|
Political Islam and The Future of Democracy in the Middle East
By Radwan A. Masmoudi
Since 2003, the Bush
administration, and President
Bush in particular, has talked
constantly about promoting
democracy in the Middle East but
has actually done very little to
achieve this objective. The
Iraq
war notwithstanding – democracy
promotion was actually an
afterthought
in Iraq – U.S. foreign policies
continue to support oppressive
regimes
in the region and reward
authoritarian rulers who falsify
elections
and oppress their people, with
more economic and security
assistance.
While the ‘hyper-talk’ about
democracy promotion initially
raised the
hopes and expectations of many
in the region, it later only
served to
discredit the intellectuals,
leaders, and activists who have
been
struggling for freedom and
democracy for decades. If we
hope to
achieve long-term peace,
stability, and development in
the Middle
East, and in the world, we must
end our double standards and
stop
supporting oppressive and
illegitimate governments in the
Middle East.
Deep Crisis in the Muslim World
There is a serious crisis in the
Muslim world, one that has
manifested
itself in many ways: from
rising levels of poverty and
unemployment,
to lack of education, to growing
corruption, violence, and
wars.
Terrorism is, of course, the
most violent form of this rage
and anger,
which finds its roots in the
terrible conditions that
millions of
people, especially young people,
find themselves in today.
Western
and American media pundits
increasingly blame Islam for the
rising
violence in the Middle East, but
the reality is that the roots
of
violence and extremism lie in
the despair, anger,
frustrations, and
humiliation that most Arabs and
Muslims feel and which they
believe is
caused by their corrupt and
inefficient governments, and the
West
which continues to support
them. Yes, some extremists use
Islam to
justify their crimes against
humanity, but the governments
also “use”
this violence to suffocate any
genuine efforts or calls for
reforms
and accountability. Most of
all, this crisis in the Muslim
world is
the result of bad governance,
poor strategic thinking and
planning,
and lack of freedoms, dignity,
and respect for inalienable
human
rights. First and foremost, it
is the twin curse of corruption
and
oppression that is at the core
of all these problems. As
global
citizens, Muslims and
non-Muslims who are concerned
about the future
of the Muslim world in this
increasingly interconnected
“global
village,” it is imperative that
we develop and implement a
strategy
for resolving this crisis. Of
course, there is no short-term
magical
fix to all these problems, but
the most important and urgent
component
of this strategy must be good
and participatory governance.
Why Democracy, and Why Now?
Change in the Middle East is
inevitable, and the only
question is what
kind of change: will it be
slow, peaceful, and
progressively move us
toward real democracy, or will
it be violent and revolutionary,
and
lead us toward another form of
dictatorship. To guard against
anarchy
and the possibility of a
theocratic state, we need a
strong coalition
of moderate reformers and
democrats (both moderate
Islamists and
secularists) who trust one
another and work together for
the public
interest. Arab democrats need
to develop a consensus on what
democracy means, how it can work
in their societies, and how to
encourage progressive, modern,
and moderate interpretations of
Islam.
Real democratization requires
pressure from inside and out.
Pressure
from within at this time is
coming mostly from Islamic
movements that
have the popular support needed
to push for reforms in their
respective countries, but
pressure from the outside is
also important
to prevent violence and
radicalization, and to give hope
to millions
of people who want an elected,
representative and accountable
government. This means that the
US must accept and support
democracy
even if moderate Islamic
movements, and not secularists,
receive the
majority of votes. Supporting
dictators is not only morally
wrong, it
also undermines peace and
stability, and promotes violence
and
extremism in the region for
decades to come.
Secularity or Secularism?
With few exceptions, most Arab
countries are ruled by a corrupt
and
secular elite that is benefiting
from the status quo. This elite
is
afraid of what democracy might
bring, so they do everything
they can
to scare the US and the West of
what democracy may bring. The
secular
elite is increasingly
marginalized, isolated,
authoritarian, and
corrupt. They are neither
genuine secularists nor
democrats, but they
raise these flags to seek
support from the West. Being
elitist, they
have no grassroots or popular
support, and they discourage
popular
participation in the political
system because they do not trust
the
people to keep them in power.
