Who Influenced Whom?

Dr. Andrew Bostom has a bone to pick with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who recently described the influence that the Nazis had on the Jew-hatred exhibited by Hajj Amin el-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. According to the latest scholarly research — including that of Dr. Bostom himself — the mufti was an accomplished anti-Semite long before Adolf Hitler took over the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei from Anton Drexler. In fact, the influence may have flowed in the other direction, with the mufti inspiring Nazi leaders in their decision to attempt a Final Solution.

Dr. Bostom’s latest essay on the topic has been published at Pajamas Media. Some excerpts are below:

Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s Animating Ideology: Nazism, ‘Nazified Islam,’ — or Islam?

During his October 6, 2013 speech at Bar Ilan University, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu alluded to the ex-Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin el-Husseini. Mr. Netanyahu characterized el-Husseini as, “the undisputed leader of the Palestinian national movement in the first half of the 20th century.” The Prime Minister highlighted the ex-Mufti’s role in fomenting pogroms (dating back, in fact, to the so-called “Nabi Musa” riots of 1920) during the decades between the Balfour Declaration, and the eventual creation of the State of Israel in 1948.

Netanyahu’s address also focused on el-Husseini’s World War II era collaboration with the Nazis, the clear implication being that the Mufti’s murderous, Jew-hating ideology was simply another manifestation of Nazi evil, transplanted to a local “nationalistic struggle” in the Middle East. I have just published an extensive analysis (available as a downloadable pdf of 51 pp., and 120 references, embedded at the end of this blog) entitled, “A Salient Example of Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s Canonical Islamic Jew-Hatred — Introduction, Text, and Commentary” which demonstrates that Netanyahu’s rehashing of such conventional, pseudo-academic “wisdom,” does not withstand any serious, objective scrutiny.

On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,” confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine — anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The Congressional record contains a statement of support from New York Rep. Walter Chandler which includes an observation, about “Turkish and Arab agitators… preaching a kind of holy war [jihad] against… the Jews” of Palestine. During this same era within Palestine, a strong Arab Muslim irredentist current — epitomized by Hajj Amin el-Husseini — promulgated the forcible restoration of sharia-mandated dhimmitude for Jews via jihad. Indeed, two years before he orchestrated the murderous anti-Jewish riots of 1920, that is, in 1918, Hajj Amin el-Husseini stated plainly to a Jewish coworker (at the Jerusalem Governorate), I. A. Abbady, “This was and will remain an Arab land… the Zionists will be massacred to the last man…. Nothing but the sword will decide the future of this country.”

Despite his role in fomenting the1920 pogroms against Palestinian Jews, el-Husseini was pardoned and subsequently appointed mufti of Jerusalem by the British high commissioner, in May 1921, a title he retained, following the Ottoman practice, for the remainder of his life. Throughout his public career, the mufti relied upon traditional Koranic anti-Jewish motifs to arouse the Arab street. For example, during the incitement which led to the 1929 Arab revolt in Palestine, he called for combating and slaughtering “the Jews.” not merely Zionists. In fact, most of the Jewish victims of the 1929 Arab revolt were Jews from the centuries-old dhimmi communities (for example, in Hebron), as opposed to recent settlers identified with the Zionist movement.

The mufti remained unrelenting in his espousal of a virulent, canonical Islamic Jew-hatred as the focal tenet of his ideology, before, during, and in the aftermath of World War II, and the creation of the State of Israel. He was also a committed supporter of global jihad movements, urging a “full struggle” against the Hindus of India (as well as the Jews of Israel) before delegates at the February 1951 World Muslim Congress: “We shall meet next with sword in hand on the soil of either Kashmir or Palestine.” Declassified intelligence documents from 1942, 1947, 1952, and 1954 confirm the mufti’s own Caliphate desires in repeated references from contexts as diverse as Turkey, Egypt, Jerusalem, and Pakistan, and also include discussions of major Islamic conferences dominated by the mufti, which were attended by a broad spectrum of Muslim leaders literally representing the entire Islamic world (including Shia leaders from Iran), that is, in Karachi from February 16 — 19, 1952, and Jordanian-occupied Jerusalem, December 3 — 9, 1953. Viewed in their totality these data do not support the current standard assessment of the mufti as merely a Palestinian Arab nationalist, rife with a “transplanted” Jew-hatred.

There is another parallel negationist trend, which is widely prevalent: the claim that el-Husseini’s canonical Islamic Jew-hatred somehow represented a suis generis “Nazification” of Islam, which has “persisted” into our era. Paul Berman articulated an unabashed formulation of this broadly held thesis, proclaiming, that abetted by the Nazis, el-Husseini “monstrously,” and “infernally,” “blurred Islam and Nazism,” achieving

A victory of Himmler’s Islam…A victory for the Islam of fanaticism and hatred over its arch-rival, the Islam of generosity and civilization.

During 1938, a booklet Muhammad Sabri edited, Islam, Judentum, Bolschewismus (Islam, Jewry, Bolshevism), was published in Berlin by Junker-Duennhaupt [Dünnhaupt]. Sabri’s booklet included Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s 1937 declaration — also deemed by some as a “fatwa” (an Islamic religious ruling) — appealing to the worldwide Muslim umma. El-Husseini’s declaration was extracted and reprinted, separately, by the Nazi regime as Islam und Judentum (Islam and Jewry), and distributed to Muslim SS units in Bosnia, Croatia, and the Soviet Union.

As best as I can determine, the first complete, annotated translation of this pamphlet, directly from the German, was provided in my essay. Moreover, no scholar had ever identified, let alone comprehensively explicated, the antisemitic Islamic motifs which punctuate el-Husseini’s pronouncement, from beginning to end. Accordingly, the translation was followed by a detailed commentary which addressed this critical (and frankly, self-fulfilling) lacuna in the scholarship on el-Husseini’s Jew-hatred: identifying and analyzing its traditionalist Islamic origins.

