English

Is there an islamic fascism?  

With the occasion of the 5th birthday of the Anglo-American intervention in Iraq (April 2003), Al-Qaeda tries to galvanize its troops, weakened in Iraq, since Sunnites tribes formerly risen against the Americans, joined the coalition and gave up the Jihad who kills more Muslims than “Crusaders”, and which is no longer supported any more by the Iraqis. (translated by Gisela Cepparo)

The rush to denounce Islamic fundamentalist terrorism in the aftermath of the tragic events of September 11 provided an ideal opportunity to perpetuate the cliché of the «mainly moderate», « Western-friendly» Islamic world, a stance trotted out after every wave of Islamist terror to strike France in recent years.

By Miroljub Jevtic: University of Sarajévo and Belgrade,
Professor of science politics and specialist of islamic revivalism in Balkans and ex-USSR
Special to Jihad Watch: Professor Miroljub Jevtiæ assesses the situation in Kosovo and beyond. Professor Jevtiæ is a professor at the College of Political Science at the Belgrade University. He is visiting the United States this month with Bishop Artemije of Raska and Prizren (which includes Kosovo and Metohija) in a mission to awaken the West -– and especially the United States -– against the ill-advised direction of current policy and the disastrous impact it would have on Kosovo's beleaguered Christian Serbs.

I have recently read with dismay Mr. Muraviec's article: “The wacky world of French intellectuals” published in April 2000 on your site (Middle East Forum) and I'd like to respond to his criticism of my positions and my work. I hope to establish here a sense of truth.

by Alexandre Del Valle* [translated from the French by Erich von Abele]
Since the instigation of the second Intifada al Aqsa, in September of 2000; since September 11, 2001, which marked the end of the inviolability of America’s strategic sanctuary; and, above all, since the second Iraqi crisis, which has resulted in the dismantling of the regime of Saddam Hussein, one has been able to note throughout the West the emergence of a Red-Green-Brown Axis (the Red of the extreme left, the Brown of the extreme right, and the Green of Islamism). The different components of this Axis have for a common objective the struggle against the new faces of Evil: America, Israel, “Imperialism”, and even the West in its entirety.

At the time when the heads of state of the European Union have just opened the negotiations concerning the membership of Turkey in the EU (a process which can, however, be interrupted at any moment) and when, at the same time, the rise of Islamism in Turkey is worrying the opponents of the Turkish candidature, it is good to analyze – step by step – the arguments of the supporters of the membership of Ankara.

Three years after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon Europe experienced its own “September 11”. Spain has learned, at its own expense, that the main threat to the democracies is, from now on, Islamist totalitarianism. Despite this real “electric” shock, a number of “experts” on Islam continue to nod in agreement that Islamo-terrorism is nothing else but a reaction to the “American-Zionist imperialism” and that it does not strike anyone except the Westerners supporting Sharon, Bush and their Muslim “lackeys”. The attacks which occurred in Morocco in May 2003 and in Turkey in November 2003 have been the proof that even in the countries ruled by Islamic parties and opposed to the United States like the government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan during the war in Irak can be targeted. The Madrid tragedy has enabled us to see to what extent a mass of foolhardy Europeans is struck by the “Stockholm syndrome”. It is a sickness which reached the point if absurdity when, on the 22 of March, the European Ministries of Justice - with Monsieur de Villepin at their head - condemned “the assassination” by the Tsahal of the spiritual chief of Hamas, Sheikh Yassin who was, at the same time, one of the most formidable sponsors of the “Green Terror” and, and therefore, one of the people responsible for the degradation of the situation in the Middle East.

One year after the 11 September – a heavy toll

I: The lessons “after Manhattan”
II: The theological and canonical foundation of Islamist totalitarianism
III: Shariah and liberal democracies: two mutually exclusivee systems
IV: New “Green Totalitarianism”
V: The great global tendencies of Islamist proselytising and terrorism
VI: The strategies of conquest of Islamist Totalitarianism
VII: The state of affairs in the places affected by Islamist activities in the West
VIII: From politically correct to “Islamically correct” or the philosophical suicide of
the West
IX: The crisis of democracies or the new totalitarian tendency

Three questions for Alexandre del Valle about: Islamist Totalitarianism – Attack on Democracies

0ne year after September 11 : a devastating assessment "Totalitarianism of the third kind". Since the unprecedented catastrophe of September 11, there has been more talk in the West than ever before about "Islamism" and the Muslim religion in general.

Since the 11th of September 2001 observers and analysts have never been talking so much about Islamism or, in fact, about Islam itself. Their different, often hasty and superficial, comments fluctuate between “Islamophobia” - encouraged by the dangerous construct Islam = Islamist terrorism; and the other face of Janus of ignorance - the idea of the “Islamically correct” in accordance with which the recurring Islamist attacks are seen as an opportunity to criticize the said construct and to boast of the intrinsic qualities of the Koran as “the text of peace” and of Islam as “religion of love”, this serving as an inversed and redemptive recepticle of the whole Western Judeo-Christian bad conscience. Let's try to look into it more closely.

During the Joint Forces operation in Kosovo, NATO carried war in Serbia on the UCK Albanian nationalist side. Two years later hardly, the Westerns and NATO, operating a turn to 180, call the Serbs to return in the security zone this time, which was prohibited to them, during the KFOR development, devoting the end of the Joint Forces operation, and to protect the southern and the east Serb boundaries, in order to constrain the new Macedonian UCK menacing the stability of the region.

What is the strategy? According to the Greek etymology, the strategy means "to conduct the army", Plato adding at once that the war, thus the strategy, must be submitted to the policy, the military art to that of the government. Before the Greeks, Sun Tzu (the VI-th century before J.C.) is the first theorist recognized as such of the strategy, his Art of the war being still studied by all the strategists and strategies and saving the surprising actuality, namely in view of the importance accorded by the Chinese thinker to the psychological and not military means in the war, phenomenon which characterizes more than any other strategic modern era of the nuclear. It will be necessary nevertheless to wait 1794 that the word strategy appears for the first time in our language, under the pen of the Prussian general Frierdrich Wilheim Bulow.

The modern geopolictics is a multidisciplinary approach, which takes into consideration the authorities rivalry as they concern to territories. As the controlling (or the possession) territory is a mean to exercise an authority or an influence on the people and resources, which are there. In France, two great geopolitics analysts contributed to rehabilitate this discipline, before mainly studied in Germany, in Russia and in the Anglo-Saxon countries: the general Peter Marie Gallois, for whom the geopolitics studies "the influence of the medium on the human", and the geographer Yves Lacoste, according to whom the geopolitics is "an intellectual process" have as a subject "the study of territorial rivalry of authorities and their repercussions in the opinion"1.