When Liberals Become Conservative: A Danish Political Culture of Islamophobia

In June of 2021, Denmark’s parliament voted in favor of a law allowing the Danish authorities to send asylum seekers to reception centers outside the European Union. This vote was the most recent turn of events in Denmark’s policies to tighten immigration. In May of 2021, the Danish authorities announced that they now consider Damascus safe for refugees to return. The announcement caused despair among Syrians living in Denmark, who had their residency revoked. Denmark, which has implemented some of the strictest interpretations of immigration policies, can provide valuable insight to understand the rise of Islamophobia in European countries. The resistance towards globalization in an increasingly multicultural Danish society has become quite severe and should be taken seriously by neighboring countries.

A decade after the war broke out in Syria, out of the 5.8 million people living in Denmark almost 35,000 are Syrians. This year, the Danish immigration services have reassessed cases of over 1,200 refugees from the Damascus region. While most Syrians in Denmark are not affected, 380 of the Syrians living in Denmark – some children – have had their status revoked. They have been asked to return to Syria voluntarily. If they do not comply, they risk being sent to deportation centers that human rights watchdogs have deemed “unacceptable for people”. Most Syrians living in Denmark affected by these policies are women, as Denmark considers the return to Damascus too dangerous for men who may be forced to join the military.

In the postwar era, significant demographic changes took place simultaneously to the socio-political evolution in Denmark. These changes mainly stemmed from three separate waves of immigration. Most immigrants had a Muslim background.

The first wave of immigrants in the late 1960s and early 1970s came from Turkey, Pakistan, Morocco, and Yugoslavia to find employment as “guest workers” in Scandinavia. They usually stayed on a temporary work visa, and after earning a wage in Denmark, they would return to their countries of origin.

The second and third waves saw a shift in immigration where immigrants were refugees and asylum seekers rather than guest workers. The second wave of immigration in the 1980s consisted of refugees mainly from Iran, Iraq, and Palestine. The third wave arrived around the 1990s, with migrants mainly originating from Somalia and Bosnia. Today about 40 percent of Danish Muslims are categorized as asylum seekers.

While the guest workers intentions were, for the most part, only to reside in the country temporarily, the asylum seekers were newcomers to the country and in the process of becoming members of Danish society. For a period of time, relations between ethnic Danes and immigrants seemed fairly harmonious; however, the general social atmosphere in Denmark became increasingly shaped by hostile attitudes around the time of a violent event across the Atlantic in 2001.

In 2001, a Liberal-Conservative coalition came into power where they would remain for the next ten years. This was the first time in one hundred years of Danish political history that any center-right or center party participated in a ruling coalition. This shift came because of the Danish People’s Party (DPP). Both populist and anti-immigration, they capitalized on the 9/11 terrorist attack in the United States.

The DPP framed 9/11 as a national security threat, strengthening the idea of “The Islamic Threat” to Danish Society. This gradually shifted the general notion of Islam with direct consequences for the Muslim population in Denmark. Anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim sentiment began at the extreme right of Danish politics but slowly simmered towards the mainstream ideology and is prominent even within the leftist political agenda.

In this political climate, the newspaper Jyllands Posten published cartoons of Prophet Mohammed on September 30, 2005. The images were insulting to Muslims as it is forbidden to depict the Prophet. As a protest against the magazine’s publication, many Muslim majority countries enacted a boycott against Danish products. In February 2006, demonstrations took place across the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia, where nearly 150 demonstrators were killed. The DPP used the protests to increase their popularity. Fueled by Islamophobic rhetoric, the DPP situated themselves as the “protectorates of Danish values and national security”.

The Danish Social Democrats lead the current cabinet. The pan-Nordic center-left political parties are generally known for being among the more liberal political movements in the Nordic region. The Icelandic equivalent takes some of the most liberal and open-door policies towards migration than other parties. While the Danish Social Democrats maintain the liberal stance of their sister parties in the other Nordic countries, they have simultaneously taken a strikingly conservative approach to immigration. Mette Fredriksen, prime minister of Denmark and leader of the Danish Social Democrats, openly voiced her disapproval of liberal mass immigration in her autobiography: “For me, it is becoming increasingly clear that the price of unregulated globalization, mass immigration and the free movement of labour is paid for by the lower classes.” The party essentially began to frame immigrants, especially Muslim immigrants, as a threat to the welfare state, asserting that strict immigration policies are necessary to preserve the Danish welfare model.

When the Social Democrats won the majority vote in 2019, Danish Politician, Morton Østergaard was shocked by the revision of their policies. “I find it odd that it’s possible to make such a shift, not just in your policy but also in your fundamental values,” he told the Observer. “What’s different in Denmark is that we’re seeing parties coming out of a Liberal or Social Democrat value base eating into national conservatism in a race-to-the-bottom contest, because they’ve decided that the marginal voter can’t get tough enough on immigrants.” An “Us vs. Them” rhetoric has become one of the pillars of Danish populism, with a survey from 2016 finding that 1 out of 3 Danes believes that “Denmark, together with the rest of the Western world, is at war with the religion of Islam and not just radicalized Muslims.” Another survey conducted around the same time found that 3 out of 4 Danes want Muslims and imams to be more vocal in disassociating themselves from terrorist acts.

The Danish authorities have become increasingly resistant towards globalization, immigration, and multiculturalism in Danish society. The incumbent Social Democratic Party laid out a “zero asylum seeker goal” in 2015, rejecting the UN refugee quota. Since the plan was set forth, the country has seen a steady decline in the acceptance of asylum seekers every year.

The Danish case echoes how the “othering” of immigrant populations has fueled inhumane treatment of immigrants that has shaped similar situations in other countries across Europe. Although Denmark is the most extreme example, other European countries have exhibited similar hostile views. Denmark’s case shows resistance to globalization and multiculturalism, posing a threat to displaced populations needing a new home. As Europe becomes more diverse, acceptance towards an increasingly pluralist European identity and a greater commitment to celebrate diversity is critical to building more equitable European societies for all.