Opinion

David Rohde

The Islamist Spring

By David Rohde
April 5, 2012

TUNIS – Like it or not, this is the year of the Islamist.

Fourteen months after popular uprisings toppled dictators in Tunisia and Egypt, Islamist political parties – religiously conservative groups that oppose the use of violence – have swept interim elections, started rewriting constitutions and become the odds-on favorites to win general elections.

Western hopes that more liberal parties would fare well have been dashed. Secular Arab groups are divided, perceived as elitist or enjoy tepid popular support.

But instead of the political process moving forward, a toxic political dynamic is emerging. Aggressive tactics by hardline Muslims generally known as Salafists are sowing division. Moderate Islamists are moving cautiously, speaking vaguely and trying to hold their diverse political parties together. And some Arab liberals are painting dark conspiracy theories.

Ahmed Ounaies, a pro-Western Tunisian politician who briefly served as foreign minister in the country’s post-revolutionary government, said that he no long trusted Rachid Ghannouchi, the leader of Tunisia’s moderate Islamist party. Echoing other secular Tunisians, he said some purportedly moderate Muslim leaders are, in fact, aligned with hardliners.

“We believe that Mr. Ghannouchi is a Salafist,” Ouanies said in an interview. “He is a real supporter of those groups.”

Months after gaining power, moderate Islamists find themselves walking a political tightrope. They are trying to show their supporters that they are different from the corrupt, pro-Western regimes they replaced. They are trying to persuade Western investors and tourists to trust them, return and help revive flagging economies. And they are trying to counter hardline Salafists who threaten to steal some of their conservative support.

The decision this week by Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood to field a candidate in the country’s presidential elections – which begin next month – is one example. The Brotherhood, which had promised not to field a candidate, said it entered to block a hardline Islamist from winning the presidency. Liberals scoffed at the explanation, accused the Brotherhood of seeking dictatorial powers and pulled out of the country’s constitutional assembly.

In Tunisia, Ghannouchi and his Ennahda party are the focus. Tunisians say debates over religion are distracting the country’s new government from its primary problem – a sputtering economy. Secularists accuse Ennhada of being too lenient on hardline Salafists, who enjoy little popular support here. Salafists have the right to protest in the new Tunisia, secularists argue, but should not be allowed to violently attack other groups.

Salafists attacked a television station in October after it aired the animated film “Persepolis,” which featured a portrayal of God. They partially shut down a leading university for two months this winter and attacked a group of secular demonstrators last month.

At the same time, a Tunisian judge jailed a newspaper editor for eight days in February after he published a photograph of a soccer player and his nude girlfriend on the cover of a local tabloid. On Thursday, two young men were sentenced to seven years in jail for posting cartoons of a nude Prophet Muhammand on Facebook.

In a recent interview here, Ghannouchi flatly dismissed supporting hardline Islam. Asked whether Tunisia’s divisions were broadening, he answered carefully.

“I am not pessimistic,” he told me. “There is a chance to reach a compromise.”

A 70-year-old, Sorbonne-educated Islamist intellectual who spent 14 years in various Tunisian prisons and 22 years in exile in London, Ghannouchi reaffirmed his liberal interpretation of Islam and democracy. While Islamic hardliners dismiss democracy as an affront to God’s authority, Ghannouchi fervently embraces it. Democracy and Islam are not only compatible, he argued, but they follow the same traditions.

“The real spokesman of Islam is public opinion, which is the high authority, the highest authority,” he told me. “Legislation, represented by the assembly, the national assembly.”

Ghannouchi says the Prophet Muhammad’s use of Shuras – or councils – to make non-religious decisions shows that democracy has existed in Islam since its birth. Government affairs should be decided by democratic vote, he said, not fatwas from religious autocrats. And he embraced full rights for minorities, international human rights treaties and free-market capitalism.

In an interview in New York, a delegation from Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood that was visiting the U.S. to reach out to Americans professed the same views.

