By Felix Struening, English translation: Dr. David van Dyke

There have been many attempts to explain the phenomenon of the Islamic suicide assassin: theological, sociological, economical and psychological. Most of the definitions can explain certain patterns in the behavior of terrorists in Israel and the Palestinian territories, for example, but they fail suddenly in the face of others such as the death pilots of September 11, 2001.

Theological arguments are based on the Koran since jihad – also in the sense of an armed war against unbelievers – is required there, and specifically death in this war is the only guaranteed path to Paradise, as the Islamicist Mark A. Gabriel has demonstrated in detail, not to mention the worthlessness of this earthly life, which accentuates the material melioration in Paradise, according to the sociologist Manfred Kleine-Hartlage. In contrast to all of this stands (apparently) the Koranic prohibition against suicide as well as the proscription against killing [other] Muslims.

Studies also show that socio-economic reasons can hardly play a role in self-sacrifice because the perpetrators come mostly from well-to-do, intact families, in addition to the sociological explanation of Hans Magnus Enzensberger, who holds the “narcissistic disease” of the Muslim man as the loser of world history to be the cause. In light of the high level of education of many suicide assassins, a massive brainwashing through Islamic organizations would also have to be present besides.

However, yet [other studies show] that the self-destructive behavior of Muslim men is marked by deeply rooted psychological components that overshadow the other behavioral patterns. At least that is the interpretation provided by the book “The Banality of Suicide Terrorism” by the American psychoanalyst Nancy Hartevelt Kobrin, who sees gender roles in Islam and the mother-son relationship of the Islamic family as decisive. In the final analysis, she views Islamic suicide terrorism as an extension of domestic violence, even in the form of a military and political tool of radical Muslim organizations.

Nancy Hartevelt Kobrin claims that the problem results primarily from the position of the Muslim woman. On the one hand, they become mothers at a very young age, usually when they are still children themselves, and are therefore devalued as a person and abused. On the other hand, it is absolutely taboo in Islamic societies for a son to separate himself in any way from his mother. Even man’s wife – or all of his wives – are worth less [than his own mother]. The man’s identification with this (from a Western perspective) completely devalued and psychologically destroyed female imago is ultimately catastrophic.

The author uses the 9/11 death pilots as well as Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda as examples. According to Kobrin, bin Laden is still in a psychological war against his father, a building engineer who renovated the famous mosques in Mecca, Medina and Jerusalem. The author bases this conclusion on the code names for the al-Qaida terror attack in Kenya, “holy Qa’aba” (Mecca), and in Tanzania, “al Aqsa” (Jerusalem), among other things.

In the last chapter of her book, Kobrin suggests how Islamic suicide terrorism could be stopped. First, societies that support suicide attacks would have to be brought to court. Also, institutions and clerics who provoke hatred of other cultures (that is, unbelievers) would have to be prosecuted.

But of primary importance for this psychoanalyst is early intervention in Muslim cultures to strengthen the position of young girls, to allow them an education, and to protect them from religious-cultural indoctrination. This includes banning the burqa, protecting them from genital mutilation, and combating the culture of shame in Islam. Here the author stands shoulder-to-shoulder with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who also believes that the suppression of women is the greatest obstacle toward the modernization and integration of Islam.

Nancy Hartevelt Kobrin finds a special explanatory model for this situation from her own field, psychoanalysis. She thinks that Muslim women often suffer from a massive “Stockholm syndrome.” This refers to the behavior of hostages who eventually defend their kidnappers and even characterize their captors as protectors. Highly educated women in Islamic families act similarly by not reporting abuse even when it is committed by a family member, or by covering up the abuse, or even actively participating in it, such as through honor killings or genital mutilation.

Nancy Hartevelt Kobrin: The Banality of Suicide Terrorism. The Naked Truth About the Psychology of Islamic Suicide Bombing, Washington, DC: Potomac Books 2010, 192 pages, 21.99 Euro.

This is a translation of the German review at Citizen Times by Dr. David van Dyke.

