The Belgian historian Henri Pirenne connected the birth of Europe as a Christian continent in the XNUMXth century with its break with Islam. Piren would probably never have expected a Muslim ghetto to emerge in Brussels, much less for that ghetto to become a center of jihadism, with marginalized and angry young Muslims rebelling against Europe within its borders.
Divorce is not an option these days. But it is not the kind of marriage that Islamic academic Tarik Ramadan advocates either. Ramadan, the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, is a Swiss citizen and UK resident who claims that Islamic ethics and values should be injected into the European system. In that case, Europe would not only tolerate Islam, but also accept it as an integral part of itself.
The problem with Ramadan's vision is that Europe is a largely secular continent, with an extremely advanced approach to ethics. Islamic societies, in contrast, are extremely religious and deeply rooted in the past. When Islamists talk about political or social reform, they generally look to the past, hoping to bring back a time when core European principles - from gender equality to gay marriage - were rejected. Even Muslims who support the modernization of Islam are not close to the European ethical vision.
The flaws in Ramadan's proposed solution to European jihadism are reflected in the errors in his explanation of the phenomenon, which he largely attributes to Europe's participation in wars in the Middle East, its approval of Israeli repression of the Palestinians, and its support for Arab autocrats. "We cannot", he writes, "support dictatorships... remain silent about the massacre of civilians south of our borders and hope that we will not have a reaction to the injustice and humiliation we have provoked".
However, the US started wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, unconditionally supports Israel, and repeatedly brought Arab autocrats to power. Europe has persistently criticized these policies - often very harshly. However, within America's borders, there has not been a huge increase in jihadist sentiment.
It is possible that the fact that US President B. Obama abandoned some of these policies is responsible for this. When the Arab Spring uprisings began, he quickly ended his support for Tunisian President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali and Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak, allowing protesters - inspired by a Western model of democracy - to topple the regime. The return of autocracy in Egypt, in 2013, through the coup d'état of Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, was certainly not achieved with the help of the US or Europe, both of which supported the democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood.
In recent years, Europe has offered even more direct aid to Arab states. Had it not been for European military intervention, Libyans would still be living under the tyranny of Muammar al-Gaddafi. It is true that Europe could have done more to prevent the chaos that ensued in Libya. However, the people of Libya must also take responsibility for the advancement of conflicting militias that refuse to unite to save the country from total collapse.
In a broader context, although the West - and especially the US - has made serious political mistakes in the Arab world over the past 50 years, external forces cannot be entirely blamed for the chaos in the region. It is the result of a deep civilizational crisis - which can only be solved by the people of the Arab world.
If European foreign policy is not responsible for the current turmoil in the Arab world, it certainly cannot be the reason for the rise of jihadism within its own borders. The real problem is at home: a catastrophic deficit of effective policies related to social justice, education, housing and employment for young European Muslims. Marginalization breeds frustration, which is subsequently fed by growing Islamophobia and the rise of right-wing movements across the continent.
This connection is evident in the fact that most European jihadists come from poor backgrounds. Since they are not particularly well versed in the teachings of Islam and are not given the opportunity to improve their lives, they become easy prey for extremists. Jihadism, with its absolute certainty and grand mission, offers a sense of purpose, pride and identity - not to mention adventure - and an outlet for their rage against the "home" that has denied them all of that.
The story of American Muslims is a measure of European failure. Like most Americans, Muslims in the US believe to some extent in the American dream. They are mostly middle class and despite all the talk about growing economic inequality, they have not given up the belief that, in the US, hard work and initiative are rewarded.
America is a land of immigrants, with a dynamic economy that time and time again allows newcomers to achieve great success. In Europe, in contrast, improving one's social status has always been very difficult, and in times of economic stagnation and sky-high unemployment rates, it is no easier.
In a social sense, America offers Muslims something that Europe does not. Its fundamentally religious culture allows Muslims to retain their identity to a much greater extent than they can in secular Europe. Indeed, core American values - personal responsibility and constitutional patriotism - are more readily accepted by Muslims than the increasingly aggressive European secular strain of liberalism. As a result, integration and assimilation are easier for Muslims in America.
All this suggests that Europe, if it wants to effectively deal with domestic jihadism - needs to rethink. This does not mean that it should suppress its secularism, much less its liberal values. In fact, Europe must breathe life into its "European dream" and make sure that all people have a real chance to improve their lives. Otherwise, they will face a lost generation of millions of young Europeans - Muslims and others.
The author is Vice President of the Toledo International Peace Center; he was the minister of foreign affairs of Israel
Translated by: N. Bogetić
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2016.
Bonus video:
