Modern Islamism is not an inherent religious drive toward conflict, but a reactive phenomenon—a direct consequence of Western geopolitical maneuvers and the failure of social models to accommodate pluralism.
Part I: The History of External Interference
The current landscape of political Islam was built layer-by-layer by foreign interests over the last century.
The Era of “Lines in the Sand” (1880s–1950s)
Colonial powers treated the Muslim world as a map to be carved up for resources. By imposing the Westphalian state model (fixed borders and centralized bureaucracy) on a region used to fluid tribal and religious identities, they created a permanent state of friction.
Installing minority-led administrations to ensure loyalty to the European crown forced religious identity to become a tool of anti-colonial resistance. Since the “state” was foreign, the “mosque” became the only authentic site of political mobilization.
The Cold War Weaponization (1947–1991)
During the struggle against Communism, Western powers viewed “the religious right” as a natural ally against “the godless left.”
The U.S. and its allies directly funded, trained, and provided the theological “justification” for the Afghan Mujahideen to fight the Soviets.
This transformed Islamism from a localized political movement into a militarized global network. We provided the hardware and the organizational blueprints that groups like Al-Qaeda would later use against the West.
Part II: The Problem—The “Assimilation” Trap
The fundamental problem today is the Western insistence on Assimilation rather than Integration.
1. The Erasure of Identity
Assimilation demands that to be “modern” or “civilized,” a person must shed their religious particularities. When Western-backed secular dictators (like the Shah or Ben Ali) tried to force this, it created a massive psychological backlash.
The Result: If people feel they cannot be “Muslim and Modern,” they will often choose to be “Muslim against Modernity.”
2. The Vacuum of Sovereignty
By intervening to topple secular regimes (like in Iraq or Libya) without understanding the local social fabric, Western powers created “power vacuums.” In the absence of a state, people returned to the most basic, rigid forms of religious identity for protection and order.
3. The “Othering” in the West
Domestically, in Europe and North America, integration is often conditional. If a Muslim immigrant integrates economically but refuses to assimilate culturally (e.g., maintaining traditional dress or prayer), they are often viewed with suspicion. This “othering” pushes youth toward Reactive Islamism as a way to find the belonging they are denied by the state.
Part III: The Solution—Integration without Assimilation
To break the cycle of reactive radicalization, the strategy must shift from “control and erasure” to “participation and pluralism.”
1. Recognizing “Hyphenated Identities”
The solution lies in a model where individuals are civically integrated (obeying laws, participating in the economy, speaking the language) but culturally autonomous.
It means moving away from “Secularism as Erasure” (French-style Laïcité) toward “Secularism as Neutrality” (where the state protects all religious expressions equally).
2. Strategic Non-Interference
Geopolitically, the West must stop treating Islamist movements as a monolith to either be “weaponized” or “crushed.”
Allowing local societies to develop their own “Islamic Democracies” without fear of a Western-backed coup. When religious groups are allowed to participate in a fair political process, they are forced to deal with “garbage and taxes” (real-world governance) rather than remaining “pure” and radical in the shadows.
3. Ending the “Security Lens”
We need to stop viewing the Muslim community through the primary lens of counter-terrorism. When the state’s only interaction with a community is through surveillance, it reinforces the narrative of “The West vs. Islam.”
It would help to invest in grassroots civic infrastructure that allows for Integration—schools, housing, and job equity—without demanding the sacrifice of religious heritage.
It goes without saying that we must reject anti-Muslim bigotry.
(Written with the help of Meta, Gemini, and Grok AI)
Writing by Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal 