European Fears of the Gathering Jihad
February 21, 2003
The pro-Saddam Hussein European manifestations of February
15th that brought millions into the streets of European capitals
are the culmination of Charles de Gaulle’s political vision
of a European destiny led by France. During World War II de Gaulle
was the leader of French resistance against the Nazis, but his
post-war anti-Americanism rallied many of his previous enemies.
Hostility to America and antisemitism were strong in various French
circles: the communists, the left, and particularly among the
numerous politicians, civil servants, intellectuals and businessmen,
who had willingly collaborated with the Germans. Those political
currents had important links with the Arab-Muslim world.
De Gaulle’s vision intended to restore to France a dominant
role in international affairs by the construction of a strong
and united Europe as a counter-weight to American power. After
the loss of Algeria in 1962, France’s last Arab colony,
de Gaulle oriented his policy toward the Arab-Muslim world. During
the 1960s, a French Mediterranean policy was elaborated, which
would link as an economic and political geostrategical unit the
European Community (EC) and the Arab League countries. But Arab
collaboration had a price: the elimination of Israel. In spite
of France’s efforts to bring its European partners closer
to Arab views, many countries were reluctant to follow this path.
At that time, the Arab-Israeli conflict didn’t provoke any
interest or declaration from the EC.
After the Syro-Egyptian October 1973 war against Israel, and
the third Arab defeat, the Arab oil producers proclaimed an oil
embargo, increased the oil price four times, lowered the production,
and classified the consuming countries into friends, enemies,
or neutrals. Now, France’s maneuvers to align the EC on
the Arab anti-Israeli policy in order to create a strong Euro-Arab
bloc succeeded. The nine countries of the EC, meeting in Brussels
(November 6, 1973) issued a joint Resolution, which endorsed the
Franco-Arab policy in respect to Israel.
In 1974 the Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation
was founded to strengthen the political, economic and cultural
co-operation between Europe and the Arab world. The Association
had about 600 members in 18 national Parliaments of the countries
of the enlarged European Union (EU), as well as in the European
Parliament – and all the major trends in European politics
were represented. This Association organized regular meetings
with Arab leaders and politicians and served as a channel between
them and the European governments, the Presidency of the European
Council of Ministers, and the Commission of the European Communities.
In other words, it was a most powerful Arab lobby functioning
through European functionaries, built into the European institutions
to influence European policy at its summit.
In the following years, this body was reinforced by a political,
economical and cultural structure, named the Euro-Arab Dialogue,
which united at the highest level the EC – later to become
the European Union – and the countries of the Arab League.
The Europeans tried to maintain the Dialogue on a base of economic
relations, while the Arab countries tied the oil and business
markets to the European alignment on their anti-Israeli policies.
Even though some countries were reluctant to follow this path,
the joint proclamations of the EU concerning the Arab-Israeli
conflict endorsed the anti-Israeli points established previously
by the Second Islamic Conference in Lahore, Pakistan (February
1974).
Henceforth, an associative diplomacy binding the Arab-Muslim
countries and the EU developed in international forums and especially
in decisions concerning the Middle East conflict. During Euro-Arab
symposiums the oil threat was brandished and pressure was exerted
on the EU, as a reminder that economic relations were inexorably
tied to Europe’s political alignment with Arab anti-Zionist
policy. However, the Dialogue was not restricted to influencing
European foreign policy against Israel and detaching Europe from
America, it also aimed at establishing permanently in Europe a
massive Arab-Muslim presence by the immigration and settlement
of millions of Muslims with equal rights for all, native-born
and migrants alike. This policy endeavored to integrate Europe
and the Arab-Muslim world into one political and economic bloc,
by mixing populations (multiculturalism) while weakening the Atlantic
solidarity and isolating America.
To facilitate Muslim settlements in the West, cultural changes
in school teaching, universities and social life were imposed.