By Felix Struening

“Islam is not just a belief, it is a way of life, a violent way of life.”, and “I believe that the subjection of women within Islam is the biggest obstacle to the integration and progress of Muslim communities in the West.” These are the two key messages of the probably best known critic of Islam, Ayaan Hirsi Ali. It is aimed not so much to the Muslims themselves, rather than to Western politicians and citizens. First, they have to understand the meaning of the gift of democracy and political freedom. And secondly, that it is Islam that threatens exactly this.

The oppression of women is genuinely Islamic

Three themes – sex, money and violence – are the crucial misunderstandings that would not be understood by Western multiculturalists, according to the author. Of course, the oppression of Muslim women is the biggest topic in the book, whether it be acting for honor killings, circumcision, forced marriage or general sexual availability and violence. “The code of honor and shame may be tribal and pre-Islamic in its origins, but it is now an integral part of the Islamic religion and culture.”

Muslims and the Welfare State

The second major issue, Ayaan Hirsi Ali talks about is the alimentation of migrants and refugees by the Western welfare states. As in Muslim cultures little nothing is taught about savings or economic households and women in Islamic countries does not have money at their disposal, Western social benefits and generous loans granted to hopeless debt. And while the migrants often support their families at home with the money received from the welfare states, one misses any responsibility to the sponsoring host society. “They were not questioned about their values, customs, practices, or their knowledge of Dutch customs and laws. […] But none of us had been citizens before, in the modern sense of citizenship. We had never felt a participatory loyalty to any government. We remained loyal to our bloodline.”

This excessive burden of the welfare of migrants from Islamic countries and their subsequent generations due to low participation in employment and high crime rates is proofed by recent studies. “But the multiculturalists belief that Somali clan culture should somehow be preserved, even when its products move to Western societies – is a recipe for social failure.”

Islam means submission

The third major issue on violence and the isolation of Muslim thinking leads to the actual accusation of the author of the Western do-gooders. The fundamental violence of Islam and the enormous impact of the religion on even seemingly moderate Muslims would still be underestimated. The principle of submission – the literal meaning of Islam – makes people dependent on authorities and prone to fundamentalism. Ayaan Hirsi Ali so damn the putative reformers of Islam, who tried in adapted versions of the Koran to mitigate the very violent passages: “What is striking about this tortuous struggle to reinterpret Muslim scripture is that none of these intelligent and well-meaning men and women reformers can live with the idea of rejecting altogether the troublesome parts of scripture. Thus, in their hands, Allah becomes a god of ambiguity rather than of clarity. From an articulate transmitter of Allah’s word, Muhammad is turned into someone who left behind an incoherent muddle of rules.”

Also, that most Muslims are seemingly moderate and don’t follow the precepts of the Koran every day, should not be misunderstood, says the author: “A moderate Muslim may not practice Islam in a way that a fundamentalist Muslim does – veiling for example, or refusing to shake a woman’s hand – but both the fundamentalists and the so-called moderates agree on the authenticity and the truthfulness and the value of Muslim Scripture.” Ultimately, Westerners have to make clear differences between cultures and have to appreciate them: “All human beings are equal, but all cultures and religions are not. [...] It is part of Muslim culture to oppress women and part of all tribal cultures to institutionalize patronage, nepotism, and corruption. The culture of the Western Enlightenment is better.”

There is a perspective

But Ayaan Hirsi Ali does not stop with this criticism, as do many other authors. “In this clash of civilizations the West needs to criticize the cultures of men of color too. We need to drop the ethos of relativist respect for non-Western religions and cultures if respect is simply a euphemism for appeasement. But we need to do more than criticize. We need – urgently – to offer an alternative message that is superior to the message of submission.” Some of these solutions she provides herself, most are about education and enlightenment of Muslim migrants. Only the call to the Christian counter-missionary work – because Christianity is now a peaceful religion – is not convincing at all. Here, the former representative of the strong and secular state drifts suddenly from previously publicized convictions.

