The Kashmir and Palestine of South East Asia are erupting.

Injustice can never fester unanswered as has been done to Muslim populations throughout the globe. However Muslims have lost the virtue of cassus belli and righteous action, opting instead for senseless violence and the opiate of misguided belief to guide their political, though just, struggles.

Borjigin's Cavern

Identity Issues in Mongolia

Mongolians, long used to using only first names, are reshaping their identities under a government-led initiative to add surnames.

For those who didn't give it much thought, and even some who did, the most obvious choice for a surname was, is and always will be Borjigin, the clan name of Genghis Khan, the 12th-century warrior and native son who put this north-central Asian nation on the map.

On Belief

I like to think of myself as logical in most aspect (though I'm sure there are many who would disagree) though I would readily concede my instinctual bias for God, the Bahai faith, Islam and Pakistan.

This despite being reared in an spritually apathetic and international English-speaking family.
Having always been ore secular in inclination and outlook I've never participated in my community until yesterday when I attended the self-development course at the national spiritual centre. Where else could I find pretty Persian Bahai virgins of my age bracket and furthermore have the carte blanche of my parents. My sense of community has been stirred up:)

As a Bahai enjoined to the independent investigation of truth, I have researched (albeit to a very limited extent) nilhism, atheism, agnosticism, mythologies and religions. I just find that I accept the simple answers of the Bahai faith though I could very well find the same intellectual solace in humanism, without the baggage of belief.

I like to think I question everything for instance I'm not sure of the divinity of my Prophet or his revelation, and I cannot be certain if it has not been tainted by human flaws. I can detect the intellectual contradictions of the Bahai faith, which would stir the soul of a skeptic, but for me belief was never about the nitty-gritty of miracles and revelation, but more about inspiration.
In fact philosophical Hinduism is the most intellectual belief system out there and, sans reincarnation, it complements my ideas entirely. The deepest contemplation on belief leads to the pure Hindu philosophies of life, it is an inevitable converge indeed to take a simple example the concept of Nirvana (release and union) is the median between the harrowing depths of oblivion and the meaningless sojourns of Abrahamic eternity.

I believe in God because I believe in belief (if that makes sense) and that it is a necessary leap for the human soul to be humbled and ennobled by faith.

Fault lines within OPEC

"Why the big "reservist" Saudi, Iran, Iraq and Kuwait should be worried about higher oil prices?"

Oct 18, 2004, 22:06

Iqbal Latif

During the first eight months of this year, the price of oil has risen to nearly $55 from just under $29. For the last 30 years, the price of oil has been the single most important determinant of the economy and the stock market. However, there is something amiss in this whole equation of the steep oil price rise. Whilst in the short term it provides opportunity, to me, in the long term, it sounds like a death knell for OPEC.As I recently explained to an OPEC country oil minister, oil pricing is a two-edged sword, which is hard to manage. Let it drift too low and quota-cheating necessitated by the single commodity- dependent economies of OPEC take the bottom of the oil prices like, oil at below $10; keep it too high, long term impacts are disastrous. Thus, rich oil nations like Saudi, Iran, Iraq and Kuwait are caught up in a quandary. They need to maintain oil at a price that helps them grow their single commodity dependent economy to a multifaceted economy, but at the same time keep new producers and threatening new tech advance out of the contention.

The authors of "Oil Factor," a gloomy book about energy, claim that the oil price will soar above $100 a barrel by the end of the decade, and possibly sooner. The Oil Depletion Analysis Centre (ODAC) is a stunning group convinced that the world is perilously close to an oil shock induced by scarcity, not politics. Thanks to the surge in the price of oil to nearly $50 a barrel, the predictions of OACD and Oil factor authors look realizable. The cartel's export earnings are running at almost three times what they were in 1998, when a barrel fetched only around $10. OPEC's 11-member states produce 26 million barrels of oil a day - 39% of the world's oil production, which accounts for half of all oil exports. They are swamped with extra $360 billion's by end of 2004. It seems Russia that produces equal barrels to Saudi should one day become the swing producer, but if one scratches the surface a little, he would realize that on reserves Saudi and their closest allies in OPEC belong to different breeds of oil producers. The two groups as a result should have conflicting oil pricing policy.

