Все записи в "Тунис" Категория
Арабские завтра
Дэвид Б. Оттауэй
Октябрь 6, 1981, должен был быть день празднования в Египте. Это отметили годовщину величайшего момент Египта победы в трех арабо-израильского конфликта, когда слабым армии страны тяги через Суэцкий канал в первые дни ofthe 1973 Война Судного дня и послал израильских войск шатаясь в отступление. На прохладно, безоблачное утро, Стадион Каир был упакован с египетской семьи, которые пришли, чтобы увидеть военную стойки его hardware.On трибуны, Президент Анвар эль-Садат,Война архитектор, с удовлетворением наблюдал, как люди и машины напоказ перед ним. Я был рядом, вновь прибывших иностранных correspondent.Suddenly, один из армейские грузовики остановились прямо перед трибуны так же, как шесть Мираж струй ревели над головой в исполнении акробатических, Картина небо с длинными следы красной, желтый, пурпурный,и зеленого дыма. Садат поднялся, по-видимому подготовки для обмена салютами с еще одним контингента египетских войск. Он сделал себе идеальный цель в течение четырех исламистских убийц, выпрыгнул из грузовика, штурмом трибуну, и изрешетили его тело с bullets.As убийцы продолжают за то, что казалось, вечность для распыления стенд с их смертельным огнем, Я считал для мгновенного ли ударился о землю и риск попираются к смертной казни через запаниковал зрителей или оставаться в движении и риску шальная пуля. Инстинкт подсказывал мне, чтобы остаться на ногах, и мое чувство журналистского долга заставило меня пойти выяснить, Садат был живым или мертвым.
| Сен 26, 2010 | Комментарии 0
ислам, Политический ислам и Америки
Арабские Insight
Is “Brotherhood” with America Possible?
khalil al-anani
“there is no chance of communicating with any U.S. administration so long as the United States maintains its long-standing view of Islam as a real danger, a view that puts the United States in the same boat as the Zionist enemy. We have no pre-conceived notions concerning the American people or the U.S. society and its civic organizations and think tanks. We have no problem communicating with the American people but no adequate efforts are being made to bring us closer,” said Dr. Issam al-Iryan, chief of the political department of the Muslim Brotherhood in a phone interview.
Al-Iryan’s words sum up the Muslim Brotherhood’s views of the American people and the U.S. government. Other members of the Muslim Brotherhood would agree, as would the late Hassan al-Banna, who founded the group in 1928. Al- Banna viewed the West mostly as a symbol of moral decay. Other Salafis – an Islamic school of thought that relies on ancestors as exemplary models – have taken the same view of the United States, but lack the ideological flexibility espoused by the Muslim Brotherhood. While the Muslim Brotherhood believes in engaging the Americans in civil dialogue, other extremist groups see no point in dialogue and maintain that force is the only way of dealing with the United States.
| Сен 15, 2010 | Комментарии 0
The Principle of Movement in the Structure of Islam
Доктор. Мухаммад Икбал
As a cultural movement Islam rejects the old static view of the universe, and reaches a dynamic view. As an emotional system of unification it recognizes the worth of the individual as such, and rejects bloodrelationship as a basis of human unity. Blood-relationship is earthrootedness. The search for a purely psychological foundation of human unity becomes possible only with the perception that all human life is spiritual in its origin.1 Such a perception is creative of fresh loyalties without any ceremonial to keep them alive, and makes it possible for man to emancipate himself from the earth. Christianity which had originally appeared as a monastic order was tried by Constantine as a system of unification.2 Its failure to work as such a system drove the Emperor Julian3 to return to the old gods of Rome on which he attempted to put philosophical interpretations. A modern historian of civilization has thus depicted the state of the civilized world about the time when Islam appeared on the stage of History: It seemed then that the great civilization that it had taken four thousand years to construct was on the verge of disintegration, and that mankind was likely to return to that condition of barbarism where every tribe and sect was against the next, and law and order were unknown . . . The
old tribal sanctions had lost their power. Hence the old imperial methods would no longer operate. The new sanctions created by
Christianity were working division and destruction instead of unity and order. It was a time fraught with tragedy. Civilization, like a gigantic tree whose foliage had overarched the world and whose branches had borne the golden fruits of art and science and literature, stood tottering, its trunk no longer alive with the flowing sap of devotion and reverence, but rotted to the core, riven by the storms of war, and held together only by the cords of ancient customs and laws, that might snap at any moment. Was there any emotional culture that could be brought in, to gather mankind once more into unity and to save civilization? This culture must be something of a new type, for the old sanctions and ceremonials were dead, and to build up others of the same kind would be the work
of centuries.’The writer then proceeds to tell us that the world stood in need of a new culture to take the place of the culture of the throne, and the systems of unification which were based on bloodrelationship.
