Right wing parties have attracted a larger following in Europe over the past few years, but overall, moderation and tolerance have characterized the response of host cultures as they struggle to integrate immigrant populations.

There are many problems with European multiculturalism and with home bred racism, as the recent riots of Muslim youths in France illustrate. But despite terror attacks in Madrid and London, the incendiary speeches of radical imams and high levels of immigrant crime in some areas, Europeans by and large have maintained their cool in the face of intimidation.

Some view this as evidence of weakness. Recently Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton, Bernard Lewis, made a speech in which he argued that Muslims are taking over Europe and characterized this as a war being waged by Islam against Christendom. This may be the aim of a minority of Muslim radicals, but it's not true of the majority. Most Muslim immigrants are interested primarily in getting a decent job and securing a future for their families, not acting as front line troops in some hypothetical war of civilizations. Judging from recent reports from France of numbers of Muslims converting to Christianity, it's pretty evident that jihad wasn't the first thing on their mind. I think it's entirely possible that Lewis is a little too steeped in the historical narrative of his profession and is hyping the current problems out of proportion.

The 'us versus them' approach of course has merit in the case of a nation that menaces the West militarily. In such situations there are instances in which war is entirely legitimate. But the same psychology shouldn't apply to societal issues, where there is a lot more room for accommodation.

The mistake Lewis makes along with writers such as Mark Steyn, is to characterize the position of European secularists as weakness or even degeneracy. In speaking of the Islamist' view of the European character, Lewis makes the following observation ... "They feel they are dealing with, as Osama bin Laden put it, an effete, degenerate, pampered enemy incapable of real resistance". This sounds very much in keeping with the views of Lewis' himself.

In the words of The Stranglers ... "no more heroes any more". It's a different world. Self-assertive chauvinism of the 'my turf' variety is hardly evidence of a global perspective. Heroic strength isn't only demonstrated through tough guy acts. The determined exercise of tolerance and patience in the face of intimidation, frequently demonstrates courageous qualities of a higher order than a willingness to resort too quickly to reactionary blow-back tactics. We have seen the impasse such thinking has led to in Israel and N.Ireland.

The use of the term "Christendom" is also a misnomer. Even though the term isn't synonymous with Christianity, there is little about modern Europe that is Christian per se. In fact many European intellectuals recoil from the values that the term 'Christendom' represents. Without serried ranks of crusader heroes to oppose the alleged Muslim take-over plan, a Euro war-of-civilization is a non-starter. But that certainly doesn't imply that Europe is simply there for the taking by any one party with any one agenda ... Muslim or Christian, or even Jewish.

When you look at Israel and the way it has handled the Palestinian issue, I don't see the hard line approach proving to be more successful than the patient work of integration. The determination of Israel to view Palestinians (even Israeli Arabs) as a threat has resulted in decades of war and hatred. A continuation of the same policies on the part of Israel guarantees that this situation will never change. Harder though it is, the better way is to set aside inherent inclinations toward exclusivity in order to treat others equally, without distinctions being made on the basis of race and heritage.

Contrary to the views of Lewis, I see the European approach as evidence of strength rather than weakness, despite the enormity of present challenges on the immigration front. The mistake I believe was to allow immigrant communities to basically transport their native culture lock, stock and barrel into European cities in the name of multiculturalism. Many residents of these immigrant enclaves remain unable to speak the language of the host nation. This has clearly been the source of a lot of the frictions that have arisen. While I don't think the solution lies in evoking the reactionary forces of 'Christendom', I do think that secular values need to become more militant when it comes to addressing the nefarious aspects of extremist religious ideology.

Of course for those with a them-and-us mentality, a more progressive approach will always be viewed as weakness because they lack an alternative vision of society, trapped as they are in the traditional mold. In reality, the Israeli position vis-a-vis the Palestinians, is the position that is weak because it is underwritten with fear. Fear-of-the-other has been the force that has sustained the identity of the Jews throughout history, and unfortunately this psychological predisposition shows little sign of changing on the part of the majority. There is however a minority of Israelis who hold progressive views and favor a more enlightened approach. They are the best hope for the future of that nation.

European secularism has become increasingly non-religious, even atheistic. Far from this being evidence of a decline in values or a slide into the abyss of atavistic paganism, it is evidence of a sophisticated society that is slowly moving away from the old 'them-and-us' mindset, notwithstanding the resistance from 'blood and soil' nationalists. As anyone with even a cursory knowledge of history is aware, them-and-us thinking leads to endless war and attrition.

There is no argument that work needs to be done to improve integration of immigrants and from that point of view there are solid reasons why the old model of multiculturalism needs to be revamped, at a minimum. A new European identity needs to emerge that includes immigrants as equal partners.

European tolerance, even humor, in the face of outspoken fundamentalism and the extremism that is incubated in some Muslim quarters, demonstrates an ethical value that is superior to a gang-up-and-beat-em-down mentality. After all, the whole idea is to integrate Muslims, isn't it? How can you integrate an immigrant community if you use the actions of a few extremists in their midst to mount a domestic crusade? You will just succeed in deepening the divide and complicating the task. Tolerance though needs to co-exist with tough law and order measures in an effort to combat domestic terrorism. This task is made a lot easier when there is a level of trust, and that can only be engendered by exercising tolerance. Unfortunately European multiculturalism has tended to emphasis the separateness of communities, and has made mutual understanding more difficult to achieve.

Terror threats are very real. European multiculturalism in its present form I believe facilitates these threats because it has created a gulf between communities. Yes, these dangers exist, but alarmist talk that Europe is about to fall under the thrall of Islam is badly overblown and frankly I'm surprised that professor Lewis has climbed onto that particular bandwagon. A simple look at current demographics tells you that it's not imminent. Moreover, if cultural and religious wars break out down the road, they will be fought at the ballot box and on the media. In the case of terrorist acts by the few, European nations aren't exactly sitting ducks waiting to keel over. They have robust legal systems and well managed police services. Talk of impending doom and a Muslim 'takeover' grossly underestimates the resourcefulness and character of peoples that survived the Nazi era and before that WW1. They aren't exactly pushovers.

In Europe we are seeing a more militant secularism that no longer bows to the dictates of religion. Despite the patience shown and the concessions made to immigrant communities in the name of tolerance, it is highly unlikely that European societies will cede control to Islam any time soon.

Although there is a serious problem on the immigration front, the commitment to secularism is its greatest hope. Those with a passionate commitment to a new societal model may not be calling upon God, but they bring other qualities to the task ... vibrant individualism, realism and the knowledge of a third way that transcends the age old polarities of religious and cultural hatred.

About the Author
Aidan Maconachy is a freelance writer and artist based in Ontario. You can visit his blog at http://aidanmaconachyblog.blogspot.com/