External pressure is absolutely
necessary to convince them that
democracy is the only way to
bring
about economic development,
stability, and rule of law.
Secularity was developed in
Europe as a reaction to the
Church’s
control of governments during
the Middle Ages. The Muslim
world was
never ruled by a religious
clergy, with the exception of
modern-day
Iran where the clerics took
control after the Iranian people
overthrew
the Shah’s oppressive
government. Complete separation
between
religious values and politics is
impossible in the Muslim world,
while
separation between religious and
political institutions is
necessary.
In the nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries, when
democracy was
being developed and implemented
in Europe, there was fear that
the
Catholic Church would be an
obstacle to democracy, but the
“Christian
Democratic” movement grew and
defended the idea that democracy
was
compatible with Christianity.
In the Muslim world, we are
seeing the
birth of “Muslim democrats” who
are advancing and advocating
similar
ideas.
We must come to accept and
understand that it will indeed
take time
for people to discern the proper
relationship between religion
and
politics, and between religious
scholars and elected political
leaders. Ultimately, people are
smart and do not want to live
under
any form of tyranny, whether
secular or religious.
How to engage and support
Moderate Islamists:
What does “Islamist” mean and
what do Islamic movements stand
for?
While extremist and radical
fringe groups exist, the
overwhelming
majority of those who call
themselves “Islamists” reject
violence and
theocracy, and simply want to
reform their societies based on
Islamic
values of justice, equality, and
accountability. In short, they
want a
democratic form of government
that respects Islamic values
without
imposing them on citizens or on
society. Moderate Islamic
movements
today range from the Justice and
Development Parties in Turkey
and
Morocco, to the reform Islah or
Wasat parties in Kuwait, Yemen,
and
Jordan. Prominent moderate
Islamist leaders include Anwar
Ibrahim in
Malaysia, Saadeddine al-Othmani
in Morocco, and Abdulwaheed in
Indonesia. A Gallup Poll
conducted in 2006 in ten
Muslim-majority
countries showed that the
overwhelming majority (between
than 70-90%
in Egypt and Pakistan) want a
democratic government, but also
want
Shari’ah (Islamic law) to be
either the main or the only
source of
legislation in their countries.
This means that they want a
democracy
governed by Islamic principles,
and they reject both theocracy
and secular democracy. The
majority wants “religious
leaders” to be
advisors to the lawmakers, and
not become lawmakers or
politicians
themselves.
One of the main challenges for
democracy in the Arab and Muslim
world
is the growing popularity of
Islamic movements and/or
political Islam,
and the relative weakness of
secular groups and movements.
The
concern that many people have is
that Islamist movements will
not
respect democracy and abide by
its rules, if and when they come
to
power. It is important to
remember that the support
Islamist parties
enjoy today did not exist 20 or
30 years ago and is clearly the
result
of the despair and hopelessness
to which these failed states
have led their populations.
Out of despair, people, and
especially young
people, are turning to Islam,
and sometimes to a distorted
and
extremist interpretation of
Islam, as their last hope to
unite,
mobilize, and cure the ills of
their societies.
There are many positive and
encouraging signs that Islamic
parties and
movements are now convinced of
the necessity of political
participation, democratization,
and reforms as the only way to
resolve
the myriad of problems and
challenges that their societies
face (such
as 30% unemployment rate, 50-60%
illiteracy rate, while more than
50%
of the population is under the
age of 20). There are also
indications
that when Islamic parties come
to power or parliament through
the
ballot box, they become more
pragmatic, and much less
ideological or
intransigent. Politics, after
all, is the art of compromise,
and
Islamists learn this art when
they get involved in politics.
Certainly the experience of the
Justice and Development party
in
Turkey is a good model for other
Islamist parties to follow.
This is
why what Daniel Pipes, and
others like him, recommend (to
consider all
Islamists as enemies) is not
only wrong but will lead to
disastrous
results. It will swell the ranks
of the Islamists and even of
the
extremists, and it will turn the
entire Muslim world against us.
Talk
about “self-fulfilling
prophecies!”
Three facts can prevent and
guard against the danger of
monopolization
of Islam by Islamic movements.
