If the West condemns sharia in Iran, why not condemn it in Europe?

One of the most powerful images we have seen lately came just a couple of days ago from Iran. Allegedly in order to protest against the mandatory Islamic dress code, a female student stripped to her underwear in the University of Tehran. Of course, she was arrested and molested.

Footage of her protest made the news worldwide. And while what finally happened to her remains unknown for the moment, her act of defiance became an online sensation. Thousands of supportive posts, articles, statements and tweets flooded the timelines. Many of them, unfortunately, are highly hypocritical.

One of the most characteristic cases was that of Amnesty International. The organisation called for the immediate release of the arrested woman. But while it appears that this whole matter should be based on principles, there are double standards to be pointed out here.

If one is all for women’s freedom and emancipation,  if one supports true liberty of choice and expression for women all over the world, then this should not only apply to countries run by mullahs. The sharia is as evil and horrible in Iran, as it is in Europe. So if the sharia is to be condemned in Iran, it should surely not be allowed anywhere in Europe.

However, accusers of Iran’s theocratic regime do not always appear to be so sensitive when it comes to women’s rights in Western lands, where Muslim communities have started to form parallel societies, or where Islamist activists are calling for the enforcement of Islamic laws and the establishment of a caliphate.

Take Amnesty International for example. While it urged Tehran to release the arrested activist, it also promotes and facilitates by all means possible Muslim illegal immigration into Europe. Needless to say, Muslim illegal immigration goes hand in hand with the oppression of women and with animosity toward homosexuals.

At the same time, when conservatives voice concerns regarding the preservation of our European identity, saying that Islamist rules are not in accordance with traditional Western principles, civil society activists and NGOs, like Amnesty International, often label them as extremists or racists.

In a sense, this is very much reminiscent of the “Gays for Palestine” paradox. How can one be in favour of his oppressor? How can one stand for freedom, while supporting and defending those who wish to see freedom abolished? What kind of Stockholm Syndrome is this?

A burqa, a niqab, or even a hijab, can be as much a violation of both human and women’s rights in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, or Yemen, as it is in the UK, Germany, Finland, Greece, or Spain.

Oppression has nothing to do with geographical locations. What is brutal abuse in Tehran cannot be regarded as a human right in Athens. A woman who is forced to hide her face or head from the world and behave as a modern day slave is as miserable in the Molenbeek district of Brussels as she is in Peshawar.

Regrettably though, politicians and NGOs in Europe, especially those of a progressive and liberal outlook, are much more likely to react against what is going on somewhere in Asia than what is happening in a suburb just a few miles away from the administrative heart of the European Union.

Enough with this hypocrisy. If sensitive westerners really want to fight Islamic theocracy and its repressive barbarity, let them begin by confronting the mullahs next door.