Showing posts with label Europe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Europe. Show all posts

Saturday, May 15, 2010

COMMENT: Miranda Devine and the coming Muslim demographic winter ...

New Zealand Conservative Catholic columnist Miranda Devine writes about the coming demographic winter about to hit the human race largely because people no longer link sex to having babies.

As the tattered sexual revolution spawned by the pill hits middle age we can see the consequences of unmooring sex from the possibility of children, and the rejection of the age-old imperative to be "fruitful and multiply".

The result is a so-called contraceptive culture, societies which regard children and childbearing as a nuisance, a burden and an expense, rather than a blessing.


This is truly an international phenomenon. It affects even that nebulous and frightfully monolithic entity they call the "Muslim world".

Contrary to popular opinion, these trends of the past 30 years are being mirrored in the developing world, in Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.

"Barren wombs and empty cradles" are a phenomenon of both the Christian and Muslim worlds. Even Iran has retreated from its baby boom of the 1980s, with the fertility rate of 6.5 collapsing to 1.7. The same trend can be seen in the once fruitful United Arab Emirates, Tunisia, Bahrain, Kuwait and Lebanon. The world's most populous Muslim nation, Indonesia, has a birth rate just above replacement, at 2.31, according to the 2009 CIA World Factbook.

The birth rate for Muslim immigrants in Europe may be higher than the countries they come from, leading to the widely predicted Islamification of the continent in the next 50 years. But it is nonetheless declining.


So much for Muslims out-populating the rest of us.

Words © 2010 Irfan Yusuf

DeliciousBookmark this on DeliciousDigg!Get Flocked

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Monday, January 25, 2010

OPINION: Fourteenth Column in Crescent Times: How to burn Swiss chocolate?


Next week, I’m organizing a huge bonfire. Hundreds of people dedicated to freedom of religion will be joining me. We have decided to show our solidarity with four Swiss minarets by burning the symbols of Swiss culture at our disposal.

Some will bring chocolate to burn. Others will turn the bonfire into a huge toasted sandwich by emptying their fridges of imported cheese.

Still others will be targeting cuckoo clocks. The wealthier ones will bring records of their secret bank accounts (I assure readers I’m not in that category).

I’m shocked that Muslims are not repeating the imbecilic spectacle that accompanied (or rather, that followed by 6 months) the publication of the Danish cartoons. Remember the burning of embassies? Remember the huge protests in Arab and other nominally Muslim countries where normally you cannot even sneeze without the secret police reading the contents of your handkerchief to make sure the blood and mucus don’t spell some criticism of the king or general or emir?

I doubt any crazed crowds will be protesting or burning Swiss embassies. Why? Because let’s be frank and honest about this. Where will the corrupt Muslim rulers store their ill-gotten and embezzled wealth if they tell their people to boycott all things Swiss? Which other country has such liberalized banking laws that allow corrupt despots to hide their loot?

Swiss Muslims are largely of indigenous European - Albanian, Bosnian and Turkish – extraction. Their mosques are likely to be designed along Ottoman lines, with flat domes and skinny minarets that look like scud missiles (and would probably be about as inaccurate if filled with explosives and launched). Ottoman mosques are modeled on the St Sophia’s Orthodox Basilica in what was once Constantinople. Apparently when the city was taken over by Fatih Sultan Mehmed, he ordered the Basilica to be surrounded by a bunch of minarets but otherwise left the structure intact. He also ordered mosques across the empire, including in European cities like Sarajevo, to be designed to resemble the cathedral/mosque.

And so mosques across the Ottoman empire resemble Eastern Greek churches. But where did Fatih Sultan Mehmed get the idea of minarets anyway? After all, the first mosques built by the Prophet in Quba did not have big tall minarets. Neither did his mosque in Madina. The minarets were added after he passed away.

So where did the minarets come from? Well, when the first generations moved out of Arabia, they modeled their mosques on the existing architecture. One of the oldest mosques in existence can be found in China. It was built by a companion of a companion (tab at-tabi’i). If you walked in the street where it was located, you could not tell it was a mosque from its architecture. Why? Because it looks just like a Chinese pagoda.