First, since there is no
organized
clergy (at least in Sunni
Islam), no one individual or
group can claim
to represent God on Earth.
Second, we actually need
multiple Islamic
parties in each country so that
none of them can claim to speak
on
behalf of Islam. Islamic
movements represent various
interpretations
(conservative or otherwise) of
Islam and competition among them
would
provide for healthy debate and
interaction. Finally, secular
forces and groups need to
develop a better understanding
for the importance
of religion in their countries,
and must understand that being
portrayed as anti-Islamic or
anti-religious will severely
hurt their
prospects of gaining sufficient
political representation. They
must
develop a new paradigm that
makes it clear that it is
possible to be
secular and religious at the
same time.
Islamist parties have evolved
tremendously within the past 10
to 15 years and we can no longer
continue to judge their
intentions. There
are ambiguities in the platform
of every group, Islamist or
otherwise,
and there is no guarantee that
secular parties will be
democratic
either. In fact, some of the
worst oppressors in history and
in the
Arab world were secular. In
democracy, the only safeguard is
to build
strong institutions and educate
the public about their rights
and
duties as active citizens;
constitutional guarantees are
worthless
without an educated and
mobilized citizenry. We need to
establish
clear mechanisms to guard
against abuses. Normative
consensus on
issues such as definitions of
democracy, rules of the game,
and the
idea of pacts also need to be
articulated.
The participation of Islamist
parties in the political process
is
essential for strengthening
political reforms and
democratization — it
is impossible for democracy to
prosper while 30 to 40 percent
of the
population is excluded from the
political process. The agendas
of
Islamic parties now focus on
economic development, fighting
corruption, reducing illiteracy,
building an independent
judiciary,
and not the implementation of
Shari’ah punishments (hudud).
Most
Islamist parties no longer call
for the implementation of
Shari’ah
punishments as they did 15 or 20
years ago. Their main priority
is good governance, transparency,
and fighting corruption,
poverty, and illiteracy.
Recent experiences in Iran,
Sudan, and Afghanistan have
been disappointing, and
Muslims find themselves
searching for different and
more positive democratic models
in the Arab and Muslim world.
Turkey,
Indonesia, and Malaysia are now
becoming the models for both
Islamists
and secularists. Modern
Islamists today look at Turkey
as a model,
much more than they look at
Iran, which has unfortunately
become a theocracy and
restricted the freedoms and
choices of its citizens.
Turkey, on the other hand, is a
model of a very progressive and
democratic Muslim state, where
the state itself is secular but
the
society is deeply religious.
The state is not and should not
be in
the business of imposing
religion or forcing people to
practice any
particular religion; imposing
religion is, in Islam, strongly
discouraged as it generally
turns people away from religion
instead of
bringing them closer.
Political parties become popular
when they reflect the values
and
principles of the people — and
religion is a big part of those
values. Islamic parties
should not be excluded from the
political
system, but should be allowed to
participate actively and
peacefully
in the democratization process
of their societies and
countries. This
process will take time — years
and perhaps decades — but it is
the
only way to bring real tangible
peace, stability, and
development to
the Muslim world.
What can the US do?
For the past 40 to 50 years,
different US administrations
have
supported secular dictators in
the Arab and Muslim world, and
this has
produced dysfunctional political
systems, in which both
corruption and
oppression are prevalent. As a
result, the idea of secularism
has been
discredited in popular eyes as
it is now associated with
corruption
and tyranny. Hence the current
choice is almost between a
“secular
tyranny” (i.e., the status quo
in the Arab world) or an
“Islamic
democracy.”
One of the most disappointing
developments occurred after the
2005
elections in Egypt and the 2006
elections in Palestine when the
US
seems to have suddenly lost its
appetite for democracy in the
Middle
East for fear that the Islamists
were going to win. For more
than 20
years, Arab governments have
been using the “Islamist threat”
as
justification for the lack of
accountability, freedoms, and
democracy. It is shameful for
the West, and truly catastrophic
for
the region, to continue to
support discredited regimes
under the
belief that they provide
stability or the promise of
reforms and
development. The real lesson of
the last 40 to 50 years in the
Arab
world — and much of the Islamic
world — is that neither
long-term
development nor stability is
possible without real
democracy,
transparency, and
accountability. It is time for
the US and Europe to
support voices for genuine
reforms, freedoms, and democracy
in the
region. Democracy in the Arab
world and in the foreseeable
future
will have a more or less
“Islamic flavor”. This is
normal, natural,
and in the long run, a healthy
development which will
ultimately lead
to the modernization and
reinterpretation of Islamic
principles for
the twenty-first century.
