RSSTë gjitha Hyrje në "Turqi" Kategori


Cordoba Foundation

Abdullah 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?
Për më tepër, 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, domethënë, in Indonesia and Malaysia.
We also have Dr Shireen Hunter, of Georgetown University, SHBA, 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

Kulturës islame Politike, Demokraci, dhe të Drejtat e Njeriut

Daniel E. Çmimi

It has been argued that Islam facilitates authoritarianism, contradicts the values of Western societies, and significantly affects important political outcomes in Muslim nations. Si pasojë, scholars, commentators, and government officials frequently point to ‘‘Islamic fundamentalism’’ as the next ideological threat to liberal democracies. This view, megjithatë, is based primarily on the analysis of texts, Islamic political theory, and ad hoc studies of individual countries, which do not consider other factors. It is my contention that the texts and traditions of Islam, like those of other religions, can be used to support a variety of political systems and policies. 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. Prandaj, a new approach to the study of the
connection between Islam and politics is called for.
I suggest, through rigorous evaluation of the relationship between Islam, demokraci, and human rights at the cross-national level, 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, economic influences, ethnic cleavages, and societal development, 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.

Saktësi në luftën globale ndaj terrorit:

Sherifa Zuhur

Shtatë vjet pas shtator 11, 2001 (9/11) sulmet, 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, Europa e Mesme, and European nations, si në komplot kapur në shtator 2007 in Germany. Bruce shtetet Riedel: 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?
Kalimi në mjetet e "pushtetit të butë,” 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? Pse, 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
këtë përpjekje.
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; dhe (2) residual generalized ignorance of and prejudice toward Islam and subregional cultures. Shtoni në këtë zemërim amerikan, fear, dhe ankthi në lidhje me ngjarjet vdekjeprurës i 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.

Vëllezërit Myslimanë EGYPT'S: Konfrontimit ose INTEGRIMIT?


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 (PDR) 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 Zgjedhjet. 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. At the same time, 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.

Islami dhe Demokracia: Text, Tradition, and History

Ahrar Ahmad

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. Megjithatë, 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. Për shembull, 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. Në të vërtetë, 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. Për shembull, 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. Në mënyrë të ngjashme, 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. Më në fund, 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., Somali, Sudan, Indonezi, Pakistan, Irak, Afganistan, Algjeri, and Bosnia).


Haldun Gulalp

Islami politik ka fituar dukshmëri rritur në dekadat e fundit në Turqi. numër i madh i studenteve femra kanë filluar të tregojnë përkushtimin e tyre duke veshur model flokësh ndaluar islamik në kampuset universitare, dhe me ndikim pro-islamike TV
kanale janë shtuar. Ky artikull përqendrohet në mirëqenien (mirëqenie) Party si përfaqësues kryesorja institucional të islamit politik në Turqi.
Mbajtje e shkurtër Partia e Mirëqënies në pushtet si partnerin kryesor të koalicionit nga mesi i vitit 1996 deri në mesin e vitit 1997 ishte kulmi i një dekade të rritjes së qëndrueshme që ishte ndihmuar nga organizata të tjera islamike dhe institucionet. Këto organizata dhe institucione
përfshihen gazetat dhe shtëpi botuese që tërhoqën shkrimtarëve islamikë, Themelet shumta islame, një sindikata Konfederata islamike, dhe shoqata një islamist Biznesmenëve. Këto institucione kanë punuar së bashku me, dhe në mbështetje të, Welfare si lider i padiskutueshëm dhe përfaqësues i islamit politik në Turqi, edhe pse ata kishin qëllimet e tyre partikulariste dhe idealet, të cilat shpesh devijuan nga projektet politike të mirëqenies së. Duke u ndalur në Partinë Mirëqenies, atëherë, lejon për një analizë të bazës më të gjerë shoqëror mbi të cilën lëvizja islamike politike u rrit në Turqi. Që nga rrëzimi i Mirëqenies nga pushteti dhe mbylljen e saj eventual, lëvizja islamike ka qenë në rrëmujë. Ky dokument do të, prandaj, të kufizohet në periudhën Welfare Partisë.
Paraardhësi i Mirëqenies së, Partia Kombëtare Shpëtimi, ishte aktiv në vitet 1970, por u mbyll nga regjimi ushtarak në 1980. Mirëqenia u themelua në 1983 dhe fitoi popullaritet të madh në vitet 1990. Duke filluar me një 4.4 për qind të votave në zgjedhjet komunale të 1984, Partia e Mirëqenies në mënyrë të qëndrueshme në rritje që tregon e saj dhe u shumua votën e saj gati pesë herë në dymbëdhjetë vjet. Ajo alarmuar ngritjen sekular të Turqisë për herë të parë në zgjedhjet komunale të 1994, me 19 përqind e të gjitha vota në shkallë vendi dhe vendet e prefektit si në Stamboll dhe Ankara, pastaj në zgjedhjet e përgjithshme të 1995 kur ajo fitoi një shumicë me 21.4 për qind të votave kombëtare. Megjithatë, Partia e Mirëqenies ishte vetëm një kohë të shkurtër në gjendje për të udhëhequr një qeveri koalicioni në partneritet me rrugën e krahut të djathtë e vërtetë Partia e Tansu C iller.