Saudis and their allies represent nearly 25 percent of the global reserves of more than 800 billion barrels. Nations with miniscule reserves within OPEC like Venezuelans, and Indonesians, need higher price now that they may be running out of oil in the next twenty years. However, Saudis, Iranians, Iraqis and Kuwaitis with much larger reserve base extending beyond five decades need balanced prices that may continue the "party of oil" a bit longer until their economies' dependence on single commodity is shifted. This fault line within OPEC where OPEC is divided into rich reserve nations and poor reserve nations would lead to a rethink within OPEC, as Saudis and their allies definitely support a more balanced regime of oil pricing. Those who remember the oil-price shocks of 1973-74, 1979-80 and 1990 should now be suffering restless nights. On all three occasions crude oil prices tripled, inflation soared and the world economy went into recession. However markets reacted positively to Greenspan's recent comments. ''While high oil prices (a whopping $54.86 per barrel today at the close) have sliced about 0.75 percent off GDP growth, the effect won't be nearly as bad as the 1970s oil crisis and the global economy will adjust.'' It is imperative to reconcile the gloomy and rosier pictures. Ironically, in inflation-adjusted terms, a barrel of oil is cheaper than it was in 1980, when it cost $81 in today's money (in 1864 newly-discovered oil hit a giddy $8 a barrel - $92 in 2004 dollars). Post first oil price crisis the global response was on the demand side-notably energy efficiency, including vehicle fuel economy. To write an article with contrary logic is a difficult uphill task, but when Economist wrote that infamous piece predicting oil below $10for eternally, it was premature like predictions of below $10 were unsustainable. Today, oil at post 50 would be equally untenable.

Hedge funds have made the situation even worse by making big bets that oil prices will continue to rise because of the imbalance in supply, demand, stocks and continuing political uncertainty in the Middle East. OPEC officials say this speculation accounts for up to 20% of the recent oil price. It is in the interest of OPEC to keep prices low otherwise the future prospects of oil, as a commodity, looks very bleak as global uncertainties come down and technological advancements bring efficient use of oil in the forefront. The world's apparently unquenchable thirst for oil is fuelling a boom in exotic kinds of exploration technology for use in much deeper waters; five to ten years ago, if you came up with the idea of a directional well that stretched 25,000 feet, the oil man would have said you're dreaming. But today, they are just drilling them down one after the other. The world has consumed 78.7 million barrels a day in the second quarter of this year. The three big industrialized economies, the U.S., Europe and Japan, are all growing in harmony, a rarity event and indicator of global prosperity despite all the pessimism inherent. China, India, Russia and Brazil known as BRIC'S collectively referred to as "sick man of global economies" in the 70's are now booming economies sucking in oil to power their manufacturing and make gasoline to fuel their industry. China, now the world's No. 2 oil consumer after the U.S., is importing 20% more oil, by volume than it was a year ago.

The IEA forecasts the world will consume 80.6 million barrels a day on average in 2004, up from 78.7 million barrels a day in 2003 and 77 million barrels a day in 2002. One thing that major pundits of the hedge funds are missing in this blind pursuit of ever-higher oil prices is the impact of petroleum intensity on pricing. The United States has in fact been following the path of lowering oil intensity "oil consumption per dollar of gross domestic product (GDP)" since the late 1970s. Global economy was consuming around 65 million barrels of oil in the early 80's; however, the total size of the global economy was only 12 trillion dollars. Today, a global economy of nearly 50 trillion dollars consumes slightly higher oil. The world is becoming a very efficient user of oil. If lessons from the first oil crisis are to be learnt, then we need to appreciate that these price rises will ultimately reduce the consumption of oil. Thoughts are now turning to reducing oil, not producing it, even more spectacular results can be ensured. With new technology, new energy forms are possible, not that they don't exist, they are very uneconomical at $35 /barrel, but at $55 per barrel, even some form of fuel cell becomes an attractive option. On top of that anyone who underestimates the potential of exponential growth of development and research would do that at his own peril.

