423124 175..186
.pdf
School
Universiti Teknologi Mara**We aren't endorsed by this school
Course
ISLAMIC 111
Subject
Political Science
Date
Dec 19, 2024
Pages
12
Uploaded by DeanLeopard4132
Democracy and Islam:promises and perils for theArab Spring protestsBradley J. CookSouthern Utah University, Cedar City, Utah, USA, andMichael StathisDepartment of Political Science, Southern Utah University,Cedar City, Utah, USAAbstractPurpose– Democracy and Islam are both capable of multiple interpretations and applications. Islampossesses ideological resources that provide justification for a wide spectrum of political models.However, the compatibility of Islam and democracy relies on the critical questions of: “whose Islam”and “what Islam,” and “whose democracy” and “what democracy.” The purpose of this paper is toexplore the possibilities and challenges of the recent democratic transitions in the Muslim world.Design/methodology/approach– The paper is a discursive essay.Findings– Islamic history has demonstrated that there is no monolithic construal of Islam andpolitics, and in fact history actually provides hope that a more representative and democraticgovernment might result from the uprisings, with healthier, progressive elements of Islam emerging inways that were not before possible.Originality/value– While other observers have explored the compatibility question of Islam anddemocracy, very little has been written on the recent political upheavals situating the question withinthis context.KeywordsIslam, Democracy, Governance, Organizational change, Systems theory, Public policyPaper typeResearch paperIntroductionDemocratic politics and religion have always co-existed with varying degrees of socialtension. Such tension is far more discernable in some religions than in others; perhapsno more so than in Islam. There are those who charge that democracy has inherentcontradictions or incompatibilities with the principles and values of Islam, and that therealities of Muslim and Arab politics demonstrate that Islam is culturally andreligiously at odds with democracy. Long before the hopeful events of the Arab Spring,the Middle Eastern historian Bernard Lewis suggested that liberal democracy andfundamentalist Islam were incompatible. At the time, the interest in this conclusionwasgenerallylimitedtoacademiccircles.Butafter9/11,referencestotheincompatibility of Islam and democracy became something of a standard mantra formedia and general observers. Upon closer examination, however, one finds that thisincompatibility notion is theoretically and historically problematic, which is the objectof this paper’s exploration. The ultimate outcome of this debate, however, is immenselyimportant and takes on a heightened sense of relevance and urgency with the recentArab protest movements in such places as Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, and Libya.The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available atwww.emeraldinsight.com/2041-2568.htmDemocracyand Islam175Journal of Global ResponsibilityVol. 3 No. 2, 2012pp. 175-186qEmerald Group Publishing Limited2041-2568DOI 10.1108/20412561211260485
Whose Islam and what Islam?In examining the question of whether democracy and Islam are compatible, it is firstimportant to find agreement on nomenclature. Islam, after all, represents nearlyone-fourth of humankind, and is poorly served by the use of monolithic or essentialistterms. It is also important to understand the unique attributes of Islam that play intothe question of compatibility. Additionally, what are Islam’s conceptual and historicalcompatibilities, if any, with the principles of democracy? What challenges exist withinthe Islamic world that pose formidable challenges for democratic orders? And, whatchallenges are inherent within democracy itself that frustrate democratic transitions ofMuslim countries?Arriving at any definitive conclusions on the question at hand is difficult at best whenevaluating the multidimensional factors influencing the complex societies within Islam.However, the compatibility of Islam and democracy relies on the critical questions ofwhose Islam and what Islam, and whose democracy and what democracy. Adding to theconfusion and further blurring the real issues is the rather arbitrary use of the term“Islamic” to describe states, regions, and even people. For 55 Muslim countries in morethan eight distinct regions, Islam is only one, but significant, element in their historiesand cultures. The influence of the traditions and values of Islam varies widely in thesedifferent contexts, not unlike the diverse cultures of predominantly Christian nationsfrom Italy to the Philippines. The truth is that the Muslim world is populated by morethan 1.4 billion people. It is highly variegated and diverse, and defies any singledefinition or characterization. Contrary to the beliefs and presuppositions of some, theexperience of Islam reveals a rich historical mosaic rather than a single operationalparadigm. Just as important, democracy itself is a contested term. While there may be adominant discourse of what democracy is in the contemporary world, multiplediscourses