It is amazing, he adds, that such a culture should have arisen from Arabia just at the time when it was most needed. There is, однако, nothing amazing in the phenomenon. The world-life intuitively sees its own needs, and at critical moments defines its own direction. This is what, in the language of religion, we call prophetic revelation. It is only natural that Islam should have flashed across the consciousness of a simple people untouched by any of the ancient cultures, and occupying a geographical position where three continents meet together. The new culture finds the foundation of world-unity in the principle of Tauhâd.’5 Islam, as a polity, is only a practical means of making this principle a living factor in the intellectual and emotional life of mankind. It demands loyalty to God, not to thrones. And since God is the ultimate spiritual basis of all life, loyalty to God virtually amounts to man’s loyalty to his own ideal nature. The ultimate spiritual basis of all life, as conceived by Islam, is eternal and reveals itself in variety and change. A society based on such a conception of Reality must reconcile, in its life, the categories of permanence and change. It must possess eternal principles to regulate its collective life, for the eternal gives us a foothold in the world of perpetual change.
| Сен 08, 2010 | Комментарии 0
ISLAM, DEMOCRACY & THE USA:
Cordoba Foundation
Абдулла Faliq
Intro ,
In spite of it being both a perennial and a complex debate, Arches Quarterly reexamines from theological and practical grounds, the important debate about the relationship and compatibility between Islam and Democracy, as echoed in Barack Obama’s agenda of hope and change. Whilst many celebrate Obama’s ascendancy to the Oval Office as a national catharsis for the US, others remain less optimistic of a shift in ideology and approach in the international arena. While much of the tension and distrust between the Muslim world and the USA can be attributed to the approach of promoting democracy, typically favoring dictatorships and puppet regimes that pay lip-service to democratic values and human rights, the aftershock of 9/11 has truly cemented the misgivings further through America’s position on political Islam. It has created a wall of negativity as found by worldpublicopinion.org, according to which 67% of Egyptians believe that globally America is playing a “mainly negative” role.
America’s response has thus been apt. By electing Obama, many around the world are pinning their hopes for developing a less belligerent, but fairer foreign policy towards the Muslim world. Th e test for Obama, as we discuss, is how America and her allies promote democracy. Will it be facilitating or imposing?
более того, can it importantly be an honest broker in prolonged zones of confl icts? Enlisting the expertise and insight of prolifi
c scholars, academics, seasoned journalists and politicians, Arches Quarterly brings to light the relationship between Islam and Democracy and the role of America – as well as the changes brought about by Obama, in seeking the common ground. Anas Altikriti, the CEO of Th e Cordoba Foundation provides the opening gambit to this discussion, where he refl ects on the hopes and challenges that rests on Obama’s path. Following Altikriti, the former advisor to President Nixon, Dr Robert Crane off ers a thorough analysis of the Islamic principle of the right to freedom. Anwar Ibrahim, former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, enriches the discussion with the practical realities of implementing democracy in Muslim dominant societies, а именно, in Indonesia and Malaysia.