The biggest and most efficient consumer, the U.S., consumed about 6.2 billion barrels, up 4.2% from a year earlier. It is expected this year the US consumption to be 6.8 billion barrels. Now let's look closely at the US petroleum intensity for which the date is easily available - from 1950 to 1980 it would take 1.6 barrel of oil to produce 1000 dollars of GDP, in 2004 it takes .8 barrel, nearly half the consumption of 1980's, to produce 1000 $ of GDP. In 1978, the total consumption of oil in a much smaller GDP of 2.2 trillion $ in 1998 was 6.6 billion barrels of oil; presently, for slightly higher consumption of around 7 billion barrels of oil, US GDP has grown to 11 trillion dollars. Reduced gasoline demand plus price-induced conservation has reduced U.S. oil consumption by 2.8 million barrels per day. Oil in the medium term, as it breaks new highs, can continue this manic one-way move up, however, the best way to break the high price of oil is to have this high price for some time, and bear in mind the silver mania. Commodity traders can sometimes well overstate the fears of disruptions; right now it is generally believed that Alqaeda is planning a global terrorist attack on major installations in Saudi Arabia so as to choke Saudi oil. Recent violence in Saudi Arabia, including a deadly attack by Islamic militants in the Saudi oil city of Khobar, and a fear that al Qaeda-linked forces are attempting to provoke civil war in the kingdom have raised fears about interruptions in oil supplies. Combine these worries with Russians trying to cow down Yukos, which accounts for 2% of the world's oil supply. Other doubts like the future of new discoveries add a new dimension of uncertainty; new oil finds are proving intangible. Some other fears that dominate the rumormongering oil markets are that new production has been low in the two biggest oil-producing regions, the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea that they are short of pipelines and ports. It is also argued that U.S. refineries are presently running at near-full capacity, providing a chokepoint for gasoline supplies to American consumers. It is argued that oil companies found an average 6.8 billion barrels of new oil a year in 2001-2003, compared to 11.4 billion barrels a year in the previous five years, since it takes take three to 10 years from discovery to production.

