If we consider Europe as a single cultural unit with common institutions, principles, and religion, harmony within has ever been absent. For centuries Europeans have been slaughtering each other for various reasons: religious, economic, or power.

There was only a peaceful period after WW II, mainly dictated by the interests of the US and their confrontation with the Eastern bloc. But the collapse of the balance of terror, the ensuing monopoly of US power and globalisation engineered thereafter, toppled the balance of power and resulted in extremities. The main winners being some east Asian countries and (for the time being) some north European countries. The circumstances also led many others to wars, emigrations, and bankruptcies. And now Europe is shaken, its unity is threatened, and each member-state focuses on its own survival.

Moreover, during the four centuries of colonialism in which they had the upper hand, the major European powers engaged mainly in plundering and did not do what would be required to ensure their future and the future of the ecosystem. For example, they neglected the problem of rapidly increasing populations, of natural resources, and did not bother to deal with the education and development of their vassal countries to reduce the need for increased births and migration. Conversely they were mainly involved in sharing their prey, which led them to devastating conflicts and finally to US predominance.
But they did not even concern themselves with their own demography or birth rate, bringing the population of a densely populated Europe to stagnation and ageing. Jobs in the north need staffing, pension funds cannot meet needs, and new immigrants are welcomed uncritically to fill the gaps. This is a convenient but precarious and problematic solution, as explained below.

The principles of the Enlightenment that constitute the cultural basis of modern Europe were born due to economic surplus and science and technology that allowed the creation of power, art, knowledge, and reflection; initially by a few intellectuals then later spread to the wider masses. But these principles e.g. rationalism, sociopolitical institutions, equality, fraternity, and liberty are not compatible with some other cultures, which, by reaction, emphasise their diversity and often resort to fundamentalism.

This incompatibility is a key factor that causes reactions to immigrants that came to enjoy the social goods of Europe but they refuse, or are not allowed to accept, its principles and so they remain alien. Consequently, most of them are not assimilable, are increasing in numbers and becoming a rapidly swelling problem. Moreover, many descendants of immigrants compete with natives in the labour market because they are unwilling to do the heavy work of their parents, and this requires inviting even more immigrants.

Despite all this, illegal migration takes on snowball dimensions and there is no single EU resolute reaction to such immigration nor to threats received from Islamists. Generally, the EU pretends to accept multiculturalism and “open door” attitudes to appease resentments at the lowest possible cost.

But this attitude encourages the waves of immigrants. And the naive or hypocritical and submissive behaviour of the EU is perceived as phobic and emboldens the Islamists to address open and presumptuous “Erdogan type” threats, to which EU does not react with a clear and rigorous manner. As opposed, the Australian government adopted a clear attitude against the Islamists, by explicitly stating that Australia is a Christian country with its own principles and those who do not embrace them must prepare their luggage for expulsion.

Although Australia has the advantage of being an island, such pronouncements must also be made by Europe, which should quiescently declare itself proud of its Christian faith and its cultural heritage, while avoiding becoming defiant, but with a firm stand where it undergoes serious challenges.

Thus it is concluded that the countries of Europe have been acting so far in a way that is uncoordinated, selfish, ignorant of history and phobic and without systematic and timely anticipation for the future. But common external threats have often acted in the past as a catalyst to the beliefs and attitudes of intimidated societies.

In this case, if the threatening attitudes of Turkey and generally of the Islamists continue, this might contribute towards the consolidation of a common European identity in the minds of its peoples and their acceptance of the fact that in Europe everybody needs everyone else in order to preserve the principles underpinning modern European societies.