Today's Europe that seems united on the surface in the form of the European Union, carries in its roots the worst of vices, including nationalism, love for materialism, a corrupt thinking based on narrow interests and a horrible past of bloody wars that killed millions of its own people.

European countries harmed each other severely through continuous wars in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth centuries in general and in the Twentieth century in particular. Finally the European states decided to get rid of their bloody past and be united on economic terms after the Second World War. They laid the foundations of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951 and the European Economic Community in 1958 to provide themselves with such a platform based on economic interests and gains that could compel them to honor each other's territorial boundaries. Despite internal differences, they became set to work for the prosperity and material progress of their poverty-stricken people who were really sick of the pathetic economic policies of their governments and the centuries' long wars.

Initially, only six European countries participated to establish these two communities namely. France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Italy and Luxembourg; and they started to sweep European resources through common policies. Gradually, other European countries began joining them on these two platforms and then finally, after the fall of USSR and Communism, fifteen European countries gave these two communities an extended form of European Union under the Maastricht Treaty. Besides economic benefits, its other objective was to play an active political role, so as to fill the vacuum after the demise of the United Soviet Socialist Republic and possibly realize the European Union as a strong political power along with the US, on the world stage. Germany and France, being the strongest pillars of Europe, are the forerunners that yearn keenly to exercise a strong political influence over the world, whilst the total number of the countries included in the EU is now twenty-eight. An important point to be kept in mind is that the reasons behind uniting Europe were more political than economic, in which the most pivotal was to stop Europe from indulging in wars that broke out again and again, due to nationalism and the clash of their interests.

The European Union achieved economic progress to a considerable extent after its establishment in 1993. It rose to the heights parallel to America in economic field, through different judicious measures. In order to shape the EU into a coordinated entity of different European countries, many policies were implemented. In addition to a single European market commonly known as the Free Trade Zone that already existed within these countries, they decided to adopt and exercise uniform laws of judiciary, commerce, agriculture, fisheries and regional development internally, and to ensure free movement of people, services, goods and capital externally. On the other hand, the incentive of Shengen Visa also made Europe a center of attraction for the people around the world. European countries that were gaining economic strength with the passage of time decided to give up their national currencies and adopt a single currency, the Euro, in 2002 in order to make themselves the biggest economy in the world. So far eighteen countries have adopted Euro. This block of 18 countries is called Euro Zone.

The EU, after its inception in 1993, made rapid development economically at the global level, till 2007, because of the stable economic factors in the international market, although even during this period it was nowhere near the US in the military field. Nor could Europe undermine the American political influence over the world. Due to this economic gain, the European countries fell into an illusion that they had got rid of their bloody, wrangling past and that their future progress depends on the EU alliance. This illusion did not last long, as soon these countries found themselves afflicted by the torment of the economic crisis that began in 2008 from America. The European countries that had made an alliance based on material benefits, in no time returned back to those differences that were very much alive in their foundations. These differences are deeply rooted in their endearing concept of nationalism, despite being the followers of the same religion. Let's take a deep look what kind of crisis Europe is surrounded by and how in this crisis their internal differences, that had lessened, re-emerged.

After the international financial crisis erupted in November 2008 in America, the EU officially announced an economic slump in Europe. Following this, other crises started to spring up, one after the other, that included the crisis of the stock markets and the bankruptcy of banks and other financial institutions. The European countries initiated costly bailouts to rescue these institutions, which instead of resolving the crisis, became a tremendous burden on the sickening economies of these countries. This crisis, very soon turned into sovereign debt crisis that continues until today. The crisis of the Euro became apparent when its value began to fall against the main international currencies, particularly the US Dollar, that was in fact followed by the sovereign debt crisis, meaning the crisis of nations' debts. It usually erupts when the income and GDP of a state declines against the built-up debt and loan. Then the state issues its debt in the form of treasury bonds, which are purchased by other states, banks and international financial institutions. The state that issues treasury bonds also pays interest on them to the buyers. However, if the state becomes unable to pay off its debt, interest and the insurance value against these bonds, then the buyers would not only stop buying further bonds but also try to get rid of the bonds they had bought previously. Consequently, a severe crisis takes place, which not only affects the economy of the state, but it also shakes the political stability along with the government's position.

