Islamisation of Europe: When Will Russia React?

Our Canadian correspondent Rembrandt Clancy has translated a German-language article by C. Jahn from Politically Incorrect about Russia’s possible response to the rise of Islam in Europe.

Previous articles by the same author translated by Rembrandt Clancy: The Kristallnacht of the Multicolored Republic (9 August 2013), The Silence of the Lutherans (14 August 2013).

Islamisation of Europe: When will Russia React?

For how much longer will Russia stand and watch while Western Europe is transformed into an Islamic dominated, nuclear-armed, EU-totalitarian entity? Since Russia is not governed by dreamy ideologues, but by political realists, one may assume that the Kremlin is coming to terms with the consequences for Russian external security of the Islamisation and ‘totalitarianisation’ of EU-West Europe. Russian strategists may be looking at the following themes in particular.

(By C. Jahn)

23 June 2014

1. The Islamisation of EU-West Europe threatens Russia

In spite of the growing opposition movements in some Western European countries such as France and England, it is to be expected that the present Islamisation policy of the Western European governments will remain unchanged. In the future, too, they will bring millions of Mohammedans to Europe, who for their part will continue their “conquest from the within” and step by step will secure for themselves a growing power and influence over policy, administration and the security forces. Particularly in Germany, with its feeble opposition, the government is advancing Islamisation with a singular aggressiveness. Even if it takes three or four decades for the Mohammedan minority to become the majority in important West European heartlands — in Belgium, Holland, large parts of France, England, Germany and Austria — the Islamic influence on the political leadership in Western Europe will have already become so strong in the short term, that Russia and the former Eastern bloc will represent the sole remaining bulwarks against the proliferation of Sharia in Europe and against the spread of the traditionally aggressive, Islamic ideology of world conquest.

An Islamised Western Europe will perforce fall into a cultural-ideological confrontation with Russia together with the rather nationalist-oriented, and in the medium term, the scarcely Islamisable states of the former East block, especially Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. It is to be feared on this account that it will be mainly Germany, being without an opposition but strongly under the influence of Islam, that will agitate against Christian Russia, but also against other countries of the former Eastern block. Merkel’s most recent tirade against Russia and the blatant hostility of the German government toward Hungary may already anticipate this future agitation and renewed front-line positioning in Europe.

Consequently in the coming decades an Islamised EU-West Europe, because of the war-readiness and battle-preparedness intrinsic to Islam, will then become militarily more offensive in its thinking and become a confrontational and potentially hostile sphere of influence to the west of Russia. This antagonistic power base in the West will constitute a geographical supplement to the hostile Islamic sphere of influence which already exists today to the south (Chechnya, Turkic states etc.). Since an EU membership is foreseeable for the recently re-Islamised and ever dangerous, nationalistic Turkey, Russia, in the not too distant future will find herself both in the west and in the south, completely trapped in a pincer movement by predominantly Islamic powers which are latently or openly hostile.

2. The EU will accelerate on its totalitarian course

The anti-democratic development of the EU will intensify in the coming years; the totalitarian trend inside the power apparatus of the EU will gain momentum. Almost all leading parties in Western Europe support a policy favouring a still more concentrated EU centralism, accompanied by democratically elected state parliaments surrendering their powers. This trend, comparable to the development of the conglomerate of states of the USSR, will ultimately result in a dictatorship of unelected bureaucrats whose power is no longer democratically legitimised at all, or only marginally so, and whose exercise of power, by analogy with the USSR, will take on absolutist features.

Since today it is already largely impossible for the Western European population to control the power of the EU leaders, this anti-democratic development of the EU, as the historical experience of all totalitarian systems has shown, will enhance the willingness inside the EU leadership circle to take political and military risks; or to state it more concretely, the threshold for military adventures will become lower, hence making the EU considerably more dangerous. The combination of these two great political trends in Western Europe, Islamisation and ‘totalitarianisation’, will form in the medium term a dangerous cocktail for the external security of Russia.

3. The EU will obtain access to armed forces and weapons

For years efforts have been underway in the EU, by means of the centralisation of national armies, to provide the Brussels bureaucrats with their own military apparatus. There is no doubt that the raising of such an EU army is only a question of time. This army will be small in the beginning; but as the overall development of the EU has always shown, it will over time fully replace the national armies. French atomic weapons will then no longer remain under the control of a democratic government, but will become directly or indirectly subject to an undemocratic, centralised bureaucracy, which will not have to justify its measures to constituents.

Consolidation of the as yet nationally fragmented military forces in Western Europe into a gigantic, combined military apparatus will represent therefore not only a completely new calibre of military potential on Russia’s western flank, but will also fundamentally change the decision-making procedures behind the unleashing of a military confrontation: — a few totalitarian leaders making rapid decisions, hence replacing elected democrats labouriously building a consensus. Both developments will lower the Western European political leadership’s threshold and raise their readiness for confrontation.

4. The EU will distract from their internal problems with external aggression

There are countless motivations for the unleashing of military conflicts, but internal political problems almost always play a role, for rulers wish to deflect attention from these by bringing their resources together against an external adversary.

EU-West Europe is effectively bankrupt and, as is generally known, it is kept solvent only by printing money — in the long run a system which is kept alive in such a way has no chance of survival. The bloated welfare systems will lead to ever higher levels of taxation and thereby to additional weakening of Western European economic power and potential for growth. The international competitiveness of Western Europe will decline, Western Europe will lose its share in the global markets, and the impoverishment which is already observable today will accelerate. Moreover, the settlement in Western Europe of ethnic groups from all over the world, which is being pressed ahead with unabated radicalism, will weaken ever more conspicuously the structural cohesion of its societies. The current inter-ethnic sham-peace in countries such as France, Holland, Belgium and also parts of Germany will develop incrementally into open strife and presumably also into internal warfare. It is probably only a question of time before these countries suffer the same gruesome fate as other polyethnic, multi-religious, artificial states; namely, Yugoslavia, Syria and Iraq.

In the coming years Western Europe will almost inevitably become poorer and more violent; and given the foreseeable ethno-territorial fragmentation, large areas will become ungovernable. Historical experience teaches that politicians in such situations, simply for reasons of self-protection, consistently yield to the temptation of externalising the internally fermenting potential for conflict by focussing on an alleged common “enemy”. Russia therefore is at risk of becoming the lightening rod for Western Europe’s economic downfall and for its growing inter-ethnic tensions.

5. When will Russia act?

Even if one were to make the favourable assumption that the developments outlined are being executed only partially with political intent; that is, that the political class of Western Europe is not acting unreservedly with deliberate, malevolent calculation, there is still an automatism inherent in the stated macro-trends operative in EU-West Europe: mass-settlement leads to Islamisation, and with it a growing externally directed aggressivity; de-democratisation leads to dictatorship, and with it a lowered threshold; military centralisation leads to concentrated strike capability and economic decline; and internal strife leads to the search for external parties who are culpable and to the mobilisation of the masses for an external war.

Since only Russia comes into question as an adversary in such a war — an Islamised Western Europe will not make war against the Arab world; and democratic Switzerland, which is being observed with growing hostility by the EU elites, constitutes no serious adversary — the question arises as to how long Russia will continue to watch this development and do nothing. From the Russian standpoint — and the Western European politicians should try to understand this standpoint — a Russian intervention into the current political and ethnic trends in Western Europe would not at all constitute “interference in the internal affairs” of EU-West Europe; rather, given the long-term geopolitical and military danger associated with these developments, it would lie directly within the immediate security interests of Russia.

18 thoughts on “Islamisation of Europe: When Will Russia React?

    • Indeed, Russia does have a large Muslim population but the vast majority of Muslims are Tartars or Russian speaking itinerant workers from Central Asia, they are not imported Arab Muslims who tend to be more radical.

      Also, Russia does not encourage Muslim immigration and state based fertility programs are off limits to Muslims. I believe Russia which is over 90% white has a much better chance of survival than Western Europe.

      Hopefully the right will continue to make political inroads and destroy the left in the process. The last European Elections saw new anti-Islam and anti-EU parties race to the front.

  1. In my mind two things stand out not mentioned from the reading of this article;

    1. The EU will at some point in the near future collapse in upon itself economically, socially and culturally if left to its own devices.