Saudis as swing producer are the key to oil prices; most OPEC members produce nearly at full capacity already. Only Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have spare capacity. Saudi Arabia remains the kingpin of oil. It has a quarter of the world's proven reserves, about 262 billion barrels of oil, under its vast desert expanses. Add in the reserves held by the country's allies in the OPEC cartel, and the total is a whopping 815 billion barrels' - some three-quarters of world reserves. Most of the extra oil in case of global crisis would have to come from Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil producer, by far its largest exporter and OPEC's traditional swing producer. It has an estimated two to three million barrels a day of spare capacity. When doubts are cast on Saudi swing production, all bets are off. That "concerted terror attacks" is a daredevil kind of planning, in my humble opinion, but in a milieu where sensationalism sells, this story has a top seller. The oil Age will end one day, as Zaki Yemani said. Oil was dirt cheap below 10 $'s, it is now 53 $'s above what it takes to produce in Saudi Arabia. Even OPEC realizes the long term impact of high prices on the ability of inefficient oil nations to produce a lot more at around 30-32 $ a barrel. The present level of oil is very tentative; new productions which are high $ cost production and were, until very recently, uneconomical to produce would need ample reassurance to come back to life. Current levels of pricing are quite attractive and highly incentivised for "dull producers" to go back on an investment spree. The reason less oil was found in 2001-2003 was not due to lack of fields, but lack of investments (who would want to discover more oil at 20-25$ a barrel?). In my opinion, the biggest threat to oil future comes from the GDP growing efficiently on lesser and lesser oil. This also signals that consumers are shifting towards cleaner economies whereas producers are loaded with old economy consumption pattern. On the security side, lesser revenue from oil creates havocs for economies like Russians and OPEC, even terror becomes difficult to handle if free jobs of paper-pushers in ministries of Saudi and Kuwait are denied. Higher oil prices can buy loyalties in commotion-prone Saudi Arabia. Nicely tied to these handouts, the same people become bigger terrorists if denied the handouts. On the other hand, OPEC countries' higher commodity prices make them great consumers. If the West keeps producing cleaner service economy with lesser consumption, and commodity-rich OPEC countries fail to understand energy efficiency impact, the dependence of commodity rich countries on the West will further increase as higher oil revenues make OPEC populace addictive to products of the west, as if that has not happened already. When taps on oil are turned off the repercussions on OPEC would be huge. Extreme swings in oil pricing create structural imbalances and false cradle to grave social demands, they are nearly impossible to fulfill at low oil prices. As oil makes new highs, the "dull producers" by nature of their business as high cost producers, usually come late to the market. But once they bring that additional few million barrels, the speculative bubble can puncture pretty fast. A story based on sensational plots can only fly that much; perhaps it is the initial high cost of production impediment for the dull producers that encourage such speculation even further. On the flip side of this argument, although the supply size of the dull producers is not more than 2-3 million barrels a day and very miniscule in relation to the 78 million barrels daily world consumption, once market speculators realize that swing production of OPEC held by Saudis is sustainable at these 50 $ level and even in the most unlikely event of knocking of Ras Tanura oil terminal by the terrorists in a coordinated attack will not diminish the ability to satisfy world consumption, then realism comes into play and out goes speculation and sensationalism. Efficiencies of world commodity markets cannot be understated here. The price levels can be overextended, but the actions in commodities and currency, or for that matter, stock markets, are not a rear window image. It is the sum total of all greed prevalent within the workings of capitalist economies; it is this ever present invisible hand and mind of greed and self-preservation that pushes these global markets to new highs. Boom and bust are inbuilt stabilizers of global capitalist markets. These speculators take on inefficiencies and iron them out; it is always a war between weak holders and strong holders and in the end, the only survivors are those who are neither over-leveraged nor get too over carried by pessimism. By nature, wealth creation and wealth preservation are safeguarded by "bodyguards of global speculators." These speculators, now headed by major hedge funds, fine tune a trend and then appear as complete "demolition businesses" to remove any physical profligacy or intellectual vanity. The United States has been a leader in new exploration and production technology that has greatly lowered the supply cost curve here and around the world, and those technical advances are continuing. In the present war between speculator myths and physical realities governing oil price rises, it is the myth of fear that is exacting the right price from consumers. In capitalist economies, there are no free lunches; too much fear leads to too much of inbuilt profit, a great thing for OPEC in the short run, but a bad omen in the long term. Now if OPEC is overtaken by greed, a few years' highs of these levels of oil will lead to permanence of greater high-cost supplies and with technological advancement on the way, who can say that these high cost producers may come to stay. In such a scenario, for big underground reserve holders of oil like, Saudi, Iran and Iraq, it would be meaningless to have too much oil in the ground, if new energy-efficient industry in the next two decades knocks gas guzzling machines out and oil becomes a cheap commodity with utilization at far more efficient levels. It is these nightmarish scenarios the producers have to work with. New non-OPEC supplies developed in the 1980s helped bring the original oil shock period to a close, and prospects are promising now for substantial additional once oil stays at these levels, as forgotten closed down fields become more profitable.

Oil price vagaries epitomize "free market" no price control economy at its best. The reason that global market oil pricing is free from the clutches of OPEC or any cartel of consumer like OECD signals the maturity of the pricing cycles. The greed inherent within capitalist systems has to stay awake and alive, that is the only difference on how capitalist markets survives every possible assault on its jugular by the ideological left. Price-controlled economies like that of the Russians imploded under their own weight, even Nehruian socialist model failed to address India's woes of poverty. It was only after free market was allowed to thrive that India's shining came glowing up on the radars of international fund managers. Even the last bastion of the socialist economy China, today, is at the extreme right of the old great leap forward model. Transformations of economies only take place when greed, a product of incentive, is allowed to unashamedly thrive. To have a huge greed-based rally of oil in late summer/early fall is the best possible preparation for a harsh winter; it is such kind of market inbuilt "maniac delusions" that has yielded best survivors of the global economies. We all know that it is the shape of a 30-year bond yield curve that indicates the direction of the market economy; it is always the long run that determines the shape of any nation's future. The concerns on higher oil prices can only be mitigated by immediate lowering of oil prices by the OPEC nations for their own benefit.

Oil above $50- And no one is even partying!

A few words about Turkey's possible accession to the EU.

On what grounds is European?

Geography; I believe three percent of Turkey is in Europe, 97% in Asia the Greeks recognised it as a different continent with Asia Minor.

Language & Race: Turks may be a mixture of many peoples but they aren't European by blood, ancestrally they go back to the highlands of Anatolia, Iran and Turan. The language of the Turks is alien to the European tongues since it descends from the heart of Asia...

Religion: Europe is Christendom, Islamic population represent a civilisation border.

