The 20th century’s history is filled with paradoxes that reflect the complexities of geopolitical conflicts, ethnic identities, and the manipulation of ideology and religion by authoritarian powers. One of the most striking examples is the involvement of some Muslims in the ranks of the Nazi Waffen-SS, often viewed as the wrong side from a modern moral perspective, though the context is far more nuanced. On the other hand, the Soviet regime under Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin carried out systematic repression of religion, including Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, which destroyed millions of lives and spiritual institutions. These phenomena weren’t the result of pure ideological loyalty, but rather stemmed from political pressures, existential threats, opportunistic propaganda, and hopes for independence that were often betrayed. In this article, I’ll delve deeply, critically, and analytically based on historical facts, statistical data, original quotes from primary sources, and rational perspectives from contemporary historians. This discussion draws on Nazi archives, Soviet documents, and academic research such as works by David Motadel, Anne Applebaum, and Robert Conquest to build credibility and avoid oversimplification. Additionally, I’ll highlight relevant moral lessons, such as the dangers of religious manipulation by totalitarian regimes, the importance of historical honesty to prevent repeating mistakes, and the ethical dilemmas in judging historical figures seen as heroes despite their responsibility for mass atrocities.
Balkan Muslims in SS Divisions: Not Ideological Support, but a Response to Local Threats
One of the most paradoxical chapters of World War II is the formation of SS divisions involving Muslim soldiers from the Balkan region, which didn’t represent Muslims globally but rather specific groups caught in ethnic conflicts and German occupation. The main division was the 13th Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Handschar (1st Croatian), formed in February 1943 on orders from Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler, with an initial strength of about 20,000 to 25,000 soldiers, mostly Bosnian and Croatian Muslims. This unit was designed as a mountain infantry division, equipped with modified SS uniforms that incorporated Islamic symbols like the fez (traditional hat) with the SS skull emblem, reflecting the Nazis’ efforts to blend religious identity with their military ideology.
The motivations for these Muslim soldiers to join weren’t rooted in Nazi racial ideology like antisemitism or Aryan superiority, but in complex political and social factors. In war-torn Yugoslavia, Bosnian Muslims faced brutal ethnic violence from communist Partisans under Josip Broz Tito and Serbian nationalist Chetniks, who often targeted their communities as part of ethnic cleansing. The Nazis exploited this trauma by promising protection, Bosnian autonomy, and religious rights, which proved to be opportunistic propaganda. Heinrich Himmler, who was ideologically inclined toward atheistic-paganism, tactically praised Islam: “Islam prepares soldiers who are obedient and unafraid of death. They are disciplined and respect their leaders.” This quote, from 1943 SS archives, shows that Nazi praise for Islam wasn’t genuine appreciation but a tool to boost troop loyalty and morale.
Analytically, the Handschar division proved ineffective due to internal indiscipline. In September 1943, a major mutiny occurred in Villefranche-de-Rouergue, France, where about 200 Muslim soldiers rebelled against their German officers, killing several before being suppressed. Mass desertions continued; by late 1944, thousands defected to the Partisans, and the division was disbanded in May 1945 with fewer than 10,000 troops remaining. Similar units like the 21st Waffen Mountain Division Skanderbeg (Albanian) and the 23rd Waffen Mountain Division Kama (second Bosnian) also failed, with Kama reaching only 3,000 troops before dissolution due to desertions. This illustrates the Nazi contradiction: while they recruited non-Aryans out of wartime necessity, their racial ideology bred internal distrust.
The moral lesson from this phenomenon is the danger of pragmatic alliances amid war, where minority groups are often exploited without long-term benefits. Historian David Motadel in Islam and Nazi Germany’s War (2014) emphasizes that this collaboration was more of a “tactical alliance” than ideological alignment, ultimately leaving victims on both sides.
Worship Facilities and Imam: Opportunistic Propaganda Strategies
The Nazis didn’t just recruit Muslim soldiers but also provided worship facilities to bolster their legitimacy, though this was purely instrumental. In the Handschar division, military imams (Imame der Waffen-SS) were officially appointed to lead the five daily prayers, Friday sermons, and ensure halal food availability and Ramadan fasting schedules. Soldiers were even allowed to leave training for Eid al-Fitr prayers, and makeshift mosques were built in camps. However, when vocal imams criticized war crimes like civilian massacres, they were often executed by the SS, showing that this “tolerance” was conditional and only to maintain troop morale.
This relationship grew more complex with the involvement of Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who became a symbol of Nazi-Arab collaboration. After fleeing Palestine for opposing British colonialism and Zionism, al-Husseini arrived in Berlin in November 1941 and met Hitler. In that meeting, al-Husseini stated: “The Arabs are natural friends of Germany because they have the same enemies—namely England, the Jews, and Communism.” Hitler responded: “Germany is resolved to urge one European nation after another to solve its Jewish problem, and at the proper time, direct a similar appeal to non-European nations as well.” Al-Husseini then promoted Arabic-language radio propaganda, calling for jihad against the Allies, and supported the recruitment of Muslim SS divisions.
Critically, al-Husseini’s motivations were anti-colonial nationalism, not full endorsement of the Holocaust. Research from Yad Vashem concludes that his influence on the “Final Solution” has been exaggerated; he focused more on Arab independence. Alliances with extremists often betray original values, and blind nationalism can lead to tragic collaborations, as experienced by al-Husseini, who was eventually tried as a war criminal.
Caucasian Muslims: Resisting Soviet Repression and Dashed Hopes for Independence
In the Caucasus and Central Asia, Muslim populations like the Chechens, Ingush, Azerbaijanis, and Tatars faced atheistic Soviet repression since the Bolshevik Revolution. When the Nazis invaded in 1941 via Operation Barbarossa, some saw it as a chance to break free from Stalin. Units like the Azerbaijani Legion and Turkestan Legion were formed from Soviet POWs, reaching tens of thousands in strength, with the Nazis promising autonomy and religious freedom.
However, these hopes were betrayed; the Nazis treated these regions as potential colonies after victory. The peak tragedy was the mass deportation of Chechens and Ingush on February 23, 1944 (Operation Lentil), where about 496,000 people were relocated to Kazakhstan and Siberia on accusations of Nazi collaboration. Estimated deaths reached 100,000 to 200,000 from starvation, disease, and violence during transit, with mortality rates around 23-30%. Stalin accused entire ethnic groups as “traitors,” though only a small fraction collaborated with the Nazis.
A rational analysis: these deportations were part of Stalin’s policy to cleanse ethnic minorities, reflecting totalitarian paranoia. Ethnic repression is often cloaked in security pretexts, leaving generational trauma that still influences Caucasian conflicts today.
Religious Repression in the Lenin and Stalin Eras: Atheism as a Tool of Power
The Bolshevik regime made atheism the state ideology, viewing religion as a “tool of bourgeois oppression.” Vladimir Lenin declared: “Religion is opium for the people... The more clergy we can shoot, the better.” In 1922, he ordered mass arrests of religious leaders, including through the Militant Godless League, which spread anti-religious propaganda. Read: Срочно ликвидировать Церковь! Власть и религия в 1937-38 гг..
Stalin worsened it during the Great Purge (1936–1938), where over 100,000 imams, clerics, and priests were killed or imprisoned. For Islam, massive repression occurred: from 26,000 mosques in Central Asia in 1917, fewer than 1,000 remained by 1941, with 10,000 mosques in Tatarstan alone closed in the 1930s. Stalin said: “We are atheists... We fight religion because it hinders progress.”
The execution of the Romanov family on July 17, 1918, symbolized the destruction of the old order. Tsar Nicholas II, his wife Alexandra, and their five children were killed without trial in Yekaterinburg by local Bolsheviks, with Lenin’s implicit approval. This murder was not just political but anti-religious, as the Romanovs represented the Orthodox Church, which was nationalized and looted. Overall data: about 20 million victims under Stalin’s regime, including ethnic Muslim deportations.
Forced atheism is as destructive as religious fanaticism, eroding inner freedom and human values.
Modern Moral Dilemma: Admiration for Stalin in Contemporary Russia
In Russia today, Stalin remains popular despite his atrocities. A 2019 Levada Center survey showed 70% of respondents viewing his role positively, with 51% respecting, liking, or admiring him—the highest since 2001. By 2021, 56% agreed he was a “great leader,” double from 2012. Reasons: state propaganda under Vladimir Putin emphasizing World War II victories and industrialization, plus nostalgia for Soviet stability amid economic uncertainty.
Critically, this creates “doublethink”: many acknowledge atrocities like the Gulag and deportations but prioritize “national glory.” Historian Anne Applebaum highlights how this glorification covers up suffering, similar to how modern “tankies” dismiss criticism as Western propaganda. National identity can distort history, and denying atrocities risks repeating authoritarian errors.
These paradoxes teach that religion is often manipulated by major powers like the Nazis and Soviets for political ends, leaving victims trapped between two evils. Data and quotes confirm Muslim collaboration was a survival response, while Soviet repression reflected atheistic totalitarianism that destroyed spirituality. The dilemma of Stalin admiration today shows how complex historical memory is, where great victories often redeem atrocities in nationalist narratives.
Historical honesty liberates, while denial endangers. We must learn from this to build societies that value religious freedom, minority rights, and power accountability, avoiding the pitfalls of political opportunism that sacrifices human values. As Lenin himself said, “Religion is poison that paralyzes human reason,” but ironically, his regime became the poison to freedom itself. With a moderate and critical approach, we can avoid extremism and understand history in its entirety.
Clarification
As a Muslim who actively defends Islamic values and the Palestinian struggle against genocide—as well as the selective bias often seen in religious criticism, which I have addressed in my previous writings about double standards toward Muslims titled “Accusing Islam While Excusing Themselves: The Double Standards No One Wants to Talk About”—I choose to publish this article with full awareness of its complexity. This is not an attempt to justify historical collaboration with the Nazi regime or to promote any anti-Islamic narrative. Rather, it is a rational, critical analysis intended to expose a historical paradox: how religion, including Islam, was frequently manipulated by totalitarian powers such as the Nazis and the Soviets as a geopolitical tool, not out of any intrinsic ideological loyalty.
To be precise, the collaboration of Balkan or Caucasian Muslims with the Nazis—such as the Handschar Division or the Azerbaijani Legion—does not represent Muslims as a whole. It was, instead, a survival response to existential threats such as ethnic cleansing by Partisan forces or the atheistic oppression of the Soviets. This is similar to how selective criticism often targets Islam while ignoring comparable contexts within other faiths, which in turn reinforces my argument for intellectual fairness. On the other hand, the religious persecution under Lenin and Stalin—with millions of victims, including the mass deportation of Chechens and the closure of mosques—stands as a sharp critique of atheistic totalitarianism, not an attack on modern communism itself. I do not support the repressive historical communism, yet I do not regard modern leftist ideology as inherently negative; I continue to respect some of my left-leaning friends, so long as discussions remain rational and do not turn a blind eye to past atrocities such as the Great Purge or the Gulag.
This publication is meant to encourage analytical reflection: the danger of political opportunism that betrays human values, the importance of avoiding historical denial to prevent repetition, and the ethical dilemma of glorifying figures like Stalin in contemporary Russia—where surveys show that nationalist pride often obscures deep trauma. If any misunderstanding arises, let it be clear: this is not propaganda, but a call for a moderate approach that values religious freedom, minority rights, and accountability in power—principles I firmly uphold as a critical defender of Islam. Further critique or discussion is sincerely welcomed to deepen our shared understanding.
- The 20th century history features paradoxes involving geopolitical conflicts, ethnic identities, and authoritarian manipulation of ideology and religion.
- Some Muslims joined Nazi Waffen-SS units, often seen morally wrong today, but contextually complex.
- Soviet regime under Lenin and Stalin systematically repressed religions like Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, destroying millions of lives and institutions.
- These events resulted from political pressures, existential threats, opportunistic propaganda, and betrayed hopes for independence.
- Article analyzes based on historical facts, statistics, primary quotes, and works by historians like David Motadel, Anne Applebaum, and Robert Conquest.
- Dangers of religious manipulation by totalitarians, need for historical honesty, and ethical dilemmas in judging historical figures.
- Paradoxical WWII chapter: Formation of SS divisions with Balkan Muslim soldiers, not representing all Muslims but specific groups in ethnic conflicts under German occupation.
- Main unit: 13th Waffen Mountain Division Handschar (1st Croatian), formed in 1943 with 20,000-25,000 mostly Bosnian and Croatian Muslims; modified uniforms included Islamic symbols like fez with SS emblem.
- Motivations: Not Nazi racial ideology, but protection from ethnic violence by Tito’s Partisans and Serbian Chetniks; Nazis promised autonomy and religious rights as propaganda.
- Himmler praised Islam tactically for obedience and discipline (1943 SS archives quote).
- Unit ineffective due to indiscipline: 1943 mutiny in France, mass desertions, disbanded in 1945 with ~10,000 troops.
- Similar failed units: Skanderbeg (Albanian) and Kama (Bosnian).