Textbooks were rewritten in view of allaying Muslim susceptibilities,
and university teachings in Middle East and Islamic history soon
conformed to Arab-Muslim norms and their worldview. Recommendations
were emphatically and repeatedly imposed for spreading the knowledge
of the Arabic language in Europe, and the learning about the superior
Islamic history and civilization. As these decisions were taken,
and then implemented through the mechanism of the Dialogue that
covered every country of the EU, a profound cultural Islamization
— through the network of schools, universities and the blessing
of Islamophile clergymen — conditioned the mentalities of
two generations of European youth. To this cultural transformation
was added from within the demographic pressure of an ever-increasing
Muslim immigration and, from without, an all-encompassing symbiosis
on every level with the Arab-Muslim world. This symbiosis built
on the system of the Euro-Arab Dialogue, and hence approved by
the higher political authorities of the EU, covered book publishing,
university exchanges, television, press and radio collaboration,
theological rapprochement, youth meetings, and intense collaboration
between numerous ONG organizations, humanitarian activities, workers
unions, economical and financial relations. Scientific, nuclear
and military training were provided as, for exemple, France’s
nuclear program with Iraq, culminating in the construction of
the nuclear reactor Osirak, destroyed by Israel in 1981.
The development of those complex ties between the Arab-Muslim
world and the EU was, at its core, conditioned by an anti-Israeli
and anti-American policy, the Arab ambition being to detach Europe
from its Atlantic ally. As Palestinian and Islamic terrorism developed,
the EU — anxious to save its growing and multiple interests
in the Muslim world — accused Israel and U.S. policy of
provoking it. Rather than confronting Islamic terrorism, European
leaders resorted to appeasement by condemning Israel. Anti-Zionism,
integrated into the developing Euro-Arab relations became a European
sub-culture of hate, denigration and disinformation, nourished
by the inner dynamic of the Euro-Arab Dialogue that led to the
rise of Eurabia. Opposing views were silenced to maintain a monolithic
façade of Islamic correctness in the press and publications.
From September 2000, the outburst of Palestinian terrorism within
Israel triggered a violent antisemitic wave in Europe as if it
had become the heart of Arabism.
France, Germany and Belgium, the troika leading Eurabia, imposed
monolithic orders for the EU and their African satellites. An
alliance with the Organization of the Islamic Conference, comprising
56 countries, would provide world supremacy at the UN in some
issues. The Euro-Arab bloc’s reliance on UN “international
legitimacy” is based on its virtual control of this forum.
Essential to the Arab League’s policy in relation to Israel,
Arafat — the godfather of international terrorism —
became the key regulator between the EU and the Arabs. The EU
assumed the main funding of the Palestinian Authority, and until
now the European Parliament refuses any investigation of how more
than a billion euros of European taxpayers’ money, transferred
to Arafat, has been used.
Today the Iraqi crisis confronts the EU governments with three
decades of pusillanimous policy based on oil, markets, short-term
economic gains, and an imperialist ambition of domination. It
is practically impossible now in Europe to control Islamic terrorism
either from within or without. Nor can the EU accept the destruction
of the multifarious symbiosis created by all European political
parties with the Arab and Muslim world, to the detriment of their
own country's security. Europe has undergone a profound structural
and demographic change, which is not yet fully perceived by Europeans,
even less by Americans. This transformation of a Judeo-Christian
based-civilization and culture by strong trends of Islamization
is creating social, political and cultural grounds for confrontations
that could provoke dangerous social implosions. The drifting away
of Europeans from America is not, therefore, due to their superior
moral exigencies, as some superficial analysts write. Rather,
this drift reveals a traumatic fear of a terrorism that the EU
always refused to acknowledge, scapegoating instead Israel and
America. It reveals the preservation, at all costs, of Arab and
Muslim corrupt dictatorships, including Arafat, with whom the
EU has built its economic and international political strategy,
power and security. And, more threatening, it indicates a profound
transformation, a mutation, whereby a civilization is drifting
toward 'dhimmitude.'*
*Author's note: Dhimmitude derives from the surrender
of the Christian clergy and political leaders to the Muslim jihad
armies, and their submission to Islamic domination of both their
lands and peoples. In exchange, they received a pledge of protection
('dhimma') from the Muslim sovereign - and the cessation of the
jihad war. This "protection" was conditioned on a ransom
payment (jizya) that was extorted from the vanquished Christian
and Jewish populations (dhimmis). Sometimes, Christian submission
to Islam was rooted in personal ambition. Dhimmitude often induced
self-hatred, and hatred against Jews and Christians who resisted
the jihad and Muslim domination. Christian dhimmitude has been
a world force for Islamization throughout history.
top
For information or comments, write to Feedback@IslamReview.com
|