have existed and continue to exist. Democracy and Islam are both capable ofmultiple interpretations and applications. However, until about 250 years ago, the worldhad never seen anything resembling modern liberal democracy. It could be argued thatno culture or religion, up to that time, had shown itself to be compatible with the dictatesof democracy. Even early American democracy would get low marks by contemporarystandards since there was no enfranchisement for the majority of the population.However, even though every religious tradition has struggled with issues of faith andgovernance, democracy has shown remarkable flexibility in a variety of milieus thatmight seem poorly suited to nurture it.When considering the fit of Islam and democracy, it is false to assume that democracycurrently has no place in the contemporary Muslim world. Over 750 million Muslims livein partially democratic societies of one kind or another, including Indonesia andBangladesh, two of the largest Muslim countries. Once the heart of Islamic orthodoxy,Turkey is today a recognizable, if imperfect, democracy. Even Iran, one of the mostconfirmed “Islamic” of Muslim countries, is showing signs of democratization from thebottom up. Muslims live in Europe, North America, and even Israel. Moreover, there islittle historical evidence that political power has been dominantly controlled by Muslimreligionists. Except for Iran’s revolution in 1979 and the Taliban rule in Afghanistan, thevast majority of political power in the contemporary Islamic world has been in the handsof secular political elites. This is not to say that democracy is alive and well in the Muslimworld as there is still a democratic deficit in the Islamic world as compared, for instance,to Latin America.JGR3,2176
Polemicists both from the West and the Muslim world have argued that Islam anddemocracyareirreconcilable.SomewesternideologuesarguethatIslamisanti-democratic because it is inherently authoritarian. Other ideologues argue thatIslam has its own mechanisms and institutions which do not include democracy.Still others argue that democracy can only exist fully if Islam is restricted to one’s privatelife. Misrepresenting and politicizing Islam in these ways leads people to the possibleconclusion that Islam has a set of values that are inferior to those of western liberalismand that Muslims are doctrinally unsuited for democracy.On the other hand, many Muslim activists, harnessing imprecise and overlygeneralized notions of secularism and sovereignty, regard democracy to be inferiorbecause it substitutes human authority for God’s authority as found in theQur’an, andin the conduct and statements of the Prophet Muhammad and inShari’ahlaw. SomeIslamists ideologues assert that democracy is an imposed neocolonial concept imposedby Westernizers and secular reformers. It is argued that popular sovereignty denies theabsolute sovereignty of God and is a system in which human whim is the source of law,rather than transcendental principles. Democracies, therefore, pose a form of idolatry.It is the argument of this essay that misperceptions perpetuated by either critics orapologists only serve to blur the discussion of the possibilities for democracy in theIslamic world.Islam’s unique attributesWhileIslamposesformidablechallengestodemocracy,thereisnoinherentcontradictionbetweenIslamanddemocracyandviewedintherightcontext,democratic ideals and principles can also be that of Islam’s. Even so, Islam possessesunique attributes that introduce complex variables in the calculus of democratictransitions. While religion can be a powerful motivating force in the lives of individuals,the distinctive influence Islam exerts over its adherents needs to be recognized. Islam isnot a religion in the same sense that Christianity or Buddhism is a religion. For Muslims,Islam is much more than a moral philosophy of life, system of belief, or a spiritual order;it is a “complete and comprehensive way of life” (Geertz, 1971). Unlike other religiousapproaches, Islam does not compartmentalize religious and temporal matters, or faithand practice, but provides an all-encompassing ordering for individuals and society andattempts a cohesive integration of all aspects of life. The termIslamin Arabic meansa complete surrendering or submission to the sovereign will of God and is suggestive ofIslam’s organic, atypical approach to life. The active participle of the wordasalamais Muslim, meaning “one who submits.” It can be argued that Islam enjoys a unique placeamong the world’s religions in terms of a complete synthesis between individual andcommunity, religion and politics, the secular and the holy. There is no distinctionbetween religious worship and social interaction. The Arabic termdı¯n(religion) does nothave the same connotation as the English word “religion,” and suggests the qualitativedifference between Islam’s primary stress on following God’s law as opposed to theemphasis of belief principally found in other religions. Some commentators havecontrasted Islam’s emphasis on right practice (orthopraxy) with that of Christianity’semphasis on correct doctrine or belief (orthodoxy) (Esposito, 1988). Within Islam, correctbelief and correct action are intended to be immutably fused.In tandem with the Islamic tenet that spiritual belief and action are two sides of thesame coin, the ideal vision of religion and politics for most Muslims is based uponDemocracyand Islam177
