Situated at the intersection of the ambitions of several regional and sometimes global powers, Bosnia was never left alone or in peace.

There was never a time when someone did not cast a glance at Bosnia's attractive strategic position and vast geoeconomic potential, hoping to benefit from it. 

People eventually referred to this intersection as the point where East meets West; however, in reality, it was a place where different socio-political and military interests clashed.

It was also the ground where major players fought, not only to resolve their own differences or satisfy their own ambitions but also to determine the fate of Bosnia and its people.

The interests of those protagonists were so overwhelmingly perilous and forceful that they completely disregarded the truth that the land, the people, the rich history, the vibrant culture, and the promising future they were so passionately concerned about did not belong to them. 

Instead, these elements rightfully belonged to the Bosniaks. However, in a harsh world where power and strength dictate what is right, and where the brutal law of the jungle - often referred to as social Darwinism or the survival of the fittest - dominates, the Bosniak frequently found themselves abandoned and isolated, akin to castaways adrift in an unforgiving sea, while others arrogantly took it upon themselves to dictate their fate and future.

After all, the idea of the East meeting the West is not as appealing in the context of Bosnia’s ongoing struggle for national survival as it is in contemporary discourses of national tourism and national economic development.

The clash of civilizations and religions

To be honest, the Islamophobic West has never perceived – and never will – the connections between Islam and Christianity, as well as the East-West relations in Bosnia and the wider Balkan region, as auspicious meetings or constructive engagements that could lead to mutually beneficial outcomes.

For them, the turmoil seen in Bosnia – and the region – is characterized by clashes between Western Christian civilization and Eastern (Oriental) Ottoman (Muslim) barbarism. The phrase “at the crossroads of the worlds” is a cliché used to intensify the Bosnian plight and inflict maximum pain on the Bosniaks.

Almost everything associated with Bosnia is branded ''Oriental". Duped, people view this label as glamorous. They believe it benefits them, assigning Bosnia and the Bosniaks an honorable status. How mistaken they are. Rather - in that manner - Islam, seen as an Oriental religion by the narrow-minded West, is labeled an imported and foreign entity.

As long as the Bosniaks adhere to it, they are also regarded as foreign, considered both national and ideological traitors.

The theory suggests that the Bosniaks must choose: either renounce their foreign identity or leave for where they are perceived to belong (the Orient). In other words, they must adapt or face consequences. Their Oriental vacation on Western (Occidental) European soil is over.

Accordingly, religions in Bosnia and throughout Europe are categorized into two groups: 'indigenous' and 'imported'. However, it is often overlooked that Europe was originally a pagan and truly barbaric continent.

All significant religions arrived in Europe and eventually carved out their permanent existential niches. In this context, Christianity, Islam and Judaism are on equal footing, as are their followers. This is a compelling reality, unless someone distorts history and clouds his conscience with prejudice and nationalistic chauvinism.

Indeed, the presence of Islam in Europe is as legitimate as that of any other religious or ideological framework, and Muslims are as integral to European society as any other group.

The case of Leopold Ranke

One of the first Western scholars to popularize this Balkan-centric civilizational clash theory on the international stage was Leopold Ranke (d. 1886), a German historian and one of the founders of modern historical science.

This was one of the objectives of his book “The History of Servia (Serbia) and a Servian (Serbian) Revolution, with a Sketch of the Insurrection in Bosnia.”

The book contributed to the growing Western Islamophobia, particularly focusing on Ottomanophobia, and especially to its Serbian, perhaps most fanatical, branch in Europe, which positioned itself as defenders of Western civilizational integrity and values against Ottoman pretensions and influences.

For that reason, the book is filled with references to the glory of Western Christian civilization and the violent barbarism of the Ottomans. It depicts Serbia and the Balkans under the Ottomans as “the seat of a protracted struggle between European civilization and Oriental despotism — between the Christian and Mahomedan religions.”