We also have Dr Shireen Hunter, of Georgetown University, США, who explores Muslim countries lagging in democratisation and modernisation. Th is is complemented by terrorism writer, Dr Nafeez Ahmed’s explanation of the crisis of post-modernity and the
demise of democracy. Dr Daud Abdullah (Director of Middle East Media Monitor), Alan Hart (former ITN and BBC Panorama correspondent; author of Zionism: Th e Real Enemy of the Jews) and Asem Sondos (Editor of Egypt’s Sawt Al Omma weekly) concentrate on Obama and his role vis-à-vis democracy-promotion in the Muslim world, as well as US relations with Israel and the Muslim Brotherhood.
Minister of Foreign Aff airs, Maldives, Ahmed Shaheed speculates on the future of Islam and Democracy; Cllr. Gerry Maclochlainn
– a Sinn Féin member who endured four years in prison for Irish Republican activities and a campaigner for the Guildford 4 and Birmingham 6, refl ects on his recent trip to Gaza where he witnessed the impact of the brutality and injustice meted out against Palestinians; Dr Marie Breen-Smyth, Director of the Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Contemporary Political Violence discusses the challenges of critically researching political terror; Dr Khalid al-Mubarak, writer and playwright, discusses prospects of peace in Darfur; and fi nally journalist and human rights activist Ashur Shamis looks critically at the democratisation and politicisation of Muslims today.
We hope all this makes for a comprehensive reading and a source for refl ection on issues that aff ect us all in a new dawn of hope.
Thank you
| Сен 07, 2010 | Комментарии 0
US Hamas policy blocks Middle East peace
Генри Siegman
Failed bilateral talks over these past 16 years have shown that a Middle East peace accord can never be reached by the parties themselves. Israeli governments believe they can defy international condemnation of their illegal colonial project in the West Bank because they can count on the US to oppose international sanctions. Bilateral talks that are not framed by US-formulated parameters (based on Security Council resolutions, the Oslo accords, the Arab Peace Initiative, the “road map” and other previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements) cannot succeed. Israel’s government believes that the US Congress will not permit an American president to issue such parameters and demand their acceptance. What hope there is for the bilateral talks that resume in Washington DC on September 2 depends entirely on President Obama proving that belief to be wrong, and on whether the “bridging proposals” he has promised, should the talks reach an impasse, are a euphemism for the submission of American parameters. Such a US initiative must offer Israel iron-clad assurances for its security within its pre-1967 borders, but at the same time must make it clear these assurances are not available if Israel insists on denying Palestinians a viable and sovereign state in the West Bank and Gaza. This paper focuses on the other major obstacle to a permanent status agreement: the absence of an effective Palestinian interlocutor. Addressing Hamas’ legitimate grievances – and as noted in a recent CENTCOM report, Hamas has legitimate grievances – could lead to its return to a Palestinian coalition government that would provide Israel with a credible peace partner. If that outreach fails because of Hamas’ rejectionism, the organization’s ability to prevent a reasonable accord negotiated by other Palestinian political parties will have been significantly impeded. If the Obama administration will not lead an international initiative to define the parameters of an Israeli-Palestinian agreement and actively promote Palestinian political reconciliation, Europe must do so, and hope America will follow. К сожалению, there is no silver bullet that can guarantee the goal of “two states living side by side in peace and security.”
But President Obama’s present course absolutely precludes it.
| Сен 07, 2010 | Комментарии 0
Islamism revisited
МАХА Аззам
There is a political and security crisis surrounding what is referred to as Islamism, a crisis whose antecedents long precede 9/11. Over the past 25 лет, there have been different emphases on how to explain and combat Islamism. Analysts and policymakers
in the 1980s and 1990s spoke of the root causes of Islamic militancy as being economic malaise and marginalization. More recently there has been a focus on political reform as a means of undermining the appeal of radicalism. Increasingly today, the ideological and religious aspects of Islamism need to be addressed because they have become features of a wider political and security debate. Whether in connection with Al-Qaeda terrorism, political reform in the Muslim world, the nuclear issue in Iran or areas of crisis such as Palestine or Lebanon, it has become commonplace to fi nd that ideology and religion are used by opposing parties as sources of legitimization, inspiration and enmity.