The Euro Zone fell under immense pressure after the news in 2011 that Greece would fall behind in paying its debts that had reached 350 billion Euros ($ 482 billion). These debts were above its GDP, by 160%, whilst the deficit in its budget had reached 13.6%, whilst the permitted deficit level within the EU is only 3.5%. This crisis got so serious that the Greek Prime Minister Papandreou had to resign before the completion of his term. Italy had to face the same scenario and its Prime Minister Berlusconi too, announced his resignation. Other European countries like Ireland, Portugal and Spain also suffered the same crisis. This sovereign debt crisis stretched even to France, which is not only an important country of the Euro Zone, but also a major political player of the EU.

Europe has been facing this crisis for the last six years now, but is still struggling hard to come out of it. It has not succeeded yet in overcoming this ordeal and the obvious reason of this failure lies in the concern over conflicting national interests of every country, rather than thinking about the collective welfare of the European Union.

Germany and France are the two strongest pillars of Europe. These two have a desperate longing to use the EU as a strong political bloc, so as to exercise an effective influence over the world. France and Germany both are working to solve the problems of the Euro Zone.

However, it appears that there are fundamental differences between them regarding how to manage the crisis and how to deal with it. This has been specially so because the subject of economy clashes with the subject of sovereignty of nations. France and Germany both consider themselves the two great heads and leaders of the EU. As such there is a competition behind the scenes between them, concerning which one of them will have the main say within the Union. France, on the one hand, suggested the establishment of Economic Government as a treatment for this crisis that will impose a specific economic policy on every Euro Zone country, which will be binding upon it. Germany, on the other hand, proposed to form an economic management, having a structure and a framework that would impose sanctions.

Germany did not agree with the French suggestion of establishing an economic government as it will give an impression to other countries, that there is a higher authority over their national governments that dictates to them. Moreover it will erode their sovereignty. That's why French proposal was not welcomed at all by Germany.

As regards to the European Union, it is of utmost importance to comprehend the role of Germany. It will not be an exaggeration to say that Germany has benefited the most from the European markets, not only before the EU was formed, as well as after its formal foundations in 1993. It consumed the resources from all of Europe to strengthen itself and to bring prosperity to its people. Economically, Germany is the strongest country of Europe.

Its strong economy relies heavily upon its exports that comprise 40% of its GDP. Germany is the second biggest exporter in the world. Europe, being a free trade zone, is a vast international market of over 500 million people. Germany's huge and ever increasing industrial and agricultural production require a vast market and the European Free Trade Zone benefits Germany from every aspect. The huge exports of Germany have monopolized the markets across Europe. This helps it to accumulate wealth from all over Europe. In addition, Germany holds the largest financial share in the European Central Bank (ECB) because it is the strongest economically amongst all the European countries. Thus its interests always remain protected. The value of the Euro is also controlled by ECB. So we can understand that if Germany holds the largest share in the ECB then it is in the position not only to influence the Euro, but also European Monetary Policy at large. Hence, Germany knows that it is in its own interest to keep Europe intact under the umbrella of one Euro currency and the EU Charter. But on the other hand, its policies and economic interests pose a hurdle for EU to get out of its economic crisis. Almost every European country is facing trade deficit with Germany. Even France, which is the second most important country of Europe, has billions of Euros drowned, due to this trade deficit with Germany. This trade deficit becomes a major reason for the overall budget deficit in the economies of these countries.

Moreover, Germany's stronghold over ECB also influences the economic matters of these countries.

Although Germany never wants to put its national interests at stake, it desperately wants to rescue the Euro from the sovereign debt crisis. In order to save the EU from weakening further, Germany has suggested many measures which are:

1- The EU should legislate an authority for Brussels- the EU capital- to control budgets of the states which suffer from a national debt crisis, through the European Central Bank.

2- Such countries must adopt austerity measures in their monetary policy, that will result in a considerable cut in the funds allocated for public development projects and government expenditures.

3- The EU should seize supporting those countries economically, as well as politically, at all international forums that usually permit deficits, to increase their budgets a great deal.

4- The voting rights of these countries should be frozen in the EU elections that are held after every five years, for a specific number of years.

5- These countries should lower the public salaries and wages in relation with austerity measures.

6- Germany also suggested that other countries should follow its example in limiting the budget deficit ceiling in their constitution, to avoid exclusion from the EU.

European countries, on the other hand, are unwilling to accept these German proposals as they will have to face a furious response from the public if they put a cut on development projects and their salaries and wages. These suggestions also require a change in the Lisbon Treaty that governs the EU which only came to existence after a difficult birth due to the sharp differences within the European states which were unwilling to surrender their national interests. Moreover, these suggestions were also seen by other states as a direct interference in their sovereignty for which they would never give their consent. Consequently, the EU does not seem to succeed in resolving this crisis so far because every state prefers its own interests rather than thinking about the collective benefit of the Union.

As far as the austerity measures are concerned, the European states in debt are not ready to adopt them beyond a certain limit. They think that they will have to take several tough steps, that also include further increase in taxation and lowering of wages. These steps will turn their public against them and leave them extremely unpopular amongst their people. They take a view that the stronger countries of Europe took most advantage of the European resources through the free trade zone and other economic policies. So responsibility also lies with them to shoulder the maximum burden of the sovereign debt crisis that has plagued the whole of Europe. In addition, they take the view that these stronger and wealthier countries should keep lending further money to the troubled countries, such as Greece, Italy, Portugal, Ireland and Spain, so that these countries do not default and the EU is saved from dismantle. On the other hand, the wealthier countries, especially Germany, which have already granted huge loans to the troubled countries do not intend to continue this practice anymore, particularly when there is little hope of these loans ever being paid back. They prefer instead to encourage these countries to adopt austerity measures.

The European economic crisis aggravates the situation further within each European country, too, because concentration of wealth is worsening, manifested as a class difference. The lower and middle classes of every country think that the general public is already on the losing side because of the crisis. They are facing alarming rates of unemployment and heavy taxes, yet will further be victimized by austerity measures. As for the elites, they do not bother to pay any cost for resolving this crisis. They demand that the elites who are already enjoying exemption from taxes and other perks from the governments, should carry equal burden along with the general public. The people of many European countries blame the EU and consider it a root cause of their economic and financial plight. They think that only the stronger countries use the Union for their interests. That's why there is an increasing demand from the people to their respective governments to pull out of the EU.
Germany, under these circumstances, is facing a dilemma.

If all the indebted countries adopt the austerity measures in the true sense, it will be disastrous for the German economy. True austerity within these countries will result in decline of demand and consumption of German exports across Europe. Germany's exports are the backbone for its economy. If they are hit, Germany will also face a further disastrous downturn in its economy.

So, to avoid this, Germany encourages the European Central Bank to lend money to these countries in order to maintain the demand and consumption of German products across Europe. Moreover, to help the indebted countries, Germany has increased its share in the European Stabilization Fund from 450 billion Euros to 1000 billion Euros. Germany also released a loan of 100 billion Euros for the ailing economy of Spain. All these steps highlight German untiring efforts to save the EU because if any country defaulted, it will have to exit the EU and once this trend started, nobody knows where it will end. It would certainly jeopardize the survival of the EU.

Germany wants other countries to discipline their budgets and emerge from crisis on their own, but this does not seem to materialize and the Euro is still under immense pressure. German Chancellor Angela Merkel warned about the future of the Euro Zone, when she declared, "Germany does not want to bankrupt any state because that would mean the bankruptcy of all of us." She repeated it again while addressing the conference of her Christian Democratic Party saying, "Europe is living in its most difficult time since the Second World War.............and if the Euro failed then Europe would fail."

The large number of suggestions from Germany, its support to increase its share in European Stabilization Fund indicate its desperation to bring Europe, EU and Euro out of the crisis while safeguarding its national interests at the same time. All this comes up with its acknowledgement that the Euro is the secret of this Union and its downfall would mean the downfall of Europe.

The political and social implications of this crisis are not less important than Europe. As mentioned earlier, the middle class and the elite of every country are divided over the solution to the crisis, particularly who is going to pay the major share of its costs. Besides this, the unemployment rate in Europe is alarming. In 2013, the average unemployment rate across Europe was 11.6%, whereas in 11 countries, it was 10 to 17% and in two countries, Spain and Greece, it was 25% and 26.5% respectively. This alarming rate of unemployment is extremely dangerous for the whole of Europe. As a result of this unemployment, the people of these countries are suffering from many social problems and politically, they blame European Union for all of this.

As for the position of the cunning Britain, which is a major member of the EU, it stands on a corner, at the edge of the Atlantic Ocean, watching the plight of Europe as a mere spectator, while working to protect itself from the disaster of the Union. However, the far reaching effects of this crisis that has struck Britain too. It is not showing any interest in solving the problem, in the same way as it is seeking to make gains and spoils from the crisis. Britain did not enter Euro Zone, refusing to give up its national currency (Pound Sterling). Britain is not concerned with the Euro issue. There are many voices within Britain that are calling to exit from the EU, so that pressure is not put on it from any side to join the Euro Zone. Indeed it showed satisfaction at the expense of the Union when the former Foreign Minister William Hague said, "The Euro will become a moment in history noted for its collective folly (stupidity)," and he compared the Euro Zone to, "A burning building that has no fire escape doors."

On another occasion Prime Minister David Cameron said, "The Euro crisis does not only represent a danger to the European economy alone but rather the world economy in its entirety." The European politicians are well aware of the British hypocrisy and contempt. The former head of European Commission, Bruso once pointed out, "It is upon the states of the Union which are not supportive of joining the Euro not to work to stand in the path of those states that wish to make progress in that direction."

Despite all this, Britain does not want to exit from the EU as long as it remains standing, because it is working to achieve economic gains from it, in addition to the political gains at the world level when it steers Europe to take decisions which are in line with its interests.

Its exit would be harmful for it. David Cameron once said in this regard, "The exiting of Britain from the EU would not be in our national interests. If we were to find ourselves outside the European Union, we would be in a situation similar to Norway meaning that we would be exposed (and affected by) all of the decisions that are being issued from Brussels, without being able to take part in making those decisions." At the same time, he rejected giving up British sovereignty when he called for, "The handing over of a large portion of the European Commission powers in Brussels to the national governments." So Britain does not want to exit from the EU, but at the same time it does not want to enter into Euro Zone.

The facts that the EU is divided into 28 nation states and the lack of a strong unified political leadership within the Union not only harms it economically, but also at the political and military level. America has been successful in using European military forces through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) for its own interests. Since 2000, major European countries including Germany, France, Italy and Spain have been trying to form a separate European military force free, from NATO and American influence, by establishing European Operational Headquarters. This military force is intended to be formed to achieve European political and military objectives in the world. So far this plan has not succeeded due to a weak political leadership. Britain too, is opposing this plan vehemently, as it thinks that it will undermine its influence over Europe and it wants to be influential at all costs. The latest effort in this regard was made in 2011, five major countries Germany, France, Spain, Italy and Poland sent a confidential letter to the Foreign Minister of the EU, Lady Ashton, urging her to go ahead in establishing European Operational Headquarters, ignoring Britain. They assured her of their maximum cooperation for this purpose. This confidential letter was somehow leaked out and Britain expressed its extreme anger over it, threatening to veto this plan in the European parliament. Britain is also supported by America in this regard, which wants to see the EU as a weak political entity at every cost. America wants to use European military might only through NATO and of course, for her own interests and benefits.

Besides this, America has also established strong ties with the states of Eastern Europe through military pacts. America influences these European states by assuring them the safeguarding of their security against their enemies.

This influence does not let these states take any interest in forming a separate European force. Thus the EU could not move forward in this direction too, because of the division within the Union and a weak political leadership. Prodi, the former president of the European Commission once expressed his frustration over it by saying, "Europe cannot afford to take care of its treasury only, and leaving its security over America."

