Worldwide Caliphate Rising?
by Jerry Gordon (October 2011)
Europe, Globalization, and the Coming of the Universal Caliphate
by Bat Ye'or
Lexington Books, 2011
Bat Ye’or, an exiled Egyptian Jew, gave up a budding career as a novelist to engage full time in chronicling the all too human experience of non-Muslims who lived as subjugated persons or dhimmi (protected persons) in lands conquered by Islamic jihad. She personally knew the perils of dhimmitude. Both she and her parents were ejected from Egypt in the wake of the Suez Crisis of 1956 becoming stateless persons until their arrival in the UK. She and her parents were among the more than 900,000 Jews expelled from Arab lands following the founding of the Jewish State of Israel in 1948. That experience compelled her to scour historical records documenting the experiences of Jews and Christians under the shari’a system of depredation that she coined, dhimmitude. Her first major work, Le Dhimmi (The Dhimmi: Jews and Christians Under Islam) lead to a series depicting how Islamic Jihad infiltrated, overthrew and subjugated indigenous peoples in pre-Islamic lands. Those who survived rape pillage and murder, and did not convert, lived in perpetual fear for their lives, avoided only by payment of the jizya, the onerous poll tax that saved them from beheading. Those seminal works by Bat Ye’or on dhimmitude also included: The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude: Seventh-Twentieth Century (1996), Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide.(2001).
Then in 2002, she enlarged her vision to document Jihadist Islam in a new guise infiltrating Europe unnoticed by the elites of the European Commission and later the EU. As she describes it in her latest book, Europe, Globalization and The Coming Universal Caliphate:
In December 2002, an article entitled “The Euro-Arab Dialogue and the Birth of Eurabia” was posted in several languages on the internet. Published in a serious Parisian Jewish periodical by an author unknown to the general public, the article situated the European Community’s Arab policy in a precise, strategic, coordinated framework called the Euro-Arab Dialogue. Constructed from agreements concluded between nine EEC governments and the countries of the Arab League in 1973-1975, this framework defined a semi-official, quasi secret policy that would trigger the transformation of Europe. Two years later, in a book published in the United States; the author analyzed the structural composition of Eurabia.
That book, she referred to, was none other than her own, Eurabia: The Euro–Arab Axis.
Eurabia established Bat Ye’or as a muse to the counter jihad movement in both the EU and America. Works by others, among them, Bawer, Bostom, Durie, Fallaci, McCarthy, Phillips, Price –Jones, Spencer and Steyn followed which further elucidated the core of doctrinal Islam. Their work warned of the encroaching Islamization of Europe, the Grand Jihad in America and the scourge of contemporary dhimmitude. With a widening interest in her views, Bat Ye’or was painted by the mainstream media in both the UK and America as “an extremist Islamophobe” for depicting the menace of Islamization of the West.
Emblematic of that criticism is Simon Kuper, a Dutchman living in France who writes a column for the Financial Times. His native Holland has witnessed the dire consequences of Bat Ye’or's thesis with the assassination of Dutch politician Pim Fortune, the murder of film director Theo Van Gogh on the Streets of Amsterdam by a Dutch Moroccan, and the trial brought against the Hon. Geert Wilders, leader of the PVV (Freedom Party) in the Hague parliament for alleged "hate speech." These fellow Dutchmen were either killed or tried for their views critical of the Islamic assault on Judeo Christian values attributable to Eurabian multilateral, multicultural and Muslim immigration policies. In a recent FT column, “The End of Eurabia,” Kuper, puts his finger on why Eurabia is important:
Slogging through the Eurabia books helped me understand possibly the most influential western geopolitical theory since the attacks of 9/11. Though few policymakers or academics take the warped notion of Eurabia seriously, hordes of ordinary Europeans and Americans do. No wonder, because Eurabia is a simple idea that seems to explain the world.
That “simple idea’” Kuper rails against has caught the attention of ordinary Europeans and Americans witnessing the excesses of elitist multilateralism and multiculturalism, two of the key pillars of Bat Ye’or’s Eurabia. The third pillar is the rising universal Caliphate in the form of the 57 member Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) that effectively controls the 118 nations in the Non-Aligned Movement of the UN General Assembly. Beginning with the creation of the Europe-Arab Dialogue (EAD), and using an obscure journal called Eurabia; the elites concocted a farrago of agencies that benightedly inserted dhimmitude into the EU.
The Subversion of Dhimmitude in Eurabia
Bat Ye’or denotes the relevance of dhimmitude, its attempt to subvert law-based European rules and its menacing dynamics:
Relevance of Dhimmitude today….jihad ideology of world conquest, propelled by billions of petrodollars facilitated by complacency of European governments is flourishing in every corner of the world.
