There are some in the West, such as American FOX News commentator, Bill O’Reilly, who claim that Europe is under “invasion.” The implication of such language is that ultimately, underneath it all, there is something nefarious about Syrians fleeing war and Arabs, in general, fleeing economic deprivation in order to migrate into Europe.
Many people are wondering how it is that in the photos and videos of the migrants there seem to be so few old people or women? How is it that most of the individuals in the photos published the European and Western press show young men seemingly in their twenties and thirties? Don’t they have families? The question underscores the actual nature of this immigration. To what extent are these refugees of war and to what extent are they economic immigrants looking for greater opportunities, or at least greater governmental economic benefits, in more generous countries? Records show that a minority of migrants are coming from Syria. The rest are coming from throughout the Arab-Muslim world for reasons other than the deprivations and miseries of war.
Much of the press has noted distinctions between how Western Europe handles the immigration crisis versus how Eastern Europe does so. Western Europe, particularly Germany and Sweden, seemed willing to take in an almost limitless number of Arab immigrants, but are now hedging their bets. This is emphatically not the case in Eastern Europe where countries such as Poland and the Czech Republic, among others, are talking about only accepting Christian refugees.
Meanwhile, as has often been noted, the wealthy Persian Gulf States, who import cheap labor from Far East Asia, have no interest whatsoever in taking in their besieged brothers and sisters from Syria. Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia are not concerned with humanitarian efforts to assist their fellows in a time of great tragedy and are taking in zero refugees.
Strangely, while people from throughout the Arab world are fighting their way into Europe, the one country that is seeing virtually no Arab emigration as part of this general mass migration is Israel. Arabs and Muslims are racing out of that part of the world, except in Israel. Israel’s Arab population is staying put, which is rather odd considering the alleged ongoing persecution of Israel’s Arabs. One would think, given news reports about Israel’s never-ending harassment and persecution of its Arab population that they would have joined the general exodus, but they have not.
Yet another question to ask, as Burak Bekdil does at the Gatestone Institute, is Why Do Muslims Flock to The “Evil West”? He writes:
Sadly, no one questions why “West-hating” Muslims go West; why their fellow Muslim Arab nations do not raise even a helping finger, let alone a hand; or why non-Muslims should pay the price for exclusively intra-Muslim wars and the wave of migrants they create.
Those are, in fact, excellent questions, but what is this price that Europeans will pay for intra-Muslim wars and the migration crisis that those wars, and general Arab poverty, have created?
It is hard to know just how many immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa will enter Europe within the next few years, but all indications are that we are seeing the largest movement of people on the planet since the end of World War II. This will likely have a significant influence in the years and decades ahead on European culture and politics. A major part of the reason for this is the disinclination of Arabs and Muslims to assimilate into their host countries.
Europe is about to become significantly less GBLT friendly than it has been in recent decades. If Arab cultures are any indication, the Arab-Muslim immigration into Europe is not going to represent a Gay friendly population. Quite the contrary. What you will see in the coming years is an increase in anti-Gay hate speech and violence and the consequent erosion of Gay and Lesbian rights throughout the continent as Arab and North African immigrants begin to flex their political muscle.
So, is Bill O’Reilly in the United States correct to call the mass immigration of Arabs into Europe an “invasion.”
I do not think so. The word is loaded. It implies an intent to do harm, whereas the vast majority of immigrants are simply seeking better circumstances for themselves. Nonetheless, still another consequence will be an increase in Jihadi violence throughout Europe.
It is hard to imagine that the Islamic State, and other organizations in the Middle East devoted to political Islam, are not embedding operatives into the Arab population streaming into Europe. What this means, of course, is that in short order we will start hearing of additional bombings throughout the continent.
The Western European inclination to take in these immigrants and refugees is grounded in humanitarianism and is, therefore, admirable.
But as we say in the United States, no good deed goes unpunished.
Published by Michael Lumish at his Blog Israel Thrives