The Woman, Life, Freedom movement in Iran, which arose after the tragic death of Mahsa Amini in 2022, has highlighted a key tension in global human rights discussions: the fear of Islamophobia is hindering vital dialogue on the systemic oppression of women and LGBTQ+ individuals in Islamic societies.
As women in Iran protest the state-enforced hijab and broader systems of gender apartheid, many activists have noted that their voices are being silenced on international platforms out of fear that critiques of these practices might be perceived as Islamophobic. Despite the clear violations of human rights, many international platforms have hesitated to fully support Iranian women, fearing accusations of Islamophobia. Critics argue that by framing this fight for autonomy as an attack on Islam, the regime and its allies — both within and outside of Iran — use ‘Islamophobia’ as a weapon to silence opposition (Amnesty International, 2023).
Islamophobia vs. Legitimate Critique
Many media outlets and activists have shied away from engaging deeply with the movement, fearing accusations of religious or cultural insensitivity. As Yasmine Mohammed argues in Unveiled, this avoidance can make Western liberals complicit in the oppression of women in Islamic societies by failing to challenge authoritarian practices that violate human rights (Mohammed, 2019).
Islamo-Trauma: The Unheard Struggles
Mohammed’s concept of “Islamo-trauma” highlights the emotional and psychological toll endured by women and marginalized groups under oppressive regimes. This trauma, caused by laws that control freedom of dress and expression, is often ignored due to fears of appearing anti-Islamic. Similarly, Ayaan Hirsi Ali discusses the trauma caused by strict Islamic laws, from forced marriage to female genital mutilation (Ali, 2006). Both activists emphasize that combating Islamophobia must not come at the expense of addressing real human rights abuses.
Weaponizing Islamophobia to Silence Dissent
A critical question emerges: who is perpetuating the conflation of legitimate human rights critique with Islamophobia? Evidence suggests that regimes like Iran weaponize Islamophobia to deflect international criticism and suppress dissent. By framing opposition to gender apartheid and religious oppression as Islamophobic, these regimes protect their interests while stifling voices calling for reform (Iran Human Rights Documentation Center, 2023).
Islamophobia and Counter-Narratives
Iranian leaders frequently argue that Islamophobia is a Western tool designed to marginalize Muslims and undermine Islamic governance. This rhetoric is used not only to rally domestic support but also to appeal to global Muslim audiences and Western critics of discrimination. By framing international critiques as part of a broader effort to delegitimize Islamic identity, Iranian officials shift attention away from internal human rights abuses, presenting themselves as defenders of Islamic values (Armanios & Karim, 2021; Moghaddam, 2020).
Western Platforms and Narratives
Iran has strategically leveraged Western media and academic platforms to reinforce its narrative, often framing criticisms of its policies as rooted in Western Islamophobia. Figures like Javad Zarif, Iran’s former foreign minister, have played a pivotal role in this strategy. Zarif frequently linked Western critiques of Iran to Islamophobic attitudes, using this framing to portray Iran as a victim of Western imperialism. In international forums and media appearances, he characterized U.S. sanctions and foreign policy as part of a broader, Islamophobic attack on Islamic governance. This approach helped to build alliances with Western intellectuals and critics of Islamophobia, effectively deflecting attention away from Iran’s internal human rights abuses (Khazaei, 2022; Sadeghi, 2021).
Evidence indicates that the Iranian regime has successfully utilized the concept of Islamophobia in Western media discourse to shield itself from criticism. Through outlets like Press TV and sympathetic figures in both academia and Western media, the regime has consistently framed opposition to policies — such as the compulsory hijab and crackdowns on protests — as products of Western Islamophobia. According to Khazaei (2022), Iranian state media portrays criticisms of Iran’s gender policies and religious laws as part of a broader effort by the West to undermine Islamic culture and governance.
Examples of Journalists and Commentators Perpetuating the Narrative
Seyed Hossein Mousavian, a former Iranian diplomat now teaching at Princeton University, has been accused of using his platform in Western media to downplay human rights abuses in Iran. His narratives often align with Tehran’s, framing criticisms of compulsory hijab and gender segregation as stemming from Western hostility and Islamophobia, rather than legitimate concerns about human rights violations (Moghaddam, 2020).
