|
Following the 9/11 attacks, there is much debate
in the Western media about compatibility and incompatibility of
Islam and democracy. There are superficial and biased analyses,
which just scratch the surface of the issue in an attempt to justify
one or another preconceived ideas.
Before agreeing to one or another point of view
the author discusses the issue in detail to show what principles of
democracy are the Western analysts and their allies among Muslims
comparing with Islam and also if we are not comparing two
incomparable in the first place.
This chapter also looks if democratization for
the Muslim world means implementation of the same principles and
values, which make democracy acceptable, in the first place, or
there are different standards applied. The author traces back the
roots of present confusion.
The discussion started back, just after the
end of the Cold War. In 1992, when the campaign against Islam
was reshaping, Amos Perlmutter, a leading light in US foreign
policy, had no hesitation in writing in the Washington Post
"Is Islam, fundamentalist or otherwise, compatible with
liberal, human rights-oriented, Western-style, representative
democracy? The answer is clearly no."4
It was the time when the US and its "democratic" allies
chose to shut their eyes on abrupt suspension of elections in
Algeria and used a massive military operation to restore the
Emir of Kuwait to his throne.... |
An extensive discussion follows on
the cultural assessment of Islam, the so called democratization
process and different components of Islamic faith in the light of
contemporary discussion and attempts to fit Islam into democratic
design.
|
...The latest American occupations and its
cluelessness about the kind of government that would work in
occupied lands have forced it to engage Muslims for proving
that democracy is not compatible with Islam unless Muslims
embrace the principles that have brought democracy closer to
its demise.
Some Muslims feel marveled when they find a
tenet of Islam matching the concept of democracy and proudly
declare that Islam is compatible with democracy. Similarly,
others quickly reject Islam when it challenges the godlessness
and spiritually bankrupt aspect of democracy. In fact, if we
take out the goodness of democracy, we will see that the
Qur’an identified all these social and political values 1500
years ago. Khaled Abou El Fadl has rightly identified these
values as, "pursuing justice through social cooperation and
mutual assistance (the Qur’an 49:13; 11:119); establishing a
non-autocratic, consultative method of governance; and
institutionalizing mercy and compassion in social interactions
(6:12, 54; 21:107; 27:77; 29:51; 45:20)."8
Yet these fine values can never be fostered in an environment
that throws religion out of the public square.... |
From here onwards the
author discusses the issues raised by John L. Esposito, Khaled Abou
El Fadl and others and put their view to test by providing hard
facts, using commonsense logic and giving references from the
authentic sources of Islam.
The
misconceptions spread under the banner of political Islam and the
"need" for secularization and reinterpretation of Islam for making
it compatible with the US-approved form of democracy are
addressed in the next part of the chapter. He the author gives an
idea about the kind of governance mechanism that would rise from
"the ashes of corrupted democracy."
Finally the author
exposes the reasons and objectives behind presenting Islam as
incompatible with democracy or vice versa and concludes the
discussion with references from authentic sources to support his
point of view.
|