Ijithad and the Reinterpretation
of Islamic Texts:
The effort to re-open the door
of Ijtihad (rational thinking),
to
reinterpret Islamic texts and
modernize Islamic thought is not
new.
It started at the end of the
nineteenth century with famous
reformers,
such as Al-Afghani, Abduh,
al-Kawakibi, and many other
prominent
scholars. It was delayed or
slowed down by the struggle for
independence for about 50 years,
and then by oppressive and
corrupt
regimes for another 50 years.
However, it is now back on track
and is
moving at a much quicker pace,
and it is on the agenda
everywhere — in
the United States, in Europe,
and in every Muslim country. I
believe
that American and European
Muslims are called upon to lead
in this
effort as we enjoy the freedom,
the means, and the opportunity
to
create the atmosphere necessary
to foster democratization.
The relationship between
religion and the state needs
further investigation and
clarification. Religious beliefs
and practices
should not be controlled by the
state as this damages both the
state
and religion. In CSID
conferences, we make it a point
always to bring
both secularists and Islamists
together and encourage them to
develop
joint objectives and
strategies. They all agree, for
example, that
they want a democracy governed
by Islamic values, but one in
which
individual rights are protected
and equal rights and duties are
accorded to all citizens,
irrespective of their ethnic,
religious background, or gender.
“Equal rights for all citizens”
is an
essential component of real
democracy, and of justice, which
is a
basic tenet in Islam. The
Qur’an clearly states: “ And
say: "The
truth is from your Lord." Then
whosoever wills, let him
believe, and
whosoever wills, let him
disbelieve.” And Prophet
Muhammad told his
governor/emissaries: “Don’t
speak by the name of God. Don’t
speak as
a representative of God. Speak
as a human not as a God. You
don’t
know exactly what the will of
God is”
There are many political and
religious questions that need to
be
studied and clarified today, and
they require Muslim leaders and
scholars to come up with new
answers and interpretations of
Islamic
texts. However, Ijtihad cannot
happen under dictatorships that
stifle
dissent and forbid free debates
and discussions. This is
another
reason democracy is and should
be a priority for the Muslim
world
because without it, there can be
no real or meaningful Ijtihad,
and
consequently Muslims will
continue to live in ignorant and
backward
socities.
What can all we do?
It goes without saying that
democracy and good governance
cannot and
should not be imposed or
imported, but they certainly can
and must be
supported. Reformers in the
Arab and Muslim world have been
working
and pushing for democracy and
good governance for decades, but
they
have received little support or
encouragement from the outside
world.
It is time for this to change,
and it is our duty and
obligation to
provide Arab and Muslim
democrats with as much support
and
encouragement as needed. Our
support begins by providing the
intellectual and philosophical
support for the simple and basic
truth
that Islam and democracy are
indeed compatible. Without
doing so,
democracy will not become
accepted by the masses and
democratic
cultures and ideals will not
become imbedded in local
cultures and
traditions. The Center for the
Study of Islam and Democracy
(CSID) is
in the best position to
demonstrate this.
Second, we need to convince the
US and European governments and
policy-
makers that they must stop their
support for oppressive and
authoritarian rulers in the Arab
and Muslim world. Even though
these
dictators claim that they are
providing stability for the
region, the
reality is that they are
creating the perfect conditions
for despair
and hopelessness that will only
lead to further violence,
extremism,
and turmoil.
Third, we need to engage and
support moderate Islamists who
are trying
to be both true to their
religion while adopting and
accepting
democracy, modernity, and
development. Building strong
coalitions
between moderate Islamists
(i.e., those who reject violence
and accept
democracy) with secularists is
the only way to challenge the
status
quo and provide a real
democratic alternative to the
untenable and
discredited rulers and regimes.
