Recent events in Britain have spotlighted a familiar yet increasingly fraught conversation: how Muslims relate to British society, and how British society sees them in return. A poll suggests most British Muslims identify more with their religion than their nation. The head of the Saudi-funded Muslim World League advises Muslims in Britain to talk less about Gaza and more about domestic issues. Labour MP Tahir Ali faces criticism for campaigning for an airport in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, accusing his detractors of Islamophobia. Meanwhile, the BBC backtracks on using the word “reverts” for converts to Islam, a term steeped in religious connotation.
These seemingly separate episodes are united by a central theme: the question of Muslim identity and its place within the broader fabric of British life. They reveal a troubling divide, where Muslims are increasingly portrayed either as incompatible with Western values or as pawns in a larger cultural struggle. Both narratives are not only simplistic but also harmful.
The Evolution of Muslim Identity in Britain
Much of this debate is fueled by a misconception—that Islam is fixed, timeless, and unchanging. Ironically, this view is shared by both dogmatic Islamists and their staunchest critics. Yet, history and experience tell a different story. The reality is that Muslim communities, like all communities, are diverse and their relationship to faith is dynamic and evolving.
READ MORE: Brazil’s Bolsonaro ‘Stable’ After Hospitalisation for Abdominal Pain
The first wave of Muslim immigrants to Britain—largely from the Indian subcontinent after World War II—were devout but culturally adaptable. Alcohol consumption was not uncommon among men, and the hijab was rare. The second generation, those who grew up in Britain, leaned toward secularism and liberalism. They fought against racism but also challenged the conservatism of their community leaders.
Yet today, a younger generation that is far more socially integrated into Western culture appears paradoxically more insistent on preserving a distinct Muslim identity. A recent study by the Institute for the Impact of Faith in Life (IIFL) found that younger Muslims are more likely than older generations to identify as Muslim first and British second. By contrast, over-65s were twice as likely to see themselves as British first.
Why the Shift? The Interplay of Politics, Religion, and Identity
This generational shift didn’t happen in a vacuum. A convergence of factors—both domestic and international—has shaped the modern Muslim identity in Britain. Internationally, Saudi Arabia’s push to export its version of Islam during its ideological rivalry with Iran helped inject more hardline interpretations into Western Muslim communities.
Domestically, British multiculturalism has played an unintended role. The idea of Britain as a “community of communities,” as outlined in the influential Parekh report, led state institutions to engage with minority communities primarily through self-appointed “community leaders.” These leaders were often male, conservative, and religious, and their status was reinforced through public funding and policy. In time, this created ethnic fiefdoms that encouraged social and political division.
Furthermore, policymakers and media outlets increasingly began to treat socially conservative views as more “authentic” expressions of Muslim identity. The BBC’s use of the term “revert,” while ultimately retracted, reflected this tendency to align with what is presumed to be the orthodox view.
Integration or Alienation? Double Standards in Identity Politics
Muslims are not the only group whose identity politics are shaped by external pressures. A 2023 report from the Institute for Jewish Policy Research showed that many British Jews also prioritise their Jewish identity over Britishness. Around 75% felt a strong attachment to Israel, which has heavily influenced their response to the Gaza war. However, when Muslims express support for Gaza or criticize Israeli actions, it is often framed as “sectarian.”
This discrepancy points to a troubling double standard. Supporting a political cause like Palestinian rights should not be viewed as inherently sectarian or anti-Western. What is sectarian is when identity alone—rather than reason or morality—dictates one’s political stance. When political engagement is confined to the boundaries of religion or ethnicity, it undermines the possibility of universal, collective action.
The Rise of Sectarian Politics in Parliament
Nowhere is this more evident than in the political sphere. Labour MP Tahir Ali has focused his efforts on advocating for religious blasphemy laws and lobbying for infrastructure in Pakistan, rather than addressing urgent local issues like child poverty or the ongoing bin strikes in Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley. His narrow agenda raises concerns about a growing trend in identity-bound politics, where politicians become spokespeople for a specific ethnic or religious group rather than representatives of a diverse constituency.
This is not new. Labour has long relied on biradari—or clan-based—political machines in cities like Bradford and Birmingham. What’s changed is that these traditional patronage networks have merged with the language of identity politics, creating a toxic blend of sectarianism cloaked in the rhetoric of inclusion.
Racism Rebranded and the Perils of Belonging
One reason younger Muslims may feel disconnected from a British identity is the persistent sense that their Britishness is not fully recognised. The IIFL study noted that Muslims often feel their faith is seen, but their citizenship is not. This alienation is compounded by right-wing narratives that question their loyalty or portray their presence as a threat to Western civilization.
Such narratives are not just expressions of bigotry—they’re part of a broader cultural shift where racism is increasingly repackaged in the language of national identity. Calls for Britain to remain a “white Christian nation” now masquerade as concerns about integration or social cohesion. These discourses only serve to deepen the very divisions they claim to address.
Conclusion: Toward a Politics of Universalism
The problem is not that British Muslims feel strongly about Gaza, or even that they place religious identity at the centre of their lives. The problem lies in reducing politics to a contest of identities, where your beliefs are only valid if they align with your group’s perceived interests.
To counter this, we need to reimagine politics not as a series of negotiations between tribes but as a platform for universalist values—equality, justice, and mutual respect. That means acknowledging the legitimate grievances of Muslims without viewing them as foreign or suspect. It also means challenging sectarianism within Muslim communities, not to suppress expression, but to elevate a broader, more inclusive vision of political life.
British society must make space for Muslim identities, just as Muslim communities must resist the temptation to retreat into cultural insularity. Only then can we move beyond the corrosive politics of identity toward a shared sense of belonging.
