Conference Report

In a world where the intersection between religion and politics has become increasingly significant, where many religious groups develop their agendas based upon certain political ends, it has become sharply apparent now, more than ever, that understanding the dynamics of this interaction is of critical importance in the shaping of a modern, democratic world. This is precisely the moment for think-tank organizations, like the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID), to come to the forefront and lead the worldwide movement for peace, understanding, and democracy. On Wednesday, April 14th, 2008, CSID held its 9th Annual Conference at the Marriot Renaissance Hotel in Washington D.C., which focused on the compelling theme of “Political Islam and Democracy: What do Islamists and Islamic Movements Want?”

CSID successfully brought together 180 of the most knowledgeable scholars, policy makers, and party leaders to each shed light on the various aspects of Political Islam and the quest for democracy. After the participants arrived, registered, and took their seats inside the New Hampshire Ballroom, CSID President Radwan Masmoudi and CSID Board Chair Asma Afsaruddin warmly welcomed the participants and thanked them for having taken so much time out of their schedules to be a part of what was sure to be a very engaging and thought-provoking day.

At 9 am, Asma Afsaruddin graciously opened the conference with the first session titled “The Intersection of Religion and Democracy: Islamist Discourses,” and introduced the first speaker of the day, Nelly Lahoud [bio, abstract], a professor of political theory at Goucher College. She began the dialogue with her discussion of “Why Jihad not Democracy,”[paper] by arguing that, contrary to what Jihadis themselves believe, Islam and democracy are not mutually exclusive, that it is not at all necessary to choose one over the other. However, she explained that the Jihadis believe their role is to “defend Muslims against