Most of the Islamists in the
Arab and
Muslim world are in fact
moderate, and it would be a
wrong and
dangerous to lump all Islamists
together, and to call them
extremists
or terrorists.
Since 1999, CSID has developed
and implemented a strategy for achieving these objectives, by:
* Organizing conferences
and seminars to bring democrats
together (both moderate Islamists,
secularists, and others),
* Educating the masses
about democracy, how it works,
and its
compatibility with Islam,
* Establishing a Network of
Democrats in the Arab World
(NDAW)
and providing them with training
and support,
* Lobbying the US
government and policy-makers to
stop supporting
dictators and to engage and
support democrats.
CSID has organized conferences
on Islam and democracy in Saudi
Arabia,
Iran, Sudan, Nigeria, and
Tunisia, and more than 20 other
countries.
The reason we have been able to
organize such activities has to
do
with the huge credibility and
connections that CSID has
established
throughout the Arab and Muslim
world during the past eight
years. Our
credibility and strong network
of friends and colleagues (among
Arab
and Muslim reformers) is
unmatched. This growing network
— which
again includes both secularists
and moderate Islamists — is
capable
of pushing for significant
dialogue and reforms in their
respective
countries. As a result, we are making a
difference. More than 1,500
political
and religious leaders and
scholars have attended our
workshops and
conferences, and more than 2,000
people in Morocco, Algeria,
Egypt,
and Jordan have been trained
through our “Islam & Democracy —
Toward
Effective Citizenship” textbooks
and workshops. The demand for
both,
however, is much greater, and
our dream is to train 5,000
people per
country, per year, for the next
ten years.
For the first time in history,
secular leaders and moderate
Islamist
leaders are starting to work
together in many countries,
learning to
build trust and strong
coalitions for positive and
meaningful
reforms. The Network of
Democrats in the Arab World is
growing and
has provided training on
leadership skills, communication
skills,
consensus building, and
conflict-resolution skills to
hundreds of members and NGO
leaders. US and European
governments are beginning to
realize that it is against their
interests (not to mention their
values) to promote oppressive
regimes in the Arab/Muslim world
and are
starting to put real pressure on
these regimes to reform and
democratize.
Our long-term goal is that both
the US and European governments,
with
the help of the international
community as a whole, will work
with and
support governments that are
serious about democracy and are
achieving
real progress toward it, while
isolating governments that
reject
democracy and continue to
oppress their people.
Conclusion
Violence and terrorism cannot
prosper or exist in democratic
societies or countries. The calls for
freedom and democracy are not
new in the
Arab and Muslim world. Arab and
Muslims have struggled for
freedom
and democracy for decades (there
were close to 200,000 political
prisoners in the Arab world in
2000, according to Amnesty
International). For decades, the
US and the West have turned
their
back to democrats and reformers
in the Arab and Muslim world and
have
supported authoritarian and
oppressive regimes, believing
that short
term stability is better than
long term development and
progress. It
is hypocritical for the US, the
“great supporter of democracy”
to be
so supportive of dictatorships
that are harmful to their
people.
Democracy is coming to the Arab
and Muslim world, whether we
know it or not, and with or without our
support. These regimes and
governments are too weak, too
discredited, and too corrupt to
last
much longer. The only question,
then, is whether we as Americans
and
as free people of the world will
support the aspirations for
freedom,
democracy, and dignity in the
Arab and Muslim world, or
whether we
will go back to supporting Arab
dictators and “doing business
as
usual” with corrupt and
unpopular regimes. It is in the
long-term
interest and benefit of the US
to support the Arab and Muslim
people’s
aspirations to freedom and
democracy so that we can build
future
relations based on respect,
dignity, and mutual
understanding.
We have made significant
progress in the democratization
of the Arab
and Muslim world, with some
disappointing and significant
setbacks in
2006 and 2007. Nonetheless, it
is likely that we will see real
and
successful democracies in the
Arab world within the next ten
years if
we pull our resources together
as an international community.
In any
case, we have no choice but to
do our best to make sure
democratization does come about
because the alternative is more
violence, more extremism, and
less stability. |