Similarly, mosques in Syria were modeled on existing Byzantine churches, which had towers for bells. Muslims also decided to build towers for their muezzins.

And so the minaret is little more than an act of architectural plagiarism. Muslims added minarets to mosques so that they did not stick out like sore thumbs in the environment.

The early Muslims were happy to build mosques that looked like the houses of worship of the dominant cultures where they settled. Australian Muslims, of course, don’t need to follow this precedent. We prefer building mosques that look like something out of 1965 Karachi. We cry “racism” when residents get upset at our insistence at always being different. Then we spend tens of thousands of dollars taking local councils to court. All for the right to build domes and minarets that our ancestors copied from churches and synagogues anyway.

Still, try telling moronic Swiss voters that they are seeking to maintain their Christian heritage by objecting to what are essentially (or at least historically) Christian religious symbols. It isn’t just their clocks that have gone cuckoo.

Words © 2010 Irfan Yusuf

Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Sunday, July 12, 2009

COMMENT: The honour killing they seem to have forgotten about ...

We've all heard of Amina Lawal, of Mukhtar Mai and of the various victims of honour killings over the years. But one woman's honour doesn't seem to figure very highly in European and Western media outlets. Indeed, in Australia, not a single News Limited newspaper has reported the murder of Marwa al-Sherbini. Not a single News Limited blogger has commented on the incident, including xenophobic bloggers like Andrew Bolt who frequently pluck poorly-reported stories of violence against women of nominally Muslim heritage.

Funny, that.

Marwa al-Sherbini is in her early thirties, smart and attractive. She comes from an educated middle class family, both her parents working as pharmacists. She grew up in the cosmopolitan Egyptian city of Alexandria. She now lives in Dresden, a city once famous for a severe allied bombardment at the end of the Second World War.

Every morning, Marwa readies herself for work. She puts on her pharmacy uniform and her headscarf. She stands in front of the mirror, check her makeup and smiles. But Marwa’s smile hides her secret dread. Each morning, Marwa’s honour is sullied and her security threatened by the violent and vicious taunts of a man.

“You slut!” he screams at her, “You whore!” The man doesn’t stop at mere words. He threatens her with violence. He even follows her to work, shouting taunts at her in the presence of horrified onlookers.

Marwa has had enough. She talks to her employers who put her onto local police. She brings an application to court. The man appears and is fined. She appeals. She knows the fine will not stop him. If anything, it will make him angrier and give him more reason to carry out his threats.

The date for appeal arrives, and Marwa attends accompanied by male relatives. The accused also attends. In the presence of the judge, the prosecutors and other persons present in court, the man screams out the same violent abuse. “You slut! You whore!” But this time he goes even further. He produces a knife and stabs her. Not once. Not twice. Marwa is stabbed at least 18 times.

It must have been a Herculean effort for the man to find the time and strength to stab Marwa 18 times. Readers might consider the effort involved by merely stabbing the air that many times.

Marwa is three months pregnant at the time. Her three year old son witnessed the whole incident.

Now let’s imagine for a moment that the man involved in the taunts and the stabbing was Marwa’s husband. Imagine if Marwa had applied to the court for an order restraining her husband from making violent threats toward her, stalking her and harassing her. Imagine if he had then stabbed her in court. No doubt this honour killing would have made a prominent story in your metropolitan daily newspaper. No doubt it would have been treated as yet another story of an honour killing. No doubt some columnists would have frothed at the pen about how Muslim migrants don’t integrate and are typically violent to women while good white-skinned European men (as if Muslims cannot be white or European!) never engage in domestic violence, let alone the kind of violence that led to the murder of Theo Van Gogh in the Netherlands.

But Marwa’s attacker was not her husband. Marwa’s husband, an academic working at the prestigious Max-Planck-Institut for pharmacology, was present in court. He tried to save his wife and was somehow confused by court security as the attacker. Perhaps they assumed that a Middle Eastern looking man was more likely to attack a woman than a German of Russian descent. Marwa’s husband was shot and at the time of writing was in a coma in hospital.

