Ikhwanweb :: The Muslim Brotherhood Official English Website

Tue109 2018

Last update19:14 PM GMT

Back to Homepage
Font Size : 12 point 14 point 16 point 18 point
MSU scholar urges policy shift toward Muslim world in new book
MSU scholar urges policy shift toward Muslim world in new book
Unless the United States drastically changes its foreign policy toward the Muslim world – and supports democratic efforts at every turn – Islamic radicalism will continue to thrive, according to a new book from a Michigan State University professor.
Saturday, January 12,2008 09:01
Newsroom.msu.edu

Unless the United States drastically changes its foreign policy toward the Muslim world – and supports democratic efforts at every turn – Islamic radicalism will continue to thrive, according to a new book from a Michigan State University professor.
In “The Many Faces of Political Islam,” Mohammed Ayoob, a renowned scholar of Middle Eastern affairs, challenges Western assumptions about Islamic politics but also argues that democracy may be the “ideal antidote” to the appeal of Islamism and its rhetoric.
“Dealing with political Islam and the challenges that emerge from it will form a significant part of the new president’s agenda,” says Ayoob, University Distinguished Professor of international relations at MSU’s James Madison College and the Department of Political Science.
“It is imperative that policy analysts and policymakers take a hard and fresh look at the reality of political Islam rather than going by conventional, stereotypical images of Islamic political activity that have become fashionable in Washington.”
Ayoob’s book, published by the University of Michigan Press, explains in layman language the concept of political Islam and its potential consequences. Political Islam, or Islamism, is the pursuit of political objectives by individuals or groups in the Muslim world who use Islamic idiom and rhetoric to achieve their goals. Drawing upon Islamic vocabulary gives their rhetoric an aura of authenticity, especially in the context of the failure of secular ideologies and regimes to deliver power, wealth or dignity to Muslim societies.
Writing and speaking about political Islam, Ayoob writes, has become a growth industry in the United States following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and has led to the emergence of many “half-baked ‘experts’” who spread misinformation in the media. Among the common assumptions he challenges in the book:
Assumption: Political Islam is driven by religious concerns. Reality: As with Christianity, religion and politics in Muslim lands historically have remained distinct. In fact, when the two spheres do intersect, it’s typically political actors who use religion for their purposes and not vice versa.
Assumption: Political Islam is monolithic. Reality: No two Islamist parties are alike. Political activities depend on a host of cultural and socioeconomic factors; what works in Indonesia, for example, would not work in Egypt.
Assumption: Islamist groups are unwilling to compromise or join coalitions. Reality: Compromise and coalitions are increasingly common in the Muslim world, as seen in Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey and even the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Assumption: Islamist parties are by definition anti-democratic. Reality: On the contrary, Islamist parties in Turkey, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan and Kuwait, among others, have engaged in democratic political activity to a significant extent.
Assumption: Violence is inherent in Islamism. Reality: Nothing could be further from the truth. Violence is the exception rather than the rule and is typically committed by fringe groups such as al-Qaida. Mainstream Islamist movements normally work within constitutional constraints even though the rules of the game are fashioned by regimes unsympathetic to their cause. The only major exceptions are Islamist national resistance movements fighting foreign occupation.

While Islamic radicalism thrives, in part, on anti-American sentiment, Ayoob says it is generally not based on opposition to the U.S. values of democracy and freedom. Instead, he says, the antipathy is grounded in a U.S. foreign policy that is perceived as using “double standards” and “Washington’s support of unsavory and repressive regimes such as those in Egypt and Saudi Arabia.”
The military occupation of Iraq has further fueled radical movements in the Middle East, he argues.
“The impact of the American decision to invade Iraq is likely to haunt Washington and its allies for a long time to come,” Ayoob writes. “The monumental mismanagement of the occupation has further added to America’s woes not only in Iraq but in the rest of the Muslim world as well.”


Posted in  
Add Comment Send to Friend Print
Related Articles
Political Islam and The Future of Democracy in the Middle East
Moderate Islamists and peaceful democracy
Pushback or Progress? Arab Regimes Respond to Democracy’s Challenge
Home Thought on Islam and Democracy
US democracy push makes Middle East liberals cringe
Is Spreading Democracy in Middle East a Bad Idea?
Democracy, not terror, is the engine of political Islam
Muslim Democracy in Action
Turkey and democracy in the Muslim world
Islamist democracy
A Conversation Continued: Democracy and Demagoguery in the Middle East
Democracy Ascendant
Democracy Promotion Needs a Plan of Action
U.S. democracy agenda in Mideast closed, activists say
Democracy in the Muslim World - Priorities and Strategies
Democracy in the Arab World, a U.S. Goal, Falters
Islam and Democracy Conference
Democracy Denied
Islam And Democracy
Open Letter to President Bush Re: Democracy Promotion
Can we have Arab Democracy without the Islamists?
Promoting Middle East Democracy II: Arab Initiatives
U.S. Stays an Unsteady Course to Middle East Peace and Democracy
Muslims see no conflict between Islamic law and democracy: poll
Parties of God: The Bush Doctrine And The Rise of Islamic Democracy
Engaging Political Islam to Promote Democracy
Future of Democracy in the Arab World
Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy
Analysis: Islam, democracy not mutually exclusive