No wonder that Leopold Ranke was pleased to have Vuk Stefanović Karadžić (d. 1864) - one of the most important Serbian nationalists, cultural and intellectual figures, and also one of the fathers of Serbian unbridled Islamophobia, thus a corrupter of regional history – as the primary source for his work(s) on Serbia. Leopold Ranke explicitly calls Vuk Stefanović Karadžić his “Servian (Serbian) friend” who collected materials for his works at his behest.

All subsequent Serbian nationalists and Islamophobes were glad to refer to Leopold Ranke’s works as the ultimate reference on Serbian and regional history. One of those who relied on Leopold Ranke to distort history was Ivo Andrić, a Croat who became a Serb. He even received the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1961 in recognition of his “remarkable” contributions to Ottomanophobia.

This affiliation, without a doubt, severely compromises the scholarly integrity that Leopold Ranke was supposed to have as a leading historian, rendering it rather irreparable and casting a long shadow over his legacy.

Leopold Ranke endorses the narratives of the Serbs

For example, while discussing the First Serbian Uprising (1804-1813) led by the Serbian butcher Đorđe Petrović Karađorđe (d. 1817), Vuk Stefanović Karadžić, Karađorđe’s biographers and other local historians agree that after retaking Belgrade from the Ottomans, the Serbs committed a genocide against the Muslim population in Serbia and parts of Bosnia.

As a result, the city of Belgrade and many other conquered areas were completely “cleansed of the Turks.” Not even the wounded, women and children were spared. The ordeal lasted two full days, during which both Serbian soldiers and civilians eagerly participated.

Driven by an insatiable thirst for Turkish (Muslim) blood, the carnage was widespread. There was nowhere to seek refuge. It was pandemonium. “Only those Bosniaks who chose to convert to Christianity were pardoned.”

By the way, in his book “Prilozi Izučavanju Genocida nad Bošnjacima (1992-1995)” (“Contributions to the Study of a Genocide Against the Bosniaks (1992-1995)”), Muharem Omerdić lists ten genocides against the Bosniaks, the first occurring between 1683 and 1689 in the satellite territories following the Ottoman-Austrian war commonly known as the 'Vienna War', and the last during the 1992-1995 Serbian-Montenegrin and Croat aggression against Bosnia.

Many more genocides were committed against other Muslims in Eastern Europe, where the Ottomans had previously held power. The aforementioned Serbian slaughter of Muslims in Belgrade and elsewhere in Serbia, as well as parts of Bosnia, is chronologically considered the second genocide against the Bosniaks.

However, when Leopold Ranke narrates the events of the gruesome Serbian Uprising, he does not mention the genocidal tendencies and the specific genocidal programs of the Serbs. On the contrary, he describes the episode as mere military engagements between two warring parties, portraying the Ottomans as clear oppressors and the Serbs as victims and liberators.

Leopold Ranke’s only related statement, which is clearly misleading, reads: “A rising of the whole of the population descended from Servian (Serbian) tribes holding the Christian faith, and a general attack on the Mahometans in Bosnia, were now anticipated.”

Needless to say, if the Serbs could carry out mass killings, leading to the complete annihilation of both urban and rural Muslim populations, in just a few days, one can imagine what the Ottomans were capable of during several centuries of total control in Serbia.

If the Ottomans were as they had been repeatedly accused of being by the Serbs—and by others—and if they did what they had always been accused of doing, there would certainly not be a single Christian individual under Ottoman rule, let alone organized and thriving Christian communities. People would have faced either forced conversion to Islam or complete annihilation.

However, after more than four centuries of Ottoman rule in Serbia, the Serbian Orthodox religion, culture and identity remained intact, with Serbs greatly outnumbering Muslims in most areas.

