The incursion of migrants into established societies inevitably creates friction due to cultural and religious differences. Whether it involves Asians in British Columbia, Latin Americans in the United States, or Muslims in Europe, the clash of cultures often sparks fierce struggles that require harsh measures to subdue. In Europe, the significant increase in Muslim immigrants, doubling from eight to sixteen million over the past decade, contrasts sharply with the declining birth rates of native ethnic groups, intensifying concerns over national identity. Many European governments and citizens fear losing their cultural heritage as cities transform into cosmopolitan hubs with growing Islamic enclaves. This cultural tension is evident in the Netherlands, where Islamic immigrants match the native population in major cities like Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and The Hague. Across Europe, the rise in crime associated with immigrants, including religiously motivated conflicts, further exacerbates the clash, fueling calls for stringent immigration policies. The ongoing struggle between Western and Islamic civilizations mirrors historical conflicts, potentially setting the stage for broader confrontations as cultural differences continue to challenge societal cohesion.

The current social unrest in Europe stems from the slow collision between a culture roughly based on the Koran and one roughly based on the Bible, creating friction and tension that await a spark to ignite a conflagration. Sometimes, a minor spark is intentionally inflamed, as seen in the recent firestorm over satirical cartoons of the Islamic prophet Mohammed published by a Danish paper, Jyllands-Posten, in September 2005. These cartoons, ranging from benign to pointed, illustrated European artists' fear of reprisal for negatively depicting Islam, yet initial reactions were mild and non-violent. It took five months for substantial unrest to emerge, pointing to deliberate encouragement of rage within the Muslim world, as leaders of the Islamic Faith Community traveled to Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon to stir attitudes against Denmark. The near-simultaneous embassy burnings in Damascus and Beirut, though ostensibly spontaneous, likely had implicit approval from Syria's regime, a police state where demonstrations require government sanction. Security forces strategically allowed the burning of Danish and Norwegian embassies while protecting others, indicating calculated provocation. In Beirut, 20,000 protestors arrived by bus with identical pre-printed signs, further suggesting orchestrated unrest. Similar events in Iran and elsewhere prompted accusations from U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that Iran and Syria deliberately incited violence to serve their own purposes. While demonstrations and threats occurred within Europe, the violence and destruction—such as embassy burnings in Syria and Lebanon, shootings in Afghanistan, and burnings of Western symbols in Pakistan and Gaza—took place exclusively in Islamic nations. Protestors chanting not only "Death to Denmark!" but also "Death to America!" and "Death to Israel!" reveal that the outrage over the cartoons is a pretense, with underlying hostility aimed at the broader West. Denmark, known for avoiding offense, became a focal point, but the larger target is Western values, which various Islamic groups and governments seem intent on keeping stirred. Unlike the spontaneous Paris riots of November, which involved mayhem in immigrant enclaves and were dismissed as a failure of integration, the cartoon uproar built slowly with encouragement from various parties, with violence occurring outside Europe and hostility directed at multiple Western nations. European politicians have largely stood their ground, refusing to subjugate the Western value of freedom of speech to religious sensitivity. This crisis has also narrowed the divide between the U.S. and Europe, exposing the failure of multiculturalism and aligning Europe slightly closer to a harder stance. The controversy over the cartoons involves core values so fundamental that neither side can yield—Muslims cannot accept visual satire of their prophet, and Europeans cannot accept dictation through threats of force, translating into rising geopolitical stakes as these civilizations continue to provoke each other.