Jews and Muslims in London and Amsterdam

Front matter

CONFLICT AND COOPERATION, 1990—2020

This book focuses on the development of bilateral Jewish-Muslim relations in London and Amsterdam since the late-1980s. It offers a comparative analysis that considers both similarities and differences, drawing on historical, social scientific, and religious studies perspectives. The authors address how Jewish- Muslim relations are related to the historical and contemporary context in which they are embedded, the social identity strategies Jews and Muslims and their institutions employ, and their perceived mutual positions in terms of identity and power. The first section reflects on the history and current profile of Jewish and Muslim communities in London and Amsterdam and the development of relations between Jews and Muslims in both cities. The second section engages with sources of conflict and cooperation. Four specific areas that cause tension are explored: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; antisemitism and Islamophobia; attacks by extremists; and the commemoration of wars and genocides. In addition to ‘trigger events’, what stands out is the influence of historical factors, public opinion, the ‘mainstream’ Christian churches and the media, along with the role of government. The volume will be of interest to scholars from fields including religious studies, interfaith studies, Jewish studies, Islamic studies, urban studies, European studies, and social sciences as well as members of the communities concerned, other religious communities, journalists, politicians, and teachers who are interested in Jewish-Muslim relations.

Sipco J. Vellenga is Associate Professor (Emeritus) in Sociology of Religion in the Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies at the University of Groningen, the Netherlands.

Introduction

PART I Framework, Background, and Subject 1 Theoretical Approach 2 Historical Roots 3 Jews and Muslims in London and Amsterdam

PART II Sources of Conflict and Cooperation 5 The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict 6 Antisemitism and Islamophobia 7 Attacks on Jewish and Muslim Targets 8 War Commemorations

XI

PART III Appendices Index

307 309 361

380 385

Preface

This book is a comparative study of contemporary relations between Jews and Muslims in London and Amsterdam. These relationships are affected by many sensitive issues such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, antisemitism in Muslim circles, and Islamophobia in Jewish circles. As well as being sensitive issues between Jews and Muslims, widely divergent views on these topics are held within Jewish and Muslim circles, prompting much debate. There is also much that unites Jews and Muslims such as similar ritual customs and a long history of living together in the Middle East and parts of Europe. In this study, the fragility of contemporary Jewish-Muslim relations is linked partly to the vulnerable positions experienced by Jews and Muslims as minority groups. Within the Jewish community, memories of the Second World War and a history of exclusion, persecution, violence, and murder are never far away. This makes many Jews cautious about entering into contact with groups they do not know well and/or which they suspect of being antisemitic. In Western European countries, Muslims are still a relatively young minority seeking an established place in society and encountering a great deal of social resistance in the process. This also makes many Muslims cautious about entering into contact with groups in which they suspect attitudes of rejection.

This study is part of the Dutch Research Council (NWO)-funded project Delicate Relations. Jews and Muslims in Amsterdam and London, which was launched in 2014. This research project was conducted by a team consisting of the present authors and project leaders and PhD students Suzanne Roggeveen and Susanne van Esdonk. Prof Judith Frishman (professor emeritus of Jewish Studies at Leiden University) also contributed to the team’s work.

The project consisted of two phases: in the first phase, between 2014 and 2019, Suzanne Roggeveen and Susanne van Esdonk conducted research on Jewish-Muslim relations in Amsterdam and London, respectively, which they both completed with a dissertation in 2020. In this phase, both project leaders started the research for the present study. Several joint publications were published in this context. In these years, the project team was supported by a number of student assistants who were involved in a lot x Preface of the preparations, conducted interviews for the team, and helped organise public meetings and conferences. Specifically, we mention Jon Barry, who kept us informed about developments in London, and also Sakina Loukili, Shannon Witlox, and Emma Post. We are very grateful to each of them for their commitment and enthusiasm.