Another factor that adds to the weaknesses of the EU is the deficiency of energy resources in Europe especially natural gas. Europe only produces 35 to 40% of its gas consumption while imports 1/3 of its requirement from Russia. This matter makes Europe dependent on Russia to a dangerous extent. Due to this dependency, Europe could not take any effective steps against Russian aggression in Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014. Russia truly crippled Europe in this matter using its gas card.

With all these shortcomings of the European Union, its incapability to resolve the current economic and national debt crisis, increasing unemployment and other problems have really shaken public confidence in it. The public opinion is rapidly turning against the EU alliance. Its evident proof is the results of the EU elections held in France and Britain in June 2014, in which people voted for those parties that consider the EU a hurdle in the progress of their countries. These parties also demand that the major portion of the Union powers should be transferred to the national governments. The number of votes cast to these parties in this election is the highest in EU history, which although does not pose an immediate threat to its integration, surely reflects an increasing dissatisfaction and anger of the people of European countries against it. The political thinkers and the intellectuals of Europe are considering these results as a vote against the EU establishment. It is obvious that the EU that existed before 2008, in the form of a strong economic bloc, is not what exists today. Its formal structure appears the same but it does not function with the same efficiency. The question of what the EU might become in future has been replaced by the question of how long it will survive with its unending crises and a weak public support.

All these arguments prove that EU is a weak alliance of the countries that had decided to be united only to gain material gains and interests, whilst maintaining a strong national identity. It is not one strong political entity, rather an unnatural and loose alliance of 28 nation states. This unnatural alliance carries many weaknesses in which the most important one is the division based on nationalism. This division is its biggest impediment, which will never allow it to become a strong political might.

Discussing America's role is equally important in connection with the EU. America cannot afford to allow the existence of any such bloc or an ideological state that challenges its status as a super power. We all are well aware of the Obama administration's desperate efforts to stop the establishment of Caliphate. So, let us turn our attention as to how it tries through several steps to weaken Europe and does not allow it to emerge as a strong bloc at the world level.

The crisis in Europe presented an opportunity to America to exploit this crisis, to turn the attention away from its own troubled financial and economic situation, as well as the fact that America is the epicenter and the main culprit of the crisis. From another angle, it seeks to shake the confidence of the Europeans in regards to their Union and its currency, Euro. It is also working to cause the downfall of the EU as well as of the Euro so as to diminish the international European influence, which competes with it especially in terms of economics and international politics. Indeed America wants Europe to follow it and walk in its shadow. For this purpose America aids Europe at a moral level, so that it remains following it. America refused the European request to double its funding of the IMF at the 2011 G-20 Summit, so as to move towards a solution for the Euro Zone crisis.

In addition to this refusal, famous American credit rating companies like Standards and Poors and Moody's and Fitch are also playing their role to further destabilize the economic condition of the European countries. These companies lowered the credit rating of Spain, Greece, Italy, Portugal and many other European banks, which numbered twenty-one, including several larger banks, which worsened the economic problems of Europe. Besides this, America has been successful in weakening and fanning the European division in political and military fields through the following factors:

1- By keeping NATO intact, which was supposed to be dismantled after the demise of USSR, as it was formed to counter its expansion policy in 1949. America does not want to dismantle it as it uses it for its own interests. It uses it against Islam on one hand and on the other, by using the excuse of NATO, it discourages the idea of forming a separate European force.

2- With the help of the British policy, where Britain does not accept to melt away into the European Union completely and wants to maintain its free and influential status. That's why it puts one foot in the EU and the other foot in America. By doing so, it also becomes a cause of division within the Union and this matter caters American interests.

3- Many states of Eastern Europe that joined the EU in 2003 including Poland, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary and Romania have strong ties with the US in terms of military and security pacts. These pacts have given the US a real influence inside Europe.

4- Greater American control over oil producing countries and their resources also gives the US a control over the EU countries that need oil. Moreover, the American control over the Third World rulers allows it to monopolize favorable trade deals and plunder the resources of the world, that deprives Europe of these gains.