theQur’anas well as the example of Muhammad and the early Muslim community.The New Testament injunction to render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar and toGod what belongs to God underscores a rationale for separation of church and statewithin Christianity – although Christianity has been used to justify a variety ofpolitical models. In contrast, Muslims see themselves as God’s representatives with adivine directive to establish God’s rule on earth in order to create a just society. TheQur’anteaches that God “made you into nations and tribes” (49:13), often establishingthe Muslim community as a discreet political entity. Not unlike Jews and Christians,Muslims see themselves as being a covenant people with God, making them acommunity of believers who must serve as an example to other nations by creating amoral social order: “And thus have we made you a nation exalted and justly balancedso that you may be a guiding example for all mankind” (2:143).In an ideal Islamic state (from a majority Sunni perspective), political authority is togovern the community by God’s law, orShari’ahin a nomocracy, rather than atheocracy or autocracy that gives power to the clergy or ruler (Nasr, 2004). At aminimum, the state must provide protection so that Muslims can carry out theirreligious duties, particularly doing good and forbidding evil. Esposito (2002), a notedscholar of Islam, observes:A sense of balance should exist among three groups: thecaliph, who serves as the guardian ofthe faith and the community; theulema(religious scholars) who provide religious and legaladvice; and theqadis(judges), who resolve disputes in accordance with Islamic law.Whether it ever existed in its ideal form, many Muslims over generations came to viewthis as the model for the perfect state. Some contemporary fundamentalist movementsbelieving it actually existed during the golden age of Islam (most often defined as beingbetween the seventh to twelfth centuries CE) desire to return to this idealized, utopianstate.While many Muslims maintain that religion should be interlaced with the state andsociety, there is considerable difference of opinion as to the precise nature of thatrelationship. In contemporary Islamic societies, there is no single agreed-upon model ofgovernment as evidenced by the diverse examples such as the military-imposed Islamicgovernments of Sudan and Pakistan, the conservative monarchies of Saudi Arabia andKuwait, and Iran’s clergy-run state. Still other Muslims subscribe to a more secular orIslamic democratic form of government while rejecting the above examples asun-Islamic, authoritarian regimes.Conceptual and historical compatibility with democracyIn 1993, the venerable Middle East historian Lewis struggled with the question of“Islam and liberal democracy;” he queried “Can liberal democracy work in a societyinspired by Islamic beliefs and principles and shaped by Islamic experience andtradition?” (Lewis, 1993, p. 89). He offered several conclusions. Generally he noted “[. . .]the prospects for Middle Eastern democracy are not good [. . .]” given the complexproblems that face the peoples of that region (Lewis, 1993, p. 98). Lewis conceded thatfrom a historical perspective the Islamic world offered the “best prospects forWestern-style democracy [. . .] of all the non-Western civilizations,” but he alsocautioned: “From a political perspective [. . .] Islam seems to offer the worst prospectsfor liberal democracy” (Lewis, 1993, p. 89). As far as compatibility with fundamentalistJGR3,2178
Islam Lewis offered no optimism at all. Professor Lewis is quite right in his reference to“historical perspective” because clearly democratic elements are to be found inPre-Islamic Arabian tribal custom, original Islamic practice in choosing acaliph, and inthe early basis of theshari’aor Islamic law. As Muslims internally debate therelationship of Islam to democracy, many scholars are drawing on traditional Islamicconcepts to illustrate a foundational basis for democracy. Muslim scholars agreethatconceptslikeshura(orconsultation)betweenrulerandtheruled,ijma(community consensus), andijtihad(the use of human reason to reinterpret Islamicprinciples and values to meet the new contexts) are sources of democratic ethics inIslam. Indeed, the earliestcaliphsafter the Prophet Muhammad, were chosen through aform of an electoral college. These concepts are harnessed to support parliamentaryforms of government with systems of checks and balances inherent in democracies,namely among the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches.It is argued by many progressive Muslims that the Prophet Muhammad himselfestablished an early precedent demonstrating how democratic practices and theoriesare compatible with an Islamic state. After Muhammad emigrated from Mecca toYathrib (or current day Medina) in 622 CE, he established both a religious and politicalcommunity. He forged a remarkable political-constitutional compact referred to bysome scholars asDustur al-Madina, or the Charter or Constitution of Medina. TheCharter of Medina, written for the multi-religious ten thousand-strong citizenry of thecity-state of Medina, is very possibly the first written constitution in the world(Hamidullah, 1968; Ishaq, 1955). Excepting Aristotle’s Constitution of Athens, there arestrongargumentsforthisposition.TheCharterofMedinaprecededtheUSConstitution by more than a 1,000 years, and the English feudal bill of rights, theMagna Carta of 1215, by almost six centuries.The Charter of Medina established a pluralistic state, accentuating the importanceof consent and cooperation for governance. According to this compact, Muslims andnon-Muslims were equal citizens with identical rights, duties and protections–including religious autonomy for minorities. The principles of equality, consensualgovernance, and pluralism were central to the Medina Charter. Muhammad drew up aform of a constitution based on the transcendent principles revealed to him through theQur’an, but he also sought the consent of those who would be affected by itsimplementation. As some have argued, the Charter also established the first modernnation-state in the world. Although Medina was just a city, its Charter was to last untilthe beginning of the Umayyad Dynasty in 661. Western historians cite the Treaty ofWestphalia in 1648 as the beginning of the modern nation-state era.Thus, the first Islamic state was based on a social contract, was constitutional incharacter, and was ruled with the explicit written consent of all the citizens of the state.Muhammad’s interpretation of theQur’andemonstrated a democratic spirit unlike theauthoritarian tendencies of many of those who claim to imitate him today. Althoughthe Charter of Medina cannot serve as a modern constitution, it can serve as a guidingprinciple,andperhapsillustratesthatauthenticIslamdoeshaveitsrootsina democratic ethos.Increasingly,Muslimcontemporaryintellectualsagreethatconsultativeandconsensual governance is best (An-Na’im, 1990; Parray, 2010; Ali Khan, 2003). Just asIslam does not exist in some monolithic form, neither does democracy. Many believethat just as the modern democracies of America and Europe accommodate diverseDemocracyand Islam179
relationships with religion, so too Muslims can develop their own forms of democraticstates that are responsive to indigenous values. Democracy’s vita can point to a varietyof democratic models combined with a variety of value systems. Scandinaviancountries have successfully coupled liberal democracy with socialist principles tocreate what is perhaps even a more compassionate democracy than exists in the USA.The British have coalesced formal theocracy with pragmatic democracy. Formally, theQueen is both Head of State and Governor of the Church of England. The Archbishopof Canterbury is partly appointed by the Prime Minister. Major doctrinal changes inthe Church of England need the approval of the British parliament either directly or bydelegation. At the practical level the British system is in the liberal democratictradition. It is slightly less of an open society than the American system but slightlymore socially empathetic.Muslim scholars like Mazrui (2003) are asking:If Scandinavians can combine liberal democracy with socialist principles, and the English cancombine a formal Protestant theocracy with a practical liberal democracy, why cannotMuslims create anislamocracywhich synthesizes liberal democracy with Islamic principles?Mazrui concedes that on many issues such as human rights and gender equality,Muslim societies lag behind the USA. However, he points out that “liberation of womenis not the same as empowerment of women. Some Muslim countries have been moreambitious in the empowerment of women than has the United States.” He points outthat Indonesia, Bangladesh, Turkey, and Pakistan have had women heads of state longbefore the USA, Russia, Germany, and France. Mazrui (2003) observes:There is still work to be done for democracy in the United States and much more work to bedone in the Muslim world. The American democracy is already here, however imperfect. ButIslamic versions of democracy are being slowly forged by history.The moral power of democracy centers on the idea that the citizenry of a nation aresovereign, expressing their will by electing representatives. According to Islam,sovereignty belongs to God where God delegates some of it in the form of humanagency (2:30). The political task is to consider how best to employ this God-givenagency in creating a society that brings about the welfare and security of thecommunity both now and in the future. But in fact, sovereignty is unavoidably human.Regardless of where sovereignty is placed theoretically, in practice it is the state whichexercises it whether in a democracy or an Islamic state. Democracy, with its principlesof separation of powers, public accountability, checks and balances, and transparencylimits human sovereignty to