From personal experience to the criticism of the system Islam

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is not only popular worldwide because the Muslim fundamentalist Mohammed Bouyeri killed the Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh on the street and pinned a death threat to her on the breast of the corpse. She also wrote the world’s autobiographical bestseller “Infidel”. There she described her way from Somalia into the free West, from Islam to the enlightened citizen. Her new book “Nomad” also carries strong autobiographical elements, but while the reading turns out as an argumentative and powerful essay against Islam. Hence, the subtitle of the English translation fits very well: “A Personal Journey Through the clash of Civilizations.”

Critics accuse the critic of Islam as usual, that one cannot conclude from one’s own live on the public. But Ayaan Hirsi Ali wants to provoke own thought and to motivate to own actions. Therefore, emotions are simply the best. Studies that show what the author claims, however, are published already enough.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali: Nomade. A Personal Journey Through the clash of Civilizations. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010, 304 pages.

This is a translation of the German review at BuchTest.

Nearly monthly, new studies and books about the problems with the integration of Muslims in Germany and whole Europe are published. In France, Great Britain and the Netherlands the problems seem to be most obviously, but also in small Denmark. In the aftermath of the Mohammed-cartoon crisis, there have been some changes concerning Muslims in politics and public opinion. The German Review of Books talked to Nicolai Sennels, a psychologist who worked for several years with young criminal Muslims in a Copenhagen prison, about recent developments.

Mr. Sennels, since the publishing of your book “Among Criminal Muslims” in 2008 and our last interview, there have been some changes in the Danish integration policy. For instance, the Danish government just announced a tenfold increase in payments to encourage reverse migration. This is one of your main requests: paying Muslims, who are not willing to integrate, to return to their countries of origin.

It is clear that my book had an influence on the debate. Many politicians quoted my book, and it is clear that the book has contributed to a more free debate in Denmark. My experiences from extensive travelling throughout our continent, my lectures and of course international media, is, that Denmark is Europe’s tip of the spear when it comes to acknowledging the problems with Islam and Muslim immigration. Parties that talk openly about these problems are growing, and parties that don’t are close to extinction. Even the two biggest left wing parties agree – the Social Democracy Party and Socialistic Peoples Party – that they will not change the strict immigration laws that have been made by the Dansk Folkeparti.

Soon we will probably get a law that will kick immigrants out of Denmark if they block or interfere with police work. This law is crucial to regain secular control of Muslim-dominated areas. While the prospect of imprisonment does not seem to scare immigrants from committing serious and dangerous crimes, it seems that losing the chance to live in our country is the only thing that really scares them. This is also my own experience from working with criminal Muslims: The one thing they fear is being deported.

Unfortunately, the chiefs of the police are very much holding back their efforts in Muslim areas. They claim that they “do not want to throw gasoline on the fire.” In the short run, this may of course be a reasonable strategy, but it also means that Islamic laws and authorities become more powerful in these areas every day.
My experience from working psychologically with Muslims shows that the Muslim culture does not find it easy to be “equal.” Either you are over or you are under: You can be different and unequal, but you cannot be different and equal. The chiefs of the police and many politicians hope for some kind of “mutual acceptance,” but this is not possible in cultures developed under Islam.

Concerning these no-go-areas, even for the police, and the growing influence of the Islamic clerics, you recently wrote in your blog at Jyllands Posten about Muslim imams as a kind of Fourth Branch of Government.

Imams, Islamic priests, have a strong influence on their followers. For many Muslims the words of an imam are law – and for even more Muslims they are guidelines for lifestyle and political views. The power of Islamic authorities among Muslims is very often much more influential and respected than secular laws and norms.
Representatives for secular authorities are very often attacked in Muslim-dominated areas in Denmark and the rest of Europe. The police and politicians are not safe in these areas. Police get mocked, receive threats and are often attacked physically when entering Muslim areas. We recently had the tragic yet comical experience of seeing one of our most politically correct politicians, the mayor of integration in Copenhagen, Jakob Hougaard, being attacked by Muslims who tried to stone him and a journalist during an interview in the Muslim ghetto, Tingbjerg. The ironic thing is that Hougaard is “on their side,” claiming that there are no problems with violence in Tingbjerg and that Islam has nothing to do with terror and integration problems. Hougaard even promised in the Islamic magazine “Akhbar” to sponsor religious Islamic festivals if he got re-elected as mayor at the elections on November 17th, 2009 – which, by the way, he did not win.

