RSSВсе записи в "Турция" Категория


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, 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

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.


Sherifa Зухур

Seven years after the September 11, 2001 (9/11) attacks, many experts believe al-Qa’ida has regained strength and that its copycats or affiliates are more lethal than before. The National Intelligence Estimate of 2007 asserted that al-Qa’ida is more dangerous now than before 9/11.1 Al-Qa’ida’s emulators continue to threaten Western, Middle Eastern, and European nations, as in the plot foiled in September 2007 in Germany. Bruce Riedel states: Thanks largely to Washington’s eagerness to go into Iraq rather than hunting down al Qaeda’s leaders, the organization now has a solid base of operations in the badlands of Pakistan and an effective franchise in western Iraq. Its reach has spread throughout the Muslim world and in Europe . . . Osama bin Laden has mounted a successful propaganda campaign. . . . His ideas now attract more followers than ever.
It is true that various salafi-jihadist organizations are still emerging throughout the Islamic world. Why have heavily resourced responses to the Islamist terrorism that we are calling global jihad not proven extremely effective?
Moving to the tools of “soft power,” what about the efficacy of Western efforts to bolster Muslims in the Global War on Terror (GWOT)? Why has the United States won so few “hearts and minds” in the broader Islamic world? Why do American strategic messages on this issue play so badly in the region? Why, despite broad Muslim disapproval of extremism as shown in surveys and official utterances by key Muslim leaders, has support for bin Ladin actually increased in Jordan and in Pakistan?
This monograph will not revisit the origins of Islamist violence. It is instead concerned with a type of conceptual failure that wrongly constructs the GWOT and which discourages Muslims from supporting it. They are unable to identify with the proposed transformative countermeasures because they discern some of their core beliefs and institutions as targets in
this endeavor.
Several deeply problematic trends confound the American conceptualizations of the GWOT and the strategic messages crafted to fight that War. These evolve from (1) post-colonial political approaches to Muslims and Muslim majority nations that vary greatly and therefore produce conflicting and confusing impressions and effects; а также (2) residual generalized ignorance of and prejudice toward Islam and subregional cultures. Add to this American anger, fear, and anxiety about the deadly events of 9/11, and certain elements that, despite the urgings of cooler heads, hold Muslims and their religion accountable for the misdeeds of their coreligionists, or who find it useful to do so for political reasons.



The Society of Muslim Brothers’ success in the November-December 2005 elections for the People’s Assembly sent shockwaves through Egypt’s political system. In response, the regime cracked down on the movement, harassed other potential rivals and reversed its fledging reform process. This is dangerously short-sighted. There is reason to be concerned about the Muslim Brothers’ political program, and they owe the people genuine clarifications about several of its aspects. But the ruling National Democratic
Party’s (NDP) refusal to loosen its grip risks exacerbating tensions at a time of both political uncertainty surrounding the presidential succession and serious socio-economic unrest. Though this likely will be a prolonged, gradual process, the regime should take preliminary steps to normalise the Muslim Brothers’ participation in political life. The Muslim Brothers, whose social activities have long been tolerated but whose role in formal politics is strictly limited, won an unprecedented 20 per cent of parliamentary seats in the 2005 выборы. They did so despite competing for only a third of available seats and notwithstanding considerable obstacles, including police repression and electoral fraud. This success confirmed their position as an extremely wellorganised and deeply rooted political force. В то же время, it underscored the weaknesses of both the legal opposition and ruling party. The regime might well have wagered that a modest increase in the Muslim Brothers’ parliamentary representation could be used to stoke fears of an Islamist takeover and thereby serve as a reason to stall reform. If so, the strategy is at heavy risk of backfiring.

Ислам и демократия: Text, Tradition, and History

Ахрар Ахмад

Popular stereotypes in the West tend to posit a progressive, rational, and free West against a backward, oppressive, and threatening Islam. Public opinion polls conducted in the United States during the 1990s revealed a consistent pattern of Americans labeling Muslims as “religious fanatics” and considering Islam’s ethos as fundamentally “anti-democratic.”1 These characterizations
and misgivings have, for obvious reasons, significantly worsened since the tragedy of 9/11. тем не мение, these perceptions are not reflected merely in the popular consciousness or crude media representations. Respected scholars also have contributed to this climate of opinion by writing about the supposedly irreconcilable differences between Islam and the West, the famous “clash of civilizations” that is supposed to be imminent and inevitable, and about the seeming incompatibility between Islam and democracy. Например, Professor Peter Rodman worries that “we are challenged from the outside by a militant atavistic force driven by hatred of all Western political thought harking back to age-old grievances against Christendom.” Dr. Daniel Pipes proclaims that the Muslims challenge the West more profoundly than the communists ever did, for “while the Communists disagree with our policies, the fundamentalist Muslims despise our whole way of life.” Professor Bernard Lewis warns darkly about “the historic reaction of an ancient rival against our Judeo–Christian heritage, our secular present, and the expansion of both.” Professor Amos Perlmutter asks: “Is Islam, fundamentalist or otherwise, compatible with human-rights oriented Western style representative democracy? The answer is an emphatic NO.” And Professor Samuel Huntington suggests with a flourish that “the problem is not Islamic fundamentalism, but Islam itself.” It would be intellectually lazy and simple-minded to dismiss their positions as based merely on spite or prejudice. по факту, if one ignores some rhetorical overkill, some of their charges, though awkward for Muslims, are relevant to a discussion of the relationship between Islam and democracy in the modern world. Например, the position of women or sometimes non-Muslims in some Muslim countries is problematic in terms of the supposed legal equality of all people in a democracy. по аналогии, the intolerance directed by some Muslims against writers (e.g., Salman Rushdie in the UK, Taslima Nasrin in Bangladesh, and Professor Nasr Abu Zaid in Egypt) ostensibly jeopardizes the principle of free speech, which is essential to a democracy.
It is also true that less than 10 of the more than 50 members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference have institutionalized democratic principles or processes as understood in the West, and that too, only tentatively. в заключение, the kind of internal stability and external peace that is almost a prerequisite for a democracy to function is vitiated by the turbulence of internal implosion or external aggression evident in many Muslim countries today (e.g., Сомали, Судан, Индонезия, Пакистан, Ирак, Афганистан, Алжир, and Bosnia).


Халдун Gulalp

Political Islam has gained heightened visibility in recent decades in Turkey. Large numbers of female students have begun to demonstrate their commitment by wearing the banned Islamic headdress on university campuses, and influential pro-Islamist TV
channels have proliferated. This paper focuses on the Welfare (Refah) Party as the foremost institutional representative of political Islam in Turkey.
The Welfare Party’s brief tenure in power as the leading coalition partner from mid-1996 to mid-1997 was the culmination of a decade of steady growth that was aided by other Islamist organizations and institutions. These organizations and institutions
included newspapers and publishing houses that attracted Islamist writers, numerous Islamic foundations, an Islamist labor-union confederation, and an Islamist businessmen’s association. These institutions worked in tandem with, and in support of, Welfare as the undisputed leader and representative of political Islam in Turkey, even though they had their own particularistic goals and ideals, which often diverged from Welfare’s political projects. Focusing on the Welfare Party, then, allows for an analysis of the wider social base upon which the Islamist political movement rose in Turkey. Since Welfare’s ouster from power and its eventual closure, the Islamist movement has been in disarray. Этот документ будет, следовательно, be confined to the Welfare Party period.
Welfare’s predecessor, the National Salvation Party, was active in the 1970s but was closed down by the military regime in 1980. Welfare was founded in 1983 and gained great popularity in the 1990s. Starting with a 4.4 percent vote in the municipal elections of 1984, the Welfare Party steadily increased its showing and multiplied its vote nearly five times in twelve years. It alarmed Turkey’s secular establishment first in the municipal elections of 1994, с 19 percent of all votes nationwide and the mayor’s seats in both Istanbul and Ankara, then in the general elections of 1995 when it won a plurality with 21.4 percent of the national vote. тем не менее, the Welfare Party was only briefly able to lead a coalition government in partnership with the right-wing True Path Party of Tansu C¸ iller.

A Muslim Archipelago

Макс L. Брутто

This book has been many years in the making, as the author explains in his Preface, though he wrote most of the actual text during his year as senior Research Fellow with the Center for Strategic Intelligence Research. The author was for many years Dean of the School of Intelligence Studies at the Joint Military Intelligence College. Even though it may appear that the book could have been written by any good historian or Southeast Asia regional specialist, this work is illuminated by the author’s more than three decades of service within the national Intelligence Community. His regional expertise often has been applied to special assessments for the Community. With a knowledge of Islam unparalleled among his peers and an unquenchable thirst for determining how the goals of this religion might play out in areas far from the focus of most policymakers’ current attention, the author has made the most of this opportunity to acquaint the Intelligence Community and a broader readership with a strategic appreciation of a region in the throes of reconciling secular and religious forces.
This publication has been approved for unrestricted distribution by the Office of Security Review, Department of Defense.

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.

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.

