RSS中的所有条目 "火鸡" 类别

伊斯兰教, 民主 & 美国:

科尔多瓦基金会

阿卜杜拉·法利克 |

介绍 ,


尽管这是一场长期而复杂的辩论, Arches Quarterly 从神学和实践的角度重新审视, 关于伊斯兰教与民主之间的关系和兼容性的重要辩论, 正如巴拉克奥巴马的希望和变革议程所呼应的那样. 虽然许多人庆祝奥巴马登上椭圆形办公室作为美国的全国宣泄者, 其他人对国际舞台上意识形态和方法的转变仍然不乐观. 虽然穆斯林世界和美国之间的许多紧张局势和不信任可归因于促进民主的方法, 通常偏爱专制政权和伪造政权,这些政权为民主价值观和人权提供口红, 余震 9/11 通过美国在政治伊斯兰上的立场,确实进一步加剧了担忧. 它创造了由worldpublicopinion.org发现的负面墙, 根据该 67% 的埃及人认为,全球范围内,美国正在扮演“主要消极”角色.
因此,美国的反应很贴切. 通过选举奥巴马, 世界各地的许多人都寄希望于发展一个不太好战的人, 但对穆斯林世界更公平的外交政策. 奥巴马的考验, 当我们讨论, 是美国及其盟友促进民主的方式. 它会促进还是强加?
而且, 它能否成为长期冲突地区的诚实经纪人?? 吸收 prolifi 的专业知识和洞察力
c学者, 学者, 经验丰富的记者和政治家, Arches Quarterly 揭示了伊斯兰教与民主之间的关系以及美国的角色——以及奥巴马带来的变化, 在寻求共同点. 阿纳斯·阿尔蒂克里蒂, The e Cordoba Foundation 的首席执行官为这次讨论提供了开场白, 他反思了奥巴马道路上的希望和挑战. 跟随 Altikriti, 尼克松总统的前顾问, 罗伯特·克莱恩(Robert Craneoff)博士对伊斯兰自由权原则进行了透彻的分析. 安瓦尔·易卜拉欣, 马来西亚前副总理, 通过在穆斯林占主导地位的社会中实施民主的实际现实来丰富讨论, 即, 在印度尼西亚和马来西亚.
我们也有Shireen Hunter博士, 乔治敦大学, 美国, 探索落后于民主化和现代化的穆斯林国家. 恐怖主义作家对此予以补充, 纳菲兹·艾哈迈德(Nafeez Ahmed)博士对后现代危机和
民主的灭亡. Daud Abdullah博士 (中东媒体监控总监), 艾伦·哈特 (前ITN和BBC Panorama通讯员; 犹太复国主义的作者: 犹太人的真正敌人) 和Asem Sondos (埃及《 Sawt Al Omma》杂志编辑) 专注于奥巴马及其在穆斯林世界促进民主方面的作用, 以及美国与以色列和穆斯林兄弟会的关系.
外交部长, 马尔代夫, 艾哈迈德·沙希德 (Ahmed Shaheed) 推测伊斯兰教和民主的未来; 克莱尔. 格里·麦克洛克林
– 因爱尔兰共和党活动而入狱四年的新芬党成员和吉尔福德的活动家 4 和伯明翰 6, 反映了他最近去加沙的旅行,在那里他目睹了对巴勒斯坦人的残暴和不公正的影响; 玛丽·布林-史密斯博士, 激进化和当代政治暴力研究中心主任讨论批判性研究政治恐怖的挑战; 哈立德·穆巴拉克博士, 作家和剧作家, 讨论达尔富尔和平的前景; 最后,记者和人权活动家 Ashur Shamis 批判性地审视了当今穆斯林的民主化和政治化.
我们希望所有这些都有助于在新的希望曙光中对影响我们所有人的问题进行全面的阅读和反思.
谢谢

