Democracy in Middle-East: Can Democracy and Islam Co-Exist - Research Paper Example

 Democracy in Middle-East The introduction of democracy in middle East will only serve to spread radical Islamic militancy and undermine security in the region. Can Democracy & Islam co-exist? This question as simple as it may sound has a lot of implications when we look into it. One such implication is the rise of Islamic militancy in a region where democracy exists. Furthermore, the region will also become a target of certain security threats. In this article, we discuss this issue with respect to the Middle-Eastern countries. Here we outline how the implementation of democracy can have its adverse effects in terms of security. Background: Democratic revolution has swept across many countries in the past few years. It would not be wrong to say that majority governments have democratic regimes as compared to the past. However, the Middle-East seems to be untouched by this wave of democracy. There are 22 members in the Arab League and not one of them has a stable and complete democratic government. In the past two decades, there was an attempt of democratic activity in few Arab countries as well. Certain problems in the government led to this action and certain governments supported political liberalization. However, with the passage of time as the situation improved such activities were put to an end. The political arena has a number of examples whereby the presence of democracy failed dramatically. Ranging from Algeria’s liberalization to the subtle in Tunisia, and the electoral manipulation in Egypt to the human rights issues and concerns in Palestine, the pages of history are filled with examples (Tessler, 2002) So what is the reason of this trend in Middle-eastern countries? While, democracy is the widely accepted form of government in most countries of the world, why autocracy rules the Arab world at large still? To understand this let us first discuss the relationship between Islam and democracy and if they are compatible with each other or not and if yes, how compatible they are. Islam and Democracy: Democracy can be defined as a form of government which derives its power from the people. There are two ways to go about it; firstly by means of a direct referendum and other by means of representatives elected by the people. If we try and take this definition to understand Islam, the answer would be simple. Islam has always been a religion of the people. Even the Messengers of Allah had to consult people in taking decisions of worldy matters (Handwerk, 2003). The Holy Book Quran was sent as guidance but many of its verses are misinterpreted to give the wrong overview of Islam to the modern world. Islam is treated as a medieval religion; hence, if one would study the history of Islam with proper references and would understand the correct meaning of its message as spread through the holy book Quran, the situation would be entirely different. Let us take one example: The Quranic verse about cutting of hands is often taken wrong by people. This verse is used to present a very stringent view of the religion. However, this verse is followed by another verse which says that whoever is repents his wrong-doings will be forgiven by Allah because Allah is merciful. This explains that there is a lot of flexibility in this religion. Harsh punishments are given when needed but the phrase could also be taken in the sense that such actions should be taken so that the person would not repeat this in the future. So, we see that Islam is a religion which has always emphasized upon: The equality of people above all sorts of discrimination of caste, creed, color etc. The Prophet Muhammad (saw) addressed the people signifying that concept during the last Hajj pilgrimage, saying: "O People! Your God is one; your father is one; no preference of an Arab neither over non-Arab nor of a non-Arab over an Arab or red over black or black over red except for the most righteous. Verily the most honored of you is the most righteous." The accountability of leaders to community, The respect of diversity amongst different religions and faiths. Rulers and ruled are subject to the same law and there can be no discrimination on the basis of position, power or privilege. This and a detailed study of the Islamic religion clearly shows Islam stands for equality and scrupulously adheres to this principle in the social, economic and political realms alike. This makes the religion completely compatible with democracy and considering it otherwise would be an argument without logic. Democracy in Middle-East: So far our argument has clearly stated two things and both contradict each other. They are: (1) Middle eastern countries (they follow the religion Islam) are mostly autocratic states and democratic form of government has not been able to prevail in these states, (2) Islam is a religion which is completely compatible with the system of democracy on the basis of its set of beliefs and principles. How do we explain these two statements? And should democracy prevail in these states or the introduction of democracy would give rise to un-rest and security concerns in these states. The understanding of this question lies in the simple debate of understanding the religion of Islam. Islamic world has not been considered a very receptive place for the principles of democracy in the modern world. The rise of many militant groups in different Muslim countries leading to havoc and wrong interpretation and presentation of what the real meaning of Islam is, has made it very difficult for these Arab countries to allow any such democratic activity in their own state. The concern that allowing any such activity in the region would lead to out-of-control destruction is hence a valid one. Let’s consider some examples to illustrate this fact: 1. Taliban: The Talibans initially ruled Afghanistan and called themselves a group of freedom-fighters who were working towards the development of the country against various conflicts that were taking place after the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan (Hayes et al. 2007). The Taliban’s way of working was very surprising and their policies which were for Islam had complete contradictions from the message of Islam. It was a simple case of misinterpreting the meaning of the message of God for their own purpose. The Taliban were only recognized as a legitimate body by Pakistan, Saudia Arabia and United Arab Emirates but post 11 September 2001 (terrorist attack on the US), UAE & Saudia Arabia cut all their ties with this group. The Taliban took a back-seat after the United States launched its operation against them but they resurged again back in 2003 and with continued efforts they have raised hell in Pakistan and Afghanistan both. Countless suicide attacks have taken place and after various efforts by the government the Taliban have spread civil unrest in Pakistan and continue to do so. Outcome: The Taliban call themselves ‘Mujahedeen’ and as per them they are doing ‘Jihad’ and killing in the name of God. However, it is quite obvious that they have completely distorted the meaning of Jihad and continue to give wrong guidance and training to young people who would engage in suicide attacks thinking it is their way of becoming closer to God. They are completely brain-washed otherwise how killing innocent people could be considered a way of gaining closeness to Allah and achieving high ranks in His eyes. So while they think of themselves as a reform group, it is not the case, and they and their extreme practices have been criticized by many Islamic scholars saying that their knowledge of Islamic history is not correct. 