Monstrous as the crimes of Saddam Hussein were, the verdict, one can reasonably assume, had already been decided upon long before its pronouncement by the court trying Saddam Hussein.

The danger facing the world today, which should have been peaceful after the end of the cold war, is whether we have entered a phase of distrust among cultures, particularly those molded largely by religion.

Though late Edward Said of Columbia University trashed Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations as a "vastly overrated article," yet Said admitted in his book Orientalism that European attempts to deal with Islam, "a rebellious and somewhat resistant culture," was a threat to Christian Europe and "had to be fixed ideologically, the way Dante fixes Mohammed (pbuh) in one of the lower circles of hell."

Historian Bernard Lewis, the bete noire of Edward Said, carried the candle of Islam's so-called millennial war with Judeo-Christian civilization and has been potent in infusing in the common Western national genetics a deep mistrust leading to Islamophobia to the extent that Western, particularly US judicial system has been implanted with a sort of doctrine of preemption.

Amy Wadman (The Atlantic Monthly, Oct 2006) has detailed a few recent cases of terrorism tried in the US on the principle of preemptive prosecution because "the September 11 attacks prompted a fundamental shift in the American government's approach to Islamic terrorism."

As in the case of the doctrine of preemption justifications have been given by citing examples of overriding the Charter of the UN by the super powers during the cold war days and even before; indictment of Al Capone on tax fraud because the US government could not get him for more serious crimes and lengthy incarcerations of habitual offenders to prevent future crimes are being cited in defense of preemptive prosecution.

"This preemptive strategy," writes Wadham "represents a moral and legal change in the American approach to justice. Its premise is that terrorism Islamic terrorism represents a singular and unprecedented threat to American safety and society."

Unfortunately the Muslim community in the US has been targeted and hundreds of cases against the Muslims have been instituted in American courts. In post-9/11 period Bush administration has expanded legislation allowing terrorism related charges even when no terrorism has taken place.

Effectively Islam and the Holy Quran, in many cases, have been put on trial and scholars on Islam (mostly non-Muslims to gain greater credibility with the jurors) are invited to give their views on Islamic texts and speeches delivered by so-called Islamic radicals that are found in possession of the accused.

Unbelievably such debasement of society, now engaged in disquisition of Islam, is taking place in a country which in the very first amendment of its constitution had guaranteed complete freedom of religion and whose Supreme Court had in 1969 unequivocally declared that a speech to be impermissible had to be "directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action."

It is, therefore, not surprising that 60% of inhabitants in Muslim countries now believe that America's major aim is to weaken the Islamic world while most Americans now believe that Islam condones killing in the name of Allah.

The alienation of the Muslim diaspora in the West is progressing to an alarming level and now the second generation Muslims who had earlier shown little interest in religion is now finding more solace in mosques or Islamic centers because of discriminations meted out to them in every day life by the majority community regardless of the fact that the first generation Muslims were invited into the European countries to shore up the sagging economies following the Second World War.

One must, however, admit that Salafi quietism and the political thoughts of Muslim Brotherhood have merged into the hybrid philosophy identified with Osama bin Laden.

The adherents of this school of thought are extremist Muslims who have caused the 9/11, London and Madrid bombings costing loss of innocent lives and perhaps for generations condemned the Muslim communities in non-Muslim majority areas to navigating the parameters of minority citizenship in their countries of birth or adoption.

Despite President Bush's repeated assurances of assistance to be advanced to countries moving towards democracy, particularly in the broader Middle East, because, he said in his 2007 State of the Union address: "Free people are not drawn to violent and malignant ideologies," it is doubtful if the "surge" policy in Iraq translated through more troops sent there and dragging foot on of a solution of the Palestinian problem (American sincerity in finding a solution of this issue has always been in doubt) would have the desired result.

Peter Singer of the Brookings Institution thinks that Muslim societies have widely differing interest and demographic groups -- regime retainers, secular reformers, gradualist mainstream, Islamist social conservatives, radical Islamists, and militant activists and terrorist themselves.

Singer feels that the US to succeed she must interact with all shades of public opinion including the radicals.

If the Marshall Plan could sway the left leaning parties towards democracy in post-war Europe and Nixon's visit to Beijing could result in widening the gulf between the USSR and China then use of Joseph Nye Jr's "soft power" could yield better result than what the hard military power has produced until now.

In the ultimate analysis one man-one vote-one time Islamists have to be engaged politically and defeated at the polls where lies their Achilles' heel.

Kazi Anwarul Masud is a former Secretary and Ambassador.