During the 2014-2019 period, the project had a user group that served as a sounding board and provided us with valuable advice. The user group consisted mainly of representatives of social institutions, namely: Prof Paul Abels and Menno Donia (National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism, NCTV), Ilona Votel (Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment), Pieter Jan van Slooten and Frederique Windhorst (City of Amsterdam), Michael Minco (Central Jewish Consultative Committee, CJO), and Rasit Bal (Muslims and Government Liaison Committee, CMO). In addition, the researchers Prof Judith Frishman (Leiden University), Dr Ulrike Popp-Baier (University of Amsterdam), Prof Maleiha Malik (King’s College London), and Dr Edward Kessler (Woolf Institute, Cambridge) were involved in the user group.

In the second phase, the synthesising study was written, concluding the project. Approaching Jewish-Muslim relations from a social scientific and religious studies framework, the present study builds on the aforementioned published dissertations. For the purpose of this study, we did research in the archive of the Board of Deputies of British Jews at the London Metropolitan Archives and the archive of CIDI, conducted interviews in London and Amsterdam, and developed new lines of research. We thank the Board of Deputies and CIDI for allowing us to conduct research in their archives and the respondents for their willingness to speak candidly with us.

We hope that this study will give the reader a deeper understanding of relations between Jews and Muslims in contemporary Western European countries and the multitude of complex factors that influence them, and that it contributes to a better understanding of their actions and motives.

Abbreviations

Abbreviation Explanation in Dutch Explanation in English AIVD Algemene Inlichtingen- General Intelligence and Security en Veiligheidsdienst Service APPG All-Party Parliamentary Group BBC British Broadcasting Cooperation BDS Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions BLEW Bij Leven en Welzijn Foundation Life and Welfare BMF British Muslim Forum BNP British National Party Board of Board of Deputies of British Jews Deputies BVD Binnenlandse Domestic Security service Veiligheidsdienst CBS Centraal Bureau voor Central Office for Statistics Statistiek CGI Contact Groep Islam Contact Group Islam CIDI Centrum Informatie en Centre for Information and Documentatie Israél Documentation Israel CJO Centraal Joods Overleg Central Jewish Consultative Committee CMO Contactorgaan Moslims Muslims and Government Liaison en Overheid Committee CST Community Security Trust CTID Collectief Tegen Collective Against Islamophobia and Islamofobie en Discrimination Discriminatie CU ChristenUnie The ChristianUnion CUF Church Urban Fund DCLG Department for Communities & Local Government EAJG Een Ander Joods Geluid A Different Jewish Voice EHRC Equality and Human Rights Commission EK Eerste Kamer der Staten Senate of the States General

Generaal

(Continued)

xii

Abbreviation

EMCEMO

FAIR

FBF FF4L FvD GLA HMD HMDT IFN IHRA

IS ISB JCM JDA

JDL JMNA

JIF JPR KMAN

LGBTIQ

LJG Amsterdam

MAB

MCB

MEND

MHCLG

Ministerie AZ Ministerie BZ

Ministerie BZK

Ministerie Jen V Ministerie SZW

Abbreviations

Explanation in Dutch

Euro-Mediterraan Centrum Migratie en Ontwikkeling

Forum voor Democratie

Islamitische Staat

Joods Marokkaans Netwerk Amsterdam

Kommittee Marokkaanse Arbeiders in Nederland

Liberaal Joodse Gemeente Amsterdam

Ministerie van Algemene Zaken

Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijkrelaties Ministerie van Justitie en Veiligheid

Ministerie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid

Explanation in English

Euro-Mediterranean Centre for Migration and Development

Forum Against Islamophobia and Racism

Faith & Belief Forum

Faiths Forum for London

Forum for Democracy

Greater London Authority

Holocaust Memorial Day

Holocaust Memorial Day Trust

Inter Faith Network for the UK

International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance

Islamic State

Islamic Society of Britain

Jewish-Christian-Muslim conference

Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism

Jewish Defence League

Amsterdam Jewish-Moroccan Network

Joseph Interfaith Foundation

Institute for Jewish Policy Research

Committee of Moroccan Workers in the Netherlands

Liberal Jewish Community Amsterdam

Muslim Association of Britain

Muslim Council of Britain

Muslim Engagement and Development

Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government

Ministry of General Affairs

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Ministery of the Interior and Kingdom Relations