A Muslim Archipelago

Max L. Bruto

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

Azzam S. Tamimi

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, në 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, në 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.

Kulturës islame Politike, Demokraci, dhe të Drejtat e Njeriut

Daniel E. Çmimi

It has been argued that Islam facilitates authoritarianism, contradicts the

values of Western societies, and significantly affects important political outcomes
in Muslim nations. Si pasojë, scholars, commentators, and government
officials frequently point to ‘‘Islamic fundamentalism’’ as the next
ideological threat to liberal democracies. This view, megjithatë, is based primarily
on the analysis of texts, Islamic political theory, and ad hoc studies
of individual countries, which do not consider other factors. It is my contention
that the texts and traditions of Islam, like those of other religions,
can be used to support a variety of political systems and policies. 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. Prandaj, a new approach to the study of the
connection between Islam and politics is called for.
I suggest, through rigorous evaluation of the relationship between Islam,
demokraci, and human rights at the cross-national level, 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, economic influences, ethnic cleavages,

and societal development, to explain the variance in the influence of

Islam on politics across eight nations.

Partitë e opozitës islamiste dhe e mundshme për angazhimin e BE-

Toby Archer

Heidi Huuhtanen

Në dritën e rritjes së rëndësisë së lëvizjeve islamiste në botën myslimane dhe

mënyra se radikalizmi ka ndikuar ngjarjet globale që nga ana e shekullit, ajo

është e rëndësishme që BE të vlerësojë politikat e saj ndaj aktorëve në atë që mund të jetë i lirshëm

quajtur 'botën islame'. Kjo është veçanërisht e rëndësishme për të pyetur nëse dhe si të angazhohen

me grupe të ndryshme islamiste.

Kjo mbetet e diskutueshme edhe brenda BE-së. Disa mendojnë se vlerat islame që

shtrihen prapa partitë islamike janë thjesht të papajtueshme me idealet perëndimore të demokracisë dhe

të drejtat e njeriut, ndërsa të tjerët shohin angazhimin si një domosdoshmëri reale për shkak të rritje

Rëndësia e brendshme e partive islamike dhe përfshirja e tyre në rritje në ndërkombëtare

punë. Një perspektivë tjetër është se demokratizimi në botën muslimane do të rritet

sigurisë evropiane. Vlefshmëria e këtyre dhe argumente të tjera mbi nëse dhe si

BE-ja duhet të angazhohen mund të testohen vetëm duke studiuar lëvizjet e ndryshme islamike dhe

rrethanat e tyre politike, vendi nga vendi.

Demokratizimi është një temë qendrore e veprimeve të përbashkëta të politikës së jashtme të BE-së, siç përcaktohet

në nenin 11 të Traktatit për Bashkimin Europian. Shumica e shteteve të konsiderohen në këtë

Raporti nuk janë demokratike, ose jo plotësisht demokratike. Në shumicën e këtyre vendeve, islamike

partitë dhe lëvizjet përbëjnë një opozitë të rëndësishëm në regjimeve mbizotëruese, dhe

në disa ata formojnë madh bllokun opozitar. demokracitë europiane kanë pasur kohë për të

merren me regjimet qeverisëse që janë autoritare, por është një fenomen i ri për shtyp

për reforma demokratike në shtetet ku përfituesit më të mundshme mund të ketë, nga

Pika e parë e BE-së, qasje të ndryshme dhe nganjëherë problematike për të demokracisë dhe e saj

vlerat e lidhura, të tilla si minoritet dhe të drejtat e grave dhe të sundimit të ligjit. Këto akuza janë

shpesh hedhur kundër lëvizjeve islamiste, kështu që është e rëndësishme për hartuesit e politikave evropiane në

kanë një pamje të saktë të politikave dhe filozofitë e partnerëve të mundshëm.

Eksperienca nga vende të ndryshme ka tendencë për të sugjeruar se më shumë liri islamike

Partitë janë të lejuara, më të moderuar se ata janë në veprimet dhe idetë e tyre. Ne shume

Rastet partitë islamike dhe grupet kanë zhvendosur kohë që larg qëllimin e tyre origjinale

e krijimit të një shteti islamik i qeverisur nga ligji islamik, dhe kanë ardhur për të pranuar themelore

parimet demokratike të konkurrencës zgjedhore për pushtet, ekzistenca e politike të tjera

konkurrentët, dhe pluralizmi politik.