Democracy, wealth and history (Ottomans never intermarried with European nobility and were always a distinct peoples, as opposed to say the Russian Tsar whose blood was only 1/128th Russian) makes Turkey alien to Europe. Turkey is at the heart of the Islamic world and rather than be the beggar at the doors of Europe should once again take up the role as one of the three leading powers of Islam (Ottoman Turkey, Safavid Iran and Moghul India). These three nations are born to lead the Islamic world into a new renaissance and the Turks have no reason to join the European club (aid is being curbed, immigration halted and trade barriers are already being dismantled through the WTO).

For Europeans as well the prospect of their tiny continent being swamped by 70mn foreigners is a fate hardly deserved by any peoples. It should look to Slavic Europe as the next wave of expansion, Russia is more European than Turkey could ever be. Albania and Bosnia, save for their Muslim populations, are however European peoples because in every other count, save religion, they match the criteria. Europe is a civilisation, a continent, Christendom of the medieval ages is the European Union of the modern age and it should match the borders of Europe.

Changing demographic patterns in West-

A myth or a ticking time bomb?
Iqbal Latif, 7th October 2004

It is a predictable course to believe that civilizations don't just disappear; others who are hungrier, more aggressive and more energetic overtake them. The demographic changes in West are one pointer towards the shape of things to come in the next century. Is it possible that what Islam could not achieve in the battle of Tours-Poitiers it may achieve by demographic changes in Europe? Had Charles Martel suffered at the hands of ‘Abd ar-Rahman at Tours-Poitiers, the fate of King Roderick at the Rio Barbate, Charles being the progenitor of the Carolingian line of Frankish rulers and the grandfather of Charlemagne, one can even say with a degree of certainty that the subsequent history of the West would have proceeded along vastly different currents. Is it possible that what Islam could not achieve in the battle of Tours-Poitiers in 732 it may achieve by demographic changes in Europe by 2032? It will be 1300 years from Poitiers victory and several doom sayers say that Europe is being haunted by a 1300 years anniversary 'holy' curse of Sultan Abd al-Rahman! According to Mona Charen, about 5 percent of the European Union is now Muslim, and historian Bernard Lewis told a German newspaper that Europe would be majority Islamic by the end of this century "at the latest." At present, more than 15 percent of the 16-24 age group in France is Muslim. In Brussels, one quarter of those under the age of 25 is Muslim. Muslims also account for 25 percent of the population of Marseilles, and 20 percent of the population of Malmo, Sweden. Immigration, both legal and illegal, from Islamic countries continues. As Timothy Savage has noted in The Washington Quarterly, the United Nations estimates that Europe's native population will decline by 100 million or more in the next 50 years. The Muslim minority in Europe is quite productive, and will double in size by 2015.The minimum birth-rate necessary to keep a society going is 2.1 children per woman. Europe's birth rate is 1.5 and falling. The immigrants who are taking the place of Germans, Italians, French and others are largely Muslim. In contrast to the irreligious native Europeans, Muslim immigrants are passionate about their faith and highly fertile. It is estimated that in England, Muslim worshipers at mosques already outnumber congregants of the Church of England every weekend. The attempt for conquest of Europe by Sultan Abd al-Rahman as early as 732 has been blown well out of strategic and historical proportions. Paranoia arose, with Islamic conquest and jihad becoming "a bogey in the West for centuries," best exemplified by Edward Gibbon's account of Sultan Abd al-Rahman's defeat at the "Battle of Poitiers" by Charles Martel in 732 AD: ”…the Rhine is not more impassable than the Nile or the Euphrates, and the Arabian fleet might have sailed without a naval combat into the mouth of the Thames. Perhaps the interpretation of the Koran would now be taught in the schools of Oxford, and her pulpits might demonstrate to a circumcised people the sanctity and truth of the revelation of Mahomet.

