Dr Carl Lucian Reinfandt (Austrian Fund for the Documentation of Religiously Motivated Political Extremism – Documentation Centre Political Islam) explores the emerging phenomenon of Islamist populism in Europe. He discusses how religious narratives are manipulated to fuel societal polarisation and undermine democratic resilience. Reinfandt advocates for a common European strategy to pool knowledge and protect pluralistic values.

Date:  30/03/2026

Reading time: 8 min

In this Newsletter Portrait, we interview Dr Carl Lucian Reinfandt, Senior Researcher at the Austrian Fund for the Documentation of Religiously Motivated Political Extremism. With a background in Islamic history and languages, Dr Reinfandt analyses how radicalisation phenomena challenge the openness of democratic societies. He explores the innovative concept of “Islamist Populism”, examining how religious language is manipulated to create”us vs them” polarisations. His work highlights the importance of strengthening democratic resilience and fostering European collaboration to protect inclusive pluralistic values.

1. Tell us a bit about your background.

I am originally from Germany, where I studied Islamic history and the languages and literatures of the Middle East. To be honest, I never intended to get involved with Islamism, political radicalisation, terrorism and all that sort of thing. I cared far too much for the region, its culture,and its people,to let myself be bogged down by these unpleasant fringe phenomena. But the tide of history was bound to catch up with me. I belong to an older generation who were at university in the early 1990s, but when the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington took place in 2001, a new generation of students arrived at the universities. They looked different from us and asked different questions: Where are the terrorists? How do we find them? Why is Islam so radical? I did not like that, butultimately thatis how things haveremainedto this day. Today many people – even Muslims – believe that Islamists and Muslims areone and the same. This polarisation will eventually tear our society apart if we carry on like this. We live in a radical age. That is why I felt a responsibility to make my specific knowledge available to the public.

2. What does your current role involve? How does your work contribute to the prevention of radicalisation?

I am a senior researcher in the Austrian Fund for the Documentation of Religiously Motivated Political Extremism (Documentation Centre Political Islam). I write analyses of phenomena of political radicalisation which, in themselves, do not necessarily pose an immediate security threat but do subject society to a stress test and, in the long term, could place a strain on that openness. At present, this appliesabove all toforms of identity politics, and within this context, increasingly to movements rooted in politicised religion. All religions, not just Islam. However, as I specialise in Islam, I prefer to work in this field.

During the recent years, I have noticed that religious language is increasingly being used in a secularised and visibly populist manner, with contrasts between “us” and “them”. With what I consider to be quite an audacity in claiming to know exactly what God wants from people and who stands in the right before God. There are Muslim, jihadis, and Christian crusaders. One hears of “Islam” and the “West”, of “believers and non-believers”, but also of “Western superiority”, the “end of history”, and the “clash of civilisations”. Such views areheld by people from all sides, not only Muslims.

In the course of my work, something has struck me: Islamist activists in Europe can be just as populist as other political activists, but this has hardly been addressed in research to date. This led me to apply the well-known concept of populism to the actors and movements of political Islam – and it worked. This has given rise to an important new category of analysis in my field of studies. I set this out in an essay that we published a few weeks ago, which I titled “What is populist about political Islam?”.

3. What motivates you to work in this field?

To be perfectly honest: there are always moments when our work and our arguments in the debateactually reachthe“other side”. Those are the moments that really motivate me. After all, reinforcing one’s own opinion is nothing new. But reaching the other side – that has real value. You can respect people even if you disagree with their views. Ultimately, it’s always about the better argument.

4. Given the current geopolitical situation in Iran and your recent study on “Islamist Populism,” how do these developments influence our understanding of radicalisation trends today?

If you are alluding to Iran: the conceptof populism plays a crucial role here. For right now, as we speak, a dangerous radicalisation can beobservednot only in Iran, but also in countries that are supposed to be our friends. The fact is, however, that destructive forces can only succeed if the “immune system”of societies is weakened. They attack democracies using populist means. This is so insidious because populists suggest to people that they are doing something “for them”. As a consequence, people become accomplices without realising that they are merely exploited by the populists. The real problem, then, is not the latter. The real problem is that people lack sufficient resilience to defend the open and democratic society, which is still the best system of governance of all, against such tricksters.

Strictly speaking, my study “What is populist about political Islam?” is not really a study. What I have written there isactually something of an interjection in an ongoing debate. My aim is to show that the term “populism” can also be applied to political Islam. The concept is so useful because it helps to identify developments that are not necessarily extremist, but which can nevertheless place a significant strain on democratic systems. Dealing with them takes time, energy, and attention – resources that we wouldactually needto address real political problems. Populism exists across the political spectrum. It can be found on the right and on the left, in nationalist and environmentalist circles. We see it in large and smallcountries. It affects people in your family and mine.

A typical feature of populist activism is the claim to speak for “the whole people”. In the context of political Islam, this often means that individual activists claim to speak for “Islam”or“all Muslims”. One then hears statements such as: “We Muslims believe…” or “Islam demands…”. In reality, however, these individuals often represent only their own political agenda – an agenda that is not necessarily shared by other Muslims. It is precisely this manipulative behaviour that we recognise from other populist movements: individual voices declare themselves to be the voice of an entire community.

They thrive on simplifications. Complex social problems are reduced to one-sided moral judgements. Cases of genuine discrimination are presented selectively or exaggerated in order to bolster the own narrative. In the case of political Islam, this often results in a worldview in which a “decadent West” is pitted against a superior “Islamic order”. State institutions, the media, and political elites are portrayed not as partially biased, but as fundamentally hostile towards Muslims.

Symbols play a key role in this: clothing, rituals, and certain rules of conduct are turned into visible signs of an exclusive identity. In this way, populist activists seek to gain the authority to define what “true” Islam is. They often ignore the great diversity within Islam. In turn, they dismiss criticism of their specific understanding of Islam as criticism of Islam itself. Divergent religious interpretations, individual forms of religious practice, and indeed any form of secular lifestyle are then condemned as deviations from a supposedly “true” Islamic order. This creates social pressure within Muslim communities. At the same time, a kind of religious renewal or “renaissance” is frequently propagated, which is deliberately directed against pluralistic models of society.

5. What challenges do you face in your work and how do you address them?

One challenge is being misunderstood: I am not hostile against Islam, and I consider the political and civic engagement of Muslims in European countries to be crucial, if not vital. We live in turbulent times, and in such times we must all stand shoulder to shoulder. We do not need populist firebrands; on the contrary, we need a strong and resilient democracy. One that proves to be inclusive to everyone who lives here. The European model, in other words.

Another challenge is certainly that I always tend to focus on things that don’t work. Extremism and radicalisation are, after all, merely symptoms of societal failure. I pay less attention to things that do work. Socially speaking. When you work in this way, you must becareful not to slip into unfounded alarmism. At the same time, however, you must also be careful not to grow weary of the whole thing at some point. Butthat’show it is for everyone who deals with it, and it passes after a short while. Because the subject – prevention of radicalisation – is, after all,very interesting.

6. How do you think collaboration across Europe helps prevent radicalisation more effectively?

Political radicalisation does not stop at national borders. That is why cooperation between European states within the framework of the European Union is so importantin this respect too. The aim is to pool our collective knowledge, coordinate necessary security and prevention measures, and pursue a common European strategy to support civil society and protect democratic values. This will make us even more effective than isolated national measures – and may even save us money.

7. What advice would you give to someone new to this field?

My advice would be: stay open-minded and curious. Read widely before you write anything. Think for yourself before letting others do the thinking for you. Don’tbe afraid to make the odd misjudgement (because everyone else does too; otherwise, we’d have found solutions to all our problems long ago). Listen to what others have to say – especially those who have become radicalised, because, after all, they are the oneswe’retalking about.

8. What do you do outside of work to stay inspired?

Let me put it this way: “A merry heart goesall the day.”

9. To conclude, what inspires you to keep working in this field, and what is your hope for the future of radicalisation prevention in Europe?

In recent years, the European model of open society came under fire. It was dismissed as slow, over-regulated, and ineffective. This criticism has come from other parts of the world that worship a different – if you like, more populist – approach. But now we see that the economy isn’t everything. Violence is not the answer. Technological inventions do not bring greater freedom. Thelaw of the strongest does not necessarily lead to greater stability. And security cannot be bought with money. I believe that the current bellicose developments in the global context, destructive as they are, nevertheless offer cause for hope in one respect:one day, we might remember the European way. Hopefully, itwon’tbe too late by then.

Dr Carl Lucian Reinfandt: Senior Researcher at Austrian Fund for the Documentation of Religiously Motivated Political Extremism (Documentation Centre Political Islam)

source https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/home/items/930335/en