While their exchange enriches our understanding, I find that their intervention is highly abstract and assumes that the situation in Europe will stay as it is today in coming years. My aim is not to produce counter-arguments to their claims, but I hope to re-phrase the question of secularism in the light of current developments in the Middle East, namely the Arab Spring. I accept that we are still at the very beginning of the change in the Middle East and there is no guarantee that popular revolutions will result in a perfect democracy and economic development. However, for the sake of enriching our debate on secularism in Europe, we may consider that the Arab Spring will change the social settings in the Middle East.

In essence, both Modood and Bhargava agree that the ‘crisis’ of secularism today is a direct result of diversification of European societies, mostly Muslim immigration to Europe and, last but not least, state policies towards their accommodation or assimilation into European societies. What happens if (Muslim) immigrants decide to return to their own countries? Can the Arab Spring contribute to the debate on secularism in Europe? If yes, in what way? If not, why not?

Debate on secularism has never been immune from the sociological, historical and political context in which the term is defined. Debate on citizenship, secularism and immigrant participation will not be settled until the conditions that brought immigrants to Europe are solved. They went to Europe for a better economic, political and social condition which did not exist in their own countries. They have not migrated to Europe because they ‘love’ the host country; rather they did so because of other social, economic and political reasons.

Now with the Arab spring, the issue is set to be a bit more complicated. For example, the rise of Turkey as an example (or model for a possible Muslim democracy), along with an economic development and deepening democracy, is giving more hope for immigrants to return to their own countries. In the last several years, many Turkish immigrants living in Sweden have moved back to Turkey. According to the director of the Swedish Institute in Istanbul, as she told me recently at a conference in Stockholm, this trend is likely to continue in the coming years.

How could the Arab spring shape the immigration debate and reverse the ‘brain drain’ in Europe? It is difficult to assess as of now. However, it is likely that immigrants will have a chance to decide whether they want to live in the host country or their home country. Reasons that caused immigration to Europe in the first place may reach a point where immigrants start to re-consider going back to their home countries. Indeed, the worsening economic environment and increasingly hostile and even Islamophobic tendencies in Europe may accelerate this process. This may result in a healthy way of thinking for immigrants, as they are likely to choose to live wherever they love, like and want to be. So then the result may be a ‘normal’ and ‘love’ marriage for immigrants in Europe, rather than a ‘forced marriage’ as we see it today.

Considering the deepening economic crisis in Europe and the possible future implications of the Arab Spring, I would like to pose the following questions to Bhargava: (a) Will the possible return of immigrants to their own countries strengthen the traditional concept of secularism (i.e. strict separation of religion and politics) in Europe? (b) Or by alleviating Europe from the current political context – the issue of immigration and their integration (or assimilation) – will this development give a chance (or an ideal opportunity) for Europe to face the issue directly, and maybe face itself too?

There are also several questions related to Modood’s concept and approach: (a) How will the return of immigrants shape the debate on secularism itself and the concept of moderate secularism? (b) What will be, if any, the influence, setbacks or positive impulses of the secularism debate in the Middle East when immigrants get back to their own countries? (c) Will immigrants be hesitant to support and promote the concept of secularism in their home countries because of their negative experiences in Europe? Or would they be supportive of it considering positive experiences in Europe?

There is already an ongoing debate on secularism in the Middle East after Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan suggested in his Arab Spring tour in September 2011 that secularism would be the best way forward. Many people, including Egypt’s powerful Muslim Brotherhood, have criticized this suggestion arguing that Egypt has its own unique history and background in religion and state relations. It is worthy that those who think about the future of secularism in the West consider both the current ongoing secularism debate in the Middle East and possible repercussions of the Arab Spring on Muslim immigrants in future.