Similarly, Negar Mortazavi, an Iranian-American journalist, has employed the Islamophobia narrative to counter voices protesting compulsory hijab. She has framed opposition to such policies as being influenced by Western biases, which minimizes the genuine struggles of Iranian dissidents, particularly women (DW, 2023).
Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the anti-war group Code Pink, has also been criticized for defending Iran’s human rights record by framing Western critiques as Islamophobic. In one interview, she remarked: “The West’s portrayal of Iran’s human rights abuses is often rooted in Islamophobia, where Islamic practices are misrepresented to serve a Western political agenda” (Sadeghi, 2021). This framing minimizes the repression of women and dissidents, suggesting that opposition is driven by cultural misunderstanding rather than legitimate human rights concerns.
Trita Parsi, founder of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), has used Western platforms to defend Iran by attributing critiques of its domestic policies to Western Islamophobia. In one of his speeches, he argued: “Many of the Western criticisms of Iran are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of Islamic governance and are colored by Islamophobic prejudices” (Moghaddam, 2020). This narrative shifts attention away from Iran’s internal repression, focusing instead on perceived Western hostility.
Hamid Dabashi, a professor at Columbia University, has frequently critiqued Western narratives about human rights in Iran, framing them as Islamophobic and neocolonial. He asserted: “Western narratives of human rights abuses in Iran are often thinly veiled forms of Islamophobia, designed to undermine the legitimacy of Islamic governance” (Dabashi, 2020). By framing the conversation within an anti-colonial context, Dabashi effectively deflects attention from the regime’s repressive practices.
Conclusion
The Iranian regime’s manipulation of rhetoric, particularly through the lens of Islamophobia, reveals a sophisticated strategy designed not only to deflect criticism but to sway some of the most influential elites in Western governments. By employing human rights-related key phrases and buzzwords that resonate with progressive, left-leaning audiences, the regime positions itself as a victim of Western imperialism rather than an oppressor. This tactic has proven especially effective in appealing to Western intellectuals and policymakers, who prioritize anti-discrimination and cultural sensitivity, thus turning potential critics into inadvertent allies.
The brilliance of this approach lies in the regime’s ability to reframe discussions of its own human rights violations in a way that resonates with the very values of its critics. This strategy has gained considerable traction, particularly within independent Western media, in the aftermath of October 7, as Israel’s relentless retaliation in Gaza has intensified. By tapping into the rising wave of anti-imperialist sentiment, the regime has successfully aligned itself with those sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, positioning itself as a champion of resistance against Western hegemony. However, that is a topic deserving of its own deeper exploration.
In this war of narratives, where perception is key, even well-intentioned actors may find themselves inadvertently supporting an authoritarian regime. It falls to discerning minds and critical observers to recognize when rhetoric is being artfully wielded to mask oppressive practices. Only through thoughtful scrutiny and intellectual vigilance can one avoid becoming a mere pawn in the sophisticated game of ideological manipulation and deflection.
References
Ali, A. H. (2006). Infidel: My life. Free Press.
Amnesty International. (2023). Iran: International community must stand with women and girls defying compulsory veiling.
Armanios, F., & Karim, S. (2021). Islam: A worldwide encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO.
Dabashi, H. (2020). Post-orientalism: Knowledge and power in a time of terror. Routledge.
DW. (2023). Interview with Negar Mortazavi. Deutsche Welle.
Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. (2023). Crackdown in the North: Suppression of the Woman, Life, Freedom Movement in Gilan and Mazandaran Provinces.
Khazaei, B. (2022). Media framing of protests in Iran: Islamophobia as a narrative tool. Iranian Studies Journal, 53(4), 678–698.
Moghaddam, A. (2020). Islamic political systems and human rights. Cambridge University Press.
Mohammed, Y. (2019). Unveiled: How Western liberals empower radical Islam. Free Hearts Free Minds.
Sadeghi, N. (2021). Weaponizing Islamophobia: How Iran uses Western discourse to stifle dissent. Middle East Quarterly, 28(2), 98–115.
Comentarios