What follows is the crux of my analysis, but to fully understand its arguments requires a careful reading of all the evidence adduced in the original essay.

Read the rest at PJM.

7 thoughts on “Who Influenced Whom?

  1. Hitler did say that Islam is a perfect religion for a soldier.

    The Turkish performance in ww1 probably impressed the Germans, Hitler was also keenly aware of the Armenian massacres. As a former subject of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire he would have rubbed shoulders with Bosnian Muslims on a regular basis. The Kaiser promoted Jihad in ww1, he was also a Zionist as Germany was aligned to the cause of Zionism (up until the Balfour declaration) When Balfour did that the entire Zionist movement tilted pro allies, hitherto more or less aligned to the German side. That may have triggered certain things. I hadn’t thought of Hitler’s anti-Jewish attitude as an attempted exploitation of latent Jihad in quite that way.

    How, very, interesting.

  2. To think, that every liberal establishment figure in the 1990s including Blair, Clinton, Albright, Kerry, Clark, Howard, Cohen and others happily endorsed the bombing of the Serbs to help out the grandchildren of these thugs set up an Islamic State in central Europe. Again, whom is influencing who?

  3. …Netanyahu’s rehashing of such conventional, pseudo-academic “wisdom,” does not withstand any serious, objective scrutiny. — Andrew Bostom

    It is maddening and depressing that even those in the ragged, amorphous boundaries of the Counter-Jihad, and even illustrious and influential individuals like Netanyahu, can remain so ignorant of this most exigent problem of our era.

    Why is it that unfamous un-influential un-illustrious ordinary civilians like the many mostly pseudonymous commenters, bloggers and chatters on the Internet know more than so many of our quasi-leaders in the Counter-Jihad? What makes the difference? We have more time to read? We don’t delegate our decision of what to read to staff aids who boil things down into bite-size for us to read hastily on jets in between flying to Brussels and Ankara? We unfamous civilians in the Blogosphere are more intelligent? We have some mysteriously higher immunity to the PC MC virus? Something has to explain this, because I keep seeing it.

  4. Dan, I have a suspicion that a large swath of 20th century history has yet to be researched and written, and that there may be afoot a similar kind of subcultural resistance and dogmatism in Academe to the one which Diana West has palpated with her new book and with the controversy it generated concerning Stealth Communism — this other subject to which I allude being Hitler’s inspiration by Islam and by certain Muslims and Islamic writings — which would also mean that Nazism itself owes a lot of its substance to Islam.

    Bostom has written about this before, by the way. As I wrote on my blog some time ago:

    …a Muslim scholar and demagogue by the name of al-Mashriqi (born in 1888), who met Hitler in 1926 (at a time when Hitler’s political career was on an upward course and when he had already become leader of the National Socialist party in Germany). This Muslim, al-Mashriqi, founded the Khaksar Movement, an Indian Muslim separatist movement. In one of his writings, he expressed designs that go far beyond a mere regional concern in northern India:

    “…we [Muslims] have again to dominate the whole world. We have to become its conqueror and its rulers.”

    Al-Mashriqi also wrote a book called Tazkira which, as Bostom describes it, “produced a quintessential message of Islam enshrining the ideals of militaristic nation-building”—i.e., it promulgated and highlighted the supremacist expansionism through militant means that is essential to Islamic doctrine and Islamic history. What is startlingly noteworthy about this is revealed in al-Mashriqi’s own account of his meeting with Hitler in 1926:

    “I was astounded when he [Hitler] told me that he knew about my Tazkirah. The news flabbergasted me. . . I found him very congenial and piercing. He discussed Islamic Jihad with me in details. In 1930 I sent him my Isharat concerning the Khaksar movement with a picture of a spade-bearer Khaksar at the end of that book. In 1933 he started his Spade Movement. ”


    As I say, historians have yet to really write this history. Two things I can think of off the top of my head that should be researched:

    1) the influence of the Koran on Hitler’s Mein Kampf

    2) the inspiration of the traditional razzia style of sudden terror raids in Islamic military history for the Nazi “Blitzkrieg” tactic.

    And of course many more things in addition.

    • It’s quite tempting to consider the possibility. The Germans were very cosmopolitan people and they were/are great intellectuals. Most of our PhD structure is German in origin. Most of the narrative about the Renaissance is German in origin and the history of the Roman empire is again based on German scholarship. Ancient Greece is also mapped out by German archeologists.
      Germany very nearly provoked a total Jihad in ww1. German high command also sent Lenin to St Petersburg on a special train.

      Hitler knew all about ww1, he also read Clausewitz who incidentally commanded Muslim cavalry in the service of the Czar.

      Personally I just think this is about how formidable the Germans really are. but one should recall that Hitler was a Vienna native. It’s a very particular mentality as Asia begins right there.

  5. Hitler is greatly admired in certain circles in India and Pakistan, and Mein Kampf, of course, being a bestseller in islamic countries. These obvious facts, clearly, give food for thought, and help see the blood red thread through the centuries.

    History books have always explained WW2 in such a way as to having us implicitly adopt the understanding that the idea of the Endlösung was conceived all of a sudden by Adolf Hitler.

    Going back in time, we comprehend that there are direct lines and connections from a certain totalitarian ideology which had already been cultivated in the deserts far away from Europe, that laid the grounds for using an unstable gigantomaniac from Vienna as the executive of their project, but now under the name of National-Sozialismus, aka Nazism.


  6. – Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer!

    Perfectly congruent with, and building upon
    one islamised mass of people, one caliphate/”nation”, one “prophet” M

Comments are closed.