2. The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood This Islamist group has a vast history as it came into being in 1928 in Egypt. This is an example of a moderate Islamic group which is making a positive impact and working on issues for which these groups are actually formed. Many critics, however, claim otherwise. In their opinion they are promoting radicalism amongst the youth in different countries but majority believe that this group is far less fundamental as compared to many. The main underlying principles of this group are democracy, pluralism and independence of judiciary. They also emphasize strongly on human rights. In 2006, the MB-affiliated members of the national legislature spent their time to solve problems of inadequate housing, hospitals that were in and conditions etc by submitting motions on and also dealt with political problems (i.e. electoral fraud). They also argued for various religious issues (although they might have proceeded with caution to avoid repression). Outcome: Hence, we see that The Muslim Brotherhood enjoys a popular position in Egypt and the general perception goes that the presence of such Islamist movements is favorable and is working towards greater political reform in the country. One senior member of the MB’s Guidance Council in Egypt has described the MB as a “safety valve for moderate Islam” without which many more youth would have chosen to become involved with violent groups (Alihashi et al. 2009). There are several other Islamist groups functioning in various Muslim countries. Poplar examples would be Hamas, Hezbollah etc. If we study each one of them we find that the role of every group is different and so are their activities. Some are playing a positive role in their respective countries while others are not. However, it is clearly evident from all of this that those who are spreading negativity on the name of Islam are just distorting its meaning and using it for their own personal gains. Islam is a very peaceful religion and promotes democracy in its true sense. Islam and democracy can co-exist in a most beautiful manner benefitting all, however, the reason it has not been successfully administered and the Middle Eastern countries don’t want to implement it is the Islamist movements that are by name ‘Islamic’, but by essence they are just spreading uncertainty and un-rest in the name of Islam. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The following conclusions have been derived from the above argument: Islam and democracy can co-exist together in the most peaceful manner ever. Islamist groups functioning in various countries have different implications based on their respective histories and set of beliefs. Some are working positively to ensure benefits for the country while some are doing the exact opposite. Such groups cannot be termed as Islamic. They are just using the name of Islam to achieve personal goals while deviating away from the true meaning of Islam. Middle-eastern countries have always tried to stay away from the democratic form of government to stay away from security threats and the rise of radicalism in the country and rightly so. While the other two conclusions have been discussed in detail to form the basis of our argument, here we will discuss the third one. When you look around what’s happening in the world everyday at the hands of terrorist groups, you are bound to take all sorts of measures to prevent such things to happen to yourself. That’s a general reaction anyone would take. While you see that some Islamist groups are really beneficial to their countries and working hand in hand to provide betterment for the country and the government system, both. Democratic form of government has been a very useful process for the development of many countries. However, the pros may be many but the cons are no less. And then the risk that if a particular group in the influence of others stray towards radicalism and fundamentalist elements start appearing in the region, security would be threatened at large and could create an out-of-control situation for many. One solution in this regard could be controlled democracy. This, in a normal world situation could offer the best of both worlds. The advantages of democracy could help the country prosper in a totally new way and with the controlled measures in place any sort of activity that could lead to security threats for the country could be prevented. The problem, however, is that the current world scenario. The present situation is such and it does not look too favorable for that kind of a resolution also. These states know that those fundamentalist elements who are sympathetic towards other Islamist ‘radical’ groups would carry out nastier activities of given the freedom. Therefore, it can be concluded that in the present world circumstances, introducing democracy in the Middle East wouldn’t be a very wise option. A form of controlled democracy or introducing some form of democratic outlet could be done if situation becomes favorable but as for now introducing it would have greater chances of the spread of fundamentalism and security problems in the region. BIBLIOGRAPHY Journal Articles Mishra, S. (2008) Islam and Democracy - Comparing Post-9/11 Representations in the U.S. Prestige Press in the Turkish, Iraqi, and Iranian Contexts, Journal of Communication Inquiry, April, Vol.32, No.2, 155-178. Tessler, M. (2002) Do Islamic Orientations Influence Attitudes toward Democracy in the Arab World? Evidence from Egypt, Jordan Morocco, and Algeria, International Journal of Comparative Sociology, October, 43: 229-249, Miller, J. (1996) Fundamentalist Islam at Large: A Cresting Wave, the Middle-East Quarterly, June, pp 51-59. Other Sources Handwerk, Brian. (2003) Can Islam & Democracy Coexist? National Geographic News, October 24. Alihashi et al. (2009) Islam, Militancy, & Democracy in the Middle East [Internet], http://www.e-ir.info/?p=1429 Hayes et al. (2007) Who are the Taliban? Their history and resurgence [Internet], http://www.infoplease.com/spot/taliban.html Read More