Are the European leaders truly serious in their intent to fight the Islamic terror?

 Even as the World is rattled by the French beheadings, stabbings, killings seeking wanton revenge, a section of Islamo-Leftists have been silently pushing the theories of European appeasement of Muslims during the First World war and in the run up to World War II. In the intervening period of two World Wars, European governments courted Muslims, accorded special treatment to them.

In 1926, France tweaked its commitment to secularism called laicite, (which literally translates into neutrality of the state) to build Mosque, Grande Mosquee de France to the utter contempt of the Catholics. On the eve of the foundation laying ceremony of the The Mosque, Paris Municipal authority official Paul Fleurot was reported to have declared that when France was in danger, Muslims from Africa defended it. This Mosque is expression of France’s gratitude towards the Muslim Soldiers.

At a time, when Europe is grappling with, “Islam Separatism”, a rampant phenomenon, whose existence no leader dared to discuss, in a public address on October 2^nd, President Macron, admitted, “what we must tackle is Islamist Separatism….. And in this radical Islamism – since this is at the heart of the matter let’s talk about it and name it – a proclaimed, publicized desire, a systematic way of organizing things to contravene the Republic’s laws and create a parallel order, establish other values, develop another way of organizing society which is initially separatist, but whose ultimate goal is to take it over completely. And this is gradually resulting in the rejection of the freedom of expression, freedom of conscience and the right to blaspheme, and in us becoming insidiously radicalized”². He added, “Islam is a religion that is currently experiencing crisis all over the world”. By explicitly conversing about concerns over emergence of the counter society, he proposed to introduce a bill to consolidate the 1905 law which adopted laicite comprising five pillar including formulating “Islam particular for France”.  Macron raised many eyebrows with a framework of having Islam free from foreign influences in France.

Rebuffing the perils of radical Islam, elitist international magazines continued to peddle the saga of the French, the British and German courtship with Muslim population as a message to the colonial subjects in the early 20^th century till second World war. Rebuking Macron’s Islamist Separatism threat they attributed poor reintegration, ghettoization of Muslim immigrants, European “Otherness” as facilitators of radicalisation and imputed political motives to Macron’s concerns of religion-based separatism.

Debate on growing radical Islamism began to surface since the January 2015 Charlie Hebdo killings, subsequent November 2015 Paris Attacks and July 2016 Nice truck mowing episode and the regular low-intensity attacks have consolidated the fears about the mushrooming Islamist separatism phenomenon. Until 2015, any public discussion on brewing extremism threat is widely scorned as a pernicious propaganda, symptomatic of the far-right groups, who are averse to liberal ideas. But unabated low-intensity attacks across France and Europe has eventually ceded space to discussions on separatism threat. For initiating discussions on this oft tabooed issue, Centrist Macron was also derided by the Liberals.

Days after double-stabbings carried out by a Pakistani near Charlie Hebdo office for republication of Prophet’s cartoons commemorating court hearing of killing of 12 people, Macron reignited the discussion on Islamic Separatism on Oct 2^nd.  But the public address in the wake of intolerant attack was labelled as “Islamophobic” and scrutinised with scepticism by sections of media.

Even before France, with 6-8% of Muslim population, highest in a European nation, could come to terms with brutal attack, decapitation of history teacher Samuel Paty by an 18-year old Chechen, on his way to home for showing the cartoons to students as part of teaching of Freedom of Expression, has sent shock waves across the nation. The brazen intolerance has only bolstered France’s fears of growing Islamic terrorism in the country. In a stern message, France conferred highest honour, ‘Legion d honnuer’ on Paty for upholding republic’s values of freedom, liberty and ordered the closure of a mosque which incited Muslims against him.

Defending the freedom of expression, commemorating Paty’s memorial service, thousands protested against the rising Islamist terrorism. In a tribute, Macron said, “He was killed because the Islamists want our future. They know that with quiet heroes like him, they will never have it”³. Later government building displayed six cartoons of Prophet demonstrating its commitment towards Freedom of expression.

Public display of cartoons stirred a war of words between Turkey and France. Turkey President Erdogan, projected Messiah of Muslim World, condemned, Macron’s remarks on Islamic terrorism and remarked “Macron needs mental treatment” as opposed to a message of condolence and support triggering a storm. Following the footsteps of Turkey, justifying the beheading, Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan’s condemned Macron’s Islamophobic remarks, urged OIC to boycott French goods, passed a resolution to recall envoy from France (even though Pakistan don’t currently have any Ambassador to France). Close on heels, former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Muhammed’s stirred the pot with hateful tweet “Muslims have a right to be angry and kill millions of French people”. These provocative statements endorsing Muslims right to violence eventually triggered a chain of protests in the Muslim-majority countries in South Asia and South East Asia.