But then he also wasn’t a complete stranger but rather her neighbour. The stranger would taunt and threaten Marwa because she wore some cloth on her head and because she didn’t quite look like everyone else in Dresden.

It all started one day when she took her son to the local park. The man was seated on the swings, and Marwa politely asked if her son could use the swing for a short while. He responded with a continuous array of taunts and threats. He labelled her “terrorist”, “Muslim bitch”, “whore” and numerous other names. In court, he questioned what right she had to be in Germany. Before stabbing her, he declared:

Do you have a right to be in Germany at all? When the NPD comes to power, there'll be an end to that. I voted NPD.

Perhaps this is what’s worth contemplating. More and more European voters are turning to far-Right parties. Many of these parties have replaced virulent anti-Semitism with virulent anti-Muslim (and general anti-immigrant) sentiment. And mainstream European parties are meeting the far-Right challenge by co-opting far-Right rhetoric and attitudes, encouraging ugly sentiment.

What isn’t quite realised is that it isn’t just immigrants that suffer. Their children, their relatives, the descendants also suffer. When they marry Europeans and have children who don’t quite look European (whatever that means), the European spouses and their part-European children also suffer.

And inevitably it is women who suffer more than men. Women are easy targets for hate-filled men. When a man feels a woman has sullied his honour or the honour, he lashes out against her. She is the easy target. A harder target is the man’s own anger, his deeper issues.

Violence against women is violence against women. It is just as evil whether it is perpetrated by a particular kind of religious fanatic or by someone inspired by fanatical hatred of a particular religion. The result is the same. A woman is harmed. Her family mourns. Her community falls into a deep communal depression.

I could write more, but it's hard to keep up with the rage and anger I feel at those who only seem to care about a Muslim woman being killed when they can use it as an excuse to malign her culture and to make life difficult for her children and others she left behind.

Words © 2009 Irfan Yusuf

Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Sunday, November 23, 2008

CRIKEY: Israeli torn between ''Islamists'' and ''the Muslim thugs'' ...


Visiting Israeli Professor Raphael Israeli presents different faces for different audiences. Sometimes he says his target is only “Islamists”, ie, those Muslims who want to impose a political version of Islam on secular democracies.

Certainly this is what he said in a letter to The Australian. Here's an excerpt from The Oz report on February 19 2007 ...

A VISITING Israeli academic has blasted Australia's Jewish leaders for disowning him after he raised concerns about the level of Muslim immigration in Europe and the consequences of a similar approach here.

Raphael Israeli, Professor of Islamic, Middle East and Chinese History at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, wrote to The Australian yesterday to complain about his treatment after a story in the Australian Jewish News which claimed he favoured a cap on Muslim immigration.

The story, which Professor Israeli said didn't accurately reflect his views, led to criticism from Muslim and Jewish leaders without further checks with him, he said. The Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council, co-sponsoring his lecture tour, decided to sever ties with him.

"Instead of standing by their guest, and supporting free debate in this country, Jewish leaders have elected to shamefully disown me in their statements that were geared to placate Muslims," Professor Israeli wrote.

"I come from a country dipped in solidarity and that never abandons its fighters in the battlefield. Here I feel abandoned, forlorn, betrayed by people who lack courage and stamina to stand up for principles."

Professor Israeli's attributed comments in the Jewish press last week in part suggested there would be demographic pressure for Indonesian Muslims to resettle. The article quoted him as saying "one of the big possibilities is Australia, so they will continue to come legally, or illegally, and settle here, and when they get to the rate of the 10per cent, like in France, then you will see life will become untenable".
Yet he wrote an almost identical, though more virulent (and need I say honest) letter to the far-Right polemical JihadWatch website. In that letter, he made it clear he was talking about “the Muslim thugs”, without differentiation. In other words, his attitudes are directed to all Australians who happen to tick the “Muslim” box on their census forms. Here's how The Age reported Israeli's remarks ...

A VISITING Jewish professor has lashed out at Australian Jewish leaders for their "shameful submission to Muslim thugs", saying his comments were less harsh than some by the Prime Minister and federal Treasurer.

Hebrew University professor Raphael Israeli, dropped from a proposed lecture tour after comments last week, said political correctness did not allow his remarks to be said, though, privately, all supported them.

He said Prime Minister John Howard and Treasurer Peter Costello had said harsher things after "Muslim riots", but "someone elected to seize upon this opportunity now and sweep Australia into a storm in a teacup".

Professor Israeli, who will teach his six-week Islamic history course at the University of NSW, posted his version of the stoush on a website.

On the Dhimmi Watch section of www.jihadwatch.org, he wrote: "The dhimmi-like Jewish leadership cancelled all activities, in a shameful submission to the Muslim thugs and under the false claims of a 'multicultural society' in Australia, which they know is not true."
Regardless of where he stands, we’d be living in denial if we insisted Israeli’s attitudes to that nebulous Arab/Muslim/Islamist/Middle Eastern “them” aren’t gaining some hold.

Why is this so? Who is responsible? And what is being done about it?

Journalism professor and veteran reporter Peter Manning believes that skewed reporting is largely to blame. His research of metropolitan Sydney newspaper reporting pre and post-September 11 shows that the prejudices have pre-dated the emergence of al-Qaeda.

Experts like Dr James Jupp of the Australian National University argue cogently against Israeli’s central thesis on limiting immigration for a particular religious group. Here's how ninemsn reported Jupp's remarks on February 16 2007.

A local immigration expert has dismissed suggestions by a visiting Israeli academic that Islamic migration to Australia should be capped.

... immigration expert Dr James Jupp from the Australian National University said talk of limiting immigration for Muslims was the kind of idea "put forward by crackpots" — even though there is no legal barrier to doing so.

He said banning immigrants on religious grounds is possible as all migrant applications are done in other countries which are not subject to our racial vilification laws.

“You [immigrants] have no legal rights to Australian law if you are outside Australia,” Dr Jupp said.

Proving religious discrimination “would be extremely difficult” as immigrants cannot access our legal system before they arrive in Australia.

”I don’t think you’d have a leg to stand on, you couldn’t prove it,” Dr Jupp said.

He added that officials could easily hide religious discrimination behind the various other requirements immigrants must meet to enter this country ...

... Dr Jupp said that would not occur here as European countries gave full citizenship to emigrants from ex-colonial nations — many of which are Muslim countries.

As Australia has no colonial ties with Muslim countries like Algeria, it was unlikely that Muslims would come to this country in such large numbers as they do in Europe.
I think much responsibility rests with Muslims themselves, especially with religious and organisational leaders who are largely first generation migrants who regard Islam as a relic of their lives “back home” and are generally disinterested in communicating Islamic theology to the broader community.

The ethno-religious nature of the Muslim religious establishment is the biggest reason why Israeli’s claims simply don’t apply to Muslims here (if they apply anywhere else).

On Radio National Israeli said that
... in Islam, secular Islam, or secular Muslims, is a contradiction in terms.
He also said that there is only one Islam, and that Muslims either adopt it or they don’t.

This is the weakest link in Israeli’s argument. Australian Muslims come from over 60 different countries. Australian Islam is more ethno-cultural than religious a phenomenon, reflected in Muslim community leadership drawn from ethnic-based mosques.

To say there is one Islam means there is one Muslim community. But the fact is that Muslims cannot even agree on holding festival days. Israeli says that a growing monolithic Muslim community in Australia is a threat. This Muslim community doesn’t exist down under.

An edited version of this piece was first published in Crikey on 23 February 2007.

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf

Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Sunday, August 03, 2008

COMMENT/EVENT: Hirsi Magaan on enlightenment ...

The (to-the-right-of-) Centre for Independent Studies is holding its big ideas forum tomorrow night at the Sydney Opera House. I'm going, as is a mate of mine with left-of-centre leanings. Hopefully, he'll be buying me some Turkish pide afterwards since I managed to secure him a ticket!

