"Eurabia" defined

The flames consuming thousands of automobiles, and the occasional bus, nursery, warehouse, and school across France are the result of tragic – in the original sense of the word – set of decisions made by the leaders of Europe, motivated by greed, jealousy, and hubris. The dream of a Europe restored to preeminence, isolating and vanquishing the upstart Americans, via a rock-solid alliance with the Arab world, has become a nightmare. The French cannot acknowledge their problem precisely because they cannot admit the folly of the policies pursued for the last three decades as the bedrock of their highest diplomatic, political, and economic ambitions.

The intifada raging in France for almost three weeks, has been characterized by overwhelmingly Muslim rioters engaged in acts of wanton destruction, punctuated by claims of “territorial control” over sections of various French cities. In the context of this ongoing havoc, one sees repeated references to the term “Eurabia” by journalists and other media and academic elites, who, almost without exception, have no idea about the concrete origins, or significance of this term.

The use of the term “Eurabia”, as noted by the scholar Bat Ye’or (in her seminal analysis, Eurabia-The Euro-Arab Axis, released earlier this year) was first introduced, triumphally, in the mid-1970s, as the title of a journal edited by the President of the Association for Franco-Arab Solidarity, Lucien Bitterlein, and published collaboratively by the Groupe d’Etudes sur le Moyen-Orient (Geneva), France-Pays Arabes (Paris), and the Middle East International (London).

One name that is generally absent from the list of the progenitors of the Franco-Arab axis is Jacques Benoist-Mechin. A very able historian who was a (probably paid) collaborator with the Third Reich before and during the war. He had to hurry to Switzerland in 1944 to escape the wrath meted out to quislings. In the post war years he concentrated on both completing his history of the German Army and in schmoozing the Saudis. This effort including a very flattering biography of the founder of the kingdom.

Eventually Jacques got his sentence in absentia for being a traitor invalidated, moved back to France and continued ingratiating himself into the Guallist movement. Many of his ideas are embodied in the basic documents that the Euros signed off on to set Eurabia in motion.

As he was for Hitler I suspect Jacques was a paid agent for the Saudis and other oil sheiks. He certainly is someone who should have the spot light of history shown on and get all the credit he is due.

I found this review of Eurabia:

Good historical writing, saddening conspiracy theory, March 27, 2005
Reviewer: Brian Griffith "author of The Gardens of Their Dreams" (Toronto, Canada) - See all my reviews

First, Bat Ye'or is clearly an important historian. Her previous work explores the history of Islamic conquests and the fate of non-Muslims under Muslim rulers. It is valuable work -- as important as any good research on the history of Christian oppression of non-Christians or heretics. But in "Eurabia", Ye'or turns to the present and future. And she sees only more of the same: Muslims will continue seeking to conquer the world. Not only that, Ye'or accuses that the jihadists have now turned Europe itself into their ally against Judeo-Christian civilization. As she explains, the jihadist "ideology, strategy, propaganda, and phraseology were conceived, formulated, and imposed on a reluctant European public opinion by a strong Arab and Western political and ideological alliance, including Third Worldists, Leftists, Communists and the Extreme Right". (p. 86)

With a blizzard of facts and citations, Ye'or lays out her proofs of a new Euro-Arab Axis against Western values. Where many Muslims claim that a Jewish conspiracy controls America, Ye'or argues that Muslims are close to controlling Europe:

"The strengthened EU framework has institutionalized a symbiotic Euro-Arab partnership preparing a Kafkaesque cultural and political totalitarianism, wherein Islamist jihadist values subvert the whole European conception of knowledge, human rights, and fundamental individual liberties." (p. 269)

For Ye'or, all recent efforts toward "dialogue", "equality" or "justice" between Muslims and others have been a sham pretext for creeping cultural conquest by Muslims. The Westerners who promoted such accords have merely appeased insatiable aggressors. Since Muslims believe that only their religion comes from God and all others serve Satan, it seems there is no realistic prospect for good relations with these people. Ye'or advocates a different approach:

"The EU financing plan for 2003 included several projects in the West Bank, Gaza, and Arab countries which, like Syria, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority, are breeding grounds of anti-Western Islamic fanaticism. Without Europe's financial aid and know-how, those countries would hardly be able to feed their own growing populations. Europe could easily compel them to abandon their racist culture, instead of vindicating it." (p. 202)

In interpreting recent events, Ye'or moves beyond solid history into the realm of conspiracy theory. Her arguments are compelling. Her indictments of hate crimes by Muslims are damning. Her knowledge is vast and her memory long. She does not forget a crime against her people. For Ye'or, it seems that the difficult path towards forgiveness and civil relations is closed till the war is done.

One more:

overall correct conclusion, but let down by weak arguments, March 15, 2005
Reviewer: maximusone "maximusone" (Brussels)

Bat Ye'or has written a book which has disappointed me somewhat. Firstly, having focused on the main title, I expected a book about Europe and how it is changing under the influence of its muslim minority. Instead it should have been entitled "How Europe and the Arab world have become allies against Israel". Still, there is room for such a book because I believe the basic assumption of the book is largely correct, i.e. that since 1973 Europe, led by France, has become more and more biased against Israel to curry favor with the Arab world.

However, what could have been a very good book is marred by some unneeded simplifications and exaggerations.

The main one is the theme of the first half of the book : a secretive, somewhat sinister group, the Europe Arab Dialogue, consisting of European politicians, who have been singularly successful at subverting the entire policy of a whole continent against Israel. Never mind that few names of these politicians are mentioned sound familiar to me. Instead, I think European elites prefer the Palestinians merely because it looks fashionable at dinner parties to claim to be on the side of "freedom fighters" like Che Guevarra and the PLO, not because Europeans are so anti-semite as the author suspects (they may be in France, but they are not in many other countries, in particular Northern Europe). It is not because so many intellectuals happened to defend Stalinist Russia that they were in his pay either...They were merely "useful idiots" without a need for a sinister body to steer them.

Similarly, I don't buy the author's argument that Europeans chose the side of the Arabs in their conflict with the Israelis because they have been reduced to dhimmi status, i.e. lower class who have to pay tribute to their muslim masters. It is even more depressing : European elites - mainly politicians and the media - have freely chosen the side of the Arabs, not because Europe feels forced to for oil supplies (that may have been so in 1973, but with real oil prices falling for 30 years, it has been a buyers' market until now) and neither because they hope to buy peace from terrorism (Europe's Arab bias started 30 years before 9/11), but because they think it is cool to say the opposite of the US.

I do think that the author makes a convincing case that the whole shift in European politics re Israel has been driven by France purely for its own (myopic) geo-political ambitions.

Lastly, I did miss a number of very important topics in this debate. The author says nothing about the impact of future demographics in Europe on its relation with the Arab world (and hence on its mortal enemy, Israel) and - astonishingly - nor does the author say a word about Turkey and the impact its membership of the EU would have.

All in all, in terms of style, way too much detailed quotes of obscure conferences between European and Arab politicians many years ago, and no speculation about the road ahead. But the description of how hypocritical Europeans have been in this conflict remains devastating.

Warning : if you did protest against Operation Iraqi Freedom, you probably won't like this book at all

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.