Gone Fishin'!

Arafish: LGF.

Back next week. Until then, here's an excellent interview with the most important scholar of our time, Bat Ye'or.

Bat Ye’or was born in Cairo. In 1955, her Egyptian nationality was revoked because she was Jewish. She found asylum in 1957 with her parents in London as a stateless refugee, acquiring British citizenship in 1959 after her marriage. In 1958, Ye’or attended the Institute of Archeology at London University and moved to Switzerland in 1960 with her husband, where she continued her studies at the University of Geneva until the birth of three children. She has worked alone in a groundbreaking field of historical research and on numerous publications for the past 35 years.

oldSpeak recently sat down with Bat Ye’or to discuss the ideas in her new book [Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis].

John Whitehead: In your book, you discuss at length the meaning of jihad, which is central to Islamic history and civilization. Few Americans understand what it means for them, their country and people around the world. Can you explain the significance of jihad and the danger it poses?

Bat Ye’or: Jihad represents both a doctrine and a jurisdiction elaborated from three sources: the Koran, the Hadiths (words and deeds attributed to the Prophet Muhammad) and the biographies of the Prophet. Treatises on jihad have been written down and explained by the four founders of Islamic jurisprudence in the 8th and 9th centuries. Since then, they have represented an important part of Islamic legislation as jihad regulates the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims according to Islamic law.

According to the jihadic doctrine, the world is divided into two parts: Muslims and Infidels, the latter living in the dar al-harb, the land of war, because their land must be Islamized by peaceful means, or by war if they resist. Before attacking the Infidels, Muslims must first call them to convert; if they refuse, they are asked to pay a ransom; if they refuse again, Muslims have the duty to wage war on them. Truce is accepted on condition that the Infidels pay a regular ransom and put no obstacle to the spread of Islam in their own countries. There are other conditions also, like sending soldiers to fight for Islamic interests. A truce should not last more than 10 years, and it is allowed only when the Muslim ruler is weak. Otherwise, war against the Infidels is mandatory.

The treatises on jihad establish with a meticulous precision the tactics and means to conduct war, the type of truces allowed and the treatment of prisoners of war: male, female and children, the division of the booty, the characters of the land of the Infidels that has become Islamized, the rules to govern the submitted Infidels and so on.
. . .
JW: The title of your book, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, implies a fusion of European and Arab interests. Your argument, however, seems to be that there is not so much an equal cooperation of these two interests but that the Islamic world is actually manipulating the Europeans. Is this explained by the Islamic policy of dhimmitude? What does this concept mean for Europe?

BY: First, I want to stress that European and Arab interests coincided on many plans. Otherwise, the European Community (EC), replaced in 1992-93 by the European Union (EU), would not have agreed on such cooperation. Those mutual concerns were the oil, Arab markets and European interests in Arab industrial developments, which created a Euro-Arab economic interdependency as was planned by European politicians and economists. On the political level, the Euro-Arab solidarity is essential to the economic collaboration between the two partners. This political solidarity refers to the anti-American and anti-Zionist militancy. Both represent strong and permanent trends in Europe, on the extreme right as well as in the Leftist movements where the Arafatian cult replaced that of Stalin. The rebirth of the powerful Nazi and communist parties machineries and ideals into Palestinianism−a jihadist anti-Western cult that subverts its values–is a European phenomenon. Europe itself wants to fulfill the Arab dream: to be a stronger power, rival and opposed to America. Both Europeans and Arabs share the desire for the fusion of the two shores of the Mediterranean and anti-Israeli policies based on Palestinianism, as well as anti-Americanism.
. . .
JW: You paint a very negative picture for the future of Europe, which, of course, affects the United States and the rest of the world. Do you see any hope for democracy and freedom as it faces what you argue is the onslaught of Islam and jihad?

BY: I distinguish between Islam and the ideology of jihad. These are two different domains. Europe rejects its Judeo-Christian tradition and wants to recreate the Andalusian paradise or the Ottoman Empire, which were both governed by shari’a. As for jihad, Europe refuses to acknowledge it because it does not fit its system of alliances and opponents. What escapes usually the observer is that Europe is not a victim. Europe has deliberately and willingly chosen a policy which it conducts systematically, whatever happens. In fact, it is so proud of it that it pressures America constantly to adopt it in the name of peace. I call it the peace of dhimmitude. But since this history is denied, no one knows what it means.

Much more here.