratives, improving data collection on hate crimes, and ensuring that civil society organisations can continue their work without intimidation. Only through sustained effort can Europe move toward a future in which migration is not criminalised, religious identity is not treated as a threat, and diversity is recognised as a strength rather than a problem.
*Positionality: the author of this blog post does not have lived experience of islamophobia.
BIBLIOGRAPHY/REFERENCES
Abbas, T., Tamimova, M., Wabnitz, P. K., Trebeschi, I., ‘From symbolic violence to structural exclusion: The multidimensional nature of Islamophobia in Europe’ (2026) 110 International Journal of Intercultural Relations. https://research.aston.ac.uk/en/publications/from-symbolic-violence-to-structural-exclusion-the-multidimension/
Alizai, H., ‘European Approaches to Stopping Islamophobia are Inadequate’ (2023) 18(1) Journal of Hate Studies 63. https://repository.gonzaga.edu/jhs/vol18/iss1/6/
Amnesty International, ‘Regional overview of islamophobia in Europe: Submission to the CoE PACE Committee on Equality and Non-discrimination’ (21 September 2022). https://www.amnesty.eu/news/regional-overview-of-islamophobia-in-europe-a-submission-to-the-council-of-europe-pace-committee-on-equality-and-non-discrimination/
Arzheimer, K., ‘Islamophobia in Western Europe is unrelated to religiosity but highly correlated with far right attitudes’ (2025) 12(3) Research & Politics. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20531680251351895
Azeez, I.A.A. and Jimoh, A.A., ‘The Impact of Islamophobia on Society, Attitudes, Policies and The Youths’ (2023) 3(7) Eduvest-Journal of Universal Studies 1322. https://eduvest.greenvest.co.id/index.php/edv/article/view/873
Davies, G.T., ‘Can Prejudice Justify Discrimination? The Case of Religion in EU Law’ (2026) The Case of Religion in EU Law. Effective Judicial Protection in EU Equality Law. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6335979
ECRI, ‘Revised General Policy Recommendation No. 5’ (8 December 2021). https://www.coe.int/en/web/european-commission-against-racism-and-intolerance/recommendation-no.5
European Commission COM(2020) 565 final, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A Union of equality: EU anti-racism action plan 2020-2025 (18 September 2020) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0565
European Commission, ‘Combating anti-Muslim hatred’, https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/combatting-discrimination/racism-and-xenophobia/combating-anti-muslim-hatred_en
European Commission: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, ‘The legal framework to combat anti-Muslim hate in the European Union’, Publications Office of the European Union (2024). https://op.europa.eu/fr/publication-detail/-/publication/b5006e58-d15e-11ef-be2a-01aa75ed71a1
FRA (Fundamental Rights Agency), ‘Being Muslims in the EU – Experiences of Muslims’ (2024). https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2024-being-muslim-in-the-eu_en.pdf
Goraya, N.S., ‘Exploring Connections between the Threat of Islamophobia & Global Immigration’ (2025) 3(4) Social Science Review Archives 4004. https://policyjournalofms.com/index.php/6/article/view/1517
Henrard, K., ‘The ECtHR, the CJEU, and the Protection of Religious Minorities: A Mixed Scorecard’ (2025) Freedom of Religion, Minority Rights and the Law 19. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/reader/read-online/8b096e76-908d-4468-9315-dd3fea389806/chapter/pdf?context=ubx
OSCE, ‘Understanding Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes – Addressing the Security Needs of Muslim Communities: A Practical Guide’ (15 May 2020). https://odihr.osce.org/sites/default/files/f/documents/9/0/448696.pdf
Oztig, L.I., ‘Islamophobic discourse of European right-wing parties: A narrative policy analysis’ (2023) 10(3) Social Currents 225. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366642909_Islamophobic_Discourse_of_European_Right-Wing_Parties_A_Narrative_Policy_Analysis
Pradana, M.Y.A., ‘Migration, Islamophobia, and Politics: A Study of the Changing Religious Landscape in Europe’ (2025) Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 79. https://www.thenewjsri.ro/index.php/njsri/article/view/795/143
UNGA (United Nations General Assembly) Resolution, International Day to Combat Islamophobia (15 March 2022), UN Doc A/RES/76/254 https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/76/254
UNGA, Res 78/264, Measures to combat Islamophobia (21 March 2024), UN Doc A/RES/78/264. https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/78/264
UNGA Res 46/30, Countering Islamophobia/anti-Muslim hatred to eliminate discrimination and intolerance based on religion or belief – Report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief (13 April 2021) UN Doc A/HRC/46/30. https://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/46/30
Yilmaz, Ö. NS Kímya, ‘The construction of the Other: xenophobia and islamophobia’ in Ars. Gor. Dr. Mehmet Emin Güven (eds), International compilation of research and studies of science, international relations and public administration (2025) (https://www.seruvenyayinevi.com/Webkontrol/uploads/Fck/politicalaralik2025_3.pdf#page=37
Case law
Samira Achbita and Centrum voor gelijkheid van kansen en voor racismebestrijding v G4S Secure Solutions NV, Case C-157/15, ECLI:EU:C:2017:203, 14 March 2017.
IX v WABE eV and MH Müller Handels GmbH v MJ, Joined cases C-804/18 and C-341/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:594, 15 July 2021.