“Our number one priority is to build a democratic Egypt,” Khaled Al-Qazzazz, the group’s foreign relations coordinator, told me, “with complete democratic institutions.”

Yet significant numbers of Tunisians, Egyptians and Americans simply do not trust the Islamists. They believe that after gaining power, they will insert Islam into school curriculums, roll back women’s rights and reduce individual freedoms.
The fear is that they will follow the route of Hamas, the Islamist movement that won elections in Gaza and Islamized local institutions after years of relatively secular Fatah rule.

In private, American officials say they hope to create economic and political incentives that make being part of the international system appealing to Islamists. That strategy is the correct one.

Holding office and being responsible for creating prosperous economies, better government services and less corruption will moderate Islamists. If they govern and fail, their popularity will erode. U.S.-backed crackdowns on Islamists will only increase their support.

In interviews, Tunisian and Egyptian Islamists said they did not want American meddling in their political affairs but said they were eager to be part of the world economy. Becoming Hamas-like international pariahs seemed to hold little appeal to them. They too know that a by-product of a globalized economy is that isolation now carries a staggering economic cost.

Asked what U.S. policies would most help Muslim moderates, Ghannouchi said “encourage investment,” “encourage tourism,” and training and educational exchange programs. Asked what U.S. policies most hurt Muslim moderates, he said unilateral U.S. military interventions that fuel anti-Americanism.

On Thursday in Washington, 300 people packed a Carnegie Endowment conference at which Islamists from Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Morocco and Jordan tried to explain their views and their goals. Americans asked Islamists if their commitment to democracy was real. Islamists asked the same question back. Some exchanges were tense, but an awkward dialogue emerged.

There is the possibility, of course, that the Islamists are sincere. Tunisian and Egyptian Islamists who spent years in exile and in jail may not want to repeat the sins of their persecutors. If Islamists abide by democratic norms, their right to participate in electoral politics should be respected. Believing in God and democracy is possible.

An extraordinary debate about the very nature of Islam is unfolding across the Middle East. In the months and years ahead, it will frighten, confuse and alarm Americans, but it is vital that Washington allow it to play out.

PHOTO: Rachid Ghannouchi, leader of the Ennahda movement, Tunisia’s main Islamist political party, speaks at a news conference in Tunis, February 23, 2012. REUTERS/Zoubeir Souissi

Comments
10 comments so far | RSS Comments RSS

The naive Left in the West could only envision a secular government emerging in the various Muslim countries that underwent the so called Arab Spring. Now reality is rearing its ugly head and the Undemocratic but West leaning governments will eventually be replaced by Hard Line Islamist governments who despise the West and all it stands for.

Posted by authentic | Report as abusive
 

At last and naturally.. Islam needed such discussions on various issues primarily “development” and its sub-components such as advancement in science and technology, promotion of freedom in the community. They needed to review their “ability to change” on one hand to adapt and adopt current state of civilization and on the other hand to lead the international community in some fields for the good and prosperity of world. So far, Islam could not give much if not anything to the world since centuries.

In addition, world powers locked them into underdevelopment since the 19th century by focusing natural resources and forming puppet government afar of peoples.

One cannot expect positive development in the Middle East unless the peoples -Islamist or non- are in real power of designing the rules of their communities. In this process Middle East or Islam needs strong criticism, but not exlusion.

Posted by hallofids | Report as abusive
 

” Americans asked Islamists if their commitment to democracy was real. Islamists asked the same question back. Some exchanges were tense, but an awkward dialogue emerged.”

The Islamists had BETTER ask if our Trojan Horse is real, my goodness.

Democracy is the US’ Trojan Horse for Hegemony.

The veil came off the ugly sister when Bush made Elliot Abrams his Democracy Czar for the Mideast.

