Asif Saleh, director of a Bangladeshi human rights group Drishtipat, has a Bangla restaurant fixation. Whenever the group has a meeting, it ends up in a Bangladeshi restaurant. Last Sunday's meeting in London was, naturally, in Brick Lane. Surrounded by hordes of Bangladeshi restaurants, sari shops and music stores, we were at home and ready to talk about our group's work.

After lunch we strolled down to an outdoor cafe and sat and watched the crowds. Brick Lane is now a tremendously hip area and we watched the throngs of trendy Londoners do the rounds of expensive new fashion labels that were springing up right next to the Karai Houses. Although bearing the trajectory of gentrification, Brick Lane will always stay Bangla Town. Apparently some of the landlords in the area are Bangladeshis, and they are determined to keep the area Bengali. As I looked at the crowds, I mused how much London had changed in four decades. Brick Lane is one of many manifestations of London's vibrant and visible Bengali community. Although New York has a strong Bangladeshi population as well (the group that had the fastest growth between 1990-2000), it's a relatively young migrant population. By contrast Britain's Bengali population date back to the time of the colonial encounter. With roots in Britain that go back decades, they are part of a newly confident British Asian mosaic

When my father came to England in the 1960s, London was a nasty, brutish place for Asians. Bengalis waiting at bus stations would get attacked with broken bottles, and "Paki" became a familiar taunt. My friend Udayan's father recalls looking at newspaper ads for lodging that simply said, "No Smokers, No Dogs, No Indians." Politicians mirrored and magnified the rage on the streets. Enoch Powell's "rivers of blood" and racist election campaigns by the Tories paved the way for the 1970s, which was the decade of the ultra-right wing National Front (formed from an amalgam of League of Empire Loyalists, Racial Preservation Society, and Greater Britain Movement). By 1973, anti-Asian sentiments were at fever-pitch, buoyed by the masses of expelled Asians arriving from Uganda, and the National Front scored upwards of 16% votes in some local elections. The murder of Bengali tailor Altab Ahmed was a turning point, mobilizing the first ever "Rock Against Racism" concert, and galvanizing the left to form anti-Nazi coalitions to fight back against the xenophobic tide.

Although the NF was dogged by internecine conflict and accusations about a Nazi past, its poisonous ideology slowly seeped into the mainstream. The most famous convert was Thatcher, with her 1978 statement that white people were frightened of being "rather swamped" by people of "an alien culture." It was under Thatcherite England that draconian immigration laws were passed, including the elimination of citizenship through birth. But although the laws were moving towards less immigration, popular perceptions were shifting. The 1980s saw a surge of race riots, but Blacks and Asians also made headway in visible public arena, helping to soften public attitudes towards migrants. Hanif Kureishi, Goodness Gracious Me, Monica Ali, Nasser Hussain, Lord Ali, Prince Nasim, Meera Syal, Lord Dholakia, these were just some of the very public faces of the "new Britain". England's most popular dish is now chicken tikka, and Indian food (mostly served by Bangladeshis) is a multi-billion pound industry with the average Briton going for Indian food once a week. Although still a drop in the bucket, events like "Africa '05" (a year-long celebration of Black and Black British art) and the massive visibility of Asians in popular culture and public jobs, would have been unthinkable ten years back. The last general election saw the active courting of the "Muslim vote", and Fifteen non-white MPs are now in Parliament.

But things can always change very quickly. Two days after my cheerful walk in Brick Lane, the London bombings shattered the bright mood of Britain 2005. Although much has been made about the fact that the bombers even targeted Liverpool Street (very near Brick Lane) and the heavily Arab Edgware Road, and that one of the first victims was Shahara Islam, the bombings may indeed succeed in driving a wedge between British Muslims and the rest of the country. Politicians have repeatedly called for respecting diversity, Muslim clerics have condemned the bombings, and the general public has not shown a xenophobic hysteria. But it only takes a small, determined gang of racists to start race riots. We saw it before in Brixton and Bradford, and now we may see it again. With the revelation that the prime suspects are British Asians from Leeds, the attacks on mosques are sure to grow. Most worrying is the spectre of parties like the BNP which are already using anti-Muslim hatred as a key platform after 9/11-- their divisive campaigns are likely to get sharper and more effective. Less than a week after the attacks, the BNP has already used photos of the bombed London bus in an election leaflet for the Barking by-elections. The slogan next to the photo simply says, "Maybe now it's time to start listening to the BNP."

If groups like the Minutemen can change America's image from "immigration nation" to nation of vigilantes patrolling the US-Mexico border, why shouldn't it happen in England as well? The US at least started from a stance of welcoming immigration, from which it is now retreating. By contrast, England has never welcomed immigrants, and has only let them in grudgingly. An apocryphal story talks about a British Asian man who was confronted and asked who he was. "I'm the creditor" he said, referring to the centuries of exploitation of India that built the British empire. "We are here, because you were there" is a common cry in England and France, arguing that immigration is a minimum right in exchange for an exploitative colonial past. But that argument has never taken hold in the popular imagination. Anti-immigrant and Islamophobic sentiments remain a powerful tool for a resurgent right, already galvanized by Turkey's possible entry into the EU. The London bombers have handed them the ultimate propaganda weapon, and the fallout is just beginning.

All this makes me think of the bombers themselves. From Al Qaeda to Madrid to Leeds, the background and motivations of the bombers are varied, as is their educational and class background. But what do they hope to accomplish? Perhaps it all springs from the Lebanon theory-- make it too expensive for the "occupation" (wherever it may be) to continue. At another level, it is the "bring the war home" theory of Baader Meinhof and Brigasti Rossi. Whatever the (most likely mixed) theoretical inspiration, the resulting damage is highest on Muslims themselves. On a conventional level, you can argue that Afghan and Iraqi civilians who are dying are the victims of the 9/11 repercussions. But the single largest victims -- the "collateral damage" -- are the Muslim migrants in the diaspora, particularly in Europe and North America.

The ongoing civil rights violations of Western Muslims are well-documented. What is less well understood is the accompanying sea-change in attitudes towards immigration. Even before the London bombings, Europe had passed draconian and far-reaching immigration controls. The barriers to migration will only keep getting higher. In a globalized world, everything moves across borders, including people. Immigration is a basic fact of this century - and it is always a positive force, for the migrants, for their new adopted homes, and for their country of origin. So migration will continue, but will be dramatically reduced by new security fears. Anti-immigrant groups have also found the perfect weapon -- instead of bullying racists, they can now repaint themselves as super-patriots, only caring about the safety of the nation.

In any migration crackdown, all are affected, but the hardest hit will be Muslim migrants. Thus Al Qaeda and its children have single-handedly brought about the largest reversal of fortune in the lives of millions of Muslim immigrants in the West. Their attacks have created an environment where racial profiling, random detention and deportation are increasingly the norm. Reza Aslan has described the current conflagration as a civil war within Islam, where the West is only a bystander. It is certainly true that the greatest threat to radical Islamists come from progressive and modernizing Muslims. At the same time, the progressive Muslim agenda is the biggest victim of these attacks.

The extremist groups, though small in number, have launched flamboyant and public spectacles using modern tools of war. The response from the progressive majority in Islam is a muted mixture of condemnation and hand-wringing. More drastic measures are now necessary. I am reminded of London's Finsbury Park Mosque, once a haven for radical Islamists. A group of moderates staged a counter-coup, seizing the board of the mosque and ousting the old guard. Direct confrontations like this, and even stronger ones, need to be our new method. Islam is in the midst of a civil war, and one side is fighting with genteel and ineffective weapons.