The term ‘inclusive government’ has emerged recently in Afghanistan, where the US-backed government collapsed in 2021. In line with this discourse led by the US administration, the Western world demanded ‘establishment of a government in Afghanistan in which all of the people are represented’. They stated that if this demand was not met, sanctions would be imposed on the Islamic Emirate government in Afghanistan and the government would not be recognised diplomatically.

The same discourse reappeared in Syria, where the Bashar Assad regime was overthrown in late 2024. Western countries, led by the United States, have repeatedly urged the forces of the Syrian revolution to 'establish an inclusive government'. The US administration has finally decided not to recognise the Syrian government, citing a similar reason.

The US did not take the same action regarding the government of Bashar Assad in Syria. They continued to officially recognise his government.

It is clear that the Western world, or the global system led by the US, will continue to use the 'inclusive government' discourse in other theatres. Popular movements will succeed in other geographies, and regimes will collapse as new governments are established. The new governments established in these theatres will most likely be accused by the US and its Western allies of being 'non-inclusive' and will not be recognised diplomatically.

The US and the West are not only refusing to recognise these governments themselves, but are also putting pressure on the rest of the world not to recognise them. They are preparing a list of sanctions and an economic blockade. Take Afghanistan, for example: the US does not recognise it and actively encourages and threatens its neighbours Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Pakistan to do the same. The aim is to cause social, political, economic and military crises in these governments, which are completely isolated from the world. The goal is to overthrow these governments, not through direct military intervention, but through political pressure. The so-called 'inclusive government' discourse is nothing more than a tool and illusion.

So what does ‘inclusive government’ mean? How can a government be ‘inclusive’?

The US and the Western world are saying that governments in the countries they target should include all kinds of religious, ethnic and social minority groups. In other words, they reckon these minorities (many of which, unfortunately, have some kind of connection with the West) should be involved in the government. For example, they want Alawites, Druze and Christian minorities to be represented in the Syrian government. They also want to include homosexuals, liberals, democrats, socialists and other similar ideological minorities.

It's a bit like the pressure put on the Ottoman administration by Western states like Britain, Russia and France through minorities in the 18th and 19th centuries when the Ottoman Empire was on its last legs. All this pressure, and the support and incorporation of minority groups into the ruling power, led to major crises. After a while, the Muslim Turks, who were the most fundamental element of the state, had almost no meaningful share in power. Eventually, the Ottoman Empire just fell apart. People who study history know all about the part that minority groups played in it.

Let us now return to the today and look at the issue from a different angle.

Let us examine the governments of the Western states that are calling for "inclusive governments" in Islamic countries.

Take the United States of America... According to surveys conducted in recent years, white men hold 62 per cent of government positions, although they make up 30 per cent of the population. If you look at the successive governments of the US, you can see that all the high-level positions are occupied by white Americans, mostly men. The situation is similar in countries like the UK, France and Germany.

Let's look at the issue from a different perspective. Muslims are one of the fastest growing communities in the US and it is estimated that by 2050 there will be 8.1 million Muslims living in the country, representing 2.1 per cent of the population. Yet there are no Muslims in the US government who retain their true Islamic identity.

The same is true of France and the UK. About 9 per cent of the French population are Muslims of Maghreb origin. But there is no Maghrebi Muslim minister in France who has an Islamic identity. In the UK, about 6 per cent of the population is Muslim and the Muslim population is growing by more than 50 per cent every 10 years. Yet we do not see a ruler with a Muslim identity in the UK.

I do not mean those who are only "culturally Muslim". On the contrary, I mean those who wear the symbols of Islam, who support the rulings of Islam, who have the basic elements of Islam such as the beard and the hijab. In other words, France, which almost expects a homosexual Shia woman to become a minister in Afghanistan, does not tolerate a veiled Muslim woman walking down the street in its own country, let alone holding a senior government position.

'Inclusive government', is it? According to official figures, Muslims make up 13 per cent of France's population. So let France show its inclusiveness. Let's put aside someone who defends Sharia law, let France appoint a minister who calls himself an 'Islamic democrat'. Let's not leave 13 percent of the population unrepresented.

These powers that intervene in Islamic countries in the name of 'inclusive government', do not even recognise a proper place for other minorities in their governments. Many communities such as Afro people, Indians, Hispanics and Gypsies cannot find a place for themselves in the Western political world. Instead, in the seats of power are those who have a crusader mentality to the extent of having a cross on their foreheads, those who have 'kafir' tattooed on their arms, those who want to organise a crusade in Muslim countries, those who say they are adopting Jewish Talmudic values. In alliance with the global capitalists, the usury lobbies, the racist and white supremacist circles, the Zionists and others...

In short, the ‘inclusive government’ discourse is nothing more than an apparatus used by Western powers to achieve their political ambitions.

This discourse should in no way be taken seriously by Muslims. If such an attempt is made to gain the approval of the Western powers, Islamic countries will face the problem of repeating the minority problem that the Ottoman Empire experienced in the 19th century.

At a time when the world is going through an era of political and diplomatic disintegration, Muslim communities should prioritise relations among themselves.

The world has gone through a multipolar process, with periods of ambiguous political poles. This was followed by a Europe-centred period and then a bipolar US-Soviet Cold War. When the USSR was about to disintegrate, a unipolar period dominated by US hegemony began.

Today we are living through a period in which this unipolar process is coming to an end and a multipolar world is emerging. Perhaps a multipolar order will follow, or perhaps an era of real disintegration.

In order to make the most of this era, Muslims are obliged to rebuild their political mentality and get rid of the direct and indirect influences of Western thought.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Mepa News.