National Review Online asked a group of commentators — including Bill Bennett, Mona Charen, Phyllis Chesler, Andrew McCarthy, Emanuele Ottolenghi, and Daniel Pipes, to weigh in on the nikab: "Muslim women veiling has become the subject of intense controversy in Britain in recent days, with Prime Minister Tony Blair calling the veil a 'mark of separation.' Should the nikab be banned? CAN it be?" For all replies, see "An Unveiling: Separate, but acceptable?"
The nikab, which leaves only a woman's eyes showing, is the second most extreme Muslim covering of women after the burka (which covers the entire head, including the eyes). Both garments have become the topic of debate in Europe in recent years; in "Europe's Burqa Wars," for example, I catalogue some efforts to penalize or render illegal the burka. Thanks to a statement by Labour politician Jack Straw, the nikab has in recent weeks become the center of furious dispute in Great Britain. To a lesser extent, it is already debated in the United States, such as the case of Sultaana Freeman, who wanted to wear a nikab for her driving license picture, or Ginnnah Muhammad, who had her lawsuit thrown out of court because she refused to take off her nikab.
I see the nikab or burka doing immense damage to male/female and Muslim/non-Muslim relations, but in those areas an American's right to freedom-of-expression prevails. On grounds of security, however, I believe that both coverings should be banned, as one cannot have faceless persons walking the streets, driving cars, or otherwise entering public spaces. (October 25, 2006)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nov. 21, 2006 update: I document the danger suggested here in a new weblog entry, "The Niqab and Burqa as Security Threat."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related Topics: Muslims in the West, Radical Islam, Sex and gender relations
receive the latest by email: subscribe to daniel pipes' free mailing list