January 1996, pgs. 34, 109-110
Issues in Islam
Islamists and the West: Co-existence or Confrontation?
By Faisal Kutty
Dr. Hassan Turabi writes, "Whenever religious energy is ...
suppressed, it builds up and ultimately erupts either in isolated
acts of struggle or resistance, which are called terrorist by those
in power, or in a revolution. On the other hand," he continues,
"when Islam is allowed free expression, it will bring about
social change peacefully and gradually."1
He notes that since Islam is based on sincere conviction and voluntary
compliance, an Islamic state cannot be imposed on a reluctant society.
In essence, therefore, an Islamic state can only be created through
the will of the people. Turabi, one of the prime architects of the
resurgence of Islam emanating from the urban centers of Turkey to
the rural hinterlands of Xinjiang (China), claims that Islamists
will create a civil society if given the chance.
Can Islamists be trusted? What is the alternative? Are Islamists
out to destroy democracy, freedom, justice and liberty? What are
the consequences of the lack of communication between the proponents
of Islamic revival and the West? These and other questions must
be considered in order to deal with this development in the Muslim
world in ways that protect international stability and the right
to self-determination.
Many Muslims see the Islamic reawakening as an alternative to secular
materialism, a reassertion of their identity and a return to their
roots. For its part, the West perceives Islamic resurgence negatively,
as the so-called "Islamic threat" or "green peril."
This fear is compounded by the fact that since the demise of communism,
Islam appears to be the only alternative system capable of transcending
ethnic and national barriers. This fear is further fanned by the
alarmist writings and speeches of some scholarswith perhaps
Harvard professor Samuel Huntington as a prime culpritjournalists
and leaders in the West and the Muslim world. The reprehensible
actions and anti-West hyperbole and rhetoric spouted by some Islamists
does not help.
The Western obsession with a perceived threat of Islamic fundamentalism
and the undertaking to combat it at any cost has led many to forget
that secular liberalism is one world view but not the only one.
The assumption of liberal secularists that "all human beings
by nature possess the capacity and desire to become liberals when
free to do so,"2 and the imposition of this view
on others only leads secularists to commit a variation of the very
crime of which they accuse Islamists: what can be called "secular
fundamentalism."
Western stereotyping of Islamists as fundamentalists, terrorists,
and inherently anti-Western is both inaccurate and counterproductive.
As John Esposito writes, "[T]o equate Islam and Islamic fundamentalism
uncritically with extremism is to judge Islam by those who wreak
havoca standard not applied to Judaism and Christianity."3
Such a characterization and the corollary lack of dialogue in fact
confers legitimacy on extremists within the movement.
Secular liberalism is one world view but not the
only one.
Although the Islamic movement, like any other, has its share of
radicals, most Islamists seek peaceful and democratic change. Shaikh
Rachid Ghannouchi, the exiled leader of the Tunisian Islamist party
Hizb an-Nahda (the Renaissance Party), sentenced in absentia
to life in prison for his democratic opposition, contends that in
seeking to reform their societies, Islamists are committed to social
justice, human rights, pluralism and an end to dictatorships. 4
He and many other Islamists point out that rather than being fundamentalist,
their movement is more akin to the European Renaissance in a Muslim
context.
Far from being monolithic, the movement is composed of divergent
groups ranging from the rejectionist and extremist minority to a
mainstream committed to working peacefully within the existing order.
There are significant differences among adherents over their visions
of an Islamic state and the routes to achieve it. While the extremists
espouse violent overthrow of the existing leadership at any cost,
the mainstream seeks Islamization through education, and social
and political activism.
There also is discord among the extremists. In Egypt, for instance,
the two groups on the fringe, Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Islamic
Group) and Islamic Jihad, differ over tactics, compete for funding
and even have an ongoing rivalry.5 The only common denominators
between the various groups are their identification with Islam and
their opposition to the secular elites.
Islamic thinkers realize it will not be possible to create the
society they wish without going through some birth pangs. Indeed,
they point out that the transformation of the Western world into
civil societies was brought about not only through intellectual
but also bloody political revolutions. Why are stricter standards
applied to the Muslim world?
Application of the Shariah
Ismail and Lamya Faruqi wrote, "Islamic law made Islamic civilization,
not vice versa."6 This fact explains why the focus
of the Islamic movement has been on implementing the shariah
in all spheres of life. This call evokes three reactions from contemporary
thinkers and policy makers in the West and in the Muslim world,
ranging from outright opposition to its approval as a viable alternative.