Bat Ye’or details the “cog mechanism” of the Euro-Arab Dialogue (EAD):
- Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation or PAEAC formed in 1973 by the Council of Europe,
- Euro-Arab Parliamentary Association (EAPA),
- Arab Inter-Parliamentary Union (AIPU),
- Union for the Mediterranean created by French President Sarkozy (UfM),
- Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (EMPA).
PAEAC is the cornerstone of the Eurabia network. Formed in 1973 in the wake of the Arab Oil boycott following the Yom Kippur War, the EAD was an offshoot of PAEAC. Funds for its operations came from a Swiss foundation with Arab funding. PAEAC had additional aid from the European Council. The PEAC program was anti-American and anti-Israel. It pushed Muslim emigration giving migrants the same rights as EU citizens. The European Commission Brussels Declaration of 1973 “called on Israel to return to the 1949 armistice lines and for the first time recognized the rights of the newly created people, the Palestinians.”
The anti-Israel doctrine was empowered by the Common Strategy on the Mediterranean Region adopted by the European Council in 2000 and reaffirmed in 2006. It stressed the importance of partnership with the Islamic countries on the littoral of the southern shores. What eventuated from this doctrine was an attempt to boycott Israel.
The European Council in 2003 established the European Security Strategy doctrine on terrorism. Devised by Javier Solana it established the appeasing doctrine that “terrorism arises from complex causes including modernization, cultural, political crises and the alienation of young people living in foreign countries.”
The UfM was launched in 2007 by French President Sarkozy with the approval of the European Council. It endeavored to ‘reunite’ Europe and Africa via economic aid.
How does the EMPA influences European Israeli policy? Bat Ye’or comments:
In October, 2008, EMPA asked the Mediterranean Foreign Ministers to represent the UfM, although they are non-binding. EMPA is a body endeavoring to shape multilateral policies that funnel the Arab world’s injunctions to European leaders.
This Mediterranean policy accepts a jihadist interpretation of truce, with its substantial financial contributions to its southern neighbors, [former] lax immigration policy, unilateral support for Palestine, promotion of the myth of an Islamic civilization of tolerance and peace. Europe is a perfect ally, serving the expansionist ambitions of the Ummah, the universal Muslim Community.
Enter the OIC-the Virtual Universal Caliphate
The EU has been engaged in extensive dialogues with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) creating multilateral relationships with the Muslim Ummah. The OIC formed in 1969 is composed of 57 member Islamic nations. It is headquartered in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The OIC organization is comprised of:
- Islamic Summit composed of Kings and heads of state - the Supreme authority
- Council of Foreign Ministers
- General Secretariat.
The OIC Secretary General Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu made addresses to multilateral and multicultural conferences of the EU furthering a strategy directed at recognition of Islam in Europe as part of a so-called Pact of Recognition and attacking “Islamophobia.” Ihsanoglu proposed that:
- Islam in Europe is given official recognition equal to other main religions of European states.
- Educational materials at all levels in key disciplines such as history, philosophy, human and social sciences should be aimed presenting a balanced view of other cultures and civilizations.
- An intercultural exchange system is established at local, national, regional and international levels and in all the media, news reporting, literary work and “even cartoons.”
- Tolerance and debate by the intelligentsia and media be promoted about their responsibilities to “avoid perpetuating prejudices.”
- Campaigns should be developed to stimulate and disseminate respect for culture, religious pluralism and cultural diversity.
- The root causes of terrorism, including political conflicts should be identified.
- Positive feelings of belonging and responsible citizenship should be encouraged among Muslim youth in Europe, and incentives given them to participate in mainstream public life.
- Existing legislation should be adopted and strengthened by EU council directives regarding hate crimes, discriminatory and unequal treatment.
Within three years, as Bat Ye’or noted “every measure proposed by Ihansanoglu entered into the framework of cooperation between Europe and the OIC.”
The OIC Supreme Council met at the Third Extraordinary Session of the Islamic Summit Conference in December, 2005 in the wake of the Danish Cartoons incident. Bat Ye’or describes the OIC objectives vis a vis the fight over Islamophobia:
They highlighted the necessity to fight and eradicate Islamophobia as a way of raising the level of mutual understanding between different cultures. They [urged] western countries “to legislate against Islamophobia and use educational and media channels to combat it”. Their recommendations included “enhanced coordination between the OIC institutions and civil society groups in the West to counter the phenomenon”.
