Banning the Burkini

In the past week, French beaches have taken steps to ban the burkini—a full-body swimsuit invented by an Australian Muslim woman who wanted to make it easier for her devout female coreligionists to bathe publicly. Supporters of the ban—including both right-wing politicians and the socialist prime minister Manuel Valls—claim that it is a wise response to the wave of terrorist attacks in their country. Nervana Mahmoud, who was not allowed by her family to swim in her native Egypt, disagrees, with reservations:

As a liberal woman, I have no problem with the burkini because I believe in freedom of choice, but as a Muslim woman, I find the burkini problematic for two reasons.

First, it symbolizes a perception that women who cover up within the Muslim world are superior to those who do not. . . . Second, many Islamists advocate total segregation [of the sexes], and are not content with the burkini. One might presume that once Muslim women agree to cover up fully, the [conservatives] will finally leave them alone. But the opposite is true. The more women give in and cover up, the higher [extremists] will raise the stakes. . . .

It may surprise many, but the harassment of women on public beaches, which is prevalent in Muslim countries, is almost negligible in Western countries, despite the revealing swimming costumes many women wear. Even in Egypt, the harassment of non-burkini- wearing women is much less [common] in upmarket beach resorts. . . .

The debate on the ban of the burkini in France is yet another example that the troubles of the Middle East do not remain in the Middle East.

Read more at Nervana

More about: European Islam, France, Islam, Islamism, Liberalism, Modesty, Religion & Holidays

What a Strategic Victory in Gaza Can and Can’t Achieve

On Tuesday, the Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant met in Washington with Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. Gallant says that he told the former that only “a decisive victory will bring this war to an end.” Shay Shabtai tries to outline what exactly this would entail, arguing that the IDF can and must attain a “strategic” victory, as opposed to merely a tactical or operational one. Yet even after a such a victory Israelis can’t expect to start beating their rifles into plowshares:

Strategic victory is the removal of the enemy’s ability to pose a military threat in the operational arena for many years to come. . . . This means the Israeli military will continue to fight guerrilla and terrorist operatives in the Strip alongside extensive activity by a local civilian government with an effective police force and international and regional economic and civil backing. This should lead in the coming years to the stabilization of the Gaza Strip without Hamas control over it.

In such a scenario, it will be possible to ensure relative quiet for a decade or more. However, it will not be possible to ensure quiet beyond that, since the absence of a fundamental change in the situation on the ground is likely to lead to a long-term erosion of security quiet and the re-creation of challenges to Israel. This is what happened in the West Bank after a decade of relative quiet, and in relatively stable Iraq after the withdrawal of the United States at the end of 2011.

Read more at BESA Center

More about: Gaza War 2023, Hamas, IDF