Policemen and politicians are not the only ones who are attacked, stoned, etc. Ambulance drivers, firemen and even completely normal people who assist the elderly are also attacked. The problem they have with the people assisting the elderly is apparently that these people wear clothes that bear the logo of the state.

While things like this happen on a daily basis throughout Denmark, it is clear that “Muslim authorities” have completely other conditions when exerting influence on other Muslims. So called “father groups” consisting of mature Muslim men can patrol the streets of e.g. Muslim-dominated areas such as Nørrebro and Gellerup without getting attacked or mocked. They are respected and can walk around freely, telling tough Muslim criminals to behave, go to school, etc. There is of course also the example of the imams, who give their speeches every Friday. These speeches are not only religious, but also political. Approximately ten thousand Muslims in Denmark go to these speeches every week and get to know which political views are accepted, which reactions they should have to this or that, how to treat women, children, Non-Muslims, etc.

While non-Islamic authorities earn very little respect and are often even disrespected and attacked in Muslim-dominated areas, imams, heads of Muslim families, etc., have great power over a majority of Muslims in our Western countries. This power is uncontrollable and very often does not respect secular laws. For many Muslims, this power has a much greater authority than the three secular powers in our countries (legislative, executive and judiciary).

This fourth power enjoys a growing acceptance, especially among local politicians and the police. Local politicians in Copenhagen pay the Danish convert and imam, Abdul Wahid Pedersen, to write books on “real Islamic values” for Muslim children in our capital. Pedersen openly accepts the stoning of women and supports honour killings and vigilantes. In the name of dialogue, and because the local politicians have realized that they lack power in the Muslim community, they put Pedersen on the payroll.

In the same way, the police hire imams to calm Muslims when the police arrest Muslims suspected of being terrorists. This strategy might save the police some extra work in the short run, but affirming imams as official legal authorities by hiring them as shepherds to tell their flock to “calm down” is clearly the wrong approach.

In the European Elections in June 2009, Geert Wilders and his right-wing Populist Party became the second-strongest in the Netherlands. Is there a new anti-Muslim, anti-migration area emerging in Europe?

Absolutely! More and more Europeans have felt the impact of Islam and Muslim immigrations in their own lives. Danes are forced out of their neighbourhoods by Muslim dominance and criminals; more and more people have close friends or family who have been physically threatened or injured in connection with Muslims; more and more parents experience how Muslim children ruin their own children’s day in school, etc. Women have increasingly experienced that Muslim men are looking or treating them chauvinistically, and people are now seeing signs of civil war on TV and outside of their own kitchen windows.

The economic consequences are equally catastrophic. A Muslim coming to Denmark costs the Danish taxpayers 300,000 euros on average. Schools, hospitals, homes for the elderly, public salaries, etc. suffer tremendously due to this expenditure.

Almost everything that the critics of Islam and Muslim integration warned about last century has become reality today. The only thing that has not yet happened is the emergence of a strong Islamic party. It is certain that this will also happen, but my own feeling is that the lack of sympathizers in the government will prevent the party from becoming too powerful; at least in Denmark. On the other side, I am sure that it is not necessary to have a strong Islamic party in order for Muslims to wreak havoc in our cities and destroy our social societies. It is also not necessary to have an Islamic party to create Muslim parallel societies that are beyond the reach of non-Islamic authorities. Actually, it seems that Denmark and other countries in Europe will have their own Gaza Strips. According to the cultural-psychological trait in Muslim culture – that different cultures and religions cannot be equal – these parallel societies will never be able to exist in harmony with their surroundings.

We also do not need an Islamic party to create periodic or permanent martial law in certain areas of Europe. The only thing we need for this is politically correct politicians, a fearful police force and normal, thinking individuals who don’t bother to write letters to the editors and talk openly about their views on Islam and criminal Muslims at their workplace, family dinners, etc.