Исламистские оппозиционные партии и потенциал взаимодействия с ЕС

Тоби Арчер

Хайди Huuhtanen

В свете растущего значения исламистских движений в мусульманском мире и

как радикализация повлияла на глобальные события с начала века, Это

ЕС важно оценить свою политику по отношению к акторам в рамках того, что может быть свободно

называют «исламским миром».. Особенно важно задаться вопросом, следует ли и как привлекать

с различными исламистскими группировками.

Это остается спорным даже в ЕС.. Некоторые считают, что исламские ценности, которые

лежащие за исламистскими партиями, просто несовместимы с западными идеалами демократии и

права человека, в то время как другие рассматривают взаимодействие как реальную необходимость в связи с растущим

значение исламистских партий внутри страны и их растущее участие в международной

дела. Другая точка зрения состоит в том, что демократизация в мусульманском мире усилится.

Европейская безопасность. Справедливость этих и других аргументов относительно того,

ЕС должен участвовать, можно проверить только путем изучения различных исламистских движений и

их политические обстоятельства, страна за страной.

Демократизация является центральной темой общих внешнеполитических действий ЕС., как положено

в статье 11 Договора о Европейском Союзе. Многие из государств, рассматриваемых в этом

доклад не демократичен, или не совсем демократично. В большинстве этих стран, исламист

партии и движения составляют значительную оппозицию господствующим режимам, а также

в некоторых они образуют крупнейший оппозиционный блок. Европейские демократии давно вынуждены

иметь дело с правящими режимами, которые являются авторитарными, но это новое явление, чтобы нажать

демократических реформ в штатах, где наиболее вероятные бенефициары могли, от

точка зрения ЕС, различные и иногда проблематичные подходы к демократии и ее

связанные значения, такие как права меньшинств и женщин и верховенство закона. Эти обвинения

часто выдвигается против исламистских движений, поэтому для европейских политиков важно

иметь точное представление о политике и философии потенциальных партнеров.

Опыт разных стран свидетельствует о том, что чем больше свободы исламисты

вечеринки разрешены, тем более они умеренны в своих действиях и идеях. Во многих

случаи, когда исламистские партии и группы уже давно отошли от своей первоначальной цели

создания исламского государства, основанного на исламском праве, и пришли к принятию основных

демократические принципы избирательной борьбы за власть, наличие других политических

конкуренты, и политический плюрализм.

Political Islam in the Middle East

Есть Кнудсена

This report provides an introduction to selected aspects of the phenomenon commonly

referred to as “political Islam”. The report gives special emphasis to the Middle East, in

particular the Levantine countries, and outlines two aspects of the Islamist movement that may

be considered polar opposites: democracy and political violence. In the third section the report

reviews some of the main theories used to explain the Islamic resurgence in the Middle East

(Figure 1). In brief, the report shows that Islam need not be incompatible with democracy and

that there is a tendency to neglect the fact that many Middle Eastern countries have been

engaged in a brutal suppression of Islamist movements, causing them, some argue, to take up

arms against the state, and more rarely, foreign countries. The use of political violence is

widespread in the Middle East, but is neither illogical nor irrational. In many cases even

Islamist groups known for their use of violence have been transformed into peaceful political

parties successfully contesting municipal and national elections. Тем не менее, the Islamist

revival in the Middle East remains in part unexplained despite a number of theories seeking to

account for its growth and popular appeal. In general, most theories hold that Islamism is a

reaction to relative deprivation, especially social inequality and political oppression. Alternative

theories seek the answer to the Islamist revival within the confines of religion itself and the

powerful, evocative potential of religious symbolism.

The conclusion argues in favour of moving beyond the “gloom and doom” approach that

portrays Islamism as an illegitimate political expression and a potential threat to the West (“Old

Islamism”), and of a more nuanced understanding of the current democratisation of the Islamist

movement that is now taking place throughout the Middle East (“New Islamism”). This

importance of understanding the ideological roots of the “New Islamism” is foregrounded

along with the need for thorough first-hand knowledge of Islamist movements and their

adherents. As social movements, its is argued that more emphasis needs to be placed on

understanding the ways in which they have been capable of harnessing the aspirations not only

of the poorer sections of society but also of the middle class.




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.

исламистские Стороны : participation without power

Malika Zeghal

Over the last two decades, social and political movements grounding their ideologies in references to Islam have sought to become legal political parties in many countries of the Middle East and North Africa. Some of these Islamist movements have been authorized to take part lawfully in electoral competition. Among the best known is Turkey’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), which won a parliamentary majority in 2002 and has led the government ever since. Morocco’s own Party of Justice and Development (ПСР) has been legal since the mid- 1990s and commands a significant bloc of seats in Parliament. В Египте, Братья-мусульмане (МБ) has never been authorized to form a political party, but in spite of state repression it has successfully run candidates as nominal independents in both national and local elections.
Since the early 1990s, this trend has gone hand-in-hand with official policies of limited political liberalization. Together, the two trends have occasioned a debate about whether these movements are committed to “democracy.” A vast literature has sprung up to underline the paradoxes as well as the possible risks and benefits of including Islamist parties in the electoral process. The main paradigm found in this body of writing focuses on the consequences that might ensue when Islamists use democratic instruments, and seeks to divine the “true” intentions that Islamists will manifest if they come to power.

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.

Исламистские движения и демократического процесса в арабском мире: Изучение серых зон

Натан J. Коричневый, Амр Hamzawy,

Марина Оттауэй

В течение последнего десятилетия, Исламистские движения зарекомендовали себя как крупные политические игроки на Ближнем Востоке.. Вместе с правительствами, исламистские движения, умеренные, так и радикальные, определит, как будет развиваться политика региона в обозримом будущем. Они продемонстрировали способность не только создавать сообщения, пользующиеся широкой популярностью, но и, и самое важное, создавать организации с подлинной социальной базой и разрабатывать последовательные политические стратегии. Другие стороны,
в общем и целом, не удалось на всех счетах.
Общественность на Западе и, особенно, Соединенные Штаты, осознал важность исламистских движений только после драматических событий, такие как революция в Иране и убийство президента Анвара ас-Садата в Египте. Внимание было гораздо более устойчивым после террористических атак в сентябре 11, 2001. Как результат, Исламистские движения считаются опасными и враждебными. Хотя такая характеристика является точной в отношении организаций радикального конца исламистского спектра, которые опасны из-за их готовности прибегнуть к неизбирательному насилию в достижении своих целей, это неточная характеристика многих групп, которые отказались от насилия или избегали его. Поскольку террористические организации представляют непосредственную
угроза, однако, политики во всех странах уделяли непропорционально большое внимание насильственным организациям.
Это основные исламистские организации., не радикальные, это окажет наибольшее влияние на будущую политическую эволюцию Ближнего Востока.. Грандиозные цели радикалов по восстановлению халифата, объединяющего весь арабский мир, или даже навязывание отдельным арабским странам законов и социальных обычаев, вдохновленных фундаменталистской интерпретацией ислама, просто слишком далеки от сегодняшней реальности, чтобы их можно было реализовать.. Это не означает, что террористические группы не опасны — они могут привести к большим человеческим жертвам даже при преследовании недостижимых целей — но что они вряд ли изменят облик Ближнего Востока.. Традиционные исламистские организации, как правило, представляют собой другое дело.. Они уже оказали сильное влияние на социальные обычаи во многих странах., остановить и обратить вспять секуляристские тенденции и изменить то, как многие арабы одеваются и ведут себя. И их непосредственная политическая цель, стать мощной силой, участвуя в нормальной политике своей страны, не является невозможным. Это уже реализуется в таких странах, как Марокко., Иордания, и даже Египет, который по-прежнему запрещает все исламистские политические организации, но теперь имеет восемьдесят восемь «Братьев-мусульман» в парламенте.. Политика, не насилие, это то, что придает господствующим исламистам их влияние.

Исламистских Радикализация


Issues relating to political Islam continue to present challenges to European foreign policies in the Middle East and North Africa (БВСА). As EU policy has sought to come to terms with such challenges during the last decade or so political Islam itself has evolved. Experts point to the growing complexity and variety of trends within political Islam. Some Islamist organisations have strengthened their commitment to democratic norms and engaged fully in peaceable, mainstream national politics. Others remain wedded to violent means. And still others have drifted towards a more quietist form of Islam, disengaged from political activity. Political Islam in the MENA region presents no uniform trend to European policymakers. Analytical debate has grown around the concept of ‘radicalisation’. This in turn has spawned research on the factors driving ‘de-radicalisation’, and conversely, ‘re-radicalisation’. Much of the complexity derives from the widely held view that all three of these phenomena are occurring at the same time. Even the terms themselves are contested. It has often been pointed out that the moderate–radical dichotomy fails fully to capture the nuances of trends within political Islam. Some analysts also complain that talk of ‘radicalism’ is ideologically loaded. At the level of terminology, we understand radicalisation to be associated with extremism, but views differ over the centrality of its religious–fundamentalist versus political content, and over whether the willingness to resort to violence is implied or not.

Such differences are reflected in the views held by the Islamists themselves, as well as in the perceptions of outsiders.