Perhaps i'm missing something very pertinent and profound in this? If so, i'd be grateful if someone could kindly point out either the moral or intellectual lacuna in my argument.

If society X has a genuine and deep attachment to certain values (e.g. secularism, freedom of speech and conscience, legal equality, one law for all) it must of necessity follow that it will combat any ideology, religion, metaphysic, which rejects these professed axioms. It would do this in a spirit of affirmation and not negation, and would do so without the slightest apology.

The "west" is therefore only anxious, confused and hesitant about Islam because it no longer actually genuinely believes in itself. This I take to be self-evident. This reads to me like a textbook case of decadence. None of our supposed values are widely considered non-negotiable, everything, in principle, is up for grabs. We bend to every strong (and not so strong) wind, and only our relative economic success hides our vacuum in the realm of values.