The new year appears to promise much action against Islamist terror that could weaken considerably, if not destroy totally, the Islamist surge of the last two years. This is because of Donald Trump’s elevation
The full face veil is not acceptable in our country. It should be banned wherever it is legally possible. Our law takes precedence over codes of honour, tribal or family rules, and over Sharia’h law.” You would wonder who is the author of this quote; perhaps some ‘fringe’Hindutva element, as the Indian media is so fond of calling it, or some ultra-conservative who has not read our Constitution and not even heard of minority rightsIJ
The author is Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel. Some two years ago, it was Merkel who had organised a Eurowide discussion in Munich on the need for multi-culturalism in Europe. What then made her change her stand so drastically and call for open face for Muslim women irrespective of what the Sharia’h law says or does not sayIJ Media reports in Europe are that Islamic fundamentalism has become a highly disruptive force for the liberal society the continent has built up through many struggles and sacrifices, which have already led to abolishing of capital punishment, assured a roof above everyone, and allowed people make their own choice about the faith they want to follow, including the right not to follow any religion.
Sharia’h law or Church-ordained restrictions are not obligatory but the minority of Islamic immigrants is forcing its followers to constrain the community within the religious restrictions challenging the liberal spirit of modernity. It is the demand for compliance with theSharia’h that is a denial of freedom. The resulting conflict is used to proclaim to their followers that European Union (EU) is anti-Islam. This inspires young and old Muslim citizens and immigrants to join the extremist movements outside and work as their fifth column.
Only the other day, Germany witnessed a lone wolf truck driver Muslim driving his vehicle in a deadly thrust into a group of Christmas merry-makers. Earlier, similar incidents spattered blood and mayhem across France, Belgium, Spain and Britain.
The death toll of civilians targeted by thesejihadis working under instructions of Islamists from Syria-Iraq had shaken to the hilt the EU’s liberal regimes resulting in a backlash against Europe's current leaders and a lurch to the right in those countries’ politics.
In turn, now whether in Germany or France or Italy or the UK or Spain, there is call to withdraw existing liberal laws of immigration, stop allowing refugees from West Asia like Syria, lebanon, Egypt or Maghreb. That rising popularity for tougher immigration laws and strong stand against Islamists are now threatening to change European Governments as many EU states go to polls in the year 2017.
There is speculation that Merkel herself may not win her country’s election in the new year, bringing conservative, anti-Muslim immigration politicians to dilute her majority. And, committed Right-wingers would destabilize current Governments in Germany, France, Italy and Austria, among others.
Britain’s vote for breaking away from the EU could be a game-changer in united Europe and demands for similar breaking-away in the continent could tear the European Union apart in the new year.
The new entrant who proposes to end the global soft-spoken and wishful thinking regarding Islamist threat to human civilisation is Donald Trump, the incoming US President. He is contemptuous towards liberalism in general and the EU’s all-out liberal welcome for refugees from West Asia in particular. He has already made a campaign pledge to shut down the door for immigrant Muslims to his country — the Statue of liberty at New York harbour notwithstanding.
A global coordination against Islamist movement was already in action under the current US President Barack Obama after the earlier Al Qaeda-ledjihadi plan to destroy non-Muslim Governments and establish an Islamic Caliphate over the whole world.
The global coalition against the IS was only partially successful, the main reason being President Obama’s decision to restrictAmerican participation to coordinated air strikes and unwillingness to attack the extremist Islamist ideology at its source. Besides, the continuing talk among the allies over Syrian rebellion against President Bashar al-Assad disrupted joint efforts against the root of the Islamist Caliphate in Syria-Iraq border.
The Syrian territory around the IS capital was being subjected to multiple rebellions with the US both supporting and opposing rival rebels. Several ceasefires were proposed and breached in these areas of Syria, with the two global powers themselves in conflict over Russia’s resistance to the spread of American and Nato influence in eastern Europe, more specifically over Ukraine.
Clearly, the global alliance against the Islamist movement was facing an internal sabotage with the US — and the EU in tow — seeking to contain an aggressive Russian President Vladimir Putin in Europe. With Trump as President, this conflict of interest may abate.
Trump has not hidden his contempt for the EU. As the Union has impeded American business interests in the European market, with several instances of high fines for alleged violations of EU fair competition rules — top US corporations such as Microsoft — Trump is bound to support the rising Rightist wave in Europe for a break-up of the EU.
Trump’s proximity to Putin, whom US intelligence agencies have accused of interfering in the presidential election last month in favour of Trump, and the incoming President choosing oil giant Exxon executive to be his Secretary of State, the indications are clear: Trump’s foreign policy would be pro-Putin and anti-EU.
If these expectations come true, Trump and Putin might work out an alliance that dumps the east European nations for a US-Russian joint effort to end the Syrian conflict and enable their joint action against the IS to succeed.
On the Asian side, China will now become the focal point of Trump, as he is pledged to exit the Trans-Pacific Partnership which the outgoing administration in the US had worked out with China and Japan, and on which India had reservations. Trump’s action, along with his no-nonsense policy of attacking Islamist-led terrorism in all its manifestations, should be welcome for New Delhi, as Pakistan-sponsored terror groups are all closely linked to Pakistan’s avowed policy to inflict repeated cuts on the Indian nation, using these terror groups.
Altogether, the new year appears to promise much action against Islamist terror that could weaken considerably, if not destroy totally, the Islamist surge of the last two years.
(The writer is a former Member of Parliament and a Delhi-based commentator on social and political issues)