The situation is further complicated today by the growing antagonism towards and fear of Islam in the West because of terrorist attacks which in turn impinge on attitudes towards immigration, religion and culture. The boundaries of the umma or community of the faithful have stretched beyond Muslim states to European cities. The umma potentially exists wherever there are Muslim communities. The shared sense of belonging to a common faith increases in an environment where the sense of integration into the surrounding community is unclear and where discrimination may be apparent. The greater the rejection of the values of society,
whether in the West or even in a Muslim state, the greater the consolidation of the moral force of Islam as a cultural identity and value-system.
Following the bombings in London on 7 Июль 2005 it became more apparent that some young people were asserting religious commitment as a way of expressing ethnicity. The links between Muslims across the globe and their perception that Muslims are vulnerable have led many in very diff erent parts of the world to merge their own local predicaments into the wider Muslim one, having identifi ed culturally, either primarily or partially, with a broadly defi ned Islam.
| Сен 06, 2010 | Комментарии 0
Исламская политическая культура, Демократия, и права человека
Даниэль E. Цена
Утверждалось, что ислам способствует авторитаризму., contradicts the values of Western societies, and significantly affects important political outcomes in Muslim nations. как следствие, ученые, комментаторы, and government officials frequently point to ‘‘Islamic fundamentalism’’ as the next ideological threat to liberal democracies. Этот вид, однако, is based primarily on the analysis of texts, Исламская политическая теория, and ad hoc studies of individual countries, которые не учитывают другие факторы. It is my contention that the texts and traditions of Islam, как представители других религий, может использоваться для поддержки различных политических систем и политик.. Country specific and descriptive studies do not help us to find patterns that will help us explain the varying relationships between Islam and politics across the countries of the Muslim world. Следовательно, новый подход к изучению
связь между исламом и политикой призвана.
Я предлагаю, через тщательную оценку отношений между исламом, демократия, и права человека на межнациональном уровне, that too much emphasis is being placed on the power of Islam as a political force. I first use comparative case studies, which focus on factors relating to the interplay between Islamic groups and regimes, экономические влияния, этнические расколы, и общественное развитие, to explain the variance in the influence of Islam on politics across eight nations. I argue that much of the power
attributed to Islam as the driving force behind policies and political systems in Muslim nations can be better explained by the previously mentioned factors. I also find, contrary to common belief, that the increasing strength of Islamic political groups has often been associated with modest pluralization of political systems.
I have constructed an index of Islamic political culture, based on the extent to which Islamic law is utilized and whether and, if so, how,Western ideas, institutions, and technologies are implemented, to test the nature of the relationship between Islam and democracy and Islam and human rights. This indicator is used in statistical analysis, which includes a sample of twenty-three predominantly Muslim countries and a control group of twenty-three non-Muslim developing nations. In addition to comparing
Islamic nations to non-Islamic developing nations, statistical analysis allows me to control for the influence of other variables that have been found to affect levels of democracy and the protection of individual rights. The result should be a more realistic and accurate picture of the influence of Islam on politics and policies.
| Сен 06, 2010 | Комментарии 0
Египет на Tipping Point ?
Дэвид Б. Оттауэй
In the early 1980s, I lived in Cairo as bureau chief of The Washington Post covering such historic events as the withdrawal of the last
Israeli forces from Egyptian territory occupied during the 1973 Arab-Israeli war and the assassination of President
Anwar Sadat by Islamic fanatics in October 1981.
The latter national drama, which I witnessed personally, had proven to be a wrenching milestone. It forced Sadat’s successor, Хосни Мубарак, to turn inwards to deal with an Islamist challenge of unknown proportions and effectively ended Egypt’s leadership role in the Arab world.
Mubarak immediately showed himself to be a highly cautious, unimaginative leader, maddeningly reactive rather than pro-active in dealing with the social and economic problems overwhelming his nation like its explosive population growth (1.2 million more Egyptians a year) and economic decline.
