Soon after the Bolshevik uprisings, Communism and Islam seemed destined to liberate the Muslim world from European Imperialism, but that was not to be due to their ideological differences.
This presented an opportunity to the United States and its allies, where they coopeted anti-Communist Jihadism to disrupt Communism. This had the unintended consequence of being theimpetus for China’s Belt and Road Initiative, which presented the U.S. and its allies with new challenges. [more]
Soon after the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, Communism and Islam were the impetus for revolutions against European imperialism in Egypt, Iraq, India, Caucasus and Central Asia, and the Indonesian Archipelago.
However, divergent views about Communism proved divisive among Muslims (who are also quite divergent in their theological interpretations of Islam) and this quasi- ideological alliance was all over by the onset of the Cold War.
Those irrevocable divisions may have been due to the essence of Islam’s socio-economic and political system. It is more consultative (‘Shoura’ or democratic theocracy) and entrepreneurial in nature, which is more compatible with social democracy and capitalism, than with communism’s autocratic state planned economy.
The other reason for such failure is the proactive role of the United States (and some Western Europeans, like Britain and France) in using Christian missionaries and NGOs in intelligence gathering while spreading Christianity in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and South America.
In the 1970s, it was revealed that the CIA sponsored missionaries in Kerala and Nagaland to not only block the advance of Communism in India, but also to establish sufficient tensions between India and China and prevent any regional stability that continues to our present day.
In the 1980s, the CIA’s material support to the Afghan Mujahideen (and by default the Afghan Arabs, like Osama Bin Laden and his followers, who were rounded up from the different Arab and Muslim countries by their intelligence services and sent to Afghanistan, via Pakistan for their paramilitary training by the ISI, in the hope that they would never come back) only exacerbated extremist violence ever since.
In the 1990s, the predominantly Muslim former Soviet Republics of Central Asia; Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and other Islamic countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan opened their doors to Saudi-sponsored Wahhabi Islam (probably with the ‘blessings’ of the CIA).
This resulted in an upsurge of Islamist fundamentalism and separatist movements in central Asia, like al-Qaeda affiliated Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP), Hizb ut-Tahrir (HuT) and Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HuJI), which have presented a challenge to China and others in the region.
Since the rise of anti-Communist Jihadism in the 1980s and its coopetition by the Anglo-Americans to disrupting Communism ever since may have been the impetus for China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
The $8 trillion investment by China in its bold, innovative and strategic Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) alliances with 138 countries comprising 51.7% of world GDP offers an infrastructure backbone of maritime, land and digital trade alliances.
The BRI alliances represent 4.8 billion people (61.7%) of the world population. Of which an estimated 1.4 billion (29.2%) identify as Muslim and are part of the 52 member countries of the Organisation of Islamic Countries (OIC), including all 22 Arab countries.
China’s BRI strategic alliances with Arabic and Muslim countries can only help neutralise the existential threat of global Islamist fundamentalism in the long-term by spreading economic prosperity and alleviating poverty.
Also, it will not only bring prosperity and stability to China’s underdeveloped north-western part (Xinjiang holds 1.33% of China’s population and contributes 1.35% to China’s GDP), but also to (its ideological partner in the new world order) Russia, and other BRI partners on its western border.
Coupled with technological innovations in global cross-border trade and finance, the BRI projects would no doubt accelerate global economic growth and revive China’s historical legacy in boosting entrepreneurships without compromising necessary protections of the weak.
Those infrastructure-driven alliances are building a global community with a shared future for mankind. This is so important at a time when our world is divided by poverty, crippling national debts and the rise of ultra-nationalism.
The clash of civilizations, anti-(Muslim)-refugees’ sentiment and Islamophobia are just symptoms of the rise in white supremacism and alt-right extremism sweeping the Anglo-American and European nations.
Those groups subscribe to a conspiracy theory of cultural and population replacement or nativism, where white European populations are being replaced with non-Europeans (predominantly Muslim Arabs from Syria and elsewhere) due to the complicity of ‘replacist’ elites.
For example, the ‘Génération Identitaire’ (GI) movement in France, which considers itself a ‘defender’ of the European civilization has affiliated youth groups in Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Slovenia and the United Kingdom. This heightened sense of ultra-nationalism is driving Western democratic politics away from economic concerns, in favour of issues related to culture and identity.
No doubt, Anglo-American and European anxieties about China’s technological, economic and geopolitical dominance may be rooted in their innate fears about being displaced by an Asian culture and the potential spread of Socialism with Chinese characteristics to the 138 countries that joined the BRI alliances, after having spent a good part of over 70 years fighting Communism.
America’s continued rise as a world power—from the 1890s through the Cold War—and its bid to extend its hegemony deep into the twenty-first century through a fusion of cyberwar, space warfare, trade pacts, and military alliances – is now limited by the reality that it has to dismantle China’s BRI alliances as it did to the USSR.
This is why the ‘five eyes’ alliance is going on the offensive with (a) sanctions and visa restrictions for Chinese officials, (b) bans on China’s technological 5G innovations (Huawei, Tik Tok and WeChat under the guise of ‘National Security’ concerns), (c) tariffs trade wars, and (d) a particular focus on ‘human rights’ in Hong Kong and Xinjiang.
The significance of having 52 Muslim countries (37.6%) that comprise 87.5 per cent of World Muslims in the BRI alliance, is not lost on the United States and its allies who are not particularly pro-Islam, which may explain their sudden interest to ‘care’ about the plight of Muslims in Xinjiang!
Thus, it is not unreasonable to conclude that the sole purpose of those disruptive policies by the “five-eyes” alliance is to intensify the global anti-China sentiment that is already aggravated due to COVID-19, and to inflame Muslim sentiment in particular, so as to torpedo China’s largest economic and geopolitical Belt and Road alliances.
George Mickhail is an LSE trained academic and a geopolitical risk analyst with 30 years’ experience in major global accounting firms and business schools. His research focuses on MetaCapitalism and mapping the geopolitical threats of global financial networks. He comments regularly on political economic affairs and his research is cited in the media.
Comments
5 responses to “Islam, Communism and the Belt and Road Initiative”
Thanks for such a succinct insight and summation of the complexities of international relationships. Having visited China on several occasions over the past few years I appreciate the enormous strides the country has made in improving the standard of living for multi millions of people; no doubt enhanced by the inherent Chinese entrepreneurial spirit. Whist we in the West may continue to undermine the BRI initiative, I’m sure China is old and ugly enough to continue to ‘accelerate global economic growth and revive China’s historical legacy’.
The term “communism” as used during the early 20th century and during the cold war is outdated, since no single society (perhaps except for small indigenous clans) is practicing communism. The term is used in an adversarial sense by ideologues from both sides. For example there is nothing “communist” about today’s China with its many millionaires and some billionaires (https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202006/17/WS5ee94a40a3108348172537a9.html#:~:text=Alibaba%20Group%20Founder%20Ma%20Yun,richest%20list%20for%20this%20year.). Instead the term is often used to stoke fears from a new cold war, yet another example for the Orwellian Newspeak language that’s taking over in times of international tensions and wars.
Thank you very much Dr Glikson for your kind sentiments and insights. I am in agreement with you that language plays an important role in framing the spectacle of international conflicts.
Many thanks to George Mickhai for presenting a view of the US led containment of China that is educational and easily understood.This geopolitical tug-of-war certain explains a lot the adventures of the US since 1890s. The global community supported US in many historical events of the world and she became the world No.1 Policeman and benevolent leader. However, things change after the Vietnam war and today, the US may not enjoy complete and total support of the global community as other nations are also rising. The world has changed and the best solution for peace is to be mutually inclusive.
The clash of civilization Muslism vs European story is another revealing educational lesson to be learned. This divide and conquer stuff got to be stopped otherwise there will be perpectual war with no peace in sight. One extremism begets another for revenge, and when will the revenge spiral stops?
Thank you very much Anthony for your kind sentiments. I agree wholeheartedly with you that we need level headed diplomats to help politicians navigate geopolitics to stop the revenge spiral.