THE ECONOMIC DILEMMA OF THE MUSLIM WORLD

Islamic Studies 35 : 3 ( 1 996) 30 1
the two economic spheres, that nothing has changed in the conscience of the
northern man. He continues to follow the creed of Liebniz5 who, while laying
down the new basis for methametics, also meditated on the occupation of Egypt
and presented on this account a detailed report to Louis X1V.6 He also
continues to follow the creed of Ernest Renan7 who saw that the "European is
born to command just as the Chinese is born to work in a slave camp, and each
must do what he is created Ibr." Hence the substitution of the sword with the
olive branch has changed nothing but the appearance.
Europe which in the 1 1 th century had forged an alliance to conduct the
Crusadesn and, in 1881, entered into a colonial pact in Berlin, under Bismarck'sY
supervision, for the imperialist onslaught, has today turned itself once again into
a bloc in the form of the "Conunon Market". Apparently constituted to resist the
challenge posed by U.S., Japan and China, it has actually come into being for
launching an economic offensive against the former spheres of European
influence in order to plant therein new pillars of their presence through
economic means.
Accordingly, it behoves anyone concerned with the economic revival
of a Muslim country or Muslim world in general, to take into consideration
internal imperatives some of whose features we have indicated earlier. Likewise,
he must also take into consideration the external imperatives as indicated here.
We must first clarify the logic of the issue by asking: What are the
limits of individual capabilities - we mean to say, with regard to his country
alone - to face internal and external imperatives? That is to say, we must know
clearly the limits of our freedom of action internally, within the framework of
harnessing social energies on the basis of the two postulates mentioned earlier
as essential conditions for setting the wheel of economic dynamics in motion,
and on the other hand, in resisting economic penetration from outside.
It must be noted that only a few countries, like the U.S., the Soviet
Union and China, fulfil the conditions of autarky. For example, U .S consumes
95% of its production within its own frontiers. It me'ms that if it broke off all
economic relations with the outside world, only 5% of its economy or work
force would be affected. In other words, the United States enjoys almost
absolute economic freedom on account of the vastness of its area and its
demographic base, that is, its affluence from the point of view of natural wealth
and human resources.
After the Cultural Revolution, China has become another country which
can harmlessly break off economic relations with he outside world, by means
of the austerity imposed by current internal imperatives in the take-off stage it
is still passing through. Likewise, the Soviet Union can do so less easily than
the United States but more easily than China. As for all other countries, they
cannot resolve all their economic problems within their particular frontiers.
Despite being the third economic power. Japan cannot afford to cut off
its ties with the outside world. That is to say, it cannot form a closed economic
circle within its frontiers except, like Germany, in rare circumstances. The latter