伊斯兰政治文化, 民主, 和人权

丹尼尔(Daniele). 价钱

有人认为伊斯兰教助长了威权主义, 与西方社会的价值观相矛盾, 并显着影响穆斯林国家的重要政治成果. 最后, 学者, 评论员, 政府官员经常指出“伊斯兰原教旨主义”是对自由民主国家的下一个意识形态威胁. 这种观点, 然而, 主要基于文本分析, 伊斯兰政治理论, 和个别国家的特别研究, 不考虑其他因素. 我的论点是伊斯兰教的文本和传统, 像其他宗教一样, 可用于支持各种政治制度和政策. 特定国家和描述性研究无法帮助我们找到有助于我们解释穆斯林世界各国伊斯兰教与政治之间不同关系的模式. 因此, 一种新的研究方法
伊斯兰教与政治之间的联系被要求.
我建议, 通过严格评估伊斯兰教之间的关系, 民主, 和跨国一级的人权, 过分强调伊斯兰教作为一种政治力量的力量. 我首先使用比较案例研究, 重点关注与伊斯兰团体和政权之间的相互作用有关的因素, 经济影响, 种族分裂, 和社会发展, 解释伊斯兰教对八个国家政治影响的差异. 我认为大部分的权力
归因于伊斯兰教作为穆斯林国家政策和政治制度背后的驱动力,可以通过前面提到的因素更好地解释. 我也发现, 与普遍看法相反, 伊斯兰政治团体的日益强大往往与政治体系的适度多元化有关.
我构建了一个伊斯兰政治文化指数, 基于伊斯兰法律的使用程度以及是否和, 如果是这样, 如何,西方观念, 机构, 和技术被实施, 检验伊斯兰教与民主以及伊斯兰教与人权之间关系的性质. 该指标用于统计分析, 其中包括 23 个以穆斯林为主的国家的样本和 23 个非穆斯林发展中国家的对照组. 除了比较
伊斯兰国家到非伊斯兰发展中国家, 统计分析使我能够控制已发现影响民主水平和保护个人权利的其他变量的影响. 结果应该是对伊斯兰教对政治和政策的影响的更现实和准确的描述.

全球反恐战争中的精准:

Sherifa Zuhur

九月之后的七年 11, 2001 (9/11) 攻击, 许多专家认为,基地组织已经恢复了力量,其模仿者或分支机构比以前更具杀伤力. 国家情报估计 2007 断言基地组织现在比以前更危险 9/11.1 基地组织的模仿者继续威胁西方, 中东, 和欧洲国家, 就像在九月被挫败的情节一样 2007 在德国. 布鲁斯·里德尔说: 很大程度上要归功于华盛顿急于进入伊拉克而不是追捕基地组织的领导人, 该组织现在在巴基斯坦的荒地拥有坚实的业务基础,并在伊拉克西部拥有有效的特许经营权. 它的影响力遍及整个穆斯林世界和欧洲 . . . 奥萨马·本·拉登开展了一场成功的宣传活动. . . . 他的想法现在吸引了比以往更多的追随者.
确实,各种萨拉菲圣战组织仍在整个伊斯兰世界中出现. 为什么对我们称之为全球圣战的伊斯兰恐怖主义的大量资源反应没有证明非常有效?
转向“软实力”工具,” 西方在全球反恐战争中支持穆斯林的努力效果如何? (长城汽车)? 为什么美国在更广泛的伊斯兰世界中赢得如此少的“民心”? 为什么美国在这个问题上的战略信息在该地区发挥如此糟糕? 为什么, 尽管穆斯林普遍反对极端主义,正如主要穆斯林领导人的调查和官方言论所示, 约旦和巴基斯坦对本拉登的支持实际上有所增加?
本专着不会重新审视伊斯兰暴力的起源. 相反,它关注的是一种错误地构建 GWOT 并阻止穆斯林支持它的概念上的失败. 他们无法认同提议的变革性对策,因为他们将自己的一些核心信念和制度视为目标
这种努力.
几个严重成问题的趋势混淆了美国对 GWOT 的概念化以及为打这场战争而制定的战略信息. 这些演变自 (1) 对穆斯林和穆斯林占多数的国家的后殖民政治方法差异很大,因此产生了相互矛盾和令人困惑的印象和效果; 和 (2) 对伊斯兰教和次区域文化的普遍无知和偏见. 增加美国人的愤怒, 恐惧, 和对致命事件的焦虑 9/11, 和某些元素, 尽管有冷静的头脑的敦促, 让穆斯林和他们的宗教为他们的同教者的罪行负责, 或出于政治原因认为这样做有用的人.

埃及的穆斯林兄弟: 对抗或整合?

Research

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 选举. 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. 同时, 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.

伊斯兰教与民主: 文本, 传统, 和历史

阿勒·艾哈迈德(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. 然而, 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. 例如, 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. 实际上, 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. 例如, 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. 相似地, 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. 最后, 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., 索马里, 苏丹, 印度尼西亚, 巴基斯坦, 伊拉克, 阿富汗, 阿尔及利亚, and Bosnia).

全球化与政治伊斯兰: 土耳其福利党的社会基础

哈尔顿·古拉尔普

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. This paper will, therefore, 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, with 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. Nevertheless, 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.

一个穆斯林群岛

最大L. 毛

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.

伊斯兰政治思想中的民主

Azzam S. 塔米米

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, 在 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, 在 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.

伊斯兰政治文化, 民主, 和人权

丹尼尔(Daniele). 价钱

有人认为伊斯兰教助长了威权主义, 矛盾的

西方社会的价值观, 并显着影响重要的政治结果
在穆斯林国家. 最后, 学者, 评论员, 和政府
官员们经常指出“伊斯兰原教旨主义”是下一个
对自由民主国家的意识形态威胁. 这种观点, 然而, 主要是基于
关于文本分析, 伊斯兰政治理论, 和特别研究
个别国家, 不考虑其他因素. 这是我的争论
伊斯兰教的文本和传统, 像其他宗教一样,
可用于支持各种政治制度和政策. 国家
具体的和描述性的研究并不能帮助我们找到有帮助的模式
我们解释伊斯兰教与政治之间的不同关系
穆斯林世界的国家. 因此, 一种新的研究方法
伊斯兰教与政治之间的联系被要求.
我建议, 通过严格评估伊斯兰教之间的关系,
民主, 和跨国一级的人权, 太多了
强调伊斯兰教作为一种政治力量的力量. 我先来
使用比较案例研究, 关注与相互作用相关的因素
伊斯兰团体和政权之间, 经济影响, 种族分裂,

和社会发展, 解释影响的差异

八个国家的伊斯兰教政治.

伊斯兰反对党和欧盟参与的潜力

托比·阿切尔

海蒂·休塔宁(Heidi Huuhtanen)

鉴于伊斯兰运动在穆斯林世界和

自世纪之交以来,激进化对全球事件的影响方式, 它

对于欧盟来说,在可以松散的范围内评估其对参与者的政策很重要

被称为“伊斯兰世界”. 询问是否以及如何参与尤为重要

与各种伊斯兰团体.

即使在欧盟内部,这仍然存在争议. 有些人认为伊斯兰价值观

落后于伊斯兰政党与西方的民主理想和

人权, 而其他人则将参与视为现实的必要性,因为日益增长的

伊斯兰政党在国内的重要性及其日益参与国际事务

事务. 另一种观点是,穆斯林世界的民主化将会增加

欧洲安全. 这些和其他关于是否以及如何

欧盟是否应该参与只能通过研究不同的伊斯兰运动和

他们的政治环境, 逐个国家.

民主化是欧盟共同外交政策行动的中心主题, 铺设

在文章中 11 欧盟条约. 在此考虑的许多州

举报不民主, 或不完全民主. 在这些国家中的大多数, 伊斯兰主义者

政党和运动构成了对现行政权的重大反对, 和

在一些地区,他们形成了最大的反对派集团. 欧洲民主国家长期以来不得不

处理专制的统治政权, 但这是一个新现象

在最有可能受益者可能拥有的国家进行民主改革, 来自

欧盟的观点, 不同的,有时是有问题的民主方法及其

相关值, 例如少数民族和妇女权利和法治. 这些费用是

经常反对伊斯兰运动, 因此,对于欧洲政策制定者来说,重要的是

准确了解潜在合作伙伴的政策和理念.

来自不同国家的经验往往表明,更自由的伊斯兰主义者

允许聚会, 他们的行动和想法越温和. 在许多

伊斯兰政党和团体早已偏离了最初的目标

建立一个受伊斯兰法律管辖的伊斯兰国家, 并开始接受基本的

选举权力的民主原则, 其他政治的存在

竞争对手, 和政治多元化.

中东的政治伊斯兰教

是努森

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, 在

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

回顾一些用来解释中东伊斯兰复兴的主要理论

(数字 1). 简单来说, 报告表明,伊斯兰教不必与民主和

有一种趋势是忽视许多中东国家已经

参与了对伊斯兰运动的残酷镇压, 导致他们, 有人争辩, 占用

反对国家的武器, 更罕见的是, 外国. 使用政治暴力是

广泛分布于中东, 但既不不合逻辑也不非理性. 在很多情况下甚至

以使用暴力而闻名的伊斯兰团体已转变为和平的政治组织

政党成功参加市政和全国选举. 尽管如此, 伊斯兰主义者

尽管有许多理论试图

说明它的增长和受欢迎的吸引力. 一般来说, 大多数理论认为伊斯兰主义是

对相对剥夺的反应, 尤其是社会不平等和政治压迫. 选择

理论在宗教本身和宗教的范围内寻求伊斯兰复兴的答案

强大的, 宗教象征的唤起潜力.

结论主张超越“悲观与厄运”的方法,即

将伊斯兰主义描绘成一种非法的政治表达和对西方的潜在威胁 (“老的

伊斯兰主义”), 以及对当前伊斯兰主义民主化的更细致入微的理解

现在正在整个中东发生的运动 (“新伊斯兰主义”). 这个

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

社会中较贫穷的阶层,但也属于中产阶级.

参与政治伊斯兰的策略

沙迪哈米德

阿曼达·卡德莱克(AMANDA KADLEC)

政治伊斯兰教是当今中东地区最活跃的政治力量. 它的未来与该地区的未来密切相关. 如果美国和欧盟致力于支持该地区的政治改革, 他们需要设计具体的, 参与伊斯兰团体的连贯战略. 然而, 美国. 普遍不愿意与这些运动展开对话. 相似地, 欧盟与伊斯兰主义者的接触是个例外, 不是规则. 存在低级联系人的地方, 它们主要用于信息收集目的, 不是战略目标. 美国. 和欧盟有许多解决该地区经济和政治发展的计划——其中包括中东伙伴关系倡议 (美皮), 千年挑战公司 (中冶), 地中海联盟, 和欧洲睦邻政策 (ENP) - 然而,他们对伊斯兰政治反对派的挑战如何适应更广泛的区域目标几乎没有什么可说的. 我们. 和欧盟的民主援助和规划几乎完全针对威权政府本身或世俗的民间社会团体,在他们自己的社会中得到的支持很少.
重新评估现行政策的时机已经成熟. 自九月恐怖袭击以来 11, 2001, 支持中东民主对西方政策制定者来说具有更大的重要性, 谁看到了缺乏民主和政治暴力之间的联系. 人们更加关注理解政治伊斯兰内部的变化. 美国新政府更愿意扩大与穆斯林世界的交流. 同时, 绝大多数主流伊斯兰组织——包括埃及的穆斯林兄弟会, 约旦的伊斯兰行动阵线 (印度空军), 摩洛哥正义与发展党 (PJD), 科威特伊斯兰立宪运动, 和也门伊斯兰党——越来越多地将支持政治改革和民主作为其政治纲领的核心组成部分. 此外, 许多人表示有兴趣与美国展开对话. 和欧盟政府.
西方国家与中东关系的未来可能在很大程度上取决于前者与非暴力伊斯兰政党就共同利益和目标进行广泛对话的程度. 最近有大量关于与伊斯兰主义者接触的研究, 但很少有人清楚地说明它在实践中可能需要什么. 佐伊·诺特, 德国外交关系委员会访问学者, 把它, “欧盟正在考虑参与,但并不真正知道如何参与。”1 希望澄清讨论, 我们区分了三个级别的“参与度”,”每个都有不同的手段和目的: 低级接触, 战略对话, 和伙伴关系.

伊斯兰政党 : 无权参与

玛丽卡·泽格尔

在过去的二十年里, 以伊斯兰教为基础的社会和政治运动试图成为中东和北非许多国家的合法政党. 其中一些伊斯兰运动已被授权合法参加选举竞争. 其中最著名的是土耳其的正义与发展党 (AKP), 赢得了议会多数席位 2002 从那以后一直领导政府. 摩洛哥自己的正义与发展党 (PJD) 从中期开始就合法了- 1990并在议会中占据重要席位. 在埃及, 穆斯林兄弟会 (兆字节) 从未被授权组建政党, 但尽管受到国家镇压,它还是成功地将候选人作为名义上的独立人士在全国和地方选举中竞选.
自 1990 年代初, 这一趋势与有限政治自由化的官方政策齐头并进. 一起, 这两种趋势引发了一场关于这些运动是否致力于“民主”的争论。大量文献涌现出来,强调将伊斯兰政党纳入选举过程的悖论以及可能的风险和好处. 在这篇文章中发现的主要范式侧重于伊斯兰主义者使用民主工具时可能产生的后果, 并试图推测伊斯兰主义者上台后将表现出的“真实”意图.

解决美国的伊斯兰困境: 南亚和东南亚的教训

沙迪·哈米德(Shadi Hamid)
我们. efforts to promote democracy in the Middle East have long been paralyzed by the “Islamist dilemma”: in theory, we want democracy, but, 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 和 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. 然而, 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, 和, 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. 而且, they are seen as crucial to U.S. efforts to counter Iran, stabilize Iraq, and combat terrorism.

伊斯兰运动和阿拉伯世界的民主进程: 探索灰色地带

内森J. 棕色, 阿姆·哈姆扎维(Amr Hamzawy),

玛丽娜·奥特韦(Marina Ottaway)

在过去的十年中, 伊斯兰运动已成为中东地区的主要政治参与者. 与政府一起, 伊斯兰运动, 温和的和激进的, 将决定该地区的政治在可预见的未来如何展开. 他们不仅展示了制作具有广泛大众吸引力的信息的能力,而且, 最重要的是, 创建具有真正社会基础的组织并制定连贯的政治战略. 其他方,
总的来说, 所有帐户都失败了.
西方公众和, 尤其是, 美国, 在发生戏剧性事件后才意识到伊斯兰运动的重要性, 例如伊朗革命和埃及总统安瓦尔·萨达特被暗杀. 自 9 月的恐怖袭击以来,注意力更加持久 11, 2001. 因此, 伊斯兰运动被广泛认为是危险和敌对的. 虽然这种描述对于伊斯兰极端组织的组织来说是准确的, 这很危险,因为他们愿意在追求目标时不分青红皂白地使用暴力, 这不是对许多放弃或避免暴力的群体的准确描述. 因为恐怖组织构成了直接
威胁, 然而, 所有国家的政策制定者都对暴力组织给予了不成比例的关注.
它是主流的伊斯兰组织, 不是激进的, 这将对中东未来的政治演变产生最大的影响. 激进分子重建统一整个阿拉伯世界的哈里发的宏伟目标, 甚至将受伊斯兰教原教旨主义解释启发的法律和社会习俗强加于个别阿拉伯国家,这与今天的现实相去甚远,无法实现. 这并不意味着恐怖组织没有危险——即使在追求不可能的目标时,它们也可能造成巨大的生命损失——但它们不太可能改变中东的面貌. 主流伊斯兰组织通常是另一回事. 他们已经对许多国家的社会习俗产生了强大的影响, 制止和扭转世俗主义趋势,改变许多阿拉伯人的着装和行为方式. 以及他们直接的政治目标, 通过参与本国的正常政治而成为强大的力量, 不是不可能的. 它已经在摩洛哥等国家实现, 约旦, 甚至埃及, 仍然禁止所有伊斯兰政治组织,但现在议会中有八十八名穆斯林兄弟. 政治, 不是暴力, 是什么赋予了主流伊斯兰主义者影响力.

伊斯兰激进化

前言
理查德·杨斯
迈克尔·爱默生

与政治伊斯兰教有关的问题继续对欧洲在中东和北非的外交政策构成挑战 (中东和北非). 在过去十年左右的时间里,随着欧盟政策试图应对这些挑战,政治伊斯兰教本身已经演变. 专家指出政治伊斯兰教中日益复杂和多样化的趋势. 一些伊斯兰组织加强了对民主规范的承诺,并充分参与了和平, 主流国家政治. 其他人仍然执着于暴力手段. 还有一些人转向了一种更加安静的伊斯兰教形式, 脱离政治活动. 中东和北非地区的政治伊斯兰教对欧洲政策制定者没有统一的趋势. 围绕“激进化”的概念展开了分析辩论. 这反过来又催生了对推动“去激进化”的因素的研究, 反之亦然, “再激进化”. 大部分复杂性源于普遍持有的观点,即所有这三种现象同时发生. 甚至条款本身也有争议. 人们经常指出,温和激进的二分法未能完全捕捉到政治伊斯兰内部趋势的细微差别. 一些分析家还抱怨说,“激进主义”的谈论带有意识形态色彩. 在术语层面, 我们理解激进化与极端主义有关, 但在其宗教原教旨主义与政治内容的中心地位上存在不同的看法, 以及是否暗示了诉诸暴力的意愿.

这种差异反映在伊斯兰主义者自己的观点上, 以及在外人的认知中.