One group believes Islamism is simply a reactionary anti-modern
movement aimed at taking civilization back to an age of barbarism,
and that the supposed golden age of Islam was a mythical utopia
or a way of life with no practical relevance today. Writers such
as Abdullahi An-Na'im, whose views are featured in numerous legal
and international affairs journals, argues that introducing the
shariah would be disastrous for international relations and
human rights. 7 They overlook the fact that Islamic law
has been created through interpretation, or usul al-fiqh
(principles of jurisprudence), and hence the legal rules (as opposed
to the underlying principles) can be reformulated, if needed, to
meet contemporary situations. Islamist and some Western scholars
counter that this fear of "reactionary Islam" is the legacy
of the Crusades and has no basis in reality.
A second category of thinkers classifies the return to Islam as
fundamentalism, a label rejected by themselves because of the negative
connotations implied by its modern usage. In the Islamist view,
the term "fundamentalist," if at all applicable in the
Islamic context, would be restricted to the ultra-conservatives
and extremists who, in the words of the late Ismail Faruqi, na¥vely
believe that Islamic laws have been fully evolved and "the
methodology was absolutely adequate and that the problem of the
Muslim World was merely one of human reluctance to realize the values
of Islam."8 It is ironic when the term is used to
refer to Islamic revival movements led by reformers who wish to
reinterpret Islamic law in keeping with the long-established Islamic
traditions of tajdid (renewal) and islah (reform).
The third group, including most Islamist leaders and even some
Western scholars, acknowledges the valuational and conceptual differences
between world religious and philosophical systems and believes that
the Islamic system can be a viable alternative. Jill Crystal argues,
"Islam clearly has values and traditions that are compatible
with the kinds of rights protections that the pro-democracy liberals
endorse."9 She concludes that equality, respect
for the rule of law, respect for private property, social justice,
and a tradition of tolerance of debate and argument are established
in Islam, although some Islamists today may repudiate this latter
principle.
Islamist Agenda
Islamists claim they have an agenda that includes changes in the
economic, political and social spheres, but that they have not been
able to demonstrate that their program goes beyond mere rhetoric.
They point out that the only way to know whether the "Islamic
solution" is workable is to provide them the opportunity to
implement their vision. Such an opportunity was lost when the Algerian
military cancelled the second round of national elections in 1992,
banned the Front Islamique du Salut (FISIslamic Salvation
Front), jailed its leaders and unleashed repression when it realized
that the FIS was on the verge of winning power at the polls. This
would have been the first democratically elected Islamist government.
Many observers attribute the resurgence of Islam to a reaction
against deplorable economic and social conditions in some Muslim
societies. They thinkand hopethat economic improvements
will check the appeal of the movement and diminish its pool of recruits.
But the evidence suggests that Islamic resurgence is not restricted
to economically depressed states. Islamic influence is pervading
all levels of society in Malaysia, for instance, even as the economy
is booming. Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who is set to become
the country's prime minister, was an Islamic activist and still
is of that orientation. Similarly, in 1994, the Islamist Refah
(Reform) party won municipal elections in 29 large Turkish citiesincluding
cosmopolitan Istanbul and Ankarawith 19 percent of the total
votes in Turkey, a secular nation with an overwhelmingly Muslim
population.
In fact, the movement finds its greatest support among university
graduates and young professionals of both genders. American scholar
John Esposito notes that most recruits are from the faculties of
humanities, law, medicine, science, engineering, and education rather
than traditional religious faculties.
The conclusion that Islamism is not limited to the economically
and socially deprived is reinforced by the fact that professional
associations of lawyers, engineers and physicians are the first
to fall to the Islamists. In Egypt, for example, all three are under
their control. When members of the Muslim Brotherhood, the 62-year-old
officially banned Islamist party, won the elections in the lawyers
syndicate in 1992, the government stepped in by "tightening"
election procedures in all professional associations.10
Economics
In the economic arena, the Islamists will attempt to institute
an interest-free banking system. They contend that the cornerstone
of modern bankinginterestonly serves the rich. Ironically,
interest-free financing schemes suggested by Islamists are gaining
acceptance even among hard-core capitalists.