Ministery of Justice and Security Ministery of Social Affairs and

Employment

(Continued)

Abbreviation

MJF

NCTV

SMN

SR

SPIOR

Tell MAMA 3FF

TK

UMMON

VVD

Explanation in Dutch

Nederland Bekent Kleur Nationaal Coördinator Terrorismebestrijding en Veiligheid Nederlands-Israëlitisch Kerkgenootschap Nieuw Israëlitisch Weekblad Nederlandse Omroep Stichting Nederlands Palestina Komitee Nederlands Verbond voor Progressief Jodendom Overlegorgaan Joden, Christenen en Moslims

Onderzoek, Informatie & Statistiek

Platform Stop Racisme & Uitsluiting

Partij van de Arbeid

Partij voor de Vrijheid

Raad van Kerken in Nederland

Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau

Samenwerkingsverband van Marokkaanse Nederlanders

Platform Islamitische Organisaties Rijnmond

Unie van Marokkaanse Moskeeorganisaties in Nederland

Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie

Abbreviations

Explanation in English

Muslim Jewish Forum of North London

The Netherlands Confesses Colour

National Coordinator for Counterterrorism and Security

Organisation of Jewish Communities in the Netherlands New Israelite Weekly

Dutch Broadcasting Foundation Dutch Palestine Committee

Dutch Union for Progressive Judaism

Consultative Body of Jews, Christians and Muslims

Office for National Statistics

Research, Information & Statistics

Platform Against Racism & Exclusion

Labour Party

Party for Freedom

Council of Churches in the Netherlands

Social and Cultural Planning Office

Alliance of Dutch Moroccans

Scriptural Reasoning

Platform for Islamic Organisations in Rijnmond

Tell Measuring Anti-Muslim Attacks

Three Faiths Forum

House of Representatives of the States General

Union of Moroccan Mosque Organisations in the Netherlands

People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy

Introduction

On 22 February 2015 the Jewish-Muslim friendship group Salaam Shalom organised a ‘Walk of Solidarity’ in Amsterdam in collaboration with the Al Kabir Mosque and the Liberal Jewish Congregation. Beginning at the Portuguese Synagogue (the ‘Snoge’) on Jonas Daniël Meijerplein and ending at the mosque on Weesperzijde, the walk was a protest against recent attacks on places of worship and against antisemitism and Islamophobia in general. An estimated 300 Jews, Muslims, and others took part. At the start and end points, flowers were laid and speeches delivered.’ While leaders from various Jewish denominations took part, according to a report in ‘New Israelite Weekly’ (Nieuw Israélitisch Weekblad, NIW), Rabbi Pinchas Toledano of the Snoge, where the walk began, did not join in because his synagogue board had advised against it.” That was because it “had a bad feeling” about Salaam Shalom and in particular about Fatima Elatik, one of the initiative’s founders, as she had participated in a pro-Gaza demonstration in 2014 at which swastikas had been displayed and the Nazi salute used. Elatik herself had posted a photograph on Facebook in which she could be seen arm in arm with a woman wearing a T-shirt reading ‘Free Palestine. Stop genocide. Help!’

In the autumn of 2017, plans to establish a Shia Muslim centre at the Golders Green Hippodrome, a former concert hall located in a traditionally Jewish neighbourhood in north-west London, evoked a mixed response in local Jewish circles and beyond. According to The Independent some of the reactions on social media were out-and-out Islamophobic. “Who are they praying to and what are they plotting? ... Beware the Islamic takeover”. “Islamic colonialism — in the heart of what was the only uniquely Jewish area in the UK”. “I am the only one with the guts to say what everybody else is thinking. It has nothing to do with parking or traffic. We don’t want a mosque there and who can blame us? Those Muslims purposely picked Golders Green because it’s a Jewish area. They want to stamp us out ... It’s one of the only Jewish areas left in London and we don’t want it polluted and destroyed by a bunch of Jew-hating Muslim terrorists”.* Various Jewish leaders publicly distanced themselves from these statements.” Among them Laura Marks, chair of Mitzvah Day and the Holocaust