The name of our horse?
Demo/cracy … Hege/mony
Demony

Posted by JagPop | Report as abusive
 

“In private, American officials say they hope to create economic and political incentives that make being part of the international system appealing to Islamists. That strategy is the correct one.”

How is that a correct strategy? Did it work in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, etc? Economic and political incentives are something you could offer to Belgium or Singapore with some expectation of a favorable result. Islamist countries have little interest in such things apart from fooling those who hand over such baubles. David Rohde’s might have been excused for having such a dubious understanding of Islamists twenty years ago, but not now. One now has to assume that David Rohde is either willfully ignorant or malicious. He is a guide who would lead a blind man into a crocodile pit.

Posted by walfourth | Report as abusive
 

“In interviews, Tunisian and Egyptian Islamists said they did not want American meddling in their political affairs but said they were eager to be part of the world economy. Becoming Hamas-like international pariahs seemed to hold little appeal to them. They too know that a by-product of a globalized economy is that isolation now carries a staggering economic cost.”

Here you really state the issue, but you want us to see a different meaning.

“Hamas-like international pariahs” means: running contrary to zionist machinations.

Iran is under sanctions as it is trying to stay off the zionist leash.

Saudi Arabia has on the drawing board SIXTEEN nuclear plants as it is planning for the not-so-distant future. As Saudi Arabia develops other industries, more of it’s oil will go towards local consumption and this will be happening at the same time as it’s oil reserves shrink. To counter this Saudi Arabia sees energizing future development with nuclear power while keeping it’s oil reserves for export income.

The sanctions against Iran PROVE that Iran should enrich it’s own uranium. If it’s future becomes one tethered to sanction-vulnerable uranium IMPORTS it will be at the whim of the zionists.

Iran is being whipped through the international banking system to put the leash around it’s own neck. The same international banking system could make Tunisia and Egypt obedient to foreign hegemony.

Nor do Tunisia and Egypt want “meddling in their political affairs” through military means either as has been seen, to state two examples out of many, in Gaza with the Bush plotted coup of 2007 (after Hamas won the election against Fatah Bush armed and prodded a Fatah strongman in Gaza to have a coup against Hamas, Hamas got wind of Bush’s treachery and preempted his coup) nor the Lebanon invasion of 2006 (Lebanon was invaded four months after Hezbollah had a major boost to it’s political ascension having signed a Memorandum Of Understanding with the Christian politcal party in February 2006).

Posted by JagPop | Report as abusive
 

Yup. Democracy is a bear. Which is why hypocrites who say it is the ultimate in political governance – so often try to impede it.

Posted by Eideard | Report as abusive
 

Islamism will not win any thing any more, people want the old system back because it is able to fight this virus.

Posted by wil.b | Report as abusive
 

“Economic and political incentives are something you could offer to Belgium or Singapore with some expectation of a favorable result. Islamist countries have little interest in such things apart from fooling those who hand over such baubles.”
REALLY ?
I wonder how many self-proclaimed experts on islamic tendencies, like the author of this line, have ever lived in an islamic country, attempted to speak the language, and experienced daily life among its denizens.
No, my friend, you cannot compare a country that has fought its own battle for real democracy with countries like Iraq and Afghanistan that have had fake “democracy” forced upon them by an outside invader.

Posted by Evereg | Report as abusive
 

Evereg,

Your “baubles” of wisdom are wasted on (presumed) Americans who have no interest in geography, math, literacy, reading comprehension, history, logic, philosophy, morality, comparative religion, languages, art, science, brotherhood, citizenship…

Perhaps you should try posting in Belgium. :)

Posted by JagPop | Report as abusive
 

This column sounds like a whole bunch of denial and excuse making by a supporter of an Arab Spring which has gone bad.

Threats against Israel, the arrests of well-meaning Westerners advocating for democracy and human rights, the attacks on the Coptic Christians: we DO have a choice as to whether are not we fund and assist people who reject common decency and tolerance toward people who are different than they are.

Posted by Parker1227 | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •