The successive DAESH attacks in Istanbul and Brussels have been discussed in various aspects. How could the terrorist group hit such strategic spots? Can we mention an overall intelligence weakness? Or are the risks already high in such suicide bomb attacks even if intelligence networks operate efficiently? Would the 31 victims still be alive today had the terrorist affiliated with DAESH who was deported by Turkey beforehand not been set free? Were the Israeli tourists intentionally targeted in the latest Istanbul attack?There are many other similar questions confusing minds that have speculative answers. However, it is a tangible fact that while DAESH is trying to represent Turkey as a dangerous place the West should stay away from in order to put the country in a tight spot and undermine its tourism income, it is also threatening and reducing the living spaces of Muslims in the West every day. The West contributed to the emergence of the monstrous DAESH due to its double standards, Western culture-centric approaches and assimilative policies that do not integrate Muslim immigrants. Nevertheless, DAESH, which seems to resort to violence on behalf of rebellion, is as a matter of fact working in favor of its enemy, namely the one-type West. As DAESH resorts to violence, radical right movements in the West have come to prominence.According to the latest public surveys conducted in the Netherlands, if an election were to be held today following the Brussels attack, the Party for Freedom, a radical right party chaired by Geert Wilders, who employs a discourse strictly against migration and Islam, would be the party on top. Wilders is a fascist who defends closing down mosques and borders and segregating Muslims. DAESH, which claims to commit murders for Islam, is in fact aiding this mindset. A similar trend also arose following the Paris attacks. Far-right Marine Le Pen, the president of the National Front (FN) party, came into prominence but was held back with the mutual acts of other parties. The general atmosphere prevailing in the West in the face of the DAESH threat favors the far right. For instance in the U.S., Donald Trump is running a highly influential presidential campaign as a candidate for the Republican nomination. Trump attracts voters with a discourse of hate by completely disregarding the values on which the U.S. is built.Unfortunately, the extreme ends always support each other, just as Stalin's form of communism was once seen as an antidote to Hitler's fascism. However, both were barbaric and totalitarian. The same vicious circle continues today. Radical discourses have gained power because of DAESH. This circle can also be seen in other dimensions. The wrong policies implemented in the Middle East constitute one of the causes of the emergence of DAESH.Ever since the U.S.'s invasion of Iraq, policies that are completely against Sunnis have been followed in an unrighteous manner. U.S. President Barack Obama has deepened the mistakes made by his predecessor, George W. Bush. Iraq started to be controlled by Iran and a prominent Shiite bloc was formed. And now this bloc is being reinforced with the efforts to recover Bashar Assad's power in Syria. Ironically, it is thought that maintaining this picture will contribute to the fight against DAESH. And the vicious circle goes on and on due to this mindset. Unfortunately, DAESH is the most significant reality of terrorism of this century so far. The problem cannot be resolved through protecting Assad or improving intelligence against terror. It is possible to overcome this bitter reality by supporting democratic Islamist movements like the Justice and Development Party (AK Party).