Memorial Day Trust and co-chair of Nisa-Nashim, who in a letter to the editor of The Jewish Chronicle condemned such Islamophobic language, pointed out that Jews and Muslims “have a similar experience of opposition and prejudice, a similar focus on family and festivals” and called for a warm welcome for the “new neighbours”.°

I.1 About This Book

Current Jewish-Muslim relations in London and Amsterdam are multifaceted and complex, as the two events described above illustrate. Numerous issues are at stake in these intercommunity relationships. Some themes unite Jews and Muslims, such as the perceived similarities between their religions and cultures and their common position as minority groups, with the resulting comparable experiences of vulnerability and threat. Other themes divide them, though, like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and antisemitic statements by some Muslims and Islamophobic views held in some Jewish circles, although these factors do not affect all Jews and all Muslims in the same way. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a case in point. While this issue divides many Jews and Muslims, and is a reason for some to avoid each other, or even clash, it brings others closer together — specifically, those who stand up for Palestinian rights and are extremely critical of Israeli policy towards them. There are also Jews and Muslims who, while taking very different positions on this conflict, are united by the conviction that everything possible must be done to prevent it spilling over from the Middle East into their own cities, and are working together to ensure this. What makes Jewish-Muslim relations in both London and Amsterdam even more complex is that they occur at different levels. Not only between individual Jews and Muslims, but also between local mosques and synagogues and between national Jewish and Islamic organisations, which are often based in these capital cities.

This book focuses upon contemporary structural bilateral Jewish-Muslim relations in London and Amsterdam. The primary aim is to gain a better understanding of these complex relations. To that end, we compare the situations in the two cities since the late 1980s and then analyse our findings in order to throw the nature of the Jewish-Muslim relations there, and the factors influencing them, into sharper relief. Our central question concerns the development of these bilateral relations in London and Amsterdam, and more broadly in the United Kingdom (UK) and the Netherlands in the case of national organisations, since the 1980s. What similarities and differences can be observed between them, and to what factors are they attributable? We answer this question from a combined historical, social scientific, and religious studies perspective.

In this study we analyse Jewish-Muslim relations in terms of ‘cooperation’ versus ‘conflict’. As such, we critically question the commonly held idea that, particularly as a result of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, these relations are strongly polarised and that Jews and Muslims are each other’s opposites. In fact, our work reveals a great variety in Jewish-Muslim relations and also provides insights into the factors that influence them. For a correct understanding of the actual situation, it is important to realise that most Muslims and Jews in London and in Amsterdam do not maintain any kind of relationship with members of the other community, either because they avoid doing so or because they simply live a long way apart, or alternatively they do have mutual contact but without their ethnic and/or religious identity playing a role. In that case, neither ‘co-operation’ nor ‘conflict’ is the appropriate term, but ‘co-existence’.”

I.2 Definitions

Muslims and Jews and their organisations in Amsterdam and London each form their own community.” These have no sharply defined boundaries. In fact, they consist of all the people, groups, and institutions which call themselves ‘Jewish’ or ‘Muslim’; or, in other words, which assign themselves a Jewish or Muslim identity.” The communities include those who are members of a synagogue or mosque community, but also ‘unaffiliated’ persons who have no connection with organised Judaism or Islam respectively. Moreover, definitions of the terms ‘Jew’ and ‘Muslim’ vary widely. For many Jews, for instance, the designation ‘Jew’ under ‘halacha’ — Jewish religious law — refers exclusively to individuals who have a Jewish mother or have converted to Judaism. Others also include those with only a Jewish father.'° The term ‘Muslim’ also has different meanings. For many Muslims themselves, the term refers primarily to those who identify with and seek to adhere to the beliefs and precepts of Islam. But to others, both Muslims and non-Muslims, it applies to anyone from a Muslim family."