In Malaysia, the Islamic banking systembased on profit and
risk sharing between the lender and the borrowercompetes with
conventional banks and has attracted large numbers of non-Muslim
depositors. Even in England, banks such as Kleinwork Benson, Citibank,
ANZ Grindlays and Midland Montague have set up Islamic banking units.
The demand is so great that Kleinwork Benson has established a research
center to develop new Islamic trade finance instruments in consultation
with Islamic scholars.
Social
Islamists also challenge the status quo in the social realm. Their
goal is establishment of a social welfare or a modified free-enterprise
state. The main objection comes from those who allege that women
will be oppressed. But here again blanket indictment of the Islamic
movement is unwarranted. Unlike the radicals, most Islamist leaders
call for the full and equal participation of women in society. Dr.
Hassan Turabi writes on the plight of Muslim women: "Male jealousy
is just one aspect of masculine capricious tendencies which inculcate
the myth that women, by nature, suffer from excessive incapacity.
Men use that fantasy as an excuse to ban women from active participation
in the broad spectrum of human life" ( The Message,
July 1993). Turabi, a legal scholar with advanced degrees from London
and the Sorbonne, and secretary-general of the Khartoum-based Popular
Arab and Islamic Congress, is of the view that Islamists must reform
traditional Muslim society, especially with respect to the deplorable
state of women.
Obviously, the status of women cannot be elevated overnight in
these male-dominated societies. But the mainstream Islamist position
as articulated by its leaders is in favor of full participation
by women. As expected, this is opposed by extremists and even many
ordinary Muslims who are not interested in reforming their cultural
ways. In fact, Turabi is branded a heretic by many Muslims for his
views on women. A society cannot be forced to change, it must be
allowed to evolve; the Islamists have elevation of the status of
women on their agenda and can only be expected to strive toward
it.
Politics
Politically, most Islamists from Algeria and Tunisia are committed
to democracy or a variation thereof (shura). In Algeria,
the Islamists were set to take power using the ballot rather than
the bullet, when this was subverted by the military with Western
acquiescence. In fact, the West's hypocritical ambivalence in the
wake of the hijacking of the democratic process in Algeria only
served to radicalize many of the grass-roots members. As Ghannouchi
says, "excluding [the Islamic movement] from the democratic
process will only impel it toward extremism, which will kill the
democratic experiment altogether."
Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, the pioneers of political Islam in
this century, are committed to democracy. Unfortunately, the extremist
fringe gets most of the Western publicity. For instance, when fanatics
went on a killing spree of Coptic Christians in Egypt, this was
exploited by the Western media as an example of Islamic intolerance.
Very little was written about demonstrations organized by the Muslim
Brotherhood against this violence. Nevertheless, as the main Islamist
party in Egypt, the Brotherhood enjoys far greater legitimacy and
support than the radicals.
When they articulate reforms, mainstream Islamists find themselves
rejected by the West as extremists, while the real religious extremists
and ultra-conservatives oppose their progressive message. For example,
the civil war in Sudan is characterized as a religious war between
the Islamic north and southern Christian and animist rebels upon
whom they would impose the shariah. In fact, it is a political
rebellion in which Christian, animist, and even some Muslim southerners
challenge the legitimacy of the government. When the Sudanese government
went the extra mile and offered a degree of autonomy, representation
in the cabinet and non-applicability of the shariah to the
south, the proposal was rejected outright by the rebel Sudanese
People's Liberation Army (SPLA), which seeks total independence
(New African, October 1993).
By alienating the Sudanese leadership under the pretense of opposing
its alleged religious persecution of Christians and animists, the
West is making it easier for more radical elements to come to power.
In fact, in Sudan some of the conservative forces oppose what they
perceive as the "liberal" Islam proposed by the Islamists
in power.
The West must realize that Islamists will not be able to create
the just society they envision without some birth pangs. The West
itself went through such bloody experiences. What the movement seeks
is the right to self-determination. This is no different from what
the Western world has enjoyed for centuries, governing itself according
to its chosen philosophy: secularism.
The West would also benefit from acknowledging that, as stated
by Ghannouchi, "It is on the common principles we share that
Muslims and Easterners can establish a mutually beneficial relationship.
There can be no escaping the reality that the destinies of our respective
civilizations are intertwined."
To prevent the further radicalization of the Islamic movement,
and facilitate the exercise of self-determination in the Muslim
world, it is imperative that the West begin by accepting the global
reality that Islamists are going to be long-term players in the
future of many Muslim nations. Consistent with this reality, the
West must rethink its attitude toward the revival.