They recommended internationalizing the fight against Islamophobia through cooperation between the OIC and the UN, EU, Council of Europe, OSEC, the African Union to ensure protection of Muslim immigrant minorities in the West and preserve their identity.
The Ten Year Program of Action recommended that member OIC states “should be involved in regional and international organizations and strive to obtain from the UN a resolution prohibiting Islamophobia.” It recommended that Western media be employed to promote “the cause of the Ummah and Islamic values.”
Bat Ye’or noted one peculiar aspect of the OIC program - deracination of the official lexicon by the EU and US governments making a connection between Muslims and terrorism.
The OIC cited the inadmissibility of all attempts to establish a link between Islam and Muslims with terrorism – a tenet strongly upheld by the EU and President George W. Bush and recently totally endorsed by the US. According to an EU civil servant, the common Union lexicons containing the forbidden words are necessary to prevent terrorism. This implies that if Europeans abstain from provoking Muslims through their bad habit of taunting their holy beliefs, they would not be attacked and terrorism would cease.
European Backlash against Multilateralism and Multiculturalism
In late November, 2009 the Swiss SVP (Swiss People’s Party) launched a successful referendum banning construction of minarets by mosques that was passed by a margin of 57 percent of eligible voters. Oskar Freysinger, head of the conservative SVP, noted in a London Times report, “In no case does this impinge on religious freedom. This has nothing to do with the practice of religion.” Ulrich Schuler said in response to Swiss Government fears that the ban would breach the law on freedom of religion said, “This is not against Islam. The minaret is a symbol of political power.” That was a reference to the comments by controversial Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, when as AKP party leader and Mayor of Istanbul in 1998 he was convicted for inciting religious hatred after reading a Muslim poem that included the lines:”The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers.” Most of Switzerland’s 350,000 Muslims (four percent of the population) are Turkish in origin.
In February, 2011, UK Prime Minister David Cameron followed by French President Sarkozy lamented the failures of multi-culturalism. Cameron said: “We have allowed the weakening of our collective identity. Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live [. . .] apart from the mainstream.” French President Sarkozy said: “We have been too concerned about the identity of the immigrant and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.” That was echoed by German Chancellor Merkel who called multi-culturalism, “an absolute failure.” The adoption of strident multi-culturalism had been launched over three decades ago by the European elitists (held up to critical scorn by Bat Ye’or in Eurabia), who accommodated the demands of the OIC and Muslim immigrants opposing their cultural and civil integration in host countries.
Muslim opposition to integration was reflected in the adoption of shari’a law in special courts in the UK and de facto ‘no go areas’ in major EU cities, where non-Muslims feared to tread.
Wilders in a speech at the Magna Carta Foundation in March, 2011 on “The Failure of Multiculturalism and How to Turn the Tide” noted:
Europe is Islamizing at a rapid pace. Many European cities have large Islamic concentrations. In some neighborhoods. Islamic regulations are already being enforced. Women’s rights are being tramapled. We are confronted with headscarves and burqa’s, polygamy, female genital mutilation, honour-killings. “In each one of our cities” says Oriana Fallaci, “there is a second city, a state within the state, a government within the government. A Muslim city, a city ruled by the Koran.”
[. . .]
In October, 2009, Andrew Neather, the former advisor of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, confirmed that the British Government had deliberately organized mass immigration as part of a social engineering project. The Blair Government wanted to –I quote – “make the UK truly multicultural.” To achieve this end, 2.3 million foreigners were allowed to enter Britain between 2000 and 2009; Neather said this policy had ‘enriched” Britain.”
[. . .]
Last month, a poll in Britain showed a staggering 48 percent of the British consider supporting a non-fascist and non-violent party that vows to crack down on immigration and Islamic extremists and restrict the building of mosques.
Wilders went on to echo Bat Ye’or’s criticisms of the unaccountable Eurabian elitists who had become useful fools for the OIC’s agenda.
On account of international treaties, EU legislation prevails over national legislation and cannot be reversed by national parliaments. In 2008, the European Court of Justice annulled both Irish and Danish immigration legislation. In March, 2010, the European Court of Justice annulled Dutch legislation restricting family reunification for immigrants on welfare.
The ease with which Europe’s political elite conducts an immigration policy aimed at the deracination of Europe shows the insensitivity of this elite. It willingly sacrifices its own people to its political goal without consideration for the people involved.
Danish Psychologist, Nicolai Sennels in a New English Review, article, “Muslims and Westerners: The Psychological Differences” discussed the evidence that European Muslims do not identify with their host countries.
