One of the worst chapters in recent Dutch history came to a close on Tuesday as a judge in Amsterdam sentenced 27-year-old Mohammed Bouyeri to life in prison. The court convicted the Moroccan-born Islamic extremist in the ritual slaughter of filmmaker Theo van Gogh, who had made a film critical of the abusive treatment of women in Islam. Bouyeri shot and stabbed van Gogh, slashed his throat and then stabbed a note to his chest vowing to kill the woman who wrote the film's script, Somali-born Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali , who fled an arranged marriage in the Muslim world for a freer life in the West.

The slaying came as a sharp jolt to the Dutch, whose society has long been viewed internationally as a multicultural success story, a modern melting pot. It also spurred debates across Europe about the integration of Muslim immigrants and sparked warnings that the "jihad behind the dikes" could spread across the continent. But in its ruling, the court smartly eschewed any mention of cultural differences, which would merely have provided added fodder to foreigner-phobic populists and instead concentrated on the crimes: murder and terrorism. Most German editorials on Wednesday write that the whole Bouyeri episode has unleashed a debate on immigrants and cultural values that will continue to simmer in Holland and Europe for years to come.

In its take on the trial, the leftist daily Die Tageszeitung basically says: The multicultural society is dead, long live the multicultural society! The fact that Theo van Gogh's film offended Muslims played no role whatsoever in the verdict against his killer. "That's how it should be and anything else would not only be wrong, but also catastrophic," the paper's editorialist writes. "Law must remain law in a country that observes rule of law, without regard for cultural differences or cultural taboos." That's the message of enlightened societies. A Muslim patriarch with four wives is breaking the law just as the Italian mafia is. "Laws defend and strengthen cultural standards," the paper continues, "These standards are achievements of western societies against which crimes perpetrated by immigrants must be measured. The law books set out binding guidelines for coexistence. And any treatment that contradicts these principals would be unacceptable." The paper says it hopes the case will take the wind out of the sails of critics who are propagandizing the "failure of multicultural society." This society is a reality, as are its contradictions, which need to be legally addressed. "New draft laws against forced marriages or preachers of hate," the paper concludes, "would be a lot more constructive than diffuse resentment."

The Berliner Zeitung has an altogether different take. Bouyeri may have lost the trial, but he has won the hearts and minds of Islamic extremists in the Netherlands. "Bouyeri was refused a martyr's death," the paper writes, "but his crime has made him a hero amongst a few Muslim youths in Holland." Police are already asking themselves how they can prevent Bouyeri from smuggling radical writings out of prison and thereby styling himself as the hero of an Islamic extremist movement. The paper also points out one aspect of the verdict that has angered many in Holland: the court's refusal to revoke Bouyeri's citizenship, which means he is still allowed to vote and could theoretically run for office. But the paper says these critics have misread what is actually a canny decision. "Bouyeri likes to see himself as being separated from Dutch society and he even refused to recognize its legal system," it argues. "But the court has refused to cut him off from that society." The paper says there are two ways to fight terror in Europe: Through strict justice and through better integration of Muslim young people. "The ideological debate with Islam has only just begun. The canny verdict of the Van Gogh trial is just the start."

There is hardly a state in Europe which has operated so complacent an immigration policy as the Netherlands, which the perpetrator, Mohammed Bouyeri, also profited from, writes the Süddeutsche Zeitung. Passports were handed out generously, mosques were built, and Islamic schools were financed. Proudly, the country established socalled pillars of the community, which could stand under their own strength: Muslim, Catholic, Protestant and Calvinist. "But these pillars didn't construct a magnificent building," the editorial from the center-left paper continues, "rather they established the basis for a society in which such groups could, at best, live next to one another, even as cultural differences could become intensified." For too long, politics closed its eyes to this constructional defect -- and its impact is being felt now. The government of Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, which took office just after the murder of populist Pim Fortuyn, actually wanted to bring calm to the country. But they're still having trouble finding the right solution. "To be sure, integration laws have been strengthened, Muslim hate-preachers have been forced to leave the country, and controls on mosques have been increased." However, it points out, politicians of all parties have stoked fears. "But in doing so, they only convince the Dutch of their reservations that immigrants misuse their rights for their own purposes. This won't paper over the cracks, it will deepen them."

The financial daily Handelsblatt says calls from Muslim mosque leaders to take a stronger position against Islamist extremists don't go far enough. We need to demand that the global Muslim community do a lot more. At the same time the verdict was handed down in the Netherlands, the Central Council of Muslims in Germany called on its followers in Germany to cooperate with security authorities and report mosques with radical tendencies to the police. "Of course, that's something one should expect of the Central Council," the editorial states. "Anyone who lives in this country and hears about a planned crime or hears information about it is bound to report it to the authorities." The fact that that's even up for discussion casts an unintentional spotlight on the poor state of integration in Germany. And the bomb attack in Sharm el-Sheik in Egypt makes clear yet again that anyone can become the victim of a suicide bomber, regardless whether they are Christian or Muslim. We're seeing this day in and day out in Baghdad. "Oddly enough, there is no storm of outrage in the global Islamic community," the editorial concludes, "But it's time for the West to begin demanding clearer statements."

The only surprise in the verdict, writes the conservative paper Die Welt, is that the judges bought almost every argument delivered by the prosecutors. It was a cold-blooded, planned and especially brutal murder. It was also, even if this wasn't definitively proven, an act of a terrorist organization. The perpetrator was certifiably sane. This line of argumentation will do more than just put Mohammed Bouyeri behind bars for the rest of his life. "It is also forcing the entire country to reflect on the fact that the Dutch can no longer ignore the fact that terror has arrived," the paper opines. They now have to deal with the reality that their "liberal and tolerant society has often been too passive in defending its own values -- so much so, in fact, that it has allowed a parallel society to be built." In this world, the paper argues, the value of freedom we take for granted means very little.