an extent. At the theoretical level, the difference betweenthemodernandIslamicconceptionsofsovereigntyisclear,butoperationalimplications tend to blur the distinction. Even ifshura,ijma, andijtihadare consideredsupportive of democratic processes, they are not exact correlates with westernconceptions. What is clear is that even with the current debates raging among Muslimintellectuals on the nature ofshuraand other Islamic principles as they relate todemocratic practice, it is clear that operationalizing such concepts are difficult andrequire considerable more deliberation.Rejection of democracy or claims of incompatibility on the part of Islamists seems tostem more from popular association of the notion with the West than past practice orIslamic theory, indeed there is nothing in theQur’anapproximating a politicalpreference at all. The suggestion that certain modern fundamentalists or IslamistsJGR3,2180
have abused Islamic tradition for their personal purposes should be abundantly clear.In this Lewis was also correct; the historical perspective suggests that there is no basisto suggest that democracy and Islam are necessarily incompatible, while the politicalperspective seems to necessitate the incompatibility of democracy and Islam to justifypolicy, whether it be the actions of Western or Islamist fundamentalists.Challenges to democracy in the Muslim worldIf Islam has the foundational capacity to build democratic societies, what accounts forthe dearth of democracies in the Muslim world? One way to this question is tounderstand that the reason Muslim countries lag so far behind in their democraticmovements is due in large part to political, historical, economic, and cultural factors –not, in fact, religious ones. The basic issue is not about Islam but about Muslims. It is notabout the text or tradition of Islam, but about modernity and authoritarian andpatriarchal cultures in Muslim countries. Westernized elites, military officers, andtribal/traditional leaders usually hold an inordinate amount of control over state power,politics, and culture. Most Muslim countries, as in other developing countries, arepropelled by a deep need and a passionate quest for development, social justice, anddignity. For the past century, the vision of a better future was seen to be better facilitatedby a strong central state with top-down reform approaches. Democracy, with itscomplex participatory, multi-institutional systems anchored in individualism andliberal values, seemed too cumbersome for genuine and swift economic development.The persistence of ruling monarchies in the region also contributes to democraticresistance. Nowhere else in the world are there so many monarchs still wieldinglegitimate power. When national leadership results through inheritance, central tenetsofdemocracyareinevitablycompromised.WhilemonarchiesinEgypt(1952),Libya (1969), and Iran (1979) have been overthrown, a remarkable number remainintact: Morocco, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and all the small Gulf countries. These politicalorders, while experiencing a measure of liberalization, are by their nature resistant tofull democratization. In the Gulf region in particular, the existence of substantial oilrevenues has created in most instances vast patronage networks that determine whogets what, when, and how.The weakness of democracy in many Muslim countries is also compromised by aprevalence of dictatorshipswho have historical records of political repression,corruption, human rights violations, and abuses of public office. These states, in manycases, are neither willing nor capable of reform. Repressive and exclusive regimes canspawn apathy and despair, which in turn breeds radicalism. The failure of secularpolitics in Muslim countries has provided incubation for the rise of extremist Islam,whereas moderate Islamic political movements are linked to inclusion and openness inthe political process.Democracy building in the Islamic worldWhileitcanbeestablishthatthereareinherentpoliticalconstraintsinthecontemporary Muslim world when it comes to democracy, there are other contributingfactors havingto dowithdemocracyitself. No examplebetter illustratesthecomplexities and challenges of building a stable democratic apparatus than does therecent cases of Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and Yemen. Establishing democracies isusually a messy business particularly to a country that has never known an authenticDemocracyand Islam181