World must be cognisant of these intolerant protests, for they are indicative of potential breeding grounds of terror and Islamic extremism. Intriguingly, the Muslim nations who defended killing of French people, dare not rise a finger against internment of over 2 million Uighur Muslims for the fear of economic repercussions.

In sharp contrast, Saudi Arabia, fountain head of Wahhabi Jihadism, the UAE and Egypt rejected violence and terrorism. No doubt, while nations reaction to this gruesome terror act has an underlying geopolitical character as well, the series of terror attacks in France has provided fresh impetus to debate on Islamic terrorism.

Macron’s outright condemnation and calling the bluff of the extremist Islam elements is a welcome development. While reprehensible justification of beheading by Muslim majority nations is really troubling.

Incidents of deaths perpetrated by extremist Islam elements across the nook and corner of globe almost every day has been a common news. The West never bothered to take a hard look at the brutal acts of terror and violence. For decades daily blood bath has become a ritualistic rigour in certain parts of the World. Hundreds of innocent lives were lost. Even as the violent killings have become an integral part of certain extremist groups the plight of the victims was never addressed. Above all, the ideology which has been silently endorsing and cultivating this kind of maniacal mindset was never challenged.

The ideology, backed, defended by the influential Islamo-Leftist group which dominates the intellectual and academic strata across the World despite the daily manslaughter continues to deride anyone who questioned veracity of reign of terror. Any open discussion on the spectre of the rising “Political Islam” is even harshly rebuked. The threat of Islamic terrorism which is steadily chipping away peace and harmony of the society is real.

Even before pregnant fears of Islamic separatism could die down, a deadly Vienna attacks that left four dead and 14 injured, claimed by ISIS has heightened fears of burgeoning terrorism across Europe. For decades, rallying the ignoble cliché of “terror has no religion”, absurdly clinging to myopic “political correctness” the West defiantly rebuked ground realities.

India which experienced onslaught of Islamic terror since 7^th century has been warning the West of the disastrous consequences of radical Islam. Even in the post-colonial era, West turned to deaf ear to India’s tryst with cross-border state-sponsored terrorism. Throwing caution to air, the West chose to admonish India and censured it for its poor human rights record. Failing to cultivate a discerning eye and overpowered by the Islamo-leftist bigotry, the West refused to even acknowledge the existence of Islamic terrorism, until the twin towers were reduced to a rouble in 2001.

After a slew of terror attacks, shedding the liberal masks, European leaders are now collectively condemning the Islamic terror. In a marked departure, apostle of liberalism, BBC referred to recent attacks as ‘Islamist terror’ stabbings. But the American media is still reluctant to call it by its name. Until unless, nations, leaders and the intellectual ecosystem stubbornly reject the Islamic terror and strip the Muslim community of self-obsessed victimhood card, this scourge passing off as a religious ideology can’t be extricated from the World.

India which has always rejected terrorism, has extended support to France and Austria and strongly condemned the terrorist attacks. Foreign Secretary Harsh Shringla, during his three-country visit to France, Germany and the UK, expressed condolences to France denounced personal attacks on Macron and added, “the civilised World needs to act together and act with firmness to address this threat to our cherished democratic value systems”⁴.

Indeed, if the European leaders are truly committed to take Islamist separatism head-on, they must at least work towards evolving a global consensus. India has proposed Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT), way back in 1986. But it hasn’t been implemented for the lack of unanimity on definition of terrorism by states. European nations can now take the lead and work towards its logical implementation. Alternatively, they can call for the boycott of nations which overtly/ covertly support terrorism, cut off the financial support to terror agencies. With souring caliphate ambitions, Turkey is now endorsing extremism, in a strong message to state sponsors of terror, NATO should expel Turkey.

For centuries, J&K bore the brunt of the Islamic terror/Jihad. Despite India’s repeated attempts to highlight the exigencies of the terror in J&K, European nations refused to take cognisance of the issue. On the contrary, they indicted India on dubious human rights charges. If European nations are determined to have a clear-headed approach towards Islamic terror, they must at least begin their campaign by condemning the Islamist Jihad perpetrated by Pakistan, the mothership of terror.

Else the outrage of European leaders devoid of discernible action and empathy towards terror victims would be hallow and futile.

@ Copyrights reserved.