The topic of this forum is Protecting the Legacy of Freedom: The Ideas of The Enlightenment in the 21st Century. Among the last minute entries is pseudo-refugee queue-jumper, self-confessed migration fraudster and disgraced former Dutch far-Right MP Ayaan Hirsi Magaan (or, as she falsely wrote on her asylum application, Ayaan Hirsi Ali).

Ms Magaan's first book, The Caged Virgin, consists largely of speeches and articles written during her term as a Dutch MP. It's hard to tell how much of this is her own work. We all know that MP's often don't write their own speeches or even articles, but rather delegate this task to their staff. It certainly would be an interesting issue for a literary sleuth like Malcolm Knox or Hanifa Deen to investigate.

I interviewed Magaan during her last visit to Australia as a guest of the Sydney Writers' Festival. She has become a darling of the far-Right, lavished with praise by bloggers who would otherwise have despised her as a dangerous "Islamist". Cultural warriors have also treated her as the final word on the experiences, cultures and religious views of 1.3 billion people who regard themselves in some way as Muslim.

I'd be interested to see how this woman, whose presence in Europe is based on defrauding Dutch migration law, will talk about enlightenment. It will be interesting to know whether she still believes that faith schools should be closed down altogether and that those wishing to teach intelligent design be imprisoned.

Among other speakers at the forum are former speechwriter for former PM Gough Whitlam and now Chief Justice of the NSW Supreme Court Jim Spigelman and rightwing commentator apologist for the Iraq debacle Arthur Herman.

Also appearing are a Christchurch-based academic in music and an English sociologist who, like so many other cultural warriors, castigated the Archbishop of Canterbury in a manner which showed he clearly hadn't bothered to read Rowan Williams' speech first.

I doubt all the speakers will agree on exactly what the enlightenment was, is and should be. I'd love to see Arthur Herman defend the Iraq war before an Australian audience. Even more humorous will be seeing him call for the United States to become Israel's proxy by invading Iran. I guess his kids won't be risking their lives in any such military adventures.

If I am not mistaken, Justice Spigelman has a relative who has served on the front line in the Middle East. His Honour's views certainly don't reflect the kind of intellectual siege mentality so many on the alegedly conservative side are affected by. Indeed His Honour was one of the first Australian judges to publicly criticise the military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay.

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf

Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Sunday, June 22, 2008

REFLECTION: Flippant thoughts on Comrade Steyn



I’m watching Mark Steyn being interviewed by a Canadian journalist (at least I think he is Canadian – it’s hard for us poor sods down under to tell the difference!) Steve Paikin about the thesis in his book America Alone. You can watch the interview by clicking here and following the prompts or by clicking here.

Here is this pompous theatre critic who doesn't know the first thing about about demography talking about the demographic history and future of Europe. This sanctimonious windbag wondering why no one in Europe wants to breed.

And this chap claims to be a conservative! He is pontificating about a topic he knows absolutely zilch about, and expects us to treat him as an authority just because he writes lots of columns for newspapers many Americans use to wrap fish with.

Real conservatives don’t talk about topics in a critical manner without first learning about the subject. This kind of ignorant critique is what the Left are known for. It’s the sort of stuff I was taught to do by my McGill-inspired Marxist law lecturers at Macquarie University back in the days when you enrolled in the law school to get a degree in sociology (or rather, socialist-ology). Mark Steyn should just cut the crap and produce his Communist Party membership now.

The most hilarious bit of the interview is where Steyn is asked about whether Muslim migrants to Europe might actually Westernise and therefore not pose as big a demographic or cultural "threat" as Steyn makes out. Steyn knew that Paikan had nailed his argument by this one simple question, and then proceeded to talk about some e-mail fired off from his end to the producers of Paikan's show.