All these factors clearly prove American dominance over Europe. Admittedly, America itself is facing a serious economic crisis, America's unemployment rate is also creeping up, there are also some voices found in thirty American states that demand separation from the federation due to unequal distribution of resources and more than forty million people are living under poverty line. However, in comparison with the EU there is no threat to the American union of states in the near future on two grounds:

1- As is the case with the EU, the decision making in America is not divided among separate political units, rather it is concentrated in Washington D.C. only. This matter does not allow its political power to weaken or divide.

2- Although the Caliphate is on its way, there has been no ideological state in the world recently that could really exploit its weaknesses and challenge its dominance over the world on the basis of an alternate ideology.

Despite American dominance, Europe also keeps waiting for opportunities to harm American interests. America always used the UN Security Council to pass resolutions according to its own interests and plans, whether it be a matter of imposing sanctions on a country or attacking it, but in 2003, France and Germany managed to influence the Security Council against supporting America in its plans to attack Iraq. France in particular, launched a strong campaign and exposed America internationally as a state that violates international law. So America appeared as an arrogant state that follows the path of unjust and brutal force and breaks international law, instead of being seen as the protector of law. Thus America's true face was further exposed.

From another angle, we see that although the US uses NATO for its own interests, but some European countries at times try to thwart American plans by using the same NATO platform. They, at some important occasions, withdraw their soldiers from different fronts, or decrease their numbers, or sometimes do not send their soldiers at all. In the war against Iraq, no European country participated physically besides Britain. Against Afghanistan, although Europe participated actively in the beginning through NATO, in the last few years Europe's support, as well as the number of its troops, have declined considerably.

Many countries simply refused to send their soldiers by using the excuse of their parliaments refusing consent to join in the American war. There are a few European countries, including Britain, that get their troops stationed at those Afghani provinces or districts where the resistance factor is not so strong, so as to avoid the loss of their soldiers. That's why in the most dangerous areas of Afghanistan, there are the American troops mostly who face a severe and bloody resistance from Taliban and one can see that the casualties of American soldiers in this war are a lot higher, as compared to NATO forces.

It is also observed that Europe tried to raise problems for America in its election year. It is a well-known fact that no American governments want to be entangled in any controversy in their election year and become quite vulnerable. They do not want any issue to hurt their image in the coming elections. This situation gives some European countries an opportunity to exploit America's weakness and through different steps, they try to pressurize the American governments.

All this discussion so far, clearly exposes the reality of these European upholders of a corrupt and false ideology. These European countries, although belong to one religion but believe in an ideology that only promotes among them greed and a continuous struggle to pocket maximum material benefits. They even develop relations with each other only on the basis of these material benefits. To gain benefits they, never hesitate even to chop each other's roots. Their hearts and minds collide and they are not sincere with each other. With the help of their ideology based on oppression and human exploitation, they seek to chain the whole world for the moment. The Capitalist ideology has failed to give humanity the solutions of its problems and weakened these countries too.

The matter that is lacking and required today is a state that would come into existence on the basis of a true ideology and exploit the weaknesses of these oppressive countries to render them ineffective, with the help of deep political insight. Today, this world desperately needs an Islamic Caliphate state that will guide the humanity from the darkness of Kufr towards the light of Islam. Looking closely into the internal differences of these European countries and their system that plunges them into crisis repeatedly, it seems as if the circumstances favoring the re-establishment of the Caliphate arisen. Many thinkers and intellectuals of Europe and America, along with their people, are found writing and protesting against the drawbacks and corruption of their capitalist system. At the same time, unfortunately, they are compelled to find solutions of their problems within the same system as there is no other ideology in the world that could guide them to the right direction. But, inshaaAllah, with the re-establishment of the Caliphate, with Pakistan or another strong state of groups of states as its starting point, with its leadership and thousands of trained Islamic politicians through mature political insight and guidance granted by Islam are ready to initiate measures to bring about the inevitable collapse of Capitalism rapidly and establish the dominance of Islam.

The Caliphate, soon after its re-establishment, shall expose the corrupt thinking of Capitalism regarding the people of the world, with the help of a strong media and its Shabab spread all over the globe, whether it be the Middle East, Europe, America or anywhere else. The Caliphate will also show the world a true picture of the Islamic State and the fruits and prosperity in it achieved by the implementation of Islamic laws and systems. This will surely on one hand create awareness among the people of the world and on the other hand, infuse hatred against their own Capitalist system. It will not be the first time in recent history. Before this, the USSR, being an ideological state did exactly the same thing, though its own ideology is also false.

