Europe and the Muslim World

Perhaps moved more by the unilateral, lopsided direction of America's 'war on terrorism', for the first in three decades broad contours of a European foreign policy are emerging on the international political horizon.
Separate but related developments testify to this European outlook that is keen to carve an independent approach on issues concerning Muslims and the Islamic World.
In 1966, it was General Charles de Gaulle who took the first initiative for a European foreign affairs approach at variance to that of the United States on such issues as the French military role in NATO, recognition of the People's Republic of China and the Middle East.
In 1970, West Germany's Chancellor Willy Brandt initiated his 'Ostpolitik' or the Eastern Policy, which sought a cautious opening towards the Communist countries of Eastern Europe including East Germany. Both these European statesmen were not popular in Washington given the Cold War where similar lines were sought to be drawn on a 'them' and 'us' vis-à-vis Communism as is being done today towards terrorism.
European sensitivity to Muslim concerns is evident from three key developments in the last week:
· The decision of European Union Foreign Ministers, meeting in Luxembourg on April 15, to send their highest foreign policy official, Javier Solana, next month to "ease Pakistan-India tensions over Kashmir" in what is clearly the first-ever European diplomatic initiative of its kind towards South Asia;
· In a major public opinion poll released on April 17 by the International Herald Tribune, there was a wide gap in European and American perceptions regarding the Palestine-Israeli conflict, with the overwhelming majority of French, British, German and Italian public opinion supporting the Palestinians against Israel, unlike the United States where support for Israel runs two times more than empathy for the embattled Palestinians;
· History is also catching up with Europe over crimes committed against Muslims in the Bosnian conflict, and on April 16, the Dutch government tendered its resignation after a report of the July 1995 massacre in the Bosnian town of Srebrenica. 7500 Muslim men and boys were massacred by the Serbs under the watchful eyes of Dutch UN peacekeepers who failed to protect them, in what is generally regarded as the worst atrocity in Europe since the Second World War.
The important lesson from the Dutch government's resignation is the recognition of Muslims as victims of ethnic cleansing and accountability for these crimes, something still missing in the case of similar crimes in India and Israel.
A more pro-active European approach is evident in other areas as well such as Norway's role in brokering peace in Sri Lanka, the decision of a court in Belgium to indict Israeli Prime Minister General Sharon for war crimes in Sabra and Shatila during the 1982 Battle of Beirut and Europe's concern on the Muslim prisoners detained without charges at Camp X-Ray in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
However, there is a disturbing aspect within the politics of Europe as well, namely, the rise of rightwing racism. This has been demonstrated in the French presidential polls, where a candidate who opposes immigration (mostly Muslims from the Maghreb) and is anti-Semitic has emerged as the principal challenger to President Chirac. Earlier elections in Austria and Denmark had also reflected this rise of rightwing racism.
Countries in the region where Pakistan is located are also sensitive to these significant political changes. Turkey, for instance, a close ally of the US and a friend of Israel, has seen its Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit condemn Israeli actions against the Palestinians as "genocide" and last month, the Secretary General of Turkey's powerful National Security Council, Major General Tuncer Klinic, even called for Turkey to have a closer relationship with Russia and Iran.
Saudi Arabia has called for the European Union to play a more active role in the Middle East, while enlisting Russian support as well after a visit to Moscow by the Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al Faisal. During President Jiang Zemin's visit to Iran, China and Iran have jointly rejected efforts for "hegemony in the region", with China also announcing its opposition to the American military presence in Central Asia and the Middle East.
But Pakistan perhaps stands out as the one country that seems oblivious to changes that are taking place, preferring to put all its eggs in one basket. No lessons have been learnt from past mistakes when for the greater part of two decades Pakistan had an Afghan-centric policy, first the 'joint jihad' with the Americans till 1989 when Washington ditched Pakistan and forgot all about Afghanistan. And during 1989-2001, Pakistan tried to fashion its own Afghan policy ditching friends and replacing favourites till Pakistan was stuck with at a dead-end with the Taliban, on the plea of having 'no other option', a refrain that has been heard with repeated frequency since then.
Pakistan's relations with Russia are illustrative of this mindset, where ground realities changed, but Pakistan treated Russia as if it was still a Cold War adversary. One result of this animus between Islamabad and Moscow is the recent Russian effort to keep Pakistan out by ensuring Indian participation in the multi-nation effort to build an army and police system for Afghanistan. Although Russia's relations with its former adversaries like China and Iran have grown after the break up of the Soviet Union.
Now that the European Union has decided to take its most significant initiative on Kashmir, Pakistan needs to wake up from its diplomatic slumber so that goals vital to the national interest can be pursued:
· Drawing attention to human rights abuses in Occupied Kashmir, more so in the context of European sensitivity towards the plight of the Palestinians and Bosnian Muslims;
· Putting India in the dock for the ethnic cleansing in Gujarat and for perpetuating tensions in South Asia with the threat of war that New Delhi has dangled since December 13;
· Coordinating closely with those Muslim countries and leaders like Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah (he meets President Bush in his ranch in Texas on April 25) and Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammed, who have clout in the West and the courage of their convictions to speak out on issues concerning Muslims.
Instead of making foreign policy an appendage of American interests and objectives in the region some which are at variance with Pakistan's own interests, Islamabad needs to muster up the courage to join the growing international consensus on issues like Palestine, Israeli atrocities and the 'axis of evil' that President Bush conjured up in January.
Pakistan also needs to rebuild its fractured relationship with its Central Asian neighbours, the largest and most influential of which, Uzbekistan, is still suspicious of Islamabad given past Pakistani support for the Taliban.
Europe, together with key Arab states and China, has parted company with the United States on the 'war on terrorism' because it has realised that America's Middle East policy is driven by Israel and directed against Israeli enemies, who are not necessarily American adversaries. Neither Iran nor Iraq or the Palestian Authority have anything remotely to do with Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden and Taliban, but they are all on the American 'hit list' only because of Israel.
Despite what the United Nations Special Envoy Todd Larsen denounced as a " morally repugnant ...horrific" spectacle after the Israeli massacres at the Jenin refugee camp, President Bush still had the temerity to call Sharon "a man of peace". The UN Special Envoy was then asked to leave since Israel could not tolerate his telling the truth regarding its crimes against the Palestinians.
It was therefore not surprising that responding to Arab public opinion, Egypt's President Mubarak snubbed the visiting US Secretary of State Colin Powell by declining to meet him.
Clearly, a wide gulf has emerged between American policy towards the Muslim World and perceptions among Europeans and Muslims, and this cleavage is likely to widen as the US seeks to expand the 'war on terrorism' in the coming months.
It is time that Pakistan took cognisance of these developments so that it is in sync with its own interests, as well as Muslim opinion. For starters, Islamabad needs to focus its diplomacy more on Europe rather than being content with just American support. Regrettably, given the single-minded focus on the Referendum, Pakistan's foreign policy is virtually 'on hold' at a critical moment in regional politics.
E-mail queries and comments to: mushahid@nation.com.pk