This is the sort of third-rate mass-debate Steyn often engages in. And he is so easy to intellectually punch in the guts, as I discovered when Steyn came here as a guest of the Centre for Independent Studies some years back. You can read about it here. As one scribe wrote to me after hearing the podcast on Radio National ...

i finally heard your question to mark steyn at that cis function the other day (it was on this morning's background briefing on abc radio). you clearly scored a direct hit, which left him winded, so much so it took him an inordinate amount of time to get back on top of his pitch arguing the inevitable that islam has a problem with its silent majority (which group doesn't) before he lost his cool with the zion protocols rubbish. well done!


I wish I could understand why the folks at Canadian Islamic Congress are wasting their time and resources on this chap. What they should be doing is focussing their time and resources on innoculating ordinary Canadians against the disease of collective responsibility Steyn and his ilk represent.

If his appearance on the Steve Paikin show is any indication, Steyn might best be described as a fruitloop. I used to eat fruitloops when I was young. Now that I’m older and more mature, I prefer cornflakes or muesli.

What the CIC should be doing is providing the facts. And not just doing it on their own. There are plenty of intelligent smart demographers, ethnographers, sociologists, anthropologists, historians and other social science gurus on both sides of the Atlantic who can do to Steyn’s 'ideas' what that character played by John Travolta accidentally did to that guy who was sitting in the back seat and had his brains splattered all over the car.

(Naturally, even a nominal Muslim like me has no idea about the joys of Western popular culture!)

Steyn is the last person who should be made into a martyr of free speech. Thanks to Steve Paikin for the interview. At least now I don’t have to waste my $2 buying Steyn’s book when it makes its way to Basement Books or some other remaindering factory.



Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

COMMENT: Lessons from the Madrid bombing ...

Last night, SBSTV’s Cutting Edge documentary series featured the story of the two prime members of the terror cell responsible for the Madrid bombings of 11 March 2004.

Jamal was a drug dealer and hit man who escaped Morocco after being accused of murder by stabbing. He entered Spain using a false name and soon became involved in drug dealing and violent crime. He entered into a relationship with another drug user, a Spanish woman of nominally Catholic background. He went to prison and soon became addicted to heroin. His girlfriend meanwhile gave birth to their (illegitimate) child.

Sarhane was a middle class Tunisian who won a scholarship to study in Spain. His family in Tunis weren’t terribly religious, and Sarhane had little exposure to Islamic teaching. In Spain, Sarhane began to frequent the M30 mosque in Madrid. The imam (resident religious jurist) was Jordanian. Sarhane came under the influence of self-taught radicals who attacked the imam for refusing to sanction their violent paranoid heterodoxy that regarded anyone (Muslim or otherwise) who disagreed with them as infidels and legitimate targets.

Somehow Sarhane met with Jamal. It was also a meeting of an extreme fringe politicised Islam (free of the strictures of classical juristic authority and Sufi spiritual orthodoxy) with a violent underworld. The combination was toxic. Over 190 people died in the process.

Some days later, a package containing a video cassette was left near the M30 mosque entrance. It featured 3 men with heads covered with black cloth sacks claiming responsibility for the Madrid bombings on behalf of a group calling itself al-Qaeda in Europe (though the trial judges found no direct link between the cell and al-Qaeda). The men also had a message for the mosque parishioners: Anyone who refused to join this wacky pseudo-jihad was an infidel who could also be legitimately killed.

Could Sarhane’s tiny cell of outcasts from the M30 mosque have carried out this attack without the help of Jamal and his underworld thugs (including a fair few gangsters with no relation to any religion)? Who knows? What we do know from this is that al-Qaeda style ideology has only a tenuous relation with any religious orthodoxy.

Little wonder al-Qaeda and its fellow travellers are happy to shed blood even in mosques and shrines and even on the holiest Islamic religious days. And even threaten entire nations.

But it isn’t enough just to recognise all this. Imams and religious leaders must ensure their mosques don’t become havens for jihadist heterodoxy. And that those embracing or returning to the faith aren’t misled by the rhetoric of hate-mongers.