The propaganda against Capitalism launched by the USSR finally forced the capitalist countries to add the patchwork of the concept of a welfare state in their ideology. It was necessary to keep their people content, as they were being addressed and influenced by the communist propaganda.

The Caliphate, according to the directions of Islam and as a corner stone of its foreign policy, will speed up the process of annexing other Muslim lands, along with ensuring the consolidation of the state. In this process, the public opinion in favor of Islam that already exists and the Muslims of the Middle East and the Central Asian states will be very helpful. Both these regions are rich with unlimited oil and gas reserves. The Caliphate after annexing the countries of these regions will directly possess these reserves. This possession will give the Caliphate a tremendous material advantage over other countries of the world, which will be used to further Islam. The Caliphate will also have an option to provide oil and gas to those countries, including some of the European ones, that are not in a state of war with the Muslims. This special favor to these countries will be helpful in separating them from the American sphere and the European bloc. It will also help these countries to get rid of the American oppressive dominance, creating an opportunity for the dominance of Islam. For this purpose, Caliphate is also able to make short-term agreements with these states. Using the card of these resources to achieve some objectives is not unprecedented. Russia, no longer being an ideological state today, did it successfully when European countries found themselves helpless against Russian aggression in Georgia and Ukraine as they are dependent on Russia for their gas needs.

The Caliphate as well as having the true ideology, will have immense material resources. Thus there seems to be little likelihood that either America or European larger countries could stand directly in front of the Islamic state to counter its expansion policy. But even if they try to do so at some stage, the Caliphate will be ready to cope with this by developing its heavy industry linked with the military advancements at a fast pace. The highly trained professional armed forces with the love of Jihad that already exists in the hearts of our soldiers will add further to the strength of Caliphate.

It is only the Caliphate that will put the dominance of Dollar over the entire world to an end, as it will adopt the currency based on the gold and silver standard. Only this currency based on gold and silver can dry up the demand for the Dollar practically. This world knows very well that the real currency is gold and silver, not the paper currency. The practical implementation of this currency, particularly in an ever-expanding Caliphates and those states that enter into treaty with it, will deliver a severe blow to the American Dollar hegemony.

Consequently, it will undermine American influence in the world. Apart from these steps, several other measures will be taken to exploit American weaknesses, particularly fanning the desire of separation from the federation within the thirty disenchanted American states. Even if this process goes slow, it will be helpful in pushing America on the back foot, diverting its focus from foreign fronts to internal issues.

Additionally, there are many American military bases on different Muslim lands that ensure its dominance across the Muslim world; but once the Caliphate starts annexing these lands after its re-establishment, there will be no more American bases in these areas. InshaaAllah, the loss of these bases in such a humiliating way at the hands of Caliphate will put the American dominance and control over the world into reverse gear. This annexation will also enable the Caliphate to control many sea routes of the world which will give the Caliphate further strength, as these routes are very important for the world regarding its trade and oil supply.

Another policy that can be pursued by the Caliphate is to give loans on soft conditions or provide aid to non-belligerent non-Muslim poor countries, such as those found in Latin America, to free them from the shackles of IMF, World Bank and America. The Caliphate can develop cordial relations with them and arouse among them the feelings of amity for the Islamic state. It will also help in severing these countries from the upholders of Capitalism, America and the dominant states within Europe.

All these steps, demand exceptional political insight and awareness. However, we know that the leadership of the future Caliphate is equipped with these features achieved on the basis of Islam. Thousands of the Shabab of Hizb ut Tahrir, trained politically as well as intellectually under this leadership, are waiting anxiously to shine upon the whole world with the light of Islam and guide it to the way of eternal success. May Allah be the Helper and Protector of this leadership and all of us and bless us with Nussrah for the establishment of the Caliphate soon! Ameen!

Written for the Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir by
Kamran Sheikh, Pakistan