Why al-Qaeda Will Dominate the European Union

Why al-Qaeda Will Dominate the European Union

By Pavel Kohout
http://www.techcentralstation.com/100704G.html

In a few decades, radical Islam will ultimately dominate the European Union,
and perhaps most of the world. It has already become a dominant force in the
UN, which is reflected in the results of voting against Israel's anti-terrorist
barrier. In this respect, we should note that the widespread usage of the word
"wall" is itself a small victory of anti-Israeli propaganda, since 93 percent
of the barrier consists of a fence that can be quickly removed once the
Palestinian authorities manage to restrain the terrorists' activity.

The first reason extreme Islam will prevail is the intellectual advantage that
al-Qaeda leaders have over western European politicians. The latter want to
believe that there is no clash of civilizations; that terrorism is just a
product of misery and lack of education; that the solution lies in a
multicultural, tolerant society; and that the stubbornness of the Americans and
Israelis is to blame for all the problems.

What naïveté. An editorial in the March issue of Mu'askar al-Battar (an
al-Qaeda newsletter) sets these fantasies right: "The war of cultures had begun
long before the 9/11 attacks, before Huntington and Fukuyama. This war has been
going on since there first were the faithful and the unfaithful." We might cite
dozens of similar statements. The European leaders who still doubt the validity
of Huntington's "clash of civilizations" theory are kidding themselves. The
leaders of Islamic radicals are fanatics, but they are intelligent fanatics.

The second reason is the unification of foreign policy in the EU. In the UN,
all member states of the European Union dutifully voted against Israel as a
flock of sheep under the leadership of France. France is home to millions of
Muslims, who are a decisive factor in its domestic politics. Their opinions,
strongly influenced by radical Islamic propaganda, shape the French, and
consequently also European foreign policy. The growth in the Muslim population
makes French policy visibly more and more pro-Arab, pro-Islam, and anti-Israel.
Also weighing heavily in European (not just French) politics is oil. The
corrupt relationships between governments and oil companies are a well-known
fact. Take the story of Elf Aquitaine, for instance. This is why European
leaders literally lick the boots of Arab dictators. Just remember Romano Prodi
kowtowing before Muammar Quadafi. But only the common foreign policy together
with the adoption of the European Constitution will allow radical Islamists to
pull the strings of all European foreign ministers at once.

France is capable of arranging a new 1938 Munich Agreement not just for Israel
but also for itself. Its policy is a combination of servility towards the
strong and ruthlessness towards the weak. France is capable of leading a brave
attack against schoolgirls wearing headscarves, but never against Hamas or the
Islamic Jihad. The Palais d'Elysée probably judges that it is better to be on
friendly terms with those movements. But a perverse tolerance of terrorists can
be traced elsewhere. Belgium, for instance, offered a generous asylum to Khalil
al-Nawawreh, the murderer of several Israelis who was a member of the gang
occupying the Nativity Church in the spring 2002. The terrorist received a
monthly payment of Â?4,000, free housing and a complete liberty. He paid Belgium
back by robbing a post office using an explosive.

The third reason is an advantage of the Islamic society in terms of evolution:
a high birthrate. This is typical for all Islamic territories from Albania to
Zanzibar. The Darwinian advantage lies in the absence of feminism and respect
for family values. One of the incontestable Islamic virtues is the duty to take
care of the old and sick in the family. Muslims hold the Europeans -- who send
their elderly to institutions -- in contempt.

The welfare state in the EU nourishes the illusion in people that the state
will take care of them when they retire. Thus, people do not try to have
children to look after them in the old age. The European welfare state is
immensely expensive. Europeans are now obliged to pay higher taxes than they
have ever had in the past 1,500 years or so. And where does the collected money
go? In some European countries, the amount of farming subsidies per calf
exceeds the amount of social benefits distributed per child. What are the
chances of survival of a civilization which values calves more than children?

This particular clash of two civilizations -- the West and radical Islam --
cannot be resolved the "European" way: through negotiations, efforts to reach
consensus, and tolerance. The only consensus acceptable for radical Islam is
its dominance in Europe. The word "Islam" means "surrender", literally
translated. Any tolerance towards terrorism actually means surrender. The best
option for a peaceful co-existence of civilizations is mutual respect. But if
the respect cannot be mutual, is it respect or surrender?

The author is an associate of the Center for Economics and Politics (CEP), Prague.