© Irfan Yusuf 2008

Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

COMMENT: Europe & Islam

Over the next few weeks, this blog will focus on certain academic writings which I have collected over the past 12 months on various topical issues relating to Muslims, democracy, multiculturalism, clash of civilisations and all those other catch phrases we have come to know and love (or loathe, depending on your perspective).

Each day (I hope!), parts of a particular study will be presented in summarised format. I’ll share some of my own thoughts, and readers are free to make their own observations.

Today I want to discuss an article by Timothy M Savage entitled Europe and Islam: Crescent Waxing, Cultures Clashing. This article was published in the Summer 2004 edition of The Washington Quarterly, a journal on international affairs published by the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS).

Savage is a former US consul general in Leipzig, Germany and currently works at the Office of European Analysis at the US State Department. The article discusses what the author describes as the “Islamic challenge to Europe” which is two-fold.

Firstly, Europe must deal with its internal sphere. It must integrate a ghettoized and rapidly growing Muslim minority which many Europeans regard as encroaching upon the collective identity and public values of European society.

Second, Europe must develop a viable external approach to dealing with its primarily Muslim-populated volatile neighbours which are the focus of the EU’s recently adopted security strategy entitled “A Secure Europe in a Better World”. Linked to this is the EU’s New Neighbourhood initiative which defines a new framework for relations with 14 states or entities – Algeria, Israel, Egypt, Lebanon, Libya, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Morocco, Ukraine, Tunisia, Syria, Russia, Moldova and Belarus.

Savage’s basic thesis seems to be that Europe’s new interaction with both its external and internal manifestations with Islam “offers a range of opportunities for positive change in the world”. Savage laments that Europe is choosing to rely on its old ways as entrenched in its unimpressive “track record of engagement with Islam over the last 1,350 years”.

Savage laments that Europe’s current stance shows it prefers “caution, predictability, control, and established structures over the boldness, adaptability, engagement, and re-defined relationships that the new situation requires”.

As for Muslims in Europe, Savage believes that they by and large are showing a “similar mindset”. This situation is dangerous, especially as Europe’s Muslim communities are growing. US State Department figures from 2003 show that Muslims make up some 5% of Europe’s population, and number in excess of 23 million. If one were to include Turkey, this figure climbs to 90 million or 15% of the total. In the past 3 decades, the Muslim population has more than doubled.

Externally, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region has the world’s 2nd highest fertility rate. Meanwhile, Europe has the world’s lowest fertility rates. In the next 3 decades, the population of the MENA region is expected to double.

By 2050, Muslims are expected to comprise al least 20% of Europe’s population.

So what does all this mean? Here’s a few thoughts …

[01] The European situation is not akin to the situation in Australia or New Zealand. Europe’s Muslim communities tend to be ethnically and linguistically homogenous. Australian Muslims come from over 60 different nationalities.

[02] Many European countries have implemented policies that have fostered ethnic welfare ghettoes e.g. France. Though some limited ghettos are present in Sydney, they are far less than in Europe.

[03] Attempts to compare the experience of Europe with its Muslim minorities (the “Londonistan” thesis) are like comparing chalk with cheese.

[04] Europe’s Muslim communities are very young and will be dominated (as they are in Australia) by the children and grandchildren of migrants. Already, in France, some 15% of the 16-25 year age bracket is Muslim. Meanwhile in Brussels, 25% of the population under 25 is Muslim In this sense, there is some comparison between Australia and Europe.

[05] The understanding of faith of young European Muslims is perhaps less affected by Middle Eastern and other theological trends in the Muslim world. It is more affected by distinctly European factors.

[06] Muslim groups and institutions from overseas will have to reinvent themselves if they are to remain relevant to the emerging younger generations.

[07] Australian and North American Muslim youth can play a constructive role within Europe by building bridges with European Muslim youth and providing them with a different and more realistic understanding of how Muslim religiosity can be played out using Western cultural symbols. Integration is not just a possibility. It is an imperative.

That’s my view. Now it’s over to you.

© Irfan Yusuf 2007

Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Stumble Upon Toolbar