This demonstrates who was truly broad-minded and tolerant, and who was bigoted and chauvinistic—who preached coexistence and promoted civilization, and who advocated violence and spread savagery. The reality on the ground, eyewitness accounts and the (inter)national legacies of both Bosnia, as part of the Ottoman realm, and Serbia, as part of the West and its aggressive ideological and territorial imperialism, undeniably reflect this. 

Leopold Ranke as an Islamophobe

The truth is that Leopold Ranke was an Islamophobe, aligning with the widespread attitudes in Europe fueled mainly by the pseudoscience of Orientalism. He joined the ranks of notable Europeans such as Robert of Ketton (d. 1160), Riccoldo da Monte di Croce (d. 1320), Dante Alighieri (d. 1321), Martin Luther (d. 1546), Voltaire (d. 1778), Washington Irving (d. 1859), and many others. It was fashionable and highly rewarding to be an Islamophobe and to criticize Muslims, particularly the Ottomans, who were seen as the most fearsome representatives of Islamic civilization in Europe.

The biggest 'wrongdoing' of Muslims was that they belonged to the orb of the 'Other' and could not fit into the new one-dimensional European cultural and civilizational molds, which were intended to be preached across the globe under the colonization and 'mission to civilize' crusades.

Consequently, a criminal narrative about Islam and Muslims was created and promoted both locally and internationally to justify the ongoing and future mistreatment of Muslims. It is unclear how much Leopold Ranke was a victim of the prevailing sentiments and how much he himself was responsible for shaping his Islamophobic views.

Regardless, the ideas put forth by Leopold Ranke are clearly indicative of an Islamophobic perspective. By way of illustration, for him, the Turks, as representatives of Islam and all Muslims, are barbarians, and their Islamic institutions “bore the strongest stamp of barbarism.”

Additionally, their “maintenance of a harem (as one of the biggest misconceptions about the Ottomans)” is presented as a symbol of inhumanity and moral depravity. The Ottoman political rivalries, including those within family circles, which, admittedly, were sometimes excessive and bloody, have also been depicted as a norm and evidence of their inherent barbarity.

Immorality and cruelty were two cornerstones of the Ottoman polity. Therefore, ultimately defeating the Turks and expelling them from Europe would be an act of “revenging mankind on those (Turkish) barbarians.”

To Leopold Ranke, “all Orientals” used to plant the heads of their enemies on pikes, and the Pachas (Ottoman military leaders) used to reward every soldier who brought them a head.

He also said, reiterating the long-established Islamophobia narrative, that Islam is a religion of violence, spread from its very commencement by the sword, is antagonistic towards everything that is not Islamic, and that peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims is impossible.

It goes without saying, therefore, that wherever there are Islam and Muslims, there is likely to be violence and tension within the ranks of different religious groups. To support his views, Leopold Ranke sometimes misquotes or misinterprets major Islamic sources, such as al- Mawardi’s “al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyyah” and the Holy Qur’an itself. His sources are almost always secondary and questionable at best.

Leopold Ranke stated thus: “As it occurred under the Caliphs, and under the Mongolian sway in India, so in the vast territories which were under the Turkish rule, we find everywhere an antagonism between the ‘faithful,’ whose religion gave them the claim to dominion, and the ‘infidels,’ who were condemned to servitude on account of their religion.

Islamism strengthens the pretensions of the ruling military powers by inculcating the belief that they exclusively enjoy the true religion…From this opposition of belief and unbelief proceeds the whole political system of the Turkish Empire.

The two principles of its foundation will always be antagonistic to each other. No hope of forming a united nation can consequently be entertained…Christianity endeavors to convert nations; Islamism to conquer the world.”

Leopold Ranke believed that the Turkish defeat would be a victory for civilization championed worldwide by Europe. A section in his book is titled “Barbarity of the Turks towards the Servians (Serbians).” Serbia was seen as a victimized member of the European Christian fraternity. It needed to be liberated and made join the rest of the European family to experience the benefits of civilization as soon as possible.