In a four-part Washington Post series written as I was departing in early 1985, I noted the new Egyptian leader was still pretty much
a total enigma to his own people, offering no vision and commanding what seemed a rudderless ship of state. The socialist economy
inherited from the era of President Gamal Abdel Nasser (1952 к 1970) was a mess. The country’s currency, the pound, was operating
on eight different exchange rates; its state-run factories were unproductive, uncompetitive and deep in debt; and the government was heading for bankruptcy partly because subsidies for food, electricity and gasoline were consuming one-third ($7 billion) of its budget. Cairo had sunk into a hopeless morass of gridlocked traffic and teeming humanity—12 million people squeezed into a narrow band of land bordering the Nile River, most living cheek by jowl in ramshackle tenements in the city’s ever-expanding slums.
| Сен 02, 2010 | Комментарии 0
Roots Of Nationalism In The Muslim World
Шабир Ахмед
The Muslim world has been characterised by failure, disunity, bloodshed, oppression and backwardness. At present, no Muslim country in the world can rightly claim to be a leader in any field of human activity. Верно, the non-Muslims of the East and the West
now dictate the social, economic and political agenda for the Muslim Ummah.
более того, the Muslims identify themselves as Turkish, Арабский, African and Pakistani. If this is not enough, Muslims are further sub-divided within each country or continent. Например, in Pakistan people are classed as Punjabis, Sindhis, Balauchis and
Pathans. The Muslim Ummah was never faced with such a dilemma in the past during Islamic rule. They never suffered from disunity, widespread oppression, stagnation in science and technology and certainly not from the internal conflicts that we have witnessed this century like the Iran-Iraq war. So what has gone wrong with the Muslims this century? Why are there so many feuds between them and why are they seen to be fighting each other? What has caused their weakness and how will they ever recover from the present stagnation?
There are many factors that contributed to the present state of affairs, but the main ones are the abandoning of the Arabic language as the language of understanding Islam correctly and performing ijtihad, the absorption of foreign cultures such as the philosophies of the Greeks, Persian and the Hindus, the gradual loss of central authority over some of the provinces, and the rise of nationalism since the 19th Century.
This book focuses on the origins of nationalism in the Muslim world. Nationalism did not arise in the Muslim world naturally, nor did it came about in response to any hardships faced by the people, nor due to the frustration they felt when Europe started to dominate the world after the industrial revolution. Скорее, nationalism was implanted in the minds of the Muslims through a well thought out scheme by the European powers, after their failure to destroy the Islamic State by force. The book also presents the Islamic verdict on nationalism and practical steps that can be taken to eradicate the disease of nationalism from the Muslim Ummah so as to restore it back to its former glory.
| август 28, 2010 | Комментарии 0
Democracy in Islamic Political Thought
Аззам S. Тамими
Democracy has preoccupied Arab political thinkers since the dawn of the modern Arab renaissance about two centuries ago. Since then, the concept of democracy has changed and developed under the influence of a variety of social and political developments.The discussion of democracy in Arab Islamic literature can be traced back to Rifa’a Tahtawi, the father of Egyptian democracy according to Lewis Awad,[3] who shortly after his return to Cairo from Paris published his first book, Takhlis Al-Ibriz Ila Talkhis Bariz, in 1834. The book summarized his observations of the manners and customs of the modern French,[4] and praised the concept of democracy as he saw it in France and as he witnessed its defence and reassertion through the 1830 Revolution against King Charles X.[5] Tahtawi tried to show that the democratic concept he was explaining to his readers was compatible with the law of Islam. He compared political pluralism to forms of ideological and jurisprudential pluralism that existed in the Islamic experience:
Religious freedom is the freedom of belief, of opinion and of sect, provided it does not contradict the fundamentals of religion . . . The same would apply to the freedom of political practice and opinion by leading administrators, who endeavour to interpret and apply rules and provisions in accordance with the laws of their own countries. Kings and ministers are licensed in the realm of politics to pursue various routes that in the end serve one purpose: good administration and justice.[6] One important landmark in this regard was the contribution of Khairuddin At-Tunisi (1810- 99), leader of the 19th-century reform movement in Tunisia, who, in 1867, formulated a general plan for reform in a book entitled Aqwam Al-Masalik Fi Taqwim Al- Mamalik (The Straight Path to Reforming Governments). The main preoccupation of the book was in tackling the question of political reform in the Arab world. While appealing to politicians and scholars of his time to seek all possible means in order to improve the status of the
community and develop its civility, he warned the general Muslim public against shunning the experiences of other nations on the basis of the misconception that all the writings, inventions, experiences or attitudes of non-Muslims should be rejected or disregarded.