From such calamities was Christendom delivered by the genius and fortune of one man [Martel].” Gibbon seemed to have been under the belief that al-Rahman's intention was a continuation of the jihad, which was false. The Sultan "had been invited into Christendom by Eudo, Duke of Aquitaine", and had no intention of continuing the jihad or conquering Europe. Examining the motives for the Muslim drive north of the Pyrenees, one can attach a macro historical significance to the encounter between the Franks and Andalusian Muslims at Tours-Poitiers, especially when one considers the attention paid to the Franks in Arabic literature and the successful expansion of Muslims elsewhere in the medieval period. Lured by the promise of plunder, as well as a desire to defeat more foes of Islam, 'Abd ar-Rahman extended his campaign towards the regnum Francorum. His invasion was neither simply a raid nor part of a grand scheme to conquer all Christendom; it was a failed attempt to eliminate a strategic threat located north of the Andalusian border. Moreover, the battle did not decide the outcome of the Christian-Muslim struggle in Francia. Rather, it brought a determined new participant into the field of combat, the Frankish army, which launched an offensive against the remaining Muslim bases to the south only a few years after Charles won his victory at Tours-Poitiers and earned himself the title Martel ("Hammer")The soldiers of the Sultan, intoxicated with red wine were left with no desire for combat after the Sultan was lethally debilitated. Nearly all the squadrons of the "Ishmaelites" had vanished; during the night, they had fled with the greatest silence, and withdrew to the safety of Andulas. There is clearly some justification for ranking Tours-Poitiers among the most significant events in Frankish history, when one considers the result of the battle in light of the remarkable record of the successful establishment by Muslims of Islamic political and cultural dominance along the entire eastern and southern rim of the former Christian, Roman world. What could not have been militarily achieved in Tours is now a phantom people seem to be worried about. Today the question is not about the probable subjugation of West by Islam through a swelling demographic bomb; more eminent is relatively the threat from radical elements that needs to be eliminated from the universal equation of concord and reconciliation. Abolition of this unseen danger is only possible through a pro-active struggle. A self-righteous policy of “appeasement” will not ensure peaceful co-habitation within the ever-increasing European multi-ethnic cosmopolitan community. The likelihood of calm integration within future European societies will transpire only if the ‘fanatical fringe’, the harbinger of global commotion, is cordoned. Only then will the future dream of large ‘ideologically’ accommodative populace within very sizable immigrant communities of Germany, France, Sweden and UK, like those of the Bosnian Muslims, or even Turkey be realized. Bosnians, the remnants of Ottoman intrusions in Central Europe and ex-Ottomans themselves, the present day Turks, are moderates by design. Ata Turk who abrogated the archaic Ottoman Empire and sold the Turks the dream of a new future; even the Islamised of Turkey, like Erdogan, today are great sponsors of that dream. It was inculcation of ‘moderation’ as a matter of state ‘secular’ policy. These immigrants are the children of past colonialists of Europe; they not only need opportunities and some kind of affirmative action to grow out of their Eastern Parisian and Marseilles ghettos, they must also see that their ‘fanatical idols’ are dealt with strength and not remunerated. Little do the westerners realize that this is an era in which minds of the future generations of their own restive segments are being nurtured and reared.The present rightist leadership of Turkey is keen to join Europe on its terms to the extent of adopting and adhering to statutes of law on murder, rape and other crimes and apply the strictures of human rights.

But the recommendation to put Turkey on the path of full membership has stoked fears among Europeans wary of bringing a poor Muslim country into the prosperous bloc, which is reflected in the 30-member EU executive commission who set tough conditions to prevent Turkey from backtracking on democratic and human rights reforms, prompting a sharp response from Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan who said that if the European Union declares itself to be a Christian Club, then Turkey should know this clearly, a sentiment that would be seconded by the largely moderate Muslims living in the West. The large immigrant populations of Turks, North Africans and South Asians are at the crossroads of destiny. They carefully study the reactions of their host governments to terrorist blackmail; an accommodative posture like those of Chirac infuses ‘radicalism’ whereas non-accommodative posture like that of Blair’s encourages moderation.Europeans and West are horror-struck by these trends; something prevents them from even discussing the subject. Civilizations don't just disappear; others who are hungrier, more aggressive and more energetic overtake them. We should not believe that in this modern day and age, the Caucasian race would disappear; the lack of the fertility argument is as hollow as Malthusian predictions. Over a period of time, with education, environment and a healthy unbiased milieu, these societies will assimilate, so the ghost of “demographic changes” is implausible and does not stand the test of transparent scrutiny; it may be very emotional and sensationalistic, but in actuality, the only thing that can make a difference is the present war on terror and not the European policy of appeasement. The war on terror is an ultimate milestone to achieve; a definite stand established to remove the radical and extremist elements from spreading their brand of “world order” so that the moderate face of Islam emerges. With Osama bin Laden and his cronies in Iraq and Afghanistan, Europeans have totally failed to understand the threat emanating from these cavemen.