Towards this end, Leopold Ranke quoted in a footnote from a work entitled “Servia (Serbia), the Youngest Member of the European Family", written by Andrew Archibald Paton. The quote is an excerpt from an interview the author had with the son of Đorđe Petrović Karađorđe, in which the author remarked: “Your Highness's father had a great name as a soldier; I hope that your rule will be distinguished by rapid advancement in the arts of civilization.”

Leopold Ranke’s comments about Đorđe Petrović Karađorđe were also along the lines of liberation from Ottoman oppression and the transition from barbarism to European civilization. Leopold Ranke stated that Đorđe Petrović Karađorđe “established the principle of the emancipation of the subject Christian nations from the government and power of the Turks; and towards him all eyes were now directed.”

And about Miloš Obrenović (d. 1860), twice the Prince of Serbia as an autonomous principality within the Ottoman state, Leopold Ranke similarly wrote: “If, then, he had imbibed the principles of true civilization, and had rendered his nation morally superior to the Ottomans, he would have excited sympathy for himself, and for the principle of Christian emancipation throughout the world.”

Leopold Ranke moreover said: “This progress of the West towards the East has again taken a prominent part in the aspect of the world. Islamism continues to be, as it has been for twelve centuries, the most inflexible adversary to the Western spirit; and in those countries where it is embraced by the entire population from Bokhara to Morocco — excitement and hostility prevail; but in the interior of the Turkish territory its antagonism is displayed in the most energetic manner.”

Also: “The spirit of modem times, which operates only by political means, does not aim at the annihilation of Islamism, either by conversion or force. Still, we are perfectly right in restraining it within due limits; and we are fully justified in endeavoring to prevent the followers of the Christian religion from being trampled on, simply because they are Christians. This view of its result constitutes the deep interest excited by the Servian emancipation: an interest which extends far beyond the boundaries of that country. We need only cast our eyes around, and glance at the other Servian tribes in Bosnia and Herzegovina…”

The essence of Leopold Ranke’s Islamophobia is captured in the following words from the “Preface” of his book “The History of Servia (Serbia) and a Servian (Serbian) Revolution, with a Sketch of the Insurrection in Bosnia”:

“The Turks have been intruders in Europe from the first; grinding down the people, and impoverishing the countries which they overran; and warring alike against liberty, enlightenment and Christianity. If we are to judge of a faith and a government by their fruits, we should all unite in hoping that the Mahomedan religion and the obstructive despotism of the ‘Sublime Porte’ should yield to the now swiftly-advancing tide of Christian civilization.”

One can only imagine how much inspiration and guidance the Serbian nationalists and their genocidal platforms against the Bosniaks have benefited from the Islamophobic views and rationalizations of Leopold Ranke.

The impact of this particular instance was significant and varied. Many of Leopold Ranke’s statements are fluid and open-ended, allowing Serbian Islamophobic counterparts to enhance their nationalistic imagination and reach a range of chilling conclusions, accompanied by equally frightening concrete policies and behavioral norms.

To view Muslims as ideological, cultural and civilizational outsiders in Europe—inherently aggressive and violent, resistant to integration and peaceful coexistence—and to believe that all European nations are “perfectly right in restraining” them “within due limits” carried significant implications for the existential futures of not only the Bosniaks but also other Muslim communities in Europe over time.

However, perhaps more than anyone else, the Serbian nationalists read too much into Leopold Ranke’s perspectives, because his goal was Serbia itself and with it the entire Balkan peninsula.

Hence, nobody can deny that Leopold Ranke indirectly invited and, to some extent, even legitimized the future genocidal behavior of the Serbs against the Bosniaks and others—which, for all intents and purposes, was just “a perfect contribution” by one of the fathers of modern West-centric historical science.

The Serbs saw themselves, in the grand scheme of things, as the servants of Europe and its Christian-civilizational agendas. They were the heavenly whip with which justice was exacted against centuries of suffering.