Intervention by Ayse Cindilkaya at the European Commission Coordination Meeting on Combatting Anti-Muslim Hatred/Racism: Ensuring Fair Job Opportunities for Young People and Building Inclusive Societies in Europe

RAMSA-Präsidentin Ayse Cindilkaya sprach am 19. Mai 2026 bei der Koordinierungssitzung der Europäischen Kommission zur Bekämpfung von antimuslimischem Hass und antimuslimischem Rassismus in Brüssel. Im Mittelpunkt ihres Beitrags standen Chancengleichheit beim Übergang von Bildung in Beschäftigung, die gesellschaftliche Teilhabe junger Muslim:innen sowie die Bedeutung inklusiver Institutionen für den demokratischen Zusammenhalt Europas.

Vollständiger Redetext (es gilt das gesprochene Wort)

Dear Ladies and Gentleman,

allow me to begin with a memory. In May 2011, here in Brussels, a joint declaration by Jewish and Muslim leaders was presented to the highest representatives of the European Union, including the then President of the European Commission. In this declaration, Jewish and Muslim leaders called for a common commitment against antisemitism, anti-Muslim hatred, and all forms of racism. In a context of rising right-wing populism, this joint declaration was a remarkable intervention.

Jewish and Muslim leaders affirmed that minorities must never be played against one another. They described Europe as their common home and committed themselves to democratic values, pluralism, and social peace. They referred both to the Holocaust and to the genocide against Bosniaks in Europe as historical lessons carrying a shared responsibility. As a 25-year-old student and Muslim youth representative, I had the privilege of contributing to and co-signing this declaration. Perhaps, fifteen years later, it is time to revisit its spirit. Because what is urgently missing today are precisely such courageous and united interventions from civil society at the highest political level.

And we must also be honest: the rise of anti-Muslim racism in Europe did not emerge unexpectedly. For many years, anti-Muslim hatred has been transnationally connected, ideologically organised, and politically amplified across borders. Jewish and Muslim organisations recognised this dynamic early and opposed it together. We should remember this. Because memory is political infrastructure.

However, I am less interested in describing the problem than in asking: How do we prevent prejudice from becoming socially normalised? And how do we prevent hostility from evolving into violence? This is where democratic societies still possess political agency. And this brings me to my central argument: the decisive challenge regarding anti-Muslim racism in Europe lies less in formal access to rights and far more in how equality is implemented in the transition from education into employment, institutions, and public participation.

Formally, many young Muslims are included. Structurally, many remain excluded from networks, institutional trust, and pathways into leadership. Today, between 6 and 10 percent of students across Europe are Muslim. In some cities and universities, the proportion is significantly higher. Europe already has a highly educated Muslim generation across academia, public life, and the professions. Many of them do not primarily organise through religious identity. And yet, they remain affected by anti-Muslim political narratives. Increasingly, young people ask: Do we still belong to Europe? And yet—they are Europe. They were born here, educated here, and contribute to these societies every day. Societies lose stability when highly qualified young citizens lose trust in equal participation.

At the same time, we are witnessing a particularly dangerous political dynamic: the strategic construction of an alleged conflict between Jews and Muslims. Right-wing populist actors increasingly portray Muslims as a threat to Jewish life while simultaneously presenting themselves as defenders of Jewish communities. Similar dynamics appear internationally, including on university campuses, where legitimate concerns regarding antisemitism are at times instrumentalised in ways that risk undermining academic freedom and democratic debate.

In Germany, after the Hamas attacks of October 2023, public narratives rapidly emerged portraying universities as spaces dominated by antisemitism and Muslim aggression. Yet empirical research commissioned shortly afterwards demonstrated something very different: antisemitic attitudes among students were comparatively low, and the portrayal of Muslim students as a general threat on campuses could not be empirically substantiated. At the same time, the study showed that Jewish and Muslim students alike experienced discrimination based on religion at similarly high levels. Yet the vulnerability of Muslim students—including mental health, security concerns, and collective suspicion—remained largely absent from public and institutional discussion.

We are also witnessing right-wing media actors entering university spaces, filming Muslim students without context, and circulating these images online—including during intercultural iftar events—framing them as signs of threat or radicalisation. Because polarisation creates a dynamic in which a largely passive majority of Muslim students becomes collectively associated with extremist fringe positions. And this deepens fear, mistrust, and social fragmentation.

Germany, for example, has built important institutional structures over the past two decades: the German Islam Conference, state-funded chaplaincy, imam training, the Avicenna Studienwerk scholarship foundation, and a vibrant Muslim civil society. These developments matter. But they remain fragile. Because across Europe, we increasingly witness political projects openly debating the rollback of Muslim visibility, Muslim rights, and even the place of Islam itself within Europe. And herein lies one of the greatest dangers of our time: that narratives claiming Islam does not belong to Europe gradually move into the political mainstream.

For this reason, Muslim life in Europe cannot depend on changing political majorities alone. We need institutional guarantees ensuring that freedom of religion, equal citizenship, and democratic participation cannot be politically revoked. This leads to a conclusion: Europe must move beyond formal equality and actively ensure that institutional pathways are genuinely open and accessible.

Three priorities are central. First, transparent and accountable recruitment processes, particularly regarding transitions into labour markets, public administration, academia, and leadership positions. Second, structured mentoring and leadership programmes accompanying the transition from education into employment. Third, the deliberate opening of institutional networks and decision-making spaces. Inclusion does not emerge through equal rules alone, but through equal access to networks, trust, and institutional opportunity.

And this is precisely where young people become central agents of change. Not symbolically, but structurally. If states genuinely wish to empower youth in the fight against anti-Muslim racism, then young people must not merely be consulted. They must be entrusted with responsibility. This means investing in leadership programmes, strengthening youth-led civil society, protecting academic freedom, and bringing young people directly into institutional decision-making spaces.

Because anti-Muslim racism is not merely a minority issue. It is ultimately a question of Europe’s democratic resilience.

And therefore, Europe’s central challenge today is not the absence of legal equality. The challenge lies in the incomplete implementation of equality in transitions into labour markets, institutions, and public participation—especially where anti-Muslim racism functions as a structural amplifier. The future of inclusive societies will not be decided by access alone, but by equal opportunity and genuine participation.

Thank you very much.

Titelbild: Foto von Simon Pugh Photography, veröffentlicht auf Flickr. Verwendung gemäß der jeweiligen Bildlizenz.