A French survey in Le Figaro showed that only 14 percent of the country’s estimated five million Muslims see themselves as “more French than Muslim.” Research made by the German Ministry of Interior shows that only 12 percent of Muslims living in Germany see themselves as more German than Muslim. A Danish survey published by the pro-Muslim pro-democratic organization Democratic Muslims led by the Danish PM and Muslim Naser Khader showed that only 14 percent of Muslims living in Denmark could identify themselves as “Democratic and Danish.”
One of the most popular books in German is Thilo Sarrazin’s Germany Abolishes Itself. As noted in a Gates of Vienna blog translation of a recent Die Zeit interview,” his criticism of Muslim immigration created more uproar than it would have if it had been written by a “right-wing extremist.” Sarrazin is a banker and a Social Democrat. The scandal was intensified by his assertion that mass Muslim immigration is lowering the average IQ of the German population.”
In the Die Zeit interview Sarrazin commented on one of the underlying problems in Eurabia: intimidation of Islamization critics:
Recently, the writer Chaim Noll wrote: If the Federal President says, Islam belongs in Germany, and then criticism of Islam also belongs in Germany. I thought that was well said. If criticism of Islam is not possible, there is this stifling atmosphere where you feel that you and your opinions are persecuted, stonewalled and oppressed. Where there is argument, there is at least a draft passing through. And where there is a draft, there are at least no small niches where a “stink” hangs.
That “stink” that Sarrazin decried has victimized Wilders, Danish free thinker, Lars Hedegaard, Austrian Politician Susanne Winters and counter-jihadist, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolf. Wilders was acquitted of all charges by an Amsterdam District Court in June, 2011. Hedegaard in Copenhagen was convicted, of charges of ‘racism.’ Austrians Winters in 2009 and Sabaditsch–Wolf in 2010 were separately convicted in Vienna courts of “anti-Muslim incitement” for criticizing Islamic doctrine and the less than exemplary behavior of the Prophet Mohammed. These trials were brought by Muslims and leftist media using hate speech laws adapted ironically to combat antisemitism. Instead they were used to throttle criticism of Islamic doctrine that denies international standards of human and civil rights such as the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As we have noted, the 1990 Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam of the OIC rejected the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights. Instead, the Cairo Declaration vaulted shari’a’s legal position overarching all human and civil rights laws of the EU, America and ironically the UN.
Soeren Kern noted the Dutch government turnabout on its multiculturalism programs in a Hudson Institute article in September, 2011:
A new integration bill (covering letter and 15-page action plan), which Dutch Interior Minister Piet Hein Donner presented to parliament on June 16, reads: "The government shares the social dissatisfaction over the multicultural society model and plans to shift priority to the values of the Dutch people. In the new integration system, the values of the Dutch society play a central role. With this change, the government steps away from the model of a multicultural society."
The letter continues: "A more obligatory integration is justified because the government also demands that from its own citizens. It is necessary because otherwise the society gradually grows apart and eventually no one feels at home anymore in the Netherlands. The integration will not be tailored to different groups."
This Dutch turnabout on multiculturalism followed by just a few days, the acquittal of Hon. Geert Wilders, “on all charges” in an Amsterdam court.
Is this pushback against Eurabia succeeding? Bat Ye’or doesn’t think so. At the conclusion of her new book, she writes:
Europe has lost its bet. A hostage to hatred of Israel, it thought it could salvage peace by its surrender to Palestinian terrorism since the late 1960’s. Burnishing the instruments of its own defeat, it has argued that terrorism will not be defeated through the military option, but rather through dialogue, multilateralism and multiculturalism, the main argument of the coming Caliphate.
The Palestinization of Europe has brought the Caliphate into the cities of Europe. . . It has moved forward on gilded carpets in the corridors of dialogue, the networks of the alliances and partnership, the corruption of its leaders, intellectuals and NGOs, particularly at the United Nations. The Caliphate is already alive and growing within Europe. In the extinction of the basic freedoms, control over thought, opinions and culture, subverting democratic laws by Shari’a, fatwas, self-censorship and fear-inseparable companions of dhimmitude.
Is America, next?
Will what Bat Ye’or describes as OIC infiltration and official dhimmitude occur here in America?
Perhaps it already has, but with some mitigating circumstances.
Let’s looks at the history.
Sixty years ago, the CIA in the Eisenhower Administration entered into an arrangement with Dr. Said Ramadan, co-founder of the World Muslim League that supported the spread of the Salafist ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood across the Ummah. Ramadan seized a mosque in Munich originally sponsored by a group composed by an ex-Nazi operative Gerhard von Mende and ex- Waffen SS Muslim soldiers from the Caucasus and Central Asia. The takeover of the Munich mosque by Muslim student leaders and later Muslim Brotherhood leaders from Egypt ironically facilitated founding in the US the Muslim Student Association and the Islamic Society of North America.