democratic system. To a whole generation of Arabs, democracy is at most anabstraction. For over 40 years, Iraqis, Egyptians, Tunisians, Libyans, and Yemenishave lived under authoritarian systems. For Americans, democracy is woven so tightlyinto their socio-cultural fabric that it is difficult to imagine governance in any otherway. There are many basic and foundational characteristics of a democracy that mostAmericans take for granted, and sometimes often assume that those living innon-democratic systems innately understand the virtues of democracy, but do notactualize them because of the chokehold of corrupt regimes. The fact is that setting updemocracies is very often chaotic and unruly. Typically, democracies are preceded byviolent conflict in which a regime must be overthrown as seen in the Arab Springmovements. A power vacuum ensues where more violence results from various groupscompeting for political and resource control, and society can get caught in a vortex ofviolence and instability. In transitioning from one governmental system to another,conflicts are almost unavoidable. Such a radical shift from a totalitarian regime in theArab Spring countries to one operating by popular voice inevitably involve strugglesthat are far from tidy and orderly.Political history also suggests that there are no quick fixes when it comes tobuilding democracies. Examples are abundant of democracies hastily fashioned thathave failed miserably. The states of Central Europe offer rare exemptions to this grimpattern. It must be kept in mind that elections in and of themselves do not producedemocracy. Democratic systems in the West are characterized by specific attributes:separation of powers, free elections, an independent civil society, rule of law, and basichuman rights such as private property, free speech, and religious tolerance. Thesevalues and traditions emanated and evolved over centuries and were the products ofspecific historical experiences such as the reformation and separation of church andstate,therenaissanceanditsensuingenlightenment,andcapitalismandthedevelopment of an independent middle class. Long before democracy could gaintraction in the West, it had to socially marinate in these experiences over long periodsof time. For instance, only about 200 years ago England and the USA were consideredtheavant gardeof free societies, but only 5 percent of their population was eligible tovote. The major regime change involving the American Revolution, took six years fromthe end of the war until the Constitution was ratified in 1789. Building a stabledemocracy in Iraq or anywhere takes time. It took seven years to rebuild Japan afterSecond World War, and about as long to rebuild Kosovo and Bosnia in the 1990s.Successful democracies also require a particular sequencing of events. The first andforemost priority of government is establishing security. Everything else is contingentupon it, and it can be argued that this is the greatest challenge to the Arab Springcountries. Once order and security are established, institutions of limited governmentcan be established with a constitution, bill of rights, an independent judiciary, and astrong central banking system. With these elements in place, countries can transitiontoward a full-fledged democracy. Without order, the public will have no confidence insuch institutions as the police, courts, and banks.The influence of agent nations, compounds the challenges to building democraciesin the Arab world. The West in general and the USA in particular have had adubious legacy in the Islamic world and Middle East. The collective memories of thecrusades and colonialism are still fresh in the national consciousness of those countries.The USA is perceived as threatening, not only as political and economic imperialists,JGR3,2182
but perhaps more insidious – as cultural imperialists. The West is perceived as usinginternational institutions, military power, and economic resources to run the world inways that will maintain Western predominance, protect Western interests and promoteWestern political and economic values. Arabs and Muslims feel they are under siege bythe modern world and that the USA symbolizes this world. There is fear that the USAhas ambitions of cultural genocide. When a country’s way of life is threatened,particularly when it perceives its spiritual or religious existence is endangered, theconflict risks becoming existential and irrational. Many are convinced that modernliberal societies of the USA and Western Europe want to wipe out religion and haveaspirations to destroy faith. America, in particular, represents globalization in all of itsdisorienting effects. In the minds of many Arabs then, there are many unresolvedquestions. Can Arab societies modernize without becoming westernized, or worse intheir minds, Americanized? What are the promises of democracy, particularly if it isimposed with a western blue-print? An open society for many in the Islamic world is afrightening prospect where there is greater accessibility to destructive and hazardouselements:drugabuse,alcoholism,prostitution,violence,divorce,elicitsexualrelationships, and other social ills. These elements are indeed part of Americansociety, but in no way define or accurately characterize it. Unfortunately, state controlledmedia in the Arab world and other countries of the Middle East have exerted a powerfulfilter of how the West and the USA are presented to local populations. Undoubtedly,most Arabs have only been exposed a negative picture of western culture and are thusunderstandably skeptical as to the intentions of America’s influence in establishing ademocracy.Islam and Islamic culture have no foundational preclusions to democracy, and formany Muslims democracy is an appropriate way to realize certain responsibilities ofthe faith in the contemporary world. Indeed, there is strong evidence that synergiesexist and that both democracy and Islam are flexible enough to find productiveaccommodation. Marrying democracy and Islam requires some reinterpretation of bothnotions. A case in point is the recently ratified Iraqi Constitution that attempts to blendIslam and democracy. The document declares Islam as the basic source of law and theofficial national religion, but that no law can contradict the principles of democracy.Muslim supporters of the Constitution have accommodated the idea that every aspectof ordinary life or of government policy need not be dictated by Islam. The Islamic vetocomes into play only if particular laws are interpreted by the constitutional court ascontravening Islam’s basic tenets. While the Constitution specifies that the courts willnot be composed exclusively of religious scholars, it does require that experts inShari’ahlaw serve alongside lawyers trained in secular civil law. Opinions are sure todiffer, and the practical details of daily life in a state where imams and secular trainedjudges working alongside each other still needs to be worked out. Although Iraq’sIslamic democracy is an experiment, it suggests that the broad abstractions ofGovernment and God can be theoretically reconciled in an Islamic context.While theQur’an per seis not an impediment to democracy, there are some thingsthat still seem to stand in the way of democratization in much of the Muslim world.This has much to do with authoritarian political traditions, a history of colonial andimperial rule, state domination of economy and society, sectarian strife, and failedsecular political paradigms. Across the political and ideological spectrum, the Muslimexperience has been one of monarchs, dictators, colonial rulers, and an overallDemocracyand Islam183
maldistribution of socioeconomic and power resources. This is an historical legacy thatneeds to be overcome if any real progress can be made. There will always be those whoare willing to hijack Islam to further a message of intolerance and an absolutist anddivisive political agenda. Just as in other large, complex faith systems, there are thosethat continue to differ on many critical questions and issues. In the case of Islam, thedebates will continue on the relationship of divine sovereignty to human sovereignty,the nature of an Islamic democracy, the relationship of ruler and ruled, the role of law,individual rights, and pluralism. Major shifts in Islamic religious thought will likely bea slow process as the meaning of sacred texts, principles and doctrines continue to beexamined and debated.However, despite the rather bleak situation at present, there are grounds for hope.Strong pressures toward liberalization exist, both because the media continuouslyprovide alternative models from other countries, and because grass-root movementsare fighting to transform the situation. Women are beginning to more effectively asserttheir rights, and in some countries we are witnessing the power of young people whoare agitating against government oppression. As we have seen, there is a verypolitically active youth movement who favor democratic change in many Muslimcountries, and many experiments are underway that warrant attention. The debatescurrently occurring among Muslim intellectuals on how to govern themselves inmodern societies using authentic Islamic interpretation are significant. It is this type ofdiscourse that can lead to more political openness, improved participation and a greaterrecognition of human rights. Progress along these lines must come, as it should, withlocal language and interpretation and it will likely be approached from a completelydifferent perspective than we may be used to in the West.Conclusions and implicationsNever has the Arab world appeared more politically fluid and uncertain with the recentuprisings. Since December 2010 the Middle East has witnessed an unprecedented levelof popular unrest resulting in the toppling of the Tunisian and Egyptian governments,several incipient civil wars and severe government backlash. In many ways we arewitnessing the beginnings of the unraveling and dismantling of the Arab order.What is occurring illustrates the universal desire for dignity and for politicalparticipation in the public space. But it also demonstrates the volatile social conditionspresent in the Arab world with 60 percent of its population who are under the age of25 with 40 percent of those unemployed – among the highest in the world (Danin, 2011).With the advent of social networking and the rapidity of technology, dictators andautocrats can no longer act with impunity and indifference to public opinion. Publicopinion matters in Arab politics in ways that it never has before now. The outcome ofthese uprisings and the democratic conversations it has spawned is far from certain.But one thing is almost certain. Islamic politics is likely to play a prominent role in thosecountries seeking more democratic development. One reason is that in places likeEgypt and Yemen, the Islamist parties tend to be the best organized. A second reason isthat with less dictatorial governance in the Arab world, Islam can be more freelyexplored as a political model, testing its range of flexibility and multiplicity ofapplication. There are possible reasons to be concerned, for sure, especially if democraticexperiments fail, weak political structures become established, or the process ishijacked by political extremities. But Islamic history has demonstrated that thereJGR3,2184
is no monolithic construal of Islam and politics, and in fact history actually provideshope that a more representative and democratic government might result from theuprisings with healthier, progressive elements of Islam emerging in ways that were notbefore possible.Haynes (1998), in his book,Religion and Global Politics, notes:Throughout history, the world religions have functioned as “terrains of meaning,” subject toradically different interpretations and conflicts, often with profound social and politicalimplications. Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity and Buddhism all have long traditionsof reformers, populists and “protestants,” seeking to give the religion contemporary meaningandsocialsalience.Thepost-modernera,ratherthanbeingdominatedbyfundamentalism alone, is a period of wider religious reinterpretation, spurred by changeswithin individual countries and at the universal level, like globalization. What this points to isthat those who neglect religion in their analyses of contemporary and comparative politics doso at their peril.Those who analyze the democratic winds of contemporary Muslim politics cannotcome to a full picture without considering Islam. Are Islam and democracy compatible?Answering this question is not only extraordinarily important, but also exceedinglydifficult. As argued here, it depends on whose Islam and whose democracy are at issue.Islam possesses ideological resources providing justification for a wide spectrum ofpolitical models. The future is yet uncertain about how this great democraticexperiment will play itself out. But one thing is certain. The stakes are extremely highand it will be in everyone’s best interest that what is playing out in the Arab andMuslim world finds a healthy accommodation between authentic, liberal Islam anddemocratic principles that diffuse power and provide necessary checks and balances.The period ahead will be fascinating.ReferencesAli Khan, L. (2003),A Theory of Universal Democracy: Beyond the End of History, Kluwer LawInternational, Dordrecht.An-Na’im, A.A. (1990),Toward an Islamic Reformation: Civil Liberties, Human Rights, andInternational Law, Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, NY.Danin, R. (2011), “The Arab uprisings: initial observations”, paper presented at the Council ofForeign Relations, Washington DC, June 23.Esposito, J.L. (1988),Islam: The Straight Path, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, p. 68.Esposito, J.L. (2002),What Everybody Needs to Know about Islam, Oxford University Press,New York, NY, p. 152.Geertz, C. (1971),Islam Observed: Religious Development in Morocco and Indonesia, University ofChicago Press, Chicago, IL, p. 14.Hamidullah, M. (1968),The First Written Constitution in the World, Muhammad Ashraf, Lahore.Haynes, J. (1998),Religion and Global Politics, Longman, London.Ishaq, I. (1955),Life of Muhammad, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Lewis, B. (1993), “Islam and liberal democracy”,The Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 271 No. 2, p. 89.Mazrui, A. (2003), “Islamocracy: in search of a Muslim path to democracy”, paper presented atthe Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy, Fourth Annual Conference, WashingtonDC, May 16.Democracyand Islam185
Nasr, S.H. (2004),The Heart of Islam: Enduring Values for Humanity, Harper Collins,New York, NY, p. 148.Parray,T.A.(2010),“DemocracyinIslam:viewsofseveralmodernMuslimscholars”,The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, Vol. 27 No. 2.About the authorsDr Bradley J. Cook is the Provost at Southern Utah University and Professor of History. Prior tohis current position he served as President of the Abu Dhabi Women’s College in the United ArabEmirates. He began his career in higher education in 1990 as the Special Assistant to thePresident at the American University in Cairo. He is the author of the bookClassical Foundationsof Islamic Educational Thought.Bradley J. Cook is the corresponding author and can becontacted at: bradcook@suu.eduDr Michael Stathis is currently Professor of Political Science and International Relations andChair of the Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice at Southern Utah University. Hehas taught Political Science since 1974 and has taught at SUU since 1991. He has publishedseveral scholarly papers and numerous newspaper articles and is also a regular radio guest onthe British Forces Broadcasting System (SITREP) commenting on world affairs.JGR3,2186To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail:reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details:www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints