ALMOST a month has passed since a Danish Imam toured the Middle East and made known to a much wider audience a series of controversial cartoons mocking the Prophet Mohammad that had been published in a newspaper in Denmark last September.Caricaturing Mohammad as either a terrorist or a supporter of terrorism, these cartoons lit the fuse for the ongoing explosions of Islamic fury we are now witnessing throughout the Muslim world.

Mohammad is the most revered figure in Islam and is known as the "Messenger of God" to that religion's adherents. Depictions of the Prophet, although not specifically banned by the Koran, are not encouraged in Islamic countries because of the general Moslem prohibition against idolatry.

So these cartoons, showing Mohammad in the worst possible light were viewed as an insult to Moslems around the world — and at last count there were some one billion of them.

Denmark has paid a very heavy price for one newspaper's decision to exercise its right to free speech by insulting the beliefs of Moslems. Danish exports to many Muslim countries are being boycotted, its embassies have been closed and, in some cases, burned as Islamic rage over the publication of the cartoons continues — seemingly unabated.

Then some other European newspapers got in the act. The cartoons have now been reprinted in a number of other countries — including France and Italy — in a so-called demonstration of unity to defend the freedom of the press and the right to free speech.

This has only served to further fuel the anger in the Muslim world. More embassies have been attacked, mass protests have been organised outside the headquarters of many foreign business interests connected to the offending countries, scores of people have now been killed.

Is this the clash of civilisations that author Samuel Huntington prophesised in his memorable book of the same name? I remember when The Clash of Civilisations & The Remaking of the World Order was published in 1998. It had been expanded from an already long article written by the author for the American Journal Foreign of Affairs.

The original article — the point of departure for the far longer and more provocative book — had created quite a stir. Huntington seemed to be pointing to a new front line of world conflict in the aftermath of the Cold War, one that divided the West from the rest of the world — a front line and a dividing line, if you will, between the secular, profit-driven First World and other, more traditionalist regions that the US and Europe failed to really understand.

Of course, both the article and the subsequent book appeared long before the beginning of the Gulf War Two which resulted in the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. When the Bush Administration demonstrated it was in earnest about going into Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein, a flurry of the President's defenders from the academic world started speaking out against Huntington and denouncing both his thesis and his conclusions.

They dismissed the very idea of a "clash of civilisations", arguing that the world was about to enter a new era of realpolitik — one where common sense and the Third World's dependence on its First World business and trading partners would dictate how international events unfolded.

Well, we've seen how short-lived that theory was.

In the aftermath of the Iraqi invasion, the estrangement between the Muslim world and the West has grown exponentially. Presumably the same thing will happen if the West is drawn into conflict with other regions where its fails to comprehend both the mindset and the culture.

In the case of the Moslem world, the West claims to respect the Islamic religion yet just look at the problems the Republic of Turkey has faced in becoming a full member of the European Community. Perhaps this country's flag provides a clue as to why some of the other EU members remain so opposed to bringing Turkey into the European fold.

The flag sports a red background with a white crescent moon and five-pointed star. It is said that the star represents the Morning Star mentioned in the Muslim Holy Book , the Koran (interestingly, the crescent and star, while generally regarded as Islamic symbols today, have long been used in Asia Minor — even before the advent of Islam).

Europe will deny that it is suffering from an advanced case of Islamophobia yet it is demonstrably ill at ease with the Muslim populations who live within its borders, some 15 million people.

Turkey desperately wants to become a member of the EU. I cannot think of a country that would seem to be more qualified. While its people are indeed Muslim, successive governments since the coming to power of Mustapha Kemal (who assumed the name Ataturk — Father of the Turks) in 1923 have ensured the country has been a Western-leaning, secular state.

Turkey is a democracy (admittedly, it has sometimes gone through periods when it has been a limited democracy) and there is a clear demarcation line between mosque and state. Indeed, unlike the more authoritarian Moslem states that prohibit political opposition and therefore drive all dissidents into the mosques (which, for obvious reasons, even the most dictatorial leaders in Islamic countries are loath to attack), Turkey has a healthy body politic and an inclusive attitude towards other faiths and cultures (it's one of the few Islamic countries, for instance, that has long recognised the state of Israel — now a key military ally and trading partner).

Since the days of Kemal Ataturk the military has been the guardian of secularised Turkish society — occasionally either mounting coups or threatening them against any government that might appear to want to turn back the clock and reintroduce an Islamic-dominated state.

During the Cold War Turkey was a loyal member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation — a grim irony given former members of the Warsaw Pact such as d Poland and even some former Soviet Republics find it easier to gain membership in the EU than Turkey.

Europe's ancient conflict with the Muslim world not only overshadows Turkey's attempts to get into Europe but Europe's relationship with its own Islamic populations.

Two years ago France's National Assembly voted overwhelmingly to ban all religious emblems and symbols from its state schools.

It was stated that this was done to protect the secular nature of the French state but this move was not lost on France's Muslim population — one of the largest in Europe. Its real target was the Muslim identity in France, in particular the Muslim hijab — the scarf worn by Muslim women and girls to cover their hair.

In Holland a popular film-maker was killed in the street by a Muslim citizen for making a film that allegedly defamed Islam.

And throughout Europe tensions between Europeans and Muslims have been on the rise as the recent riots in French cities by immigrant Muslim youths make quite clear.

Then there is the whole question of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, the alleged War on Terrorism and the terrorists themselves who claim to be Muslim and to be waging a just war against those who have invaded Muslim lands from Iraq to Afghanistan to the conflict between Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan over the Indian-dominated territory of Kashmir with its largely Muslim population.

So while some might argue that the eruption of violence and outrage over the Danish cartoons that defamed the Prophet Mohammad might be much ado about nothing, a contrived controversy engineered by a militant Danish Imam, we really should examine the extent of this ongoing crisis — and realise what we are, in fact, witnessing is indeed a clash of civilisations.