Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan are the trouble spots, where the action is. Europe, on the other hand, appears to be an aging, beautiful and peaceful museum without much relevance to global strategy. In fact, Europe's relevance to American foreign policy seems mostly confined to two issues. The first is Russia and the question of how Moscow would react to another round of NATO expansion, probably to Georgia and potentially Ukraine. The other one is Muslims in Europe. In fact, this issue is perhaps even more important than Russia because it directly relates to America's nightmares about terrorism. No wonder that in their latest assessment of how the world will change between today and 2025, US intelligence agencies had only one big point to make about Europe: The concentration of Muslims in some cities could lead to "tense and unstable situations, especially if economies lagged." The report also argues that Muslims in Europe would "value separation in areas with Muslim-specific cultural and religious practices." This bleak view of angry Muslims in Europe is becoming a cliché in American debates. If you watch TV programs in the US about Europe you get the sense that second-generation Muslims in Europe are all engaged in radicalism and that Europe has now become a jihad factory thanks to their growing numbers.
The reality, however, is much more complex. It is certainly true that Islam is the most rapidly growing religion in Europe today. It is also true that Muslims in Europe have a hard time integrating into European society, mostly because of a combination of self-isolation on their part and discrimination on the part of the host society. Yet European cities, as it is argued in the current issue of The Economist, also have an ability to "accommodate many different kinds of social reality and the practical problems posed by co-existence between faiths and cultures -- from swimming-pool regulations to the slaughter of animals to headgear in municipal premises -- can often be handled in practical ways through a healthy process of local bargaining."
As The Economist also argues, the American fear of Eurabia -- the idea that Europe is turning into a Muslim continent because of growing Muslim immigration and birthrates -- is also absurd. Muslims make up less than 4 percent of the EU's total population. It is their concentration in urban areas that is creating an optical illusion for American observers visiting European cities such as Amsterdam, Paris, London and Berlin.
If I were an American policy maker, I would be more concerned about the European far right that is increasingly turning xenophobic instead of Muslims. In fact, all this talk about Eurabia and Europe turning into a jihad factory is exactly what fuels polarization and creates political opportunities for the extremist political formations of Europe. In many parts of Europe, the far right scores well in the ballot box by exploiting the fear of radical Islam conquering European cities. There are too many places in Europe where Islamophobia is on the rise. Austria, where the far right took 29 percent of the national vote in September, is one of them. It is also true that there are countries where extremists fare less well in the polls, but this is partly because center-right parties often adopt parts of the anti-foreigner agenda by pledging to curb immigration.
Perhaps the greatest threat in the long run is the European backlash against multiculturalism. There seems to be a growing sense in Europe that Muslims have been allowed too much cultural freedom and that now it is time to push for integration. Yet, what most Europeans fail to understand is the difference between integration and assimilation. Integration is a two-way street. If the host society turns increasingly racist and reluctant to tolerate diversity, integration becomes a thinly veiled tactic to push for assimilation and discrimination. Assimilation is a dirty word for most Muslims because it implies that you need to relinquish part of yourself to please the majority. This is why European politicians need to learn to speak about integration. But, perhaps more importantly, they need to realize that integration can only be possible with more tolerance for diversity and multiculturalism.