The Eurotrash have long let in "guest workers" who just happened to be muslim and bingo ,like a warren of rabbits, most major European nations have a large muslim minority! (Suprise)No wonder the Surrender Monkeys in France voted for a guy who called it straight out: send them ALL home now! Sans muslims!!!The US MUST DO the same: ALL muslims out of the US to the MidEast or where ever their fellow-rats will take them!

This article takes the standard Arab slant that one would expect from its' source. The Euroweenies are indeed irrelevant in world affairs - as they are important only to themselves. The trip by the Saudis to Russia was completely rebuffed by President Putin - the Russians will have nothing to do with or for the Saudis. The author of this tripe is merely voicing his wishes and opinions, rather than the facts, as one would expect in a country that is so heavily supporting of the monster that they created - the Taliban. President Bush told the world to take sides - with us or against us - and the world is indeed doing so. Here's the scorecard as I see it for major world players:

With Us: Russia, Israel, England, India, Japan, Taiwan, Phillipines, Turkey, Australia (wobbly), New Zealand (wobbly), Canada (wobbly), Mexico (when it suits them).

Against Us:China, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, North Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, Venezuela, Cuba (hahaha), the UN (majority), the EU (minus England).

Total those up militarily, and what do you get? I wouldn't want to live in one of the "against us" nations. At least oil should decline in price since there won't be any Arabs left.

For starters, Islamabad needs to focus its diplomacy more on Europe rather than being content with just American support.

LOL! Got a news flash for ya, Mushahid: Support from Europe don't count for squat.

Even Pakistan could take on Europe (excluding Britain) and win. Course, they'd surrender before things even got started, so it wouldn't really be a fight.

Well, they see how the muslim populations in Europe can exert influence on those countries' foreign policies. And they want to leverage that as much as they can. Recently, the EU has announced a 'fact-finding' mission to Gujarat, India to investigate the horrendous riots/massacres going on there and also to 'mediate' in Kashmir. Pakistan's strategy of 'internationalising' both Gujarat and Kashmir is coming to fruition. In fact the Indian FO recently accused Tony Blair that his complaints about Gujarat and Kashmir were due to having to mollify the muslim voters of the UK.

"rightwing racism"

Don't you love the way this charge is thrown around? If realizing that some cultures will not only never blend in with the freedom of ones own culture, but will eventually try to kill freedom is racism, then dunk me in that color. Paint a big ole red R on my blouse. I refuse to be the kind of sucker that runs and hides from lables thrown around by those that are either ignorant of details or have an agenda.

If realizing that some cultures will not only never blend in with the freedom of ones own culture, but will eventually try to kill freedom is racism, then dunk me in that color.

From Anger and Pride by Oriana Fallaci

I am speaking to those who, though not stupid or evil, are wallowing in prudence and doubt. And to them I say: “Wake up, people. Wake up!!” Intimidated as you are by your fear of going against the current--that is, appearing racist (a word which is entirely inapt as we are speaking not about a race but about a religion)--you don’t understand or don’t want to understand that a reverse-Crusade is in progress. Accustomed as you are to the double-cross, blinded as you are by myopia, you don’t understand or don’t want to understand that a war of religion is in progress. Desired and declared by a fringe of that religion, perhaps, but a war of religion nonetheless. A war which they call Jihad. Holy War. A war that might not seek to conquer our territory, but that certainly seeks to conquer our souls. That seeks the disappearance of our freedom and our civilization. That seeks to annihilate our way of living and dying, our way of praying or not praying, our way of eating and drinking and dressing and entertaining and informing ourselves. You don’t understand or don’t want to understand that if we don’t oppose them, if we don’t defend ourselves, if we don’t fight, the Jihad will win. And it will destroy the world that for better or worse we’ve managed to build, to change, to improve, to render a little more intelligent, that is to say, less bigoted--or even not bigoted at all. And with that it will destroy our culture…

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.