Nicolai Sennels is the author of the Danish book “Among criminal Muslims. A psychologist’s experience from Copenhagen” published in 2008. It has been translated into English, French and Swedish. The author is a psychologist and has worked for the Copenhagen authorities for several years. From 2005 to 2008 he worked at the Sønderbro youth prison in Copenhagen.

You can read a former interview with Nicolai Sennels.

By Felix Struening

The current geopolitical situation is characterized by a resurgence of the former great powers. The concept of the – mainly European and American – democracy is called into question by the successes of the autocratic regimes like China and Russia. Robert Kagan, foreign policy adviser to Republican presidential candidate John McCain in 2008, already started in 2003 a broad discussion with his book “Of Paradise and Power. America and Europe in the New World Order”. Now he presents with “The Return of History” an essay that deals intensively with the conflict between democracy and autocracy. Thereby, he questiones the legitimacy of the hegemony of the United States as well as the domination of the democratic model itself.

The end of the political primacy

On the basis of the three paradigms of the diplomatic and political influence, military strength and above all the economic power, the author analyzes the countries Russia, China, Japan, India and Iran regarding their hegemony demands. He shows that the faith in political opening through economic recovery turned out to be false and how the primacy of politics over economy gets lost step by step. “Growing national wealth and autocracy have proven compatible. Autocrats learn and adjust. The Russian and Chinese autocracies have figured out how one can authorize a free market economy and simultaneously suppressing political activity. They have understood that people who make money, stay out of politics, especially when they know that an intervention will let them suffer.”

While the resurgence of the great powers and the conflict between democracies and autocracies seems to be problematic for the author, he sees no long-term problem in the global Islamism. Although these tendencies must be clearly countered at the political level, Islamism will be defeated by modernity, because of Islam’s backward-looking focus on its tradition. Correspondingly short, it is only the topic on a few pages. Similarly tight is the chapter on the hegemony of Iran, which leads to the conclusion, that Robert Kagan sees in the Islamic Republic only little danger.

Is democracy an end-of-range model?

In the political debate the discussion of a possible end of democracy increases. Above all, Colin Crouch developed in “Post Democracy” a concept, that sees democracy influenced by other factors, particularly the expansion of the capitalistic principle of proftablility to non-economic areas. But this implicitly still assumes that democracy is the right form of society and its disappearance a negative trend.

Robert Kagan now carefully dares to take a more open perspective, and, given the political reality to question democracy as such. Between the lines of his book you can read the question of whether democracy is not only a Eurocentric and U.S. policy model. From the perspective of China and Russia are the American democratization efforts in the former Soviet states, the Balkans and the Middle East, first of all U.S. expansionism in their own areas of hegemony. The great powers suddenly identify the interference in the politics of other countries illegal, because it contradicts their own interests. “This is one of the great schisms in the international system, which divide the democratic world and the autocracies. For three centuries was the law of nations, which regarded any interference in the internal affairs of other nations as inadmissible, but rather on the side of autocracies. Now the democratic world is about to reverse this protection, while autocracies will rush to defend the principle of the inviolability of national sovereignty.” One of the examples of Kagan, is the NATO-led overthrow of Serbia, Russia tried to prevent.

In general, the author here touches on a moral paradox of the democratic social order, which is difficult to solve. To get or preserve democracy and its value system, undemocratic means are often necessary. Regarding foreign affairs, this usually means the use of military force, on the domestic front, the demarcation between freedom of the citizens and security of the state. Here it can be difficult to deal with individuals or groups who see their own values higher than the system of democratic principles. Tolerance and freedom the democratic state can only grant those social and religious groups who practice this principle of freedom also internal.

In the foreign affairs the liberal creed, that every person ascribes equal rights, which may be curtailed by any state, legitimates democracies, to interfere politically, economically and – if needed – militarily in the internal affairs of other states. But this is just under the premise that only democracies get these rights. Thus we Europeans and the Americans put democracy above of all other forms of government. But countries such as Russia or China, see democracy mere as one of the possible forms of government, and for nationalistic reasons they prefer autocracy. And even if these two great powers pursue not an ideological dissemination of autocracy, they offer protection and support to other autocracies. Whether this is now China’s influence in Africa and Asia, or particularly Russias patronage of the Islamic regime in Iran. With the growing economic power of Russia and China, the West has not only lost its monopoly of globalization, the two autocracies also ideologically become more role models.

Democracy in the empirical and normative comparison

The book is not especially innovative in its presentation of the political conditions, let alone that it creates new facts. His introductory narration of historical facts shows the generous, in global politics experienced storyteller, allowing also the political laymen to understand the following discussion. Robert Kagan is fundamental – despite his normative affirmation of democratic values – in his questioning of even these values because of the current geopolitical situation. This provides an approach that deprives democracy of its formal sanctity, then historicizes it and forces it into an empirical comparison with other forms of government. The question appears, if we can expect a country to democratize, if the autocracy is working well for the national interests, notably the economy and is accepted by most of the population, because of rising living standards?

Of course, normatively one wants to answer this question in the affirmative. But empirically, other factors must be considered. Thus, the mostly from outside established democratic elections in the Middle East and the states of North Africa, almost always led to a rise of Islamic fundamentalists. The last time this became clear in the electoral victory of the radical Islamic Hamas in the Palestinian autonomous areas. So, should the United States and other democracies encourage democratization in the Middle East? Robert Kagan sees the answer in turning around the question: “Should the U.S. support autocratic governments in the Middle East? This is, after all the alternative. There is no neutral stance on these issues.” That what we call a Realpolitik, the cooperation with autocracies, is therefore certainly needed. But we always have to apply pressure toward democratization and liberalization, states the author.

But we should consider in the juxtaposition of democratic and autocratic regimes even more circumstances. From a historical perspective, the forms of government of the great powers always have been role models. Whether this was the fascist nationalism in its expression of the German Empire, the communism of the Soviet Union or the current autocracies in China and Russia. They always have been and will be emulated by smaller or in world politics less important countries in order to obtain the support of the big ones. Whether the European democracies and the wave of democratization in the 1990s, are just a temporary model in a continuous timeline, or whether democracy is the most advanced form of government and thus the ultimate level of political participation and decision-making, is the crucial question.

“The great fallacy of our times is the belief that a liberal international order is based on the triumph of ideas and on the natural unfolding of human progress.” progress is neither inevitable, as the natural democratization of all countries. The examples of Russia and China show that rising wealth is not necessarily associated with political freedom.

Must we thus deny the ideological – or rather moral – superiority of democracy and see it therefore justified in geopolitical competition with the autocracies? Then of course we also have to criticize the hegemony of the United States, which brings us back to the question at the beginning. The alternative, a multipolar world order, also appears fair from a democratic perspective, however, involves much more danger. “A large part of the world tolerats the geopolitical preeminence of the United States not only, but they willingly support – not because people love America, but because they know that the U.S. will protect them against enemies who are more worrying.” Most countries should therefore prefer the compromise of the superpower United States. For its withdrawal would only shift the power to other interested parties.

Robert Kagan: The Return of History and the End of Dreams, Knopf 2008, ISBN-13: 978-0307269232, 19.95 $ (14.99 €); German translation: Die Demokratie und ihre Feinde. Wer gestaltet die neue Weltordnung?, Siedler, 2008, ISBN-13: 9783886808908, 16.95 €

This review is a tranlation of the German one at BuchTest, therefore the quotes are back-translations from the German book and not necessary identical with the original.

By Felix Struening

“Can Europe be the same, with different people in it?”, aks the U.S. journalist Christopher Caldwell. His answer is a resounding and distinct “No”. The Muslim mass immigration during the past 50 years has already changed Europe a lot. By the year 2050, family reunion and the Muslim fertility rate will do the rest. European politicians previously overestimated the necessity of foreign workers and still don’t understand the cultue-shaping power of Islam. As a consequence, the welfare state will soon collapse, and the political changes will be far-reaching.

The end of the welfare state

To prove these statements, Christopher Caldwell introduces in the first part of his book in the history of the (Muslim) Immigration in Europe. He points to the fundamental mistakes of political elites: In the beginning Europe just needed workers. But when they decided to stay, they got their families to join them. This and for example the death of heavy industry meant that although the number of foreigners living in Germany from 3 million in 1971 increased to 7.5 million by the millennium, the number of foreigners working, however, remained stable at 2 million.

Later, Europe’s politicians have argued with the demographic change on immigration. But the United Nations (“Replacement Migration”) have even calculated, that more than 701 million immigrants would have come into Europe since 1960, to balance the superannuation of the population. This would be far more people than living here right now. Moreover, as Christopher Caldwell cited a Spanish study found that even a massive influx yields liitle, since most migrants working in low-wage sector, and also are getting old and will claim their pensions.

The understanding of Islam

The other two parts of “Reflections on the Revolution in Europe”, dealing with Islam as a religion, the Muslims and Europe’s weakness, to oppose the political religion. Christopher Caldwell points again and again on Islam itself, and the fact that the Europeans underestimate “the culture-shaping potential of religion.” He asks the question if Islam itself can be the source of the terrorism practiced in its name or whether its a misuse of the religion. There is little sense speaking of ‘moderate Muslims’ if there are no ‘unmoderates’, be it in a religious or political way. “[W]ithout an underlying belief that there is something especially dangerous about Islam, the term ‘moderate Muslim’ makes no sense.” At the same time, the author suggested that Western politicians, especially after terrorist attacks, acquit Islam because they know in their bones, that it just happened because of Islam. Why else should Westerners have to explain to Muslims what is their belief or not?

For Christopher Caldwell it is also the Muslim population itself, which prepares European problems. Fundamentalists disrupt the co-existence, although obvious, but in the long run the simple presence of growing Muslim populations will take their toll. Between political Islam (ie the Muslim Brotherhood) and jihadism (by al-Qaeda, etc.) the author does not, however, differentiate, which leads to blur his concept of Islam a bit. Here a differentiation makes sense, like Thomas Tartsch has suggested in the German book “Da’wa and Jihad”.

Europe’s lack of response

The author shatters in his analysis European ideals in a accurate and sustainable way, such as a European Islam that is compatible to democrazy and liberal. Islam had great times, but “it is in no sense Europe’s religion and it is in no sense Europe’s culture.” Europe is in competition with Islam concerning the loyalty of the immigrants, only that Islam has currently the best cards, at least in terms of demography. If many Muslims migrate to Europe, it means, they prefer life there, but it does not necessarily mean that they want the European culture too.

Measures to integrate showed mainly the weakness of the Europeans, not to ask about other cultures because of the felt guilt for World War II, the Holocaust and colonialism. The dialogue with Islam is often naive, like the Islam-Konferenz (Islamic Conference) initiated by the German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble.

The U.S. perspective

Christopher Caldwell writes from the perspective of an American journalist with a lot of European experience. He knows the European literature on Islam and immigration, he read Oriana Fallaci (“The Rage and the Pride,” “The Force of Reason”), as well as studies by the German Ministry of Interior (“Muslims in Germany”). His view from the outside seems to be non-dogmatic and distanced enough to light all facets of the immigration phenomena. The author always dicusses possible objections in order to disprove them afterwards thoroughly.

The book addresses very clear an American audience, because the author uses repeatedly comparisons to the developments in the United States to clarify what is happening similar, but above all, what works in Europe otherwise. At the same time, however, the work stands out for the European reader with clarity, even by political incorrectness to venture here, unfortunately, only a few authors. A journalist working up with scientific precision as that of Christopher Caldwell is found rather rare. There remains hope that “Reflections on the Revolution in Europe”, will be translated into German (and other languages) and won’t be limited to the English-speaking world such as Bat Ye’ors “Eurabia”.

Christopher Caldwell: Reflections on the Revolution in Europe. Immigration, Islam and the West, Penguin, 2009, ISBN-13: 9780713999365, 13.95 €

This is a translation of the German book review by the author at BuchTest.