ISLAM’s Long Game

How Political Islam Exploits the West’s Tolerance 

Tyrell Bowman 

 

 

Muammar Gaddafi once made a prediction about Europe that should have received far more attention than it did. Speaking in 2006, he declared that there were signs Islam would achieve victory in Europe “without swords, without guns, without conquests”. His argument was demographic. Europe, he believed, would eventually change from within. (WorldNetDaily)

Whether Gaddafi’s prediction ultimately proves right or spectacularly wrong is not the point. What matters is that the idea exists. It is openly discussed within strands of Islamist thought: Western societies do not necessarily have to be defeated militarily. They can be transformed politically, culturally and demographically over generations.

Pretending that organised political Islam does not exist is equally absurd.

Britain’s own government has said so. Its official review of the Muslim Brotherhood concluded that the movement’s foundational writings envisage the gradual transformation of individuals and societies followed ultimately by political unification under a Caliphate governed by Sharia. The review described the Brotherhood primarily as a political projectand said aspects of its ideology run directly against British principles of democracy, individual liberty, equality and freedom of belief. (GOV.UK)

The later independent review of Prevent went further. It noted that some Islamist organisations operating in the West have deliberately placed less emphasis on openly demanding a Sharia state and concentrated instead upon building influence within Muslim communities and wider society. It described Islamism as an ideology opposed to important aspects of secular liberal government and characterised the Islamist endeavour as one seeking to spread Sharia governance as widely as possible. (GOV.UK)

That is considerably more serious than anything supposedly invented by the “far right”.

The historical roots matter too. Medina in 622 was not simply a story of Muslims arriving somewhere and conquering it overnight, as it is sometimes crudely presented. Muhammad arrived in Yathrib following negotiations with local tribes and subsequently created a new political and religious community. What emerged was enormously significant: religion, communal identity, law, political authority and ultimately military power became intertwined within the first Muslim polity. Oxford scholarship describes the Constitution of Medina as establishing a new ummah, while other scholarship identifies it as the foundation of Muhammad’s political community. (OUP Academic)

This explains something Western politicians repeatedly fail to understand. Islam developed not merely as a private system of spiritual belief but as a civilisation possessing religious, legal and political dimensions. Islamism takes those political dimensions and makes them central.

And that changes the argument.

The danger is not a ridiculous Hollywood scenario in which an Islamic army suddenly marches across the Channel. The much more plausible challenge is slow, decentralised and perfectly capable of operating through the institutions of a liberal democracy: demographic growth, community organisation, religious institutions, foreign financing, lobbying, electoral influence, pressure groups, education, law, media and the gradual normalisation of demands that would once have been considered incompatible with Western secular government.

There is nothing secret about the demographic component. In England and Wales, the Muslim population increased from 2.7 million in 2011 to 3.9 million in 2021, while Christianity declined dramatically. Birmingham went from 21.8 per cent Muslim in 2011 to 29.9 per cent in 2021. (Office for National Statistics)

Pew’s demographic modelling produced even more striking long-term figures. Under its medium-migration scenario, Muslims could account for approximately 16.7 per cent of the United Kingdom, 17.4 per cent of France, 20.5 per cent of Sweden and 10.8 per cent of Germany by 2050. These are scenarios, not predictions, and immigration policy can dramatically alter them. But they demonstrate why demography cannot simply be dismissed as irrelevant. (Pew Research Center)

Many in Islam believe that a Muslim baby born in Birmingham is a soldier. The problem begins when explicitly Islamist movements themselves view demographic and institutional growth as part of a political mission.

Foreign influence deserves equally serious scrutiny. Turkey’s Directorate of Religious Affairs, Diyanet, has developed extensive religious networks overseas, sending imams and supporting mosques across Europe. European Commission-funded research has examined precisely this Turkish state religious policy in Britain, France and the United States, including Ankara’s attempt to extend its influence amongst diaspora communities. The researchers also concluded that its reach has significant limitations — an important qualification — but the attempt to exercise influence is real. (CORDIS)

Qatari money has raised similar questions. Investigations into Qatar Charity have documented substantial financing of European mosques, Islamic centres and educational organisations, including organisations alleged to have connections with Muslim Brotherhood networks. Such concerns have reached the European Parliament itself. (European Parliament)

Yet the extraordinary feature of all this is not simply what political Islam is doing. It is the reaction of the West.

Western institutions frequently seem terrified of examining the subject. Sections of the progressive Left have formed alliances with deeply conservative Islamic organisations despite holding completely contradictory positions on homosexuality, women’s rights, religious authority, freedom of expression and the separation of church and state. Human-rights language can turn into a shield protecting illiberal ideas from legitimate examination. Criticise Christianity and you are progressive. Criticise capitalism and you are enlightened. Criticise Western history and you are courageous. Criticise political Islam and suddenly the discussion becomes dangerous.

Islam is not a race. Criticism of Islamic doctrine is not racism. Opposition to Islamism is not hatred of Muslims.

That distinction ought to be shouted from every university, newsroom and government department in the country.

The churches themselves have often appeared uncertain about what they are supposed to defend. As Prince of Wales, Charles gave a famous speech arguing that Islam had contributed greatly to European civilisation and that there were things the West could learn from it. His argument was principally about spirituality, environmental stewardship and mutual understanding, and should be represented fairly. But its symbolism was unmistakable. While Christianity was retreating rapidly from British public life, one of the country’s most important constitutional figures was praising the spiritual lessons of Islam. (The Royal Family)

Interfaith respect is admirable. Civilisational amnesia is not. Too much of the West has chosen appeasement disguised as tolerance. And tolerance without boundaries eventually stops being tolerance. It becomes surrender. The Islamist who genuinely believes history is moving towards the Caliphate has no reason to hurry. Elections come and go. Governments change. Populations change slowly. Institutions evolve. Political influence accumulates. A concession won today becomes the starting point for another demand tomorrow.

That is the real significance of Gaddafi’s statement. He understood that civilisations can change without armies crossing borders. Many now betray everything worth defending about Western civilisation and would hand Islamists their greatest propaganda victory.

The west needs to, control borders. End uncontrolled mass immigration. Insist upon integration. Defend freedom of speech without religious exemptions. Expose and prohibit genuinely extremist organisations. Publish foreign funding. Stop governments outsourcing Muslim representation to self-appointed religious pressure groups. Teach our children the history and inheritance of their civilisation without shame. Protect the equality of women, religious minorities, homosexuals, apostates and unbelievers without qualification. And make absolutely clear that democratic government and secular law are not temporary arrangements waiting to be replaced.

Above all, stop being frightened of the conversation.

Political Islam understands something the modern West appears to have forgotten: civilisations survive because people believe they are worth preserving. For fourteen centuries Islam has demonstrated an extraordinary ability to endure, organise and expand. Western civilisation should study that history, without hysteria and without pretending uncomfortable facts do not exist.

Gaddafi believed Europe could be transformed without a shot being fired.

The question is no longer whether he said it. The question is whether Europe intends to prove him right.