Islami politik në Lindjen e Mesme

A Knudsen

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, në

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. Megjithatë, 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.




Political Islam is the single most active political force in the Middle East today. Its future is intimately tied to that of the region. If the United States and the European Union are committed to supporting political reform in the region, they will need to devise concrete, coherent strategies for engaging Islamist groups. Akoma, the U.S. has generally been unwilling to open a dialogue with these movements. Në mënyrë të ngjashme, EU engagement with Islamists has been the exception, not the rule. Where low-level contacts exist, they mainly serve information-gathering purposes, not strategic objectives. The U.S. and EU have a number of programs that address economic and political development in the region – among them the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI), the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), the Union for the Mediterranean, and the European Neighborhood Policy (PPE) – yet they have little to say about how the challenge of Islamist political opposition fits within broader regional objectives. SHBA. and EU democracy assistance and programming are directed almost entirely to either authoritarian governments themselves or secular civil society groups with minimal support in their own societies.
The time is ripe for a reassessment of current policies. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, supporting Middle East democracy has assumed a greater importance for Western policymakers, who see a link between lack of democracy and political violence. Greater attention has been devoted to understanding the variations within political Islam. The new American administration is more open to broadening communication with the Muslim world. Ndërkohë, the vast majority of mainstream Islamist organizations – including the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Fronti i Veprimit Islamik i Jordanisë (IAF), Morocco’s Justice and Development Party (PJD), the Islamic Constitutional Movement of Kuwait, and the Yemeni Islah Party – have increasingly made support for political reform and democracy a central component in their political platforms. Veç, many have signaled strong interest in opening dialogue with U.S. and EU governments.
The future of relations between Western nations and the Middle East may be largely determined by the degree to which the former engage nonviolent Islamist parties in a broad dialogue about shared interests and objectives. There has been a recent proliferation of studies on engagement with Islamists, but few clearly address what it might entail in practice. As Zoé Nautré, visiting fellow at the German Council on Foreign Relations, puts it, “the EU is thinking about engagement but doesn’t really know how.”1 In the hope of clarifying the discussion, we distinguish between three levels of “engagement,” each with varying means and ends: low-level contacts, strategic dialogue, and partnership.

Partive islamike : Pjesëmarrja pa energji

Malika Zeghal

Gjatë dy dekadave të fundit, lëvizjet sociale dhe politike argumentim ideologjitë e tyre në referenca në Islam janë kërkuar për t'u bërë palë juridike politike në shumë vende të Lindjes së Mesme dhe Afrikën e Veriut. Disa prej këtyre lëvizjeve islamiste kanë qenë të autorizuar për të marrë pjesë në mënyrë të ligjshme në konkurrencë elektorale. Në mesin e më i njohur është Partia për Drejtësi dhe Zhvillim e Turqisë (AKP), e cila fitoi një shumicë parlamentare në 2002 dhe ka çuar qeveria që ndonjëherë. Partia e Marokut e Drejtësisë dhe Zhvillimit (PJD) ka qenë i ligjshëm që nga mesi- 1990s dhe komandon një bllok të konsiderueshëm të vendeve në Parlament. Ne Egjipt, Vëllazëria Muslimane (MB) ka qenë kurrë i autorizuar për të formuar një parti politike, por në dritën e represionit shtetëror ka drejtuar me sukses kandidatët si të pavarur nominale në të dy zgjedhjet nacionale dhe lokale.
Që nga fillim të viteve 1990, Ky trend ka shkuar dorë më dorë me politikat zyrtare të liberalizimit politik të kufizuar. së bashku, dy tendenca kanë shkaktuar një debat në lidhje me nëse këto lëvizje janë të angazhuar për "demokraci." Një literaturë e gjerë ka çarë deri për të theksuar paradokse si dhe rreziqet e mundshme dhe përfitimet e përfshirë partitë islamike në procesin zgjedhor. Paradigma kryesore gjenden në këtë trupin e shkrimit fokusohet në pasojat që mund të pasojnë, kur islamistët përdorin instrumente demokratike, dhe kërkon të hyjnore të "vërtetë" synimet se islamistët do të shfaqet në qoftë se ata të vijnë në pushtet.

