How the Crusades Continue to Influence Modern Politics

Nearly 1,000 years after Pope Urban II’s sermon ignited a series of religious wars, the Crusades remain a powerful rhetorical device in contemporary politics. United States Secretary of War Pete Hegseth recently drew attention for his frequent use of Crusader imagery and language. In his 2020 book, “American Crusade: Our Fight to Stay Free,” Hegseth wrote, “The present moment is much like the 11th century … We don’t want to fight, but, like our fellow Christians a thousand years ago, we must.”

Hegseth has utilized this biblical framework to articulate both domestic and foreign policy positions, ranging from the ongoing conflict with Iran to what he describes as a battle against leftism. He is not alone; politicians and extremists across the spectrum, from former President George W. Bush to late al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, have invoked the Crusades to justify their agendas.

Historians note that the original Crusades serve as a prime example of how religion can be leveraged as a tool for political mobilization. In the mid-11th century, Muslim Seljuk Turks seized control of Jerusalem and vast territories in the Middle East. By 1095, rumors of persecution against Christian pilgrims had spread through Europe.

At the Council of Clermont that year, Pope Urban II called for a Holy War, declaring “Deus vult!” or “God wills it!” The papacy was engaged in a fierce power struggle with Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV at the time. When Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos requested military aid against the Seljuks, Urban saw an opportunity to consolidate papal authority by rallying European nobility independently of the emperor.

Jonathan Phillips, a crusading history expert at Royal Holloway University in London, explains that the call was persuasive in an era marked by droughts, famines, plagues, and widespread beliefs about the end times. Urban promised Crusaders the forgiveness of all sins and eternal salvation, despite the lethal risks. “Their chances of dying were about 35 to 40%,” Phillips noted, emphasizing that only strong religious motivation could drive such an undertaking.

The initial response included the “People’s Crusade” of 1096, a disorganized force of peasants and low-ranking knights that perpetrated massacres of Jewish communities in the Rhineland, marking some of medieval Europe’s earliest large-scale antisemitic violence. A more structured army of nobility followed, eventually capturing Jerusalem in 1099, where they killed thousands of Muslims and Jews.

While the fall of Acre in 1291 is often cited as the end of the Crusades in the Holy Land, subsequent campaigns continued for centuries, including efforts against the Ottoman Turks and the Reconquista in Iberia.

Today, the legacy of these conflicts is frequently repurposed to frame modern cultural and political struggles. In 2001, President George W. Bush’s description of the “War on Terror” as a “crusade” sparked controversy, mirroring how bin Laden had previously framed US military actions as a religious war against Islam.

Bin Laden also invoked the figure of Saladin, the Kurdish commander who recaptured Jerusalem in 1187, to legitimize his jihad. According to Mohamad El-Merheb, a historian at SOAS University of London, Saladin became a symbol of resistance against Western colonialism throughout the 20th century, particularly in Islamist and nationalist movements.

In the West, far-right movements have similarly adopted Crusader symbolism. The phrase “Deus vult” has been used by extremists such as Anders Breivik and political groups like Germany’s Alternative for Germany (AfD) and France’s Reconquête party. Hegseth has reportedly tattooed “Deus vult” on his arm and worn a Crusader cross.

Experts warn that such references often oversimplify history by framing it as a binary clash between Christianity and Islam. El-Merheb pointed out that this narrative ignores the Crusades’ inherent antisemitism, their violence against other Christian groups like the Cathars, and the numerous cross-religious alliances that existed between Muslims and Crusaders. Furthermore, these modern appropriations tend to gloss over the extreme brutality and destruction characteristic of the medieval campaigns.