Khairuddin further called for an end to absolutist rule, which he blamed for the oppression of nations and the destruction of civilizations.
| август 27, 2010 | Комментарии 0
Секуляризм, Герменевтика, and Empire: The Politics of Islamic Reformation
Saba Mahmood
Since the events of September 11, 2001, against the
backdrop of two decades of the ascendance of global religious politics, urgent
calls for the reinstatement of secularism have reached a crescendo that cannot
be ignored. The most obvious target of these strident calls is Islam, в частности
those practices and discourses within Islam that are suspected of fostering fundamentalism
and militancy. It has become de rigueur for leftists and liberals alike
to link the fate of democracy in the Muslim world with the institutionalization
of secularism — both as a political doctrine and as a political ethic. This coupling
is now broadly echoed within the discourse emanating from the U.S. State
Department, particularly in its programmatic efforts to reshape and transform
“Islam from within.” In this essay, I will examine both the particular conception
of secularism that underlies the current consensus that Islam needs to be
reformed — that its secularization is a necessary step in bringing “democracy” to
the Muslim world — and the strategic means by which this programmatic vision is
being instituted today. Insomuch as secularism is a historically shifting category
with a variegated genealogy, my aim is not to secure an authoritative definition of
secularism or to trace its historical transformation within the United States or the
Muslim world. My goal here is more limited: I want to sketch out the particular
understanding of secularism underlying contemporary American discourses on
ислам, an understanding that is deeply shaped by U.S. security and foreign policy
concerns in the Muslim world.
| август 27, 2010 | Комментарии 0
Исламская политическая культура, Демократия, и права человека
Даниэль E. Цена
Утверждалось, что ислам способствует авторитаризму., противоречит
ценности западных обществ, и существенно влияет на важные политические результаты
в мусульманских странах. как следствие, ученые, комментаторы, и правительство
официальные лица часто указывают на «исламский фундаментализм» как на следующее
идеологическая угроза либеральным демократиям. Этот вид, однако, основан в первую очередь
по анализу текстов, Исламская политическая теория, и специальные исследования
отдельных стран, которые не учитывают другие факторы. Это мое мнение
что тексты и традиции ислама, как представители других религий,
может использоваться для поддержки различных политических систем и политик.. Страна
конкретные и описательные исследования не помогают нам найти закономерности, которые помогут
мы объясняем различные отношения между исламом и политикой в разных странах.
страны мусульманского мира. Следовательно, новый подход к изучению
связь между исламом и политикой призвана.
Я предлагаю, через тщательную оценку отношений между исламом,
демократия, и права человека на межнациональном уровне, это слишком много
акцент делается на силе ислама как политической силы. я первый
использовать сравнительные тематические исследования, которые сосредоточены на факторах, связанных с взаимодействием
между исламскими группами и режимами, экономические влияния, этнические расколы,
и общественное развитие, чтобы объяснить разницу во влиянии
Ислам в политике восьми стран.
| август 24, 2010 | Комментарии 0
Исламская политическая культура, Демократия, и права человека
Даниэль E. Цена
Утверждалось, что ислам способствует авторитаризму., противоречит
ценности западных обществ, и существенно влияет на важные политические результаты
в мусульманских странах. как следствие, ученые, комментаторы, и правительство
официальные лица часто указывают на «исламский фундаментализм» как на следующее
идеологическая угроза либеральным демократиям. Этот вид, однако, основан в первую очередь
по анализу текстов, Исламская политическая теория, и специальные исследования
отдельных стран, которые не учитывают другие факторы. Это мое мнение
что тексты и традиции ислама, как представители других религий,
может использоваться для поддержки различных политических систем и политик.. Страна
конкретные и описательные исследования не помогают нам найти закономерности, которые помогут
мы объясняем различные отношения между исламом и политикой в разных странах.
