An Islamist Winter? | Standpoint

January/February 2012

Where do we go from here? Like it or not, Islam, or at least what to do with it, is part of the debate. Contrary to common perceptions, Islamists do not offer credible alternatives to the crumbling despotic systems. Nor, as election results have shown, do they have the popular support needed for tackling so great a challenge alone. Nevertheless, even the secular parties do not want to shut Islam out of the promised new life. The problem is that there is no consensus as to what precisely Islam is and, more importantly, who owns it.

One could describe as minimalists those who acknowledge that Islam has no theory of government and that a revival of the caliphate is no longer an option, so Muslim-majority nations should develop political systems that fit their own needs and aspirations. The Koran does not even contain such words as government, republic, constitution, and politics. However, it is full of detailed rules regarding private life. Thus, what matters is to conduct one's personal life in an Islamic way, even in a religiously neutral political system.

In this emerging intra-Islamic debate, Turkey, as already noted, is establishing a claim as the minimalists' standard-bearer. It was the first to support the uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya and is now the strongest supporter of the revolt against Syrian despot Bashar al-Assad.

Turkish leaders, including prime minister Erdogan, have been the only top officials from Muslim countries to visit Arab Spring nations, receiving red carpet treatment. In public meetings, Erdogan has told Arab audiences that it is possible to have an Islamic society and a secular state.

Turkey itself is an example. Turks top the list of pilgrims to Mecca, and there are twice as many mosques in Turkey as in Iran with a population of the same size. And yet Turkey has had a secular system of government since the 1920s. Erdogan knows what he is talking about. His Justice and Development Party won power by casting itself as a conservative party faithful to a secular republic. Even then, in two successive general elections, it failed to win a straight majority of the votes.

Tags:

Like this article? Share, save or print using the icons below:

A reader from NY

January 2nd, 2012
12:01 PM

While I agree with the premise and conclusion of this piece, I am as bewildered as the previous reader ("Orientalism") by Mr. Taheri's depiction of the Turkish government as a "model" of secular Islamic democracy. As Turkey's Islamist PM Erdogan vies for accession to the EU, on the one hand, and to fill the regional power vacuum left by Mubarak's ouster and the Arab Spring, on the other, one must look to events of the last 18 months and wonder how independent a truly secular government in an Islamist society can be, particularly when that society derives its intellectual, moral and spiritual guidance from its religious scholars and theologians - NOT its politicians. Moreover, to offer Turkey's NOMINAL separation of state and religion as a beacon to the Arab world is as naive as the presumption that the Islamic Brotherhood's newfangled secular campaign platform is to be taken at face value. I've often thought the Occupy Wall Street activists would do well to look East for a better appreciation of their "99 vs. 1" mantra; but, if this movement has anything in common with the Arab Spring, it's that both were fomented by passions rather than a plan. One can rail against social injustice, economic hardship and political corruption, but there is a world of difference between identifying a problem and knowing how to fix it. Absent a solution and the means to implement it, there can be no remedy - or revolution.

Orientalism

January 1st, 2012
7:01 AM

Informative and well summed up. However, some may argue that we are seeing the following now in Turkey as the military security regime that protected secularism is being dismantled.... the description of Iran post 1979 revolution resonates with many Turks these days... you could replace mullahs for the ruling AKP party. 'the mullahs and their minions were infiltrating the apparatus of the state, placing their people in strategic positions within the bureaucracy, the judiciary and the media, and creating paramilitary squads. They accepted elections on the basis of one man, one vote, once' And this also applies to Turkey when talking about military repression of Islamist parties.. 'They know how to hide their true colours and bide their time. If it is foolish to overestimate their strength when they are part of a broader picture, it is deadly to underestimate their capacity for doing harm when they seize all levers of power.' Some may say, if the popular vote wants a more pro-Islamic run country so be it, but as the writer also mentions 'obsessions such as the Israel-Palestine issue, anti-Americanism, vilification of minorities and anti-woman programmes' are old Islamists discourse and are anti-democratic, in my opinion. Today,we are seeing a visible backwards trend in Turkey on these issues. Turkey noteably has the highest number of journalists in prison. Most live in fear of reprisal for having a critical voice. Wire-tapping by the pro-government police force is common. Turkey as a model?

Sarat Kumar

December 26th, 2011
8:12 PM

It is not really important whether the Islamists allow tourists to drink alcohol or even whether muslim women would be veiled, scarved or not. Will they: Amend constitutions to allow non muslims to occupy the highest political, military and social offices in Arab and Muslim countries? Allow all religions and atheists to preach and propagate their beliefs peacefully? Adopt constitutions without references to Islam? As someone who has lived in the Middle East for 14 years, let me tell you, Mr Taheri (I know you dont need my telling) the Arabs in particular and Muslims in general are light years away from these concepts.

Post your comment

More Features