- Moral lesson: Dangers of pragmatic alliances exploiting minorities; Motadel (2014) calls it “tactical alliance” leaving victims on both sides.
- Nazis provided instrumental worship facilities in Handschar division: Appointed military imams for prayers, halal food, Ramadan schedules, Eid allowances, and makeshift mosques.
- Conditional “tolerance”: Critical imams executed for opposing war crimes.
- Complex ties with Grand Mufti al-Husseini: Fled Palestine opposing British colonialism and Zionism; met Hitler in 1941.
- Al-Husseini: “Arabs are natural friends of Germany” due to shared enemies (England, Jews, Communism); Hitler promised to address “Jewish problem” globally.
- Al-Husseini promoted Arabic radio propaganda, jihad calls, and Muslim SS recruitment; motivated by anti-colonial nationalism, not full Holocaust support (Yad Vashem research).
- Alliances with extremists betray values; blind nationalism leads to tragic collaborations; al-Husseini tried as war criminal.
- Muslim groups in Caucasus/Central Asia (Chechens, Ingush, Azerbaijanis, Tatars) faced Soviet atheistic repression since Bolshevik Revolution.
- Nazi 1941 invasion (Operation Barbarossa) seen as liberation opportunity; formed units like Azerbaijani and Turkestan Legions from POWs (tens of thousands), promising autonomy and religious freedom.
- Betrayed hopes: Nazis viewed regions as colonies.
- 1944 tragedy: Mass deportation of 496,000 Chechens and Ingush (Operation Lentil) to Kazakhstan and Siberia on collaboration accusations; 100,000-200,000 deaths (23-30% mortality) from starvation, disease, violence.
- Stalin labeled entire ethnic groups “traitors” despite minimal collaboration.
- Analysis: Part of ethnic cleansing policy reflecting totalitarian paranoia.
- Repression cloaked in security pretexts causes generational trauma affecting current Caucasian conflicts.
- Bolsheviks made atheism state ideology, viewing religion as bourgeois oppression tool.
- Lenin: “Religion is opium for the people... The more clergy we can shoot, the better” (1922 mass arrests via Militant Godless League).
- Stalin’s Great Purge (1936-1938): ~100,000 religious leaders killed and imprisoned.
- Islam repression: From 26,000 Central Asian mosques in 1917 to ~1,000 by 1941; 10,000 Tatarstan mosques closed in 1930s.
- Stalin: “We are atheists... We fight religion because it hinders progress.”
- Symbolic: 1918 Romanov family execution (Tsar Nicholas II, wife, five children) without trial; political and anti-religious, targeting Orthodox Church.
- Overall: ~20 million Stalin victims, including Muslim deportations.
- Forced atheism as destructive as religious fanaticism, eroding freedom and human values.
- Stalin popular despite atrocities: 2019 Levada survey - 70% positive view, 51% respect, like, admire (highest since 2001); 2021 - 56% “great leader” (double 2012).
- Reasons: Putin-era propaganda on WWII victories, industrialization; nostalgia for Soviet stability amid economic uncertainty.
- Creates “doublethink”: Acknowledge Gulag or deportations but prioritize national glory.
- Applebaum: Glorification covers suffering, like modern “tankies” dismissing criticism as Western propaganda.
- National identity distorts history; denying atrocities risks repeating authoritarianism.
- Paradoxes show religion manipulated by Nazis or Soviets for politics, trapping victims between evils.
- Muslim collaboration: Survival response; Soviet repression: Atheistic totalitarianism destroying spirituality.
- Stalin admiration highlights complex historical memory where victories redeem atrocities in nationalist narratives.
- Key lesson: Historical honesty liberates, denial endangers; build societies valuing religious freedom, minority rights, power accountability.
- Avoid political opportunism sacrificing human values; ironic Lenin quote on religion as poison, but regime poisoned freedom.
- Moderate, critical approach avoids extremism and fully understands history.
Historical Paradox: Muslim Collaboration with the Nazis and Religious Repression in the Soviet Union
Balkan Muslims in SS Divisions: Not Ideological Support, but a Response to Local Threats
Worship Facilities and Collaboration with Haj Amin al-Husseini: Opportunistic Propaganda Strategies
Caucasian Muslims: Resisting Soviet Repression and Dashed Hopes for Independence
Religious Repression in the Lenin and Stalin Eras: Atheism as a Tool of Power
Modern Moral Dilemma: Admiration for Stalin in Contemporary Russia
Reflections and Lessons for the Future
