Western” governments in many Muslim countries fashionedrnfrom the wreckage of the Ottoman Empire, the West seems tornhave convinced itself of the existence of benign Islam. Indeed,rnthe promotion of “moderate” Muslim regimes —especiallyrnthose willing to make peace with Israel, and, even better, thosernthat have a lot of petroleum—has become a linchpin of U.S.rnglobal policy. Eg}pt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan,rnMorocco, the Gulf states, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Nigeria, Indonesia,rnand a few others have become the darlings of U.S. policy,rnvalued as supposed bulwarks against “fvmdamentalism” ofrnthe Iranian variety (Iran itself having lately been a member ofrnthe favored assembly). Operationally, this means not only overlookingrnthe radical activities of the supposedly “moderate”rnMuslim states—for example, Saudi Arabia’s and Pakistan’s supportrnfor the Taliban regime in Afghanistan (whom even the Iraniansrndenounce as dangerous fanatics), and assistance by virtuallyrnall Islamic nations to the thinly disguised radical regime inrnSarajevo—but also a consistent American bias in favor of thernMuslim party in virtually every conflict with a Christian nation.rnThe most prominent exception to date has been a pro-Armenianrntilt in the Nagorno-Karabakh question, a frmction of Armenian-rnAmericans’ early cultivation of Congress, but this anomalyrnwill undoubtedly soon shift to Azerbaijan’s favor under therncombined pressure of the Turkey/Israel lobby, of residual ColdrnWar antipathy for Russia (seen as Armenia’s main protector),rnand of American oil companies fixated on an energy El Doradornin the Caspian Basin.rnIt is hardly a surprise that business executives who would sellrntheir grandmothers to Abdul Abulbul Amir for oil drillingrnrights would see the world as a reflection of their balance sheets,rnnor is it a surprise that secular, socially progressive opinion isrnviscerally anti-Christian. What is not expected is that so manyrnWestern Christians, Americans in particular, are willing to believernthe worst about their Eastern Christian cousins, who, onlyrnlately freed from Islamic (and later, in most cases, communist)rnservitude, are desperately attempting to avoid a repeat ofrnthe experience. Today, when all of the Russian North Caucasusrnis subject to plunder and hostage-taking raids staged fromrnShari’a-vuled Chechnya, when not just Nagorno-Karabakh butrnArmenia proper is in danger of a repeat of 1915, when Cyprusrnand Creece receive unvarnished threats to their territorial integrityrnon a weekly basis for the offense of purchasing defensivernweapons, and when the borders of Serbia are rapidly approachingrnthose of the pashaluk of Belgrade in order to appease America’srnnew friends in Bosnia and Kosovo, organized RomanrnCatholic and Protestant sentiment in America overwhelminglyrnsides with non- and anti-Christian elite opinion in its pro-Muslim,rnanti-Orthodox tendency.rnFor example, in 1993, statements were issued by a number ofrnRoman Catholic, Protestant, and Anglican spokesmen in thernUnited States urging military intervention on behalf of the Islamicrnregime in Sarajevo. “We are convinced that there is justrncause to use force to defend largely helpless people in Bosniarnagainst aggression and barbarism that are destroying the veryrnfoundations of society and threaten large numbers of people,”rnwrote the chairman of the U.S. Catholic Conference, at a timernwhen the Muslim beneficiaries of the intervention were not onlyrnimpaling Serb POWs on spits but also were slaughtering RomanrnCatholic Croats by the hundreds in an offensive in centralrnBosnia. “What is going on in Bosnia is genocide by any otherrnname,” observed a prominent Baptist spokesman. “The ghostsrnof Auschwitz and Dachau have come back to haunt us. If werndo nothing we are morally culpable.” “Those of us who opposedrnthe Gulf War believed that war was not the answer,”rnopined the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, “but todayrnwe find ourselves confronted with an evil war, the surernelimination of which may be possible only by means of armedrnintervention.” Thus did the high-minded guardians of thernWest’s Christian integrity give their blessing for NATO to aidrnthe resumption oi jihad in Europe. Granted, they were to somernextent victims of the melodramatic media coverage that hasrncharacterized the Balkan war, but that is not much of an excuse:rnWho told them to believe everything dished up by CNN?rnIn a previous article in Chronicles, I have noted that Westernrnanti-Orthodox bias, which I have dubbed Pravoslavophobia,rnrarely means antipathy for Orthodoxy as such. Most seriousrnProtestants and Roman Catholics often have a fairly positive attituderntoward Orthodox Christianity as a morally conservativernand liturgically traditional bulwark within the spectrum ofrnChristian opinion. Perhaps it has been so long since WesternrnChristians have had to defend themselves physically as Christiansrn(as opposed to Americans, Englishmen, Germans, etc.)rnthat they just do not understand those for whom it is a currentrnconcern.rnOn the other hand, there are Westerners for whom antipathyrnis based on the traditional Orthodox character of the front-linernstates bordering on Islam, Indeed, from this viewpoint, the desirernof these countries to avoid not only islamicization but Westernizationrnas well is a major count against them. Though differingrnin the specifics, the overall attitude toward Orthodoxrnnations today is strongly reminiscent of that of the West towardrnthe East as the dying Byzantine, Bulgarian, and Serbian statesrnfaced Ottoman conquest in the 15th century. The West thenrnwas explicit: We will help you only if you renounce Orthodoxyrnand adopt Roman Catholicism. The Orthodox East is beingrntold today that unless they unquestioningly submit to the West’srntutelage in political, social, moral, and economic matters—therncollective “religion” of the Enlightenment heritage—theyrnagain will be thrown to the wolves. In fact, the West will evenrnhelp the wolves to devour them.rnThe immorality, not to mention the stupidity, of this shouldrnbe obvious. Maybe Christians will never come to agreementrnon doctrinal matters; maybe the East will insist on retaining itsrndistinctive religious and cultural heritage. Whatever happens,rnthe survival of Orthodox Christiari civilization in the Eastrnshould be hardly less important to the West than to the Orthodoxrnthemselves, and indeed over the long term, the West’s ownrnfate may depend on it. The fact that the West cannot recognizernthis reality is evident in the forest of minarets going up mainlyrnin Western Europe but also now in North America.rnSome Christians see the Muslim influx primarily as an opportunityrnfor evangelization, and indeed we should never neglectrnto share the Gospel, the only real liberation, with Muslims,rnwho should not, as individuals, be held responsible for thernviolent system into which they were born and of which theyrnare—perhaps more than anyone else—victims. At the samerntime, in light of the growing volume of Muslim immigration.rnWestern Christians will soon find out—maybe sooner thanrnthey think, given Western birthrates—that confronting the Islamicrnadvance has become, as it has always been for EasternrnChristians, a simple matter of physical survival. But by thatrntime, it may be too late for the West as well.rnFEBRUARY 1999/17rnrnrn