The Muslim and Jewish communities in both London and Amsterdam not only have diffuse external boundaries, they are also very diverse in their internal composition — for example, in terms of philosophical outlook or religious affiliation and origin.'? One important distinction across the board is between religious and non-religious Jews and Muslims; that is, between those for whom the Jewish or Islamic faith does or does not have personal meaning.'* And on the non-religious side there is a further distinction between ‘cultural’ and ‘secular’ groups — those who do observe certain customs or practices, such as partaking in the ritual seder meal at Passover or eating only halal food, and those who do not.'* Influenced by international developments in Judaism, among practising Jews in both cities we encounter the full spectrum of strands, from ultra-orthodox to liberal, alongside traditional ‘moderate’ orthodoxy, with often sharp divisions as a result. Likewise, the Muslims in the two cities vary widely in their religious affiliations, which again range from highly orthodox movements to liberal groups.

Ethnically, too, the communities are diverse. One important historical distinction is between Sephardic Jews, whose forefathers came originally from the Iberian Peninsula and North Africa, and Ashkenazi Jews with their roots in Central and Eastern Europe. As for Muslims, London has large groups originating in Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, the Middle East, North Africa, and sub-Saharan Africa. In Amsterdam, by contrast, the principal groups are of Moroccan, Turkish, and Surinamese origin. In order to reflect this great diversity, henceforth we refer to the Jewish and Muslim ‘communities’ — in the plural — in both cities rather than to a Jewish or Muslim ‘community’ in the singular.

One key term in this study is ‘identity’, so it is essential that we clarify how it is used here. Crucially, there is an important distinction between ‘avowed identity’ (or ‘self-identity’) and ‘ascribed identity’; that is, between the identity an individual, group, or institution adopts for itself and the one outsiders give it.'° These can differ quite substantially. People may define themselves (self-identify) as Jewish or Muslim, for example, but choose not to reveal that identity in the public arena so that others do not recognise (ascribe) them as such — as when Jewish men decide not to wear a kippah in public, or Muslim women a headscarf, for fear of being harassed. The opposite also happens if, say, a Londoner or Amsterdammer of Turkish origin is addressed as a Muslim because of the prevailing stereotype that all Turks are Muslims, whereas he considers himself to be secular. As already noted (see footnote 9), in this study we define Muslims and Jews on the basis of avowed identity.

People do not have one single identity, but several intertwined identities and subidentities.'° A person can be Jewish and female, a daughter, single, a friend, highly educated, an architect, a neighbour, a clarinet player, a Londoner, and British. Or Muslim and male, a partner, a father, a son, a friend, a neighbour, a university graduate, an accountant, an amateur footballer, an Amsterdammer, and a Dutchman. Depending upon the context in which people interact with each other, certain of their subidentities are more or less important and are expressed more or less actively. Ethnic and/or religious identities, for instance, generally play a greater role in the personal sphere than at work. In the public discourse about Muslims and Jews, there is a widely held misconception that the ethnic and/or religious identities of members of these groups are all-important to them and so largely explain their behaviour in just about every area of life, whereas in fact that is often influenced primarily by other identities or subidentities. Although of course we focus in particular upon specifically Jewish and Muslim identities in this study of Jewish-Muslim relations, we do realise that other subidentities also play a role in them.

We can further distinguish between ‘individual identity’ and ‘collective identity’.'’ The former refers to the identity of a particular person, the latter to that of a group, institution, or community. And in social and public life, one’s individual identity is regularly overshadowed by one’s collective identity. In other words, a person is judged — and sometimes condemned — according to the group, institution, or community to which he or she is seen as belonging to. In his Remembrance Day speech on 4 May 2020, the Dutch Jewish writer Arnon Grunberg warned of the awful consequences this kind of generalisation can have when taken to extremes:

And it’s also logical that, when certain segments of the population are talked about in a way that hearkens back to the darkest years of the twentieth century, sooner or later people will feel empowered to talk about Jews in the same way. For me, it was clear from the start: when they talk about Moroccans, they’re talking about me. “I can’t understand, cannot tolerate it when a person judges another person not by what he is but by the group to which he happens to belong,” Primo Levi wrote to his German translator in the 1960s. These are words we should repeat to ourselves on a weekly, perhaps even daily, basis if only to remind ourselves how toxic words can be.'®

This study centres on Jews and Muslims not as individuals, but as members of communities. By always considering the great diversity within both groups, we endeavour to acknowledge that their respective individual members come in many shapes and forms and cannot all be categorised under one common heading.