страны мусульманского мира. Следовательно, новый подход к изучению
связь между исламом и политикой призвана.
Я предлагаю, через тщательную оценку отношений между исламом,
демократия, и права человека на межнациональном уровне, это слишком много
акцент делается на силе ислама как политической силы. я первый
использовать сравнительные тематические исследования, которые сосредоточены на факторах, связанных с взаимодействием
между исламскими группами и режимами, экономические влияния, этнические расколы,
и общественное развитие, чтобы объяснить разницу во влиянии
Ислам в политике восьми стран.
| август 22, 2010 | Комментарии 0
СТРАТЕГИИ ВЗАИМОДЕЙСТВИЯ ПОЛИТИЧЕСКОГО ИСЛАМА
ШАДИ ХАМИД
AMANDA Kadlec
Политический ислам - самая активная политическая сила на Ближнем Востоке сегодня. Его будущее тесно связано с будущим региона.. Если Соединенные Штаты и Европейский Союз привержены поддержке политических реформ в регионе, им нужно будет разработать бетон, согласованные стратегии взаимодействия с исламистскими группировками. Еще, Соединенные штаты. обычно не желал вступать в диалог с этими движениями. по аналогии, Взаимодействие ЕС с исламистами было исключением, не правило. Где существуют контакты на низком уровне, в основном они служат целям сбора информации, не стратегические цели. Соединенные штаты. и ЕС имеют ряд программ, направленных на экономическое и политическое развитие в регионе, в том числе Инициативу ближневосточного партнерства. (МИФИ), Корпорация "Вызовы тысячелетия" (MCC), Союз Средиземноморья, и Европейская политика соседства (ЕПС) - но они мало что могут сказать о том, как вызов исламистской политической оппозиции вписывается в более широкие региональные цели.. США. помощь и программы ЕС в области демократии почти полностью направлены либо самим авторитарным правительствам, либо светским группам гражданского общества с минимальной поддержкой в их собственных обществах..
Пришло время для переоценки текущей политики.. С сентябрьских терактов 11, 2001, поддержка демократии на Ближнем Востоке приобрела большее значение для западных политиков., кто видит связь между отсутствием демократии и политическим насилием. Большее внимание было уделено пониманию различий в политическом исламе.. Новая американская администрация более открыта для расширения контактов с мусульманским миром.. тем временем, подавляющее большинство основных исламистских организаций, включая Братья-мусульмане в Египте, Исламский фронт действий Иордании (IAF), Партия справедливости и развития Марокко (ПСР), Исламское конституционное движение Кувейта, и Йеменская партия ислах - все чаще делают поддержку политической реформы и демократии центральным компонентом своих политических платформ.. В дополнение, многие выразили сильную заинтересованность в открытии диалога с США.. и правительства ЕС.
Будущее отношений между западными странами и Ближним Востоком может во многом определяться степенью, в которой первые вовлекают ненасильственные исламистские партии в широкий диалог об общих интересах и целях.. В последнее время наблюдается рост исследований взаимодействия с исламистами., но немногие четко рассматривают, что это может повлечь за собой на практике. В роли Зои Наутре, приглашенный научный сотрудник Немецкого совета по международным отношениям, кладет это, «ЕС думает о взаимодействии, но на самом деле не знает, как это сделать» 1. В надежде прояснить дискуссию, мы различаем три уровня «вовлеченности,"Каждый с разными средствами и целями: низкоуровневые контакты, стратегический диалог, и партнерство.
