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.

“Islam means peace” vs. “Islam is the greatest threat to the free world”. Between these two extremes a hot debate is developing for years, in which left and right wing, populists and scientists, do-gooders and racists place their arguments. Thorsten Gerald Schneiders, a German Islam and political scientist, made the honorable attempt to create clarification with the book project “Glorification of Islam versus Emnityof Islam”. And he failed in a splendid way.

End of 2009 the first volume was published under the title of “Emnity of Islam. If the limits of criticism become blurred.” On nearly 500 pages mainly scientists analyze historical and current, institutional and personal hostility towards Islam. Without exception, all authors refuse the criticism of Islam – if it is not limited to theological arguments. For them, any rejection of the ideology of Islam or Muslims means racism and xenophobia.

Of course, the editors found here well-known representatives, whether this is Kai Hafez, Siegfried Jäger and Sabine Schiffer with their studies about the picture of Islam in the media and the Internet, or, for example, Jürgen Leibold from a research project on “group-focused misanthropy” and his contributions on Islamophobia. The core argument, which underlies all of these contributions is, that one could not speak in such a general way about Islam and Muslims, not that shortened and simplified. However, this would correspond to the processes of prejudice and stereotyping, the construction of bogeyman’s and ultimately racism. Last not least, such an argument serves the devaluation of the alien and the superelevation of oneself, the authors argue.

Most authors misdo in three ways, caused by their XXX: First, no one dares even to undertake consideration, that for example the negative reporting about Islam has something to do with the social reality. Or that the ideological system of this religion perhaps could be the cause of the many problems, which is, actually, proofed by integration studies, migration reports and crime statistics every day. Instead, reference is made to alleged socioeconomic factors, again without asking for their causes.

The second error results from the political and ideological self-conception of the authors. Thus, some contributors consider it already questionable, if the host society calls Muslim migrants calls to adapt to the local social system and to acknowledge our legal system. The idea, that we as a host society have the right to make rules, is for some of the authors already racism. As with the first misconception, they are not willing to make an evaluative distinction between cultures.

Third, is a mistake that probably comes from the constant analysis of the prejudices of others: Some of the researchers themselves generalize and draw such unscientific and irrelevant comparisons themselves that the reader’s hair stood on end. If today’s mosque protests are compared, without further comments, with the opponents of the synagogue about a century ago, this is neither scientific nor helpful in any way.

Ultimately, the book focuses on phenomena such as the website Politically Incorrect (PI-News), but which represents the ideologically right margin or the populist formation of the critical of Islam people in Germany. However, that is, as one would equal the German right-wing newspaper “Junge Freiheit” (young freedom) with the whole conservative scene. Large parts of those who comment critically on Islam and the integration of Muslims do this factual arguing and becoming ever better informed. Therefore, it makes no sense, to speak about enmity of Islam or even about Islamophobia, therefore unfounded fear or a general rejection of Islam. The focus of the book follows its title, so much so right, but is ultimately only about a small part of the Germans.

All the more interesting was the following second volume “Glorification of Islam. If the criticism is taboo”, published in spring 2010. Now, the other side would be addressed, those who glorify Islam would be criticized. But far from it! With the completely inappropriate title, instead, the contributions explore what an appropriate criticism of Islam could look like – according to the anthologist. Most authors therefore belong to the fields of Islamic and religious studies and the first ten items are purely theological treatises and source studies. There are quite substantial contributions, such as the credibility of the hadiths-tradition, to more recent biographies of Muhammad in relation to classical sources, and to reason in the question of faith context. Even a solid theological justification for the abolition of the Islamic headscarf is part of it.

But once the perspective turns to social science the quality decreases rapidly. Once again – as in the first volume – the authors seek strange and far-fetched arguments to suppress the one fact: among migrants Muslims are mainly, indeed almost exclusively, the ones, who provoke social evils. In his introduction, Anthologist Schneiders brings this even to the point, but without taking any consequence for the selection of its authors, or contributions from it:

“The situation of many Muslim citizens in Germany is not rosy. Educational deficits, unemployment, poor housing situations and so on lead to upbringing problems, limitations of the personal individuality [...] or high crime rates. Although this has nothing to do with Islam directly, but according to several studies in recent years, people with a Turkish or Arab family background in Germany are significantly affected or involved. Now, since most of them understand themselves primarily as Muslims [...], the situation is in fact after all a problem, which the believers – above all the religious dignitaries and officials – must pay attention.”

Altogether, the book project “glorification of Islam versus enmity of Islam” remains lackluster and has at most a documentary character. Contentwise, only a small part of the spectrum between multiculturalist leveling down and populist enmity is addressed. Moreover, the selection of authors is very one-sided, which leads to the fact, that the two anthologies don’t have any argumentative punch. This is really a pity, because there are such good arguments as well as interesting actors on all sides. Just remember the 2007-debate on “Islam in Europe”, published by the editor in chief of signandsight Thierry Chervel as a book. Or the current debate on Islam on the comparison of anti-Semitism and criticism of Islam.

Which kinds of criticism of religions in general and Islam in particular, are admissible, is one of the major issues at all – not only since the Muhammad cartoon crisis in 2006. But the two books published by Thorsten Gerald Schneiders offer only a limited insight into the topic. And while the anti-Semitism and prejudice researchers trying to reach the prerogative of interpretation in the discourse about criticism of Islam with more and more publications about Islamophobia and enmity of Islam, there are few books, such as soon published “enemy stereotype: criticism of Islam,” which offer a broad analysis of possible forms of critique.

So far, the two books are only published in German:

Thorsten Gerald Schneiders: Islamfeindlichkeit. Wenn die Grenzen der Kritik verschwimmen. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften 2010, 483 pages, 49.95 Euro.

Thorsten Gerald Schneiders: Islamverherrlichung. Wenn die Kritik zum Tabu wird. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften 2010, 401 pages, 39.95 Euro.
(Please see also the German review at BuchTest and at Citizen Times.)

Also mentioned:

Thierry Chervel, Anja Seelinger (Hg.): Islam in Europa. Eine internationale Debatte, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp 2007, 227 Seiten, 10 Euro.
(This debate is online available in English at signandsight.com. For the German review of this book see BuchTest.)

Hartmut Krauss (Hg.): Feindbild Islamkritik. Wenn die Grenzen zur Verzerrung und Diffamierung überschritten werden. Osnabrück: Hintergrund Verlag 2010 (will be published in autumn).

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

“Immigrants tend on average to be more poorly educated and more frequently unemployed and to participate less in public life than the native population.” This first finding of the study “Unutilised Potentials” of the “Berlin-Institute for Population and Development” is not surprising at all. Yet behind the unassuming title, figures are conceal that are that brisance and distinct; it is hard to beat. The study is the first one in Germany that compared the success of integration of migrant groups from different countries of origin. For critical observers, the fact that the Turks got the worst results is hardly surprising, but it is a slap in the face for the defenders of multiculturism in Germany.

Migrants integrate differently – depending on their country of origin

This distinction of the immigrants became possible due to the initial polling of the migrant’s country of origin in the 2005 micro census by the Federal Statistical Bureau, an annual survey of one percent of the population living in Germany. The derived data is also so innovative because previous studies on migration only included foreigners. In the meantime, however, half of the 15 million migrants and their offspring living here have German citizenship “without thereby necessarily the integration problems are resolved.” This is 20 percent of the local population, which means Germany has a larger migrant population than any other European country. Given demographic trends, this proportion will increase even more in the future.

For a reasonable description, the immigrants were divided into eight regions or groupings: ethnic German immigrants (from the former Soviet Union, so called “Aussiedler”), Turkey, Southern Europe (Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain), other countries of the EU-25, the former Yugoslavia, Far East, Middle East and Africa. Thereby, undifferentiated data arise primarily in the regions from which two types of refugees migrated, respectively asylum applicants and – in contrast – highly qualified professionals, since the micro census does not specify the legal status for privacy reasons. Here, the editors of the study can only propose the very different integration achievements within each group of migrants and make presumptions based on the figures of the asylum applications from the interior ministry.

The question is why Afghanistan and Pakistan were included in the group “Far East” instead of “Middle East.” Here, the cultural background should be considered as more important than the geographical location. This leads to slightly unclear results of the Far East group. Therefore, very regrettably, one cannot see the values of each country, not even in the Annex.

Index for measuring integration

In order to investigate the different immigrant groups in terms of their integration, the experts of the Berlin-Institute developed an index for measuring integration (IMI). 15 indicators in the areas of assimilation, education levels, employment and financial backup address very different areas of life and should also be as independent as possible from each other. On the basis of five indicators, the immigrants and their next generation are compared dynamically, because the real success of integration is only measurable by the people born in the migrant country.

Generally, in all eight groups of migrants, there is a broad spectrum of integration success, but “migrants with a Turkish background tend by far to be the most poorly integrated group in Germany.” This is in spite of the fact that the Turks have already been in Germany for a long time, and half of them were born there. For example, the high unemployment rate also exists in the second generation and the level of educational has only subtly improved. With nearly one third without any education, the group of Turks is the least educated among all migrants.

The need for political action

The study is not only explosive in its findings, but also well presented. A little history of immigration into Germany since World War II and the presentation of the basic proportions of migrants in Germany provide an appropriate introduction. The statistical data are presented graphically and colour-coded, thus very easy to understand. Only the absence of the respective percentages in the bar and pie charts could be criticised. Due to the explanation of individual values and concepts, the study is also understandable for non-experts.

The well-documented index for measuring integration contains figures that should not only determine the current immigration policy, but also be included in every higher-education institution as a “must-read.” The different treatment of integration-willing migrants and those who live at the expense of the welfare state of the host society and isolate themselves from this society, must ultimately be a political reality. This study clearly indicates – without mentioning it explicitly, however – that migrants from countries with a strong Islamic influence integrate into German society much more poorly than migrants from non-Islamic countries. Additionally, the study also shows that how well migrates integrate depends mainly on the efforts of the migrants themselves.

In addition to the mentioned topics, the study also examines how well integration in different regions and cities in Germany functioned. It concludes with a chapter on the potential costs of failed integration. Here, however, the authors note that the available studies, such as of the Bertelsmann Foundation from 2008, result in very different figures due to different calculation models. But what they all have in common is that the lack of integration costs the host society a hell of a lot.

The blame for this can be given to the previous multicultural policy: “The vision of a multicultural society in which each ethnic group should be unaffected act out their character, never allowed real integration, but rather strengthened the live in those parallel societies, in which the lower classes of the cities mass.” For the researchers at the Berlin-Institute this means primarily “unutilised potential.” Therefore, probably the unassuming title of the study “On the current state of integration in Germany.”

Franziska Woellert, Steffen Kröhnert, Lilli Sippel, Reiner Klingholz: Unutilised Potentials. On the Current State of Integration in Germany, Berlin Institute for Population and Development, 2009.

The study is only published in German (PDF), but there is a English summary (PDF) and an abstract as well.

This review is a translation of the German review at BuchTest.

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.