Although long term demographic changes may allow further opportunities to medievalists to enforce their brand of world order, the goal in the short term is quite obvious and will stop at nothing but perpetual jihad. Indeed their interpretation of the Talibinised version of medievalism is a cassus belli in itself. From their hidden underground pulpits OBL demonstrates to the already vicious circumcised ‘extremists’ the virtues of ‘destruction’, rage built on impotence and collective failures of their doctrine so far to bring prosperity to the region of Islam. It is about establishment of set precedent of ‘order of governance’ based on antiquated and outmoded traditions. The real fruit, which the extremists are aiming to pluck at, are Iran and Pakistan, and Turkey and Saudi Arabia that fall in their radical laps. Once in control of the ‘holy land’ and the energy resources of ‘petrolistan’, joined with the nuclear strategic assets of Pakistan with revolutionary zeal of Iran, and the geographical proximity of Turkey to Europe, they will place their foot on the jugular of the global energy sources and wreak havoc on global economies. No one but the Europeans would suffer the most from this eventual outcome.

Historically, in the 1400 years history of Islam, it has never seen unification within its factions. But faced with a “common enemy,” these extremists with their various ideological strains have buried their hatchet, so to speak, and have combined forces for the first time in centuries to spread their fangs of terror. The worst part is that in history it has always been the extremists who ruled over silent majority moderates, as later are more vociferous and belligerent in the use of force to curb freedom and dissent. Tyrannies in lands of Islam are result of bulldozing of ‘silent majorities’ the propensity of silent majorities of Islam to yield into ‘holy’ totalitarianism is astounding. It is for this that not a single true pluralistic democracy exists from Maghreb to extreme geographical end of the Islamic world. Strongman reigns supreme on the psyche of the entire ummah! From King Mohammed VI the sovereign, Commander of the Faithful to Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei the unique brand of strongman culture clench the silent majorities in total submission. The extension of this order to the hinterland of Europe looks likely in a few decades as demographic pattern work their way, but instantaneous cowing of their own societies into compliance will help promulgation of the ultimate objective of ‘doctrine of Allah’ over the gullible, very realizable in near term. Once the ‘nation of Islam’ is cowed into submission, the dream of ‘conquista’ of Andalusia and beyond Pyrenees becomes more realistic. Humanity today is confronting the challenge of ‘intellectual rearing’ of the ticking time bomb of demographic changes imminent in Europe. Our determination today will help bring up the nurturing of this huge populace increase in a ‘restrained’ manner. Any other course will lead to future ethnic wars of cleansing. Imagine a fanatical arc of instability spanning out from Morocco to South Asia, added with a burgeoning Europe that would be majority Islamic by the end of this century, all raised on sights and sounds of victory of radicalism. Only one authority stands between them achieving their intention to establish an archaic version of the ‘realm of Allah’ on earth and conversion of the entire Islamic world to their brand of ‘radicalism,’ that one clout is the resolve of the ‘civilized world and a few good men’ to preserve the basic rights of mankind at large. It is the only hope of European nations if they understand and realize that moderating the flame of fanatical extremists is the only way for people to commingle on the bank of Seine-Rhine.

‘Failure of fanatics’ in this war on terror will be the ‘success of moderates.’ Nothing works better than success. Today, at these crossroads, if peace in the future has to be secured, the restrained and accommodative face of Islam has to be supported. By yielding to suicide bombings and beheading threats, we will make radicalism as the currency of order within future Islamic societies. Our follies of today will help breed a generation that will be alien to cohabitation. It would be racist to worry about the demographic time bomb if the mindset of that ‘collective’ is ready to cohabitate and believes in pluralism and tolerance, virtues of mankind at large. This is the only challenge that Europe faces and the key to this quandary lies with their present actions. Sadly, so far, the actions fall short of what will mutate the ‘mind’ of this huge group towards peaceful coexistence; those immigrants will see that blackmail does pay.