In Morocco, Macron Endorses the Myth of Al-Andalus

French President Emmanuel Macron paid a three-day state visit to Morocco from October 28 to October 30. The visit was meant to shore up French-Moroccan ties, in the hope of promoting the sale of French arms — airplanes, submarines — to the North African state. But in his speech before the Moroccan parliament on October 29, Macron promoted the myth of Al-Andalus, and praised Islamic rule in Spain as a splendid period of tolerance and culture.

The French writer and teacher Jean-Loup Bonamy, who specializes in global geopolitics, was having none of it, and in an article in Le Figaro he eviscerated Macron’s preposterous rewriting of history. More on Macron’s rewriting of history can be found here: “‘By exalting the myth of Al-Andalus, Macron thinks he will gain the respect of Muslims but only arouses their contempt,'” translated from “«En exaltant le mythe d’Al-Andalus, Macron pense gagner le respect des musulmans mais ne suscite que leur mépris,»” by Jean-loup Bonnamy, Le Figaro, November 5, 2024:

“History justifies what we want,” said Paul Valéry. It is perhaps to illustrate this remark that Emmanuel Macron wanted to reactivate the myth of Al-Andalus during his trip to Morocco. Curiously praising a foreign invasion of the national territory, the President of the Republic declared to his Moroccan hosts: “The years of Al Andalus have made Spain and southern France a breeding ground for exchange with your culture”.

What is the myth of Al-Andalus? This is the idea that the Muslim presence in Spain (711 – 1492) was a golden and tolerant period, conducive to the harmonious coexistence of different cultures and the three major monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam). This vision was forged by 19th century European historians, critical of Catholicism, for whom the Spain of their time appeared as the stronghold of Catholic fanaticism. It was a matter of praising the supposed tolerance of Muslim Spain in the past to denigrate Catholic intolerance by contrast. Of course, the multiculturalist political correctness of our time has seized on this idea.

However, this myth is far from corresponding to reality. First of all, it is based on an anachronism. The notions of tolerance or freedom of worship and conscience are products of the modern West. Such concepts did not exist in the Middle Ages and would have been incomprehensible to everyone at the time, whether Christians or Muslims. Secondly, the theological-legal framework of Islam is not at allinclined to tolerance. In Muslim law, polytheists are sentenced to death. And Jews and Christians are not considered true Jews and true Christians by Islam. Indeed, from a Muslim point of view, the only authentic Jews and Christians are… the Muslims themselves, the only ones to have remained faithful to Abraham’s original monotheistic message. Islam accuses Jews and Christians of falsifying their religious texts. And it is because of this adulteration of the texts that Allah dictated the Koran to Muhammad, in order to remind men of the truth again, this time in a total and definitive way.

Jews and Christians are therefore lost. In a society governed by a Muslim power (as was Al-Andalus), they enjoy the ambivalent status of dhimmi, which is both a protection and a humiliation. On the protection side: Muslim law grants them life and allows them to worship. Thus, they must not be converted by force. But, on the humiliation side, they have to pay a very heavy specific tax, are obliged to wear distinctive clothes to recognize them,are not allowed to build dwellings higher than those of their Muslim neighbors and they are forbidden to ride horses or carry weapons.

In court, dhimmis have no right to contradict a Muslim. Asymmetry is at the heart of this system: the dhimmi can convert to Islam, but any conversion to Judaism or Christianity of a Muslim is punishable by death. It is this status, quite unenviable, that prevailed in Al-Andalus, as elsewhere in the land of Islam. In his book Al-Andalus, the invention of a myth, the Spanish historian, Islamologist, and Arabist Serafin Fanjul, affirms that it was “a terrifying regime, very similar to South African apartheid,”marked by intolerance and conflict, discrimination and segregation, suffering and violence, far from the much- vaunted openness and appeasement….

We have been witnessing the clash of the Cross and the Crescent for 1400 years. However, this does not prevent Christians and Muslims from cooperating and does not condemn us to the clash of civilizations. To win the respect of Muslims, a non-Muslim must not praise the (imaginary) tolerance of Islam: he must affirm that he respects Muslim identity but that he demands the same respect for his identity. Everyone must be taken for what he is, without provocation, but without illusions. The indispensable observation of our differences and the firm defense of our identity are not an obstacle to common projects.

Emmanuel Macron would have been better inspired to exalt the battle of Poitiers, where Charles Martel halted the Muslim advance into Europe, and then to specify that this victory did not prevent Charlemagne, grandson of Charles Martel, from maintaining excellent relations with Haroun al-Rachid, caliph of Baghdad, or helping Spanish Muslims fighting against other Muslims. He could have highlighted the existence of mixed marriages, occasional military alliances, gift exchanges, friendly tournaments between the Christian nobility and the Muslim nobility, though still enemies, at certain times in the history of Al-Andalus.

He could have spoken of Lyautey, a French Catholic officer who defined himself as “the first servant of the Moroccan sultan, ,protecting Islamic identity, opposing any installation of French settlers and helping the king of Morocco to restore his authority by defeating the rebel tribes one by one. He could have praised the precious help of North African soldiers during the two world wars. It would have made more sense and aroused more respect among his Moroccan hosts than to praise a tolerant Al-Andalus… which has existed only in Western imaginations.

Intent on flattering his Moroccan hosts, Macron insisted that “the years of Al-Andalus made Spain and the south of France a breeding ground for exchange with your culture.” But those relations between the Muslim rulers in Spain and the non-Muslims they oppressed — for why else did the Christians fight the Reconquista for 700 years to throw off the Muslim yoke? — can hardly be called an “exchange.” There was no Muslim “tolerance,” as we in the West understand that term, in Islamic Spain. Macron wanted to win the favor of his Moroccan hosts. It would have been enough for him to have supported — as he did — Morocco’s claim to the Western Sahara. But he should not have been rewriting — sanitizing — the history of Islamic Spain.