When referring to Muslims and Jews, the terms ‘religion’, ‘ethnicity’, and ‘race’ are frequently used. The definitions of these words are not fixed, but contextual. That is, what they mean depends upon the historical, social, and cultural context in which they are applied.” The context in which we use them in this study is the UK and the Netherlands of today. In the contemporary Western context, the term ‘religion’ is often associated not only with ‘major’ faith traditions such as Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, and Islam but also with ‘minor’ ones such as Jainism and Sikhism, as well as with new forms of religiosity and individual spirituality which involve engagement with a reality experienced by believers as transcendent.”° In line with Gloria Wekker, we define ‘ethnicity’ as “the social system that gives meaning to ethnic differences between people — to those differences that can be made on the basis of people’s origin, appearance, history, culture, language and religion”.”' The term ‘race’ refers to assumed biological and related cultural differences between people, and ‘racism’ can be defined as “a set of assumptions about the superiority or inferiority of ‘races’ marked by visible physical differences” Although ‘race’ is not a meaningful concept in a scholarly sense, it is one used in the public arena. In the UK, ‘race’ is a very common term in everyday speech; in the Netherlands it (the Dutch word ‘ras’) has not been heard widely since the Second World War, although that has been changing in recent years.” In relation to Jews and Muslims, in practice the terms ‘religion’, ‘ethnicity’, and ‘race’ are often used interchangeably.

The term ‘Jewish-Muslim relations’, the core theme of this study, covers relationships between individual Jews and Muslims, between local Jewish and Muslim organisations and groups, including synagogues and mosques, and between national Jewish and Muslim bodies. Although we do consider all the various constellations in which Jews, Muslims, and their respective institutions interact, among them trilateral and multilateral contexts, our primary interest is bilateral Jewish-Muslim relations. When it comes to Jewish and Muslim organisations, we can draw a broad distinction between ‘umbrella’ bodies — generally alliances of ethnic and/or religious institutions — and ‘grassroots’ organisations whose members are usually individuals.** These can also take the form of ‘networks’.

In themselves, Jewish-Muslim relations are all patterns of interaction and/or communication between individual Jews and Muslims or their respective organisations. These can take a wide variety of forms, shaped by such factors as the type of initiative (top down, bottom up, external, internal) and its strength (strong, weak), focus (opinions, practices, interests, objectives), form (activities, discussion), institutionalisation (incidental, structural), duration (short, long), geographical scope (local, citywide, regional, national, international), subject matter (religion, culture, civil society, science, education, economy, politics, public debate), and style (conflict, co-operation, neither). Relations of this kind are never fixed, but constantly evolving.

In particular, we characterise Jewish-Muslim relations in terms of ‘cooperation’ and ‘conflict’. Lewis Coser defines conflict as “a struggle over values and claims to scarce status, power and resources in which the aims of the opponents are to neutralise, injure or eliminate their rivals”.” And the Norwegian sociologist of law Vilhelm Aubert highlights an interesting distinction between two types of conflict: the conflict of interest and the conflict of values or identity.2° Which, he argues, differ not only in their nature and course, but also require different methods of resolution. Conflicts of interest are associated with scarcity, the classic example being the wage dispute between employers and employees. This can usually be resolved through bargaining, a process of give and take in which the two sides eventually negotiate an outcome acceptable to both. Rarely though, if ever, does this mechanism work in conflicts of values or identity. When trying to settle a fundamental disagreement about the status of women, say, efforts to reach a compromise are unlikely to produce a satisfactory outcome. Rather, the two sides are most likely to adopt entrenched positions they regard, on principle, as nonnegotiable. Identity conflicts therefore have to be resolved using other mechanisms. Aubert points to the law as one, but also mentions in passing — and without elaborating any further — the option of ‘agree to disagree’.*” In this study, by contrast, we consider that and other ‘social identity strategies’, as we dub them, at length. Specifically, we explore which of these strategies are deployed in Jewish-Muslim relations in London and Amsterdam, and what role they play in them.”