In the period following 9/11, despite the report and findings of the Congressionally- chartered Commission, we witnessed the start of official multiculturalism in Washington during the Bush Administration. The first evidence of that was the mantra that the terrorism had nothing to do with Islam, an alleged religion of peace, so we were told. Then the Bush Administration formally recognized the Organization of the Islamic Conference in 2007, since renamed the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), appointing a Texas Muslim businessman as a special envoy to the Muslim Ummah. The Obama Administration appointed another Texas Muslim, who was a White House Deputy Counsel to become the second special envoy to the OIC. Then we had the deracination of the official government counterterrorism lexicon by substituting “manmade disasters,” instead of terms like Jihadist or Islamist connected to the term terrorism. We had the removal of a Pentagon consultant on jihad warfare doctrine, Army reserve Major Stephen Coughlin at the behest of Heshem Islam, a Muslim outreach aide to the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense in the Bush Administration. Islam accused Coughlin of being “a Christian fanatic with a pen.” Early in the Obama Administration, the President officially reached out to the Ummah via trips to Ankara, Turkey, praising its Islamist government as a model, and Cairo where President Obama gave a speech at the al Azhar University, apologizing for US conduct in the Arab Muslim heartland. Nonetheless, his Attorney General, Eric Holder, opened up investigations into removing barriers to misuse of Muslim Charities or Zakat that designated as one of its seven purposes, jihad, as the way of Allah. In 2008, a Federal Court in Dallas, Texas convicted founders of the Holy Land Foundation, a Muslim Charity on 108 charges of funneling upwards of $35 million in funds to Muslim Brotherhood affiliate, Hamas in Gaza. In the course of that trial, the FBI had obtained copies of a secret plan to engage in a Grand Jihad in America to introduce shari’a to supplant the US Constitution. Further, the Holy Land Foundation federal prosecutors had identified as unindicted co-conspirators several Muslim Brotherhood front groups, who have yet to be prosecuted.
The Obama Administration appointed members of the Muslim Brotherhood to policy positions and advisory posts at the Department of Homeland Security. In the wake of the Fort Hood massacre by Maj. Nidal Hasan, the Army Chief of Staff said that the first victim of that slaughter was "diversity." In the eruption of the mega mosque controversies that coursed from ground zero in lower Manhattan to Murfreesboro in Middle Tennessee and Temecula, California, the US Department of Justice intervened in local court proceedings declaring that Islam was a protected religion under our Constitution. Christian and Jewish groups obsessed about engaging Muslim clerics in dialogues that conveyed da’wa- the call to Islam - as a benign peaceful faith hiding its real doctrine and misleading both sponsoring non-Muslim groups and the general public. Mainstream media promoted this view that Islam was a benign faith evading the realities of Muslim Brotherhood strategic plans uncovered by private investigators containing a political agenda of conquest by infiltration and deception. Infiltration of our bi-partisan political party system occurred through the election to office of Muslim candidates at both Congressional and state levels, fostered by leading figures with deep connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Like the grass roots efforts in the EU to combat dhimmitude, there have sprung up in the US opposition to mosque building and campaigns to introduce anti-shari’a legislation in more than 20 states. Three such statutes were enacted in Arizona, Tennessee and Louisiana during the 2010 and 2011 legislative sessions. Congressional Homeland Security Committees in both the House and Senate undertook investigations of home grown terrorism. Radical clerics in America were found to be recruiting youths as Jihadis who engaged in murderous lone wolf attacks here or joined al Qaeda groups abroad fighting our troops in the field.
What Bat Ye’or laments as a foregone conclusion about dhimmitude in Europe may also have infiltrated this country with the condonment of the administrations in Washington and in major state capitals, the mainstream media and even non-Muslim religious bodies. However, there appears to be more resolve at the grass roots level here to fight this development, to stifle the spread of the universal Caliphate to this bastion of democracy and freedom. We have something that Europe doesn’t have-a written Constitution with a Bill of Rights – the First Ten Amendments - with the right to exercise free speech embedded in the First Amendment.
To comment on this book review, please click here.
To help New English Review continue to publish timely and interesting book reviews like this one, please click here.
If you have enjoyed this article and want to read more by Jerry Gordon, please click here
Jerry Gordon is a also regular contributor to our community blog. To read his entries, please click here.