| август 19, 2010 | Комментарии 0
Решение исламистских Америки Дилемма: Уроки из стран Южной и Юго-Восточной Азии
Шади Хамид
США. efforts to promote democracy in the Middle East have long been paralyzed by the “Islamist dilemma”: in theory, we want democracy, но, in practice, fear that Islamist parties will be the prime beneficiaries of any political opening. The most tragic manifestation of this was the Algerian debacle of 1991 а также 1992, when the United States stood silently while the staunchly secular military canceled elections after an Islamist party won a parliamentary majority. More recently, the Bush administration backed away from its “freedom agenda” after Islamists did surprisingly well in elections throughout region, including in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the Palestinian territories.
But even our fear of Islamist parties—and the resulting refusal to engage with them—has itself been inconsistent, holding true for some countries but not others. The more that a country is seen as vital to American national security interests, the less willing the United States has been to accept Islamist groups having a prominent political role there. тем не мение, in countries seen as less strategically relevant, and where less is at stake, the United States has occasionally taken a more nuanced approach. But it is precisely where more is at stake that recognizing a role for nonviolent Islamists is most important, а также, here, American policy continues to fall short.
Throughout the region, the United States has actively supported autocratic regimes and given the green light for campaigns of repression against groups such as the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, the oldest and most influential political movement in the region. In March 2008, during what many observers consider to be the worst period of anti-Brotherhood repression since the 1960s, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice waived a $100 million congressionally mandated reduction of military aid to Egypt. The situation in Jordan is similar. The Bush administration and the Democratic congress have hailed the country as a “model” of Arab reform at precisely the same time that it has been devising new ways to manipulate the electoral process to limit Islamist representation, and just as it held elections plagued by widespread allegations of outright fraud
and rigging.1 This is not a coincidence. Egypt and Jordan are the only two Arab countries that have signed peace treaties with Israel. более того, they are seen as crucial to U.S. efforts to counter Iran, stabilize Iraq, and combat terrorism.
| август 19, 2010 | Комментарии 0
The Mismeasure of Political Islam
Мартин Крамер
Perhaps no development of the last decade of the twentieth century has caused as much confusion in the West as the emergence of political Islam. Just what does it portend? Is it against modernity, or is it an effect of modernity? Is it against nationalism, or is it a
form of nationalism? Is it a striving for freedom, or a revolt against freedom?
One would think that these are difficult questions to answer, and that they would inspire deep debates. Yet over the past few years, a surprisingly broad consensus has emerged within academe about the way political Islam should be measured. This consensus has
begun to spread into parts of government as well, especially in the U.S. and Europe. A paradigm has been built, and its builders claim that its reliability and validity are beyond question.
This now-dominant paradigm runs as follows. The Arab Middle East and North Africa are stirring. The peoples in these lands are still under varieties of authoritarian or despotic rule. But they are moved by the same universal yearning for democracy that transformed Eastern Europe and Latin America. True, there are no movements we would easily recognize as democracy movements. But for historical and cultural reasons, this universal yearning has taken the form of Islamist protest movements. If these do not look
like democracy movements, it is only a consequence of our own age-old bias against Islam. When the veil of prejudice is lifted, one will see Islamist movements for what they are: the functional equivalents of democratic reform movements. True, on the edges of these movements are groups that are atavistic and authoritarian. Some of their members are prone to violence. These are the “extremists.” But the mainstream movements are essentially open, pluralistic, and nonviolent, led by “moderates” or “reformists.” These “moderates” can be strengthened if they are made partners in the political process, and an initial step must be dialogue. But ultimately, the most effective way to domesticate the Islamists is to permit them to share or possess power. There is no threat here unless the West creates it, by supporting acts of state repression that would deny Islamists access to participation or power.
| август 18, 2010 | Комментарии 0
IkhwanScope на Facebook
На IkhwanScope Scribd
IkhwanScope на Twitter