Support for Democratization
First, the West must extend the concern for democracy to the Islamic
world. For far too long the West has ignored the calls for democracy
in the Islamic world because of fear of Islamists coming to power.
Islamist parties are banned outright or seriously restricted, leaving
them no choice but to choose the bullet. As American political scientist
Graham Fuller said: "Let Islam come out of the underground
and learn to survive in electoral politics as it now does in Turkey,
Pakistan and Egypt. Give the process a little time. Political evolution
always has rocky periods, but Islamic politics may not be the bogeyman
Westerners fear."11
Human Rights
Second, the human rights violations and atrocities committed against
Islamists must not be tolerated. While openly, and rightly, condemning
the atrocities committed by radical segments of the movement, the
West has ignored human rights violations perpetrated against Islamists
in Algeria, Tunisia, and Egypt which are documented by organizations
such as Asia Watch, Amnesty International, and the Lawyers Committee
for Human Rights.
Channels of Communication
Third, a dialogue must be opened with the Islamist leaders toward
establishing a relationship of cooperation and coexistence. The
attitude of distrust and lack of respect between the two sides cannot
persist. Some Islamist leaders have said they are open to such dialogue.
Turabi, for instance, came to Canada in 1992 for this purpose. The
reception he got illustrates the present state of disrespect: He
was assaulted in broad daylight at the Ottawa airport and his Sudanese
assailant was acquitted in a Canadian court.
There are many in the higher echelons of the movement who seek
a dialogue with the West, including Rachid Ghannouchi, Hassan Turabi
and Mahfoud Nahnah. Shaikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, for instance, has
stated: "[Dialogue with the West] is a mandatory obligation
for us in order for it to understand what we want for ourselves
and our people." He also has said, "Were we to convince
Western leaders and decision-makers of our right to live according
to our faithideologically, legislatively, and ethnicallywithout
imposing our views or inflicting harm upon them, we would have traversed
an immense barrier."12
Unless these steps are taken, the distrust between the West and
the Islamic world will only lead to international instability. Radicals
who call for confrontation and a new cold war will replace leaders
such as Turabi who claim, for instance, that the "West has
developed many positive values of Islamfree, consultative
government, dignity to the individual, free enterprise," and
who call for coexistence and emulation in some respects. The choice
is up to the West.
NOTES:
1 Hassan Turabi, "Principles of Governance,
Freedom, and Responsibility in Islam," American Journal
of Islamic Social Sciences, 4:1, p. 1.
2 Peter O'Brien, "Islam vs. Liberalism in
Europe," American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences,
10:3, pp. 367, 379.
3 John L. Esposito, "Political Islam: Beyond
the Green Menace," Current History, January 1994, pp.
19, 24.
4 Rached Ghannouchi, "Islam and the West:
Realities and Potentialities," in Ahmed Bin Yousef and Ahmad
AbulJobain, eds., The Politics of Islamic Resurgence: Through
Western Eyes, The United Association for Studies and Research,
Springfield, Virginia, 1992, pp. 45, 48.
5 Caryle Murphy, "Egypt: An Uneasy Portent
of Change," Current History, February 1994, pp. 78-79.
6 Ismail Faruqi and Lamya Faruqi, The Cultural
Atlas of Islam, MacMillan Publishing, New York, 1986, p. 279.
7 See for example Abdullahi an-Na'im, "Islamic
Law, International Relations, and Human Rights: Challenge and Response,"
Cornell International Law Journal , vol, 20, p. 317.
8 Ismail Faruqi, "Islamization of Knowledge:
Problems, Principles and Prospectives," in Islam: Source
and Purpose of Knowledge, IIIT, Herndon, Virginia, p. 34.
9 Jill Crystal, "Authoritarianism and its
Adversaries in the Arab World," World Politics, pp.
262, 286.
10 Caryle Murphy, ibid., p. 80.
11 Quoted in Shaikh Rached Ghannouchi, "The Islamic
Movement Isn't an Enemy of Democracy," The Ottawa Citizen,
Jan. 28, 1992.
12 The Politics of Islamic Resurgence, p. 40.
Faisal Kutty holds a law degree from the University of Ottawa.
Together with Shaikh Ahmad Kutty, he is working on a book entitled
Human Rights: International Law and the Shariah. |