Balkan Sectarianism Stephen Schwartz, a convert to Sufi Islam, documents the tensions between the relatively liberal Islam dominant in the south Slav and Albanian lands and the incursion of more conservative Arab forms after the recent wars. Here is a representative sample:

Yet the United States has not acknowledged the goodwill it did create in the Balkans. As it looks forward to the next stages in the "war on terror," it would do well to make the most of the solidarity shown by Balkan Muslims generally, and Albanians in particular. The answer to Usama bin Ladin is not the kind of Islam practiced in the Arab world, with its strong streak of intolerance for difference. It is certainly not a version of Wahhabism as exported by Saudi Arabia-a doctrine that is infected with the germ of terrorist extremism. It is the sort of tolerant Islam that is practiced in the Balkans, and whose practitioners today feel themselves closer to the United States than to their benighted Arab "brethren." This is an asset the United States would do well to nurture and employ. In the post–September 11 world, you never know when you might need a few good Muslims.

Now, first I'd like to say that I have reservations toward the intervention in Kosovo, and had them at the time. But the apathy that Schwartz asserts characterizes Arabs and their attitude toward persecution of Muslims by their Christian neighbors, and contrasts with the concern of the Turks or Iranians, to me is illustrative of the intense parochialism of the Arab world. I've noted how it seems the Arab world didn't seem much concerned with the massacres in Gujarat of thousands of Muslims. Now here comes this article about the Arab apathy (and Schwartz's narrative makes clear there was even some sympathy or support for Serbs from some Arab regimes) toward European Muslims. It seems from my vantage point as a non-Arab ex-Muslim, who's patrilineal line has been Muslim 600 years, Arabs look to non-Arab Muslims only as foot-soldiers in their own wars and causes [1]. But when it comes to other groups, they have the attitudes and contempt of their ancestors toward the malwalis, the converted or client peoples [2]. Fundamentalists want to recreate the Caliphate, that is what Osama wants to do, and Saddam Hussein styles himself a latter day Caliph. Do other Muslims remember the history of the Caliphate? The Umayyad dynasty, that ruled from circa 650-750 was characterized by an strict ethnic hierarchy. The Muslim Arabs on top, the malwalis in the middle, and the dhimmis (subject non-Muslim peoples) at the bottom. The Abassid revolt and dynasty has been often interpreted as the victory of the malwalis against what some Islamic historians termed "The Arab Kingdom" (The Umayyads). But though the Abassids adopted many of the modes and methods of the Persian state, it was still an Arab polity ruling over a vast non-Arab populace [3]. Today in the oil-rich Arab states many non-Arab Muslims do the day to day work of a productive society [4]. These workers are not citizens, and are viewed with contempt by their Arab Muslim brothers. Arabs are born to be princes of Islam. Non-Arab Muslims should never forget that, but they nevertheless do. I remember hearing that Osama was telling Mullah Omar that the latter might be the new Caliph, but I think we all know that the Arab masses would not follow an illiterate Pathan [5]. Osama himself was to be the Caliph, over Arab, malwali and dhimmi. [1] I would give even odds that this is made up, but nevertheless, my grandfather was the head of the local ulema and was one of the men who you hear about memorizing the Koran. [2] Most "Arabs" are of course the descendents of malwalis, but then most Muslim fundamentalists in South Asia that heap scorn on Hindus are the descendents of Hindus (as I am). [3] The Abassid period was the time of Arabization of the Aramaic, Syriac and Coptic speaking regions that are now the core of Araby. [4] Of course, they are not looked with as much scorn as the Christian Filipinos who have even less value in their eyes. A Saudi once told me that Bangladeshis were at least clean, unlike the Filipinos. [5] A Punjabi once told me that if Arabic was the language of heaven, Pathan was no doubt the language of hell.