Yesterday Daniel Jupp showed how the ‘European’ critique of Trump’s ‘betrayal’ of democracy and the international rules order is not only hypocritical but triggered by the President’s ‘rude awakening’ calls on the climate hoax, censorship and immigration. Jupp takes this argument further today, explaining Europe’s hostile response to the US/Israeli air strikes on Iran in terms of the various countries’ appeasement of their growing Muslim populations.
RATHER like a concerned friend staging an intervention with an alcoholic, the Trump administration has again and again tried to save Europe from itself, to tell a friend drunk on delusions that it is time to sober up. The short-term high of progressive virtue comes with a long-term hangover of economic ruin, international irrelevance, and total societal collapse. Nowhere is this more abundantly evident than in the welcoming of, and indulgent patronage fading into submissive terror towards, third world Muslim populations who refuse to integrate with Western culture and values.
Those who have called everything the Trump administration does a betrayal of European values and norms are those who themselves have enacted the greatest betrayal imaginable of the existing European populace.
Take the Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, who has condemned US and Israeli air strikes on the brutal Iranian regime: ‘We are not going to be complicit in something that is bad for the world and is also contrary to our values and interests, just out of fear of reprisals from someone.’
This is the same socialist Pedro Sánchez who has triggered a major political and diplomatic debate by fast-tracking legal residency for hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants.
A key concern is that once granted residency in Spain, migrants gain freedom of movement across the Schengen Area, raising fears of secondary migration into other EU countries. To say nothing of welfare-happy Britain.
Or take the French President Emmanuel Macron, who said this about the Iranian intervention: ‘These were conducted outside the framework of international law, which we cannot approve. Yet history never mourns the executioners of their people. And none will be missed.’
From the context of the rest of the speech and from the murder of 30-40,000 dissidents prior to the air strikes, the reference to executioners is about the Iranian leadership. A remarkably clumsy construction that has been widely spread by leftist and Islamist groups to say that Macron was calling the Israelis and Americans executioners. Macron joins the Spanish and others in invoking the cover of ‘international law’ to distance France and himself from the air strikes, even as Iran fires indiscriminately at everyone in response. Even though existing defence agreements with nations like the UAE, Oman, Bahrain and the UK (following the strike on the UK’s Cyprus base) require France to respond.
Mirroring speeches given by Keir Starmer on the topic, Macron simultaneously asserts that the air strikes are justified, laying out the same reasons for them given by the US and Israel and citing Iranian crimes, before stating that the action is illegal and can’t be supported — and then describing the military craft France is sending in support.
Almost undoubtedly this absurdity is influenced by France’s own massive Muslim population and ongoing immigration crisis. Although Macron has shown a tougher domestic approach towards Muslims than Britain or Spain, such as via a Charter of Imams requiring acceptance of French values, France has an enormous foreign-born population. In 2023, 347,000 immigrants arrived in France, the majority from Muslim nations. Now 9.2million foreign-born people living in France represent 13.8 per cent of the population.
Keir Starmer aligned himself with Macron, Sanchez and German Chancellor Merz in a joint statement critical of the strikes which was at pains to declare that Britain, Germany and France had no part in the strikes, a statement they tried to balance with weak condemnation of the Iranian regime. All urged further negotiation, in a curious departure from their previous Coalition of the Willing (the war hawk transnational group urging further European and US support for Ukraine) efforts to counteract US diplomatic efforts towards peace regarding the Ukraine War.
At the same time, however, the Prime Minister and his Labour Party allies launched a schmooze campaign of ever greater public displays of ‘dhimmitude‘. ‘Dhimmi’ is the term for a non-Muslim who, in the Ottoman Empire and other Muslim states, paid an additional tax and accepted lower legal status so that Muslims wouldn’t kill them. We see today’s version in Western leaders continually signalling their submissive respectfulness towards Islam.
Such was the ceremony held by the Prime Minister in the Houses of Parliament to mark the end of Ramadan, the first Iftar event in Westminster Hall, at which he again distanced Britain from the Israeli and US air strikes on Iran and appealed to the Muslim vote by echoing their ideas regarding Gaza.
The event, titled ‘The Big Iftar’, was organized by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims and attended by hundreds of Muslim MPs, community leaders, and guests. Sir Keir praised British Muslims as ‘the face of modern Britain’ and acknowledged the ‘difficult time’ many are facing due to the conflict in Gaza, re-affirming the need for a two-state solution and the UK’s commitment to humanitarian aid. He condemned rising anti-Muslim hate crime, linked it to far-right rhetoric, and cited the rebuilding of a mosque wall in Southport as a symbol of national unity and promised a £40million investment to enhance mosque security nationwide. He affirmed the UK would not participate in offensive actions against Iran and would only use military bases for defensive purposes.
Unsurprisingly he received a standing ovation from attendees.
The symbolic nature of events like this is obvious. In a historic hall graced by Christian monarchs, reflecting Christian architecture and history, our nominally Christian Prime Minister shows servile deference and preferment to Muslim, all excused by words like ‘inclusion’, but actually representing submission.
It is the underlying explanation for the confused stances taken by nations such as Britain on the Israeli-Hamas war in Gaza and the current US and Israeli pursuit of the terrorist sponsor, Iran.
The betrayal of Europe has been a betrayal of its people to Muslim supremacy which now requires, if they are to retain the Muslim vote at home, pathetic hesitancy and malign dishonesty on foreign affairs from the kind of leaders who opened the borders of the West and have been prepared to turn a blind eye to Muslim crimes and the worst Muslim attitudes and behaviours.
A ‘leader’ like Starmer attends a ‘Big Iftar’ to apologise for US and Israeli actions, to try to secure the Muslim vote when the Green Party are offering themselves as an even more submissive partner, and to network for the appearance of power which now rests, apparently, in the hands of 6.5 per cent of the population.
And this is why the US and Israel can no longer rely on nations like Britain, France and Germany, even while Muslim nations such as the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and even Qatar (who hosted Hamas themselves) avoid criticism of the US action more than Europe does. Not only do most surrounding Muslim nations have a better understanding of Iranian regime influence on regional instability, they also aren’t as afraid of the reactions of a Muslim populace as Western nations are.
One might say that much of the former free world, is now the Dhimmi World.
