The Islamists Are Coming

But democracy and piety aren't always contradictions.

BY ROBIN WRIGHT | NOVEMBER 7, 2011

The factors that generated the uprisings -- the young bulge, literacy, and the tools of technology -- have spawned diverse ways of thinking among younger Islamists, too. Ibrahim Houdaiby's grandfather and great-grandfather were both supreme leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood. He became its best-known blogger in 2005. But Ibrahim also advocated pragmatism, internal democracy, less secrecy, religious tolerance, and women's rights.

"I had lots of debates with my grandfather," he told me. "One was over which comes first: freedom or sharia. My grandfather said sharia leads to freedom. My argument came from the Quran, which says, 'Let there be no compulsion in religion.' I said freedom comes first." Ibrahim eventually resigned from the Brotherhood over practical political differences.

The wild cards at the far end of the spectrum are the Salafis, ultraconservative radicals inspired by Saudi Arabia's puritan Wahhabi sect. They are often a hybrid. In Egypt, the Islamic Group started to renounce violence in the late 1990s as part of a deal with the government to release its imprisoned members. Some have even crusaded against jihadi tactics they once endorsed. Their willingness to share power, however, is not convincing because of rigid positions on everything from Islamic law and women to Israel.

Abboud al-Zomor, for example, provided the bullets to kill Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1981. Imprisoned for three decades, he was released after Mubarak's ouster. "There is no longer any need for me to use violence against those who gave us our freedom and allowed us to be part of political life," he told the New York Times this year. But Zomor's goal of creating a strict religious state has not changed -- and it does not inspire confidence about the movement's ability to compromise.

The new spectrum reflects the key bottom line: Over the next decade, the most dynamic debate will be among the diverse Islamists, not between Islamist and secular parties. These political tensions will play out as they vie to define Islam's role in new constitutions -- and then implement it in daily life.

These trends should not come as a surprise: Many Muslims share conservative values even as they push for freedoms. The right to human dignity, Muslims believe, is God-given -- a view shared by Thomas Jefferson and engraved on the walls of his memorial. The values of their religion are a starting point for all other aspects of life.

"Without Islam, we will not have any real progress," reflected Diaa Rashwan, an expert on political Islam at Cairo's Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies. "When Western countries built their own progress, they didn't go out of their epistemological or cultural history. Japan is still living in the culture of the samurai, but in a modern way. The Chinese are still living the traditions created by Confucianism."

"So why," he mused, "do we have to go out of our history?"

MARCO LONGARI/AFP/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS: MIDDLE EAST
 

Robin Wright, a fellow at the U.S. Institute of Peace and the Woodrow Wilson Center, is the author of Rock the Casbah: Rage and Rebellion Across the Islamic World.

TROY C

5:41 AM ET

November 8, 2011

We need to accept that

We need to accept that Islamists will always have a different flavor of democracy, and we should encourage them to adopt it to suit their own culture. Political philosophy that might work from home in the West will not necessarily translate to a popular policy for Muslim governments. Only when we can fully appreciate the diversity of thought will we be able to take democracy to the world.

 

ARABIAN KNIGHTS

8:30 AM ET

November 8, 2011

Islamist vs. Muslim, BIG difference!

There is a difference between just Muslims and Islamists who specifically spawned Al-Qaida, such as Ghanoushi's group, the 'Libyan rebels' and the Muslim Brotherhood. Sadly, due to the current clueless-ness ravaging this almost retarded administration and the department of state- in both area studies and international law, the world will have a chance to get an up-close and personal taste of Islamists rule (Taliban, anyone?)
Although, it seems that most, for the past decade, have deliberately not distinguished between Islamists and Muslims, there is a huge difference- Muslims are people who happen to have been born Muslims, Islamists in many cases are leftovers from the colonial days, where they reject everything they perceive as Western, and adhere to a version of Islam that even the caliphs would have found intolerably extreme. These Islamists are going to harm their own people more than anyone else, with the US' blessings. Most Islamists in these countries have an advantage, not because they are popular, but becuase they are receiving funding and assistance from outside these poverty stricken countries- A-Nahada has been accused of buying votes with a certain 'tiny Gulf country's money'- What is simply amazing, is that our 'experts' seem to have missed the fact that these countries are dealing with the fallout of a global food shortage, not a 'democracy and liberty' awakening that came out of the blue. Food prices have risen over 800% in Syria before the current unrest started. As one author stated "even Islamists have to eat"- once these governments are in power, with their intolerance and hate, the people will find that not only have they lost their modest freedoms, but they are also still hungry, and that is when the blood will start flowing in the streets. The other un-thought of consequence, is that now these people who swore to destroy the west, will now have armies, a seat in the UN, a say in world politics, what will become of human rights? liberties? etc.
What is simply amazing, is that (just) Muslims have been the target of massive hate and discrimination, probably reaching its height, in recent years, after the Ft Hood shootings, and the Ground Zero mosque saga, where anyone who was 'just' a Muslim paid a huge price of alienation, harassment and open discrimination. The media did not waste any time calming that some overseas Imams have some magical powers over all American Muslims, where a few emails zombied them into shooting their colleagues, vs. looking at the after affects of massive backlash, hate and open discrimination against all Muslims, especially in the military that resulted as payback for the actions of Bin Ladin- which might have had something to do with the tragic shooting, (I noticed no one ever heard again about the shooting that happened a few weeks before in Camp Victory.)
Today, the worst of the so called 'Muslims' the media and the Right so love to talk about- the types that give all Muslims a bad name are being enabled to take over the governments of vital allies in the Middle East, these people who were a danger to their own people are now 'poor persecuted people-' in many cases the Islamists were 'persecuted' as part of the American war on terror as they were directly threatening the United States. The Libyan rebels have blatant AL-Qaida members among them, I wonder if anyone is being held responsible for 'assisting and abiding sworn enemies of the United States?' when all is said and done? or will Americans remain asleep at the wheel, believing every media created massacre, allowing their tax dollars to create new massacres where old ones were never proven to be real? but then, today, the truth of the matter is... it is not the Muslims that are coming, but the Islamists..... We will all lie in the bed our ignorant arrogant leadership made for us....

 

IDILISSA

6:26 PM ET

November 8, 2011

Appreciated

I appreciate this article and its inclusion of the basis of movements in the Muslim world in Islamic law and values. This is common to most societies and should not be viewed as particularly strange or alarming. One thing I would point out as something that could have been improved in this excellent essay, is the reference to the 2500 year old dynasty in Iran. That the shah represented the culmination of the Sassanian dynasty is a piece of propaganda that was used to ensure his legitimately -- it has since been thoroughly refuted. Furthermore, the characterization of the Muslim Brotherhood as categorically anti-women, anti-Christian and anti-Israeli sounds like Israeli hasbara, and can be largely diffused by examining the majority of Egyptian MB policies and actions. The identification of Saudi Arabia propaganda as a problem in fuelling extremism is well-put. The thing is, the Muslim world doesn't appreciate this either. But what can be done, when America supports S.A. without reserve? They continue to fund and support extremism and unconscionable tactics without consequence.

 

MARTY MARTEL

9:59 AM ET

November 26, 2011

Arab Spring will be followed by fundamentalist Islamic summer

All signs point to Islamic fundamentalists coming to power following West-supported regime changes in Egypt and Libya. When new Islamic fundamentalist-led government in Egypt shacks up with Hamas and Hezbollah against Israel, US will come to regret supporting regime change. Ditto for Libya, Syria and Jordan.