Conflicts can range in intensity from peaceful to violent. When the differences between groups escalate to such an extent that they find themselves diametrically opposed to one another, we speak of polarisation.”? In this kind of situation, members of the groups concerned often end up airing negative, prejudice-driven stereotypes about each other.*° When these target Jews, they can be classified as ‘antisemitic’ and in the case of Muslims as ‘Islamophobic’. In a nutshell, these terms refer to discrimination, prejudice, hostility, or violence towards Jews as Jews and Muslims as Muslims, respectively.’ If the antagonism between groups further descends into a deep-seated sense that it is ‘us versus them’, then opponents easily metamorphose into enemies and the danger of violence rears its head.**

The opposite of conflict is co-operation.” Here, groups join forces in order to achieve certain goals. When it comes to Jewish-Muslim cooperation, two particular forms can be distinguished: dialogue or ‘talking together’ and collaboration or ‘working together’.”* The dialogue may concern religious matters, but also cover cultural, social, or political issues. Collaboration, meanwhile, may focus upon the promotion of common religious or cultural interests in the public domain such as the right to ritual slaughter or to obtain kosher and halal food; but it can also address secular matters such as joint efforts to improve the local area, the city, the country, or the world.

The term ‘social capital’ refers to the relationships people, groups, and organisations maintain with each other, and to the resulting standards of reciprocity and mutual trust. As such, social capital is fundamental to the effective functioning of a community or society. The American sociologist Robert Putnam distinguishes between ‘bonding’ and ‘bridging’ social capital, with the former denoting the relationships within a group or organisation and the latter those between groups and institutions.°*° It will be clear that, in addressing relations between Jews and Muslims and between their respective institutions, the focus of this study is ‘bridging’.

Jewish-Muslim co-operative relations vary in strength. In this respect, the American sociologist Mark Granovetter distinguishes between ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ ties.°” The strength of a relationship, he claims, is determined by a combination of “the amount of time, the emotional intensity, the intimacy (mutual confiding) and the reciprocal services which characterise the tie”? Strong ties are usually found within groups, weak ones between groups and institutions. Weak ties allow for the building of bridges between different groups; in this context, Granovetter talks of “bridging weak ties”. In the Jewish-Muslim relationships we are investigating, we are probably dealing mainly with weak ties which in certain cases develop into strong ones.

With regard to the concept of co-operation between religious groups, terms such as ‘inter faith’, ‘interfaith’, ‘interreligious’, and ‘intercommunal’ are often used. In the British context a distinction is sometimes drawn here between ‘interfaith’ (one word) and ‘inter faith’ (two words).*° The latter then refers to co-operation whereby each group retains its own individuality, whereas under the former the collaboration is so intense that their identities may eventually merge to form a new religious identity.*"

Most UK institutions therefore prefer the term ‘inter faith’ to refer to their activities in the field of relations between religious groups. In the Netherlands, by contrast, this distinction is not generally made and both types fall under the heading ‘interreligious’ (‘interreligieus’).** That said, not all the forms of co-operation investigated in this study are covered by the term ‘interreligious’. We also explore situations in which Jews and Muslims — practising and/or non-practising — co-operate on the basis of factors other than religion; as neighbours, for example, as residents of the same city or as citizens of the same country. For these cases, we use the term ‘intercommunal’.

As already mentioned, we define Jewish-Muslim relations in terms of ‘cooperation’ and ‘conflict’. In our view, every such relationship is the outcome of a specific combination of forces, some of which bring together Jews and Muslims or their respective organisations and some of which drive them apart. Just as there are usually elements of division even within co-operative relationships, so there are frequently unifying factors even in conflictual ones. It is just that the integrative forces prevail in the former, while the separating forces are predominant in the latter. And because the interplay between these conflicting forces is changing constantly, the relationships themselves are always in flux.