    2. Russia has an internal problem with Islam that does not appear to be easing.

    On the first point, the Russians can see the path the EU is on and the future scenario developing and will do nothing while it remains in motion with the possibility that the problem will correct itself through internal political or revolutionary measures.

    On the second point, the Russians, if they ever decided to take military action against an Islamized Europe would in effect have to fight a war on two fronts; Europe and internal Islam – which would rise up against the Russian state in support of their ‘brothers’ in Europe. I know of no country that has survived let alone won a war, while fighting on two fronts.

    What the author of the article has not taken into consideration is that there is still a possibility, albeit a slim possibility, that a political reverse in Europe can be achieved if the EU itself can be dissolved through the future actions of the newly elected politicians who the media like to describe as being of the ‘far right’.

    And while that is a possibility there is reason to hope for a peaceful transition back to full democratic and constitutional national governments that we must consider.

  2. @nemesis: The US fought on two fronts in WW II and is considered the winner of the war. If you want to be more specific and say that no country has fought both an external and internal war and succeeded, you might have grounds for a claim, though examples would be useful.

    • Bill, while I understand where you are coming from it has to be appreciated that the US fought with other nations in two separate theatres of war and not on two fronts alone, during World War 2.

  3. Some very good points were brought up here. I too have thought that our hopes could well be vested in Russia. In the above scenario, the US will likely have become fully under the political and societal domination of the Left and will consequently applaud Western European efforts to start trouble. The main problem that I see with Russia at the moment is her terribly low birthrate. Perhaps more Boers and other cast-offs will take the Russians (Georgians, interestingly, are offering the same) up on their to settle in or near the lands from which Indo-European speakers originally spread (I strongly favor the North of the Black Sea school).

  4. So the choice is submit to the horror of islame or total war? It’s time for ethnic Europeans to quit killing each other and turn their weapons against a common enemy.

  5. Not only for years, but for decades, Russia has been plagued with violent Islamic terrorism, arguably worse than the terrorism so far suffered by any other Western polity — and yet Russia hasn’t rounded up Muslims and deported them. You’d think that the Soviet Union, and even Russia, wouldn’t have the anxiously irrational qualms the rest of the West has about protecting its society; but apparently it does.

  6. We have to create apostates. We can’t kill 1+billion Muslims. They have to be converted. This means we have to use the intellectual tools of our brightest and we must get our leaders to see what is happening so that we can mount the most persuasive mind-changing campaign in history. We have to reason, explain, dispute, elucidate, quarrel, convert from now until a Muslim reformation occurs. There is no excuse. World history cannot follow the cruel, loveless ravings of a desert psychopath. We could be humiliated in dhimmitude for hundreds of years or worse. Every bright star in our culture would be gone, from music to science to dogs. It would be the end of love itself. Maybe Russia and China and Africa will join us with the eastern Europeans.

  7. According to the Pew Forum, as of 2010 the European Union had about 19 million Muslims, or 3.8% of the population. Meanwhile Russia had 16.4 million Muslims, or 11.7% of the population. Yet we’re supposed to believe that “Christian” Russia faces a dire threat from the “Muslim” EU? Methinks it should be the other way around.

    These numbers count only self-described practitioners of Islam, not people of Muslim heritage who may be atheists or non-religious. If all people with a Muslim background were counted, then the gap between the EU and Russia would widen further to roughly 5% for the former and at least 15% for the latter.

    Moreover, these numbers probably don’t count the massive influx of illegal immigrants into Russia in recent years. There are now an estimated 4 million illegals in Russia, most of whom are Muslim. Russia has its own ‘Camp of the Saints’ scenario unfolding on its southern border, just like Europe and the US.

    And while Turkey remains a candidate for EU membership, it can be vetoed by any one of the 28 existing members. So while some small Muslim-dominated nations in the Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and Kosovo, combined population less than 10 million) might–MIGHT–eventually join the EU, the chances of Turkey being allowed to join are extremely remote.

    Meanwhile Putin has recently established the Eurasian Union along with Belarus and Kazakhstan. He wants to expand it to also include the Muslim nations of Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, which, along with Kazakhstan, have a total population of 75 million, more than half of that of Russia itself. The Eurasian Union wants to eventually abolish all internal borders, just like the EU, which would surely mean the end of Russia as part of the larger European Christian civilization.

    Russia under Putin joined the Organization of Islamic Cooperation as an observer in 2005 and might one day apply to become a full member. Needless to say, none of the 28 EU states are members or observers of the OIC. Russia is also a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a budding anti-NATO military alliance, along with China and several Muslim nations. Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran are observer states at the SCO and may eventually become full members.

    So it seems pretty clear to me that not only is Putin’s Russia *not* a Christian bulwark against Islamic expansionism, but that it’s the driving force within an interlocking group of Asian/Muslim alliances directed against the Christian (or post-Christian) West. Putin is not a Russian nationalist; he actively persecutes real nationalists in Russia. He’s not even a ‘Russian Federationist’, working on behalf of all of the people of the multicultural Russian Federation. Instead he’s a Eurasianist, busy building international coalitions opposed to the Euro-Atlantic world.

    And unlike in the EU, there is no Russian equivalent of UKIP, Front National, PVV, Vlaams Belang, Lega Nord et al. Putin’s United Russia Party (universally known as ‘the party of crooks and thieves’ and widely blamed for the Muslim immigration invasion) has suppressed all nationalist opposition to his rule. Not to mention its control over the media and internet; a blog like Gates of Vienna could not exist in today’s Russia.

    So, in short, the article above is pure nonsense. The EU, for all its faults, is far less Islamic (and pro-Islamic) than Putin’s Russia, and also far freer. Hopefully a post-Putin Russia will change course and embrace Europe and the West while turning its back on its Muslim neighbours to the east.

  8. A [deprecated] researched article written by [an epithet] with naive views about Russia… why am I not surprised?
    a) The country most threatened by islamization is Putinistan itself as it already has a muslim minority far greater than any country in WE.
    b) Russians have no problem courting muslims (Hezbollah, Iran) if it suits their geopolitical goals
    “The Russians think that with Orthodox Christianity Russia will be able to cope with Islam,” he explained. “Orthodox Christianity is strangely compatible with Islam. Western Christianity is far more distant from Islam. Did you know there are very strong and fast-developing contacts between the Russian Orthodox Church and Iran? This started some five or six years ago. The mullahs and the Orthodox are consolidating their friendship. They share an ideological and spiritual platform which is called ‘anti-Americanism.’ Both of them reject American values and way of life, and they reject American policy. That unifies them. It’s very important after the Soviet collapse that Russia was able to combine with true allies who will work against the same ideological enemy.

    Iran is a strong anti-American state. The same can be said of Syria and Hezbollah too. I am here in Moscow, just 800 meters from a new Mosque that is being built. It is huge. The Russian police say that some 120,000 Muslims are gathering there in downtown Moscow. The number of Muslim immigrants is growing. They have been coming in for the last five-to-six years. The ethnic composition of Moscow is changing.”

    c) He complains about “Merkel’s most recent tirade against Russia and the blatant hostility of the German government toward Hungary” yet he sees no problem in Orban being Putin’s 5th column in the middle of Europe (just like Schroeder is) and Jobbik’s Gabor Vona openly prostituting himself with the Turks just couple weeks ago calling islam “the last hope of humanity”.

  9. Russia ? Short answer: “NEVER”. Don’t even start to count on help from there.
    There is not a single man in politics who speak like one blond politic from Holland (who lost again in polls). I heard that some dude spoken on radio about similar stuff…. and he was stubbed 10 times on same or next day near his home (I don’t know how, but he is alive). Group against illegal immigration banned. Punishments for speaking “hate” are forced. Punishment for hurting religious feelings are forced. Punishment for criminals who actually beat,humiliate,”accidentally” beat to death,rape russian people are low and looks like slowly lowing.

  10. It is more likely that the EU will deconstruct as the Brits will probably leave it and if Le Pen wins in France, which cannot ne discounted, then it is likley either to fall apart or reinvent itself and return to being the Common Market which is what it should have remained. The idea of United States of Europe governed by unelected bureaucrats is ludicrous. Either it reinvents itself or it get thrown in the garbage.

Comments are closed.