Dilema islamike Amerikës Zgjidhja e: Mësime nga Azia Jugore dhe Juglindore

Shadi Hamid
SHBA. përpjekjet për të promovuar demokracinë në Lindjen e Mesme kanë kohë që janë paralizuar nga "dilemë islamike": në teori, ne duam demokraci, por, në praktikë, frikë se partitë islamike do të jenë përfituesit kryesor të çdo hapjes politike. Manifestimi më tragjike e kësaj ishte përmbysje e algjerian i 1991 dhe 1992, kur Shtetet e Bashkuara qëndroi në heshtje, ndërsa me vendosmëri laik zgjedhjet e ushtarake anulua pas një parti islamike fitoi një shumicë parlamentare. Më shumë kohët e fundit, administrata e presidentit Bush mbështeti larg nga "agjendën e lirisë" e tij pasi islamistët e bëri çuditërisht edhe në zgjedhjet në të gjithë rajonin, përfshirë në Egjipt, Arabia Saudite, dhe territoret palestineze.
Por edhe frika jonë e partive islamiste-dhe refuzimi rezulton që të angazhohen me ta-ka qenë në kundërshtim vetë, mbajtjen e vërtetë për disa vende por jo të tjerët. Më shumë se një vend është parë si jetike për interesat e sigurisë kombëtare amerikane, më pak të gatshëm të Shteteve të Bashkuara ka qenë për të pranuar grupet islamike që ka një rol të rëndësishëm politik ka. Megjithatë, në vende të shihen si më pak të rëndësishme strategjike, dhe ku më pak është në rrezik, Shtetet e Bashkuara ka marrë herë pas here një qasje më të nuancuar. Por kjo është pikërisht aty ku më shumë është në rrezik që duke njohur një rol për islamistët jo të dhunshme është më e rëndësishme, dhe, këtu, Politika amerikane vazhdon të dështoj.
Në të gjithë rajonin, Shtetet e Bashkuara kanë mbështetur në mënyrë aktive dhe të regjimeve autokratike dhënë dritën e gjelbër për fushata e represionit kundër grupeve të tilla si Vëllazëria Muslimane egjiptian, lëvizjes më të vjetra dhe më me ndikim politik në rajon. Në mars 2008, gjatë asaj që shumë vëzhgues e konsiderojnë të jetë periudha më e keqe e anti-Vëllazëria represionit që nga viti 1960, Sekretarja e Shtetit Kondoliza Rajs hiqet dorë një $100 milion reduktim të mandatuar nga Kongresi i ndihmës ushtarake në Egjipt. 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. Për më tepër, they are seen as crucial to U.S. efforts to counter Iran, stabilize Iraq, and combat terrorism.

LËVIZJET islamike dhe procesit demokratik në botën arabe: Eksplorimi i Zonat Gray

Nathan J. I nxirë nga dielli, Amr Hamzawy,

Marina Ottaway

During the last decade, Islamist movements have established themselves as major political players in the Middle East. Together with the governments, lëvizjet islamike, moderate as well as radical, will determine how the politics of the region unfold in the foreseeable future. Th ey have shown the ability not only to craft messages with widespread popular appeal but also, and most importantly, to create organizations with genuine social bases and develop coherent political strategies. Other parties,
by and large, have failed on all accounts.
Th e public in the West and, in particular, Shtetet e Bashkuara, has only become aware of the importance of Islamist movements after dramatic events, such as the revolution in Iran and the assassination of President Anwar al-Sadat in Egypt. Attention has been far more sustained since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. As a result, Islamist movements are widely regarded as dangerous and hostile. While such a characterization is accurate regarding organizations at the radical end of the Islamist spectrum, which are dangerous because of their willingness to resort to indiscriminate violence in pursuing their goals, it is not an accurate characterization of the many groups that have renounced or avoided violence. Because terrorist organizations pose an immediate
threat, megjithatë, policy makers in all countries have paid disproportionate attention to the violent organizations.
It is the mainstream Islamist organizations, not the radical ones, that will have the greatest impact on the future political evolution of the Middle East. Th e radicals’ grandiose goals of re-establishing a caliphate uniting the entire Arab world, or even of imposing on individual Arab countries laws and social customs inspired by a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam are simply too far removed from today’s reality to be realized. Th is does not mean that terrorist groups are not dangerous—they could cause great loss of life even in the pursuit of impossible goals—but that they are unlikely to change the face of the Middle East. Mainstream Islamist organizations are generally a diff erent matter. Th ey already have had a powerful impact on social customs in many countries, halting and reversing secularist trends and changing the way many Arabs dress and behave. And their immediate political goal, to become a powerful force by participating in the normal politics of their country, is not an impossible one. It is already being realized in countries such as Morocco, Jordan, and even Egypt, which still bans all Islamist political organizations but now has eighty-eight Muslim Brothers in the Parliament. Politikë, not violence, is what gives mainstream Islamists their infl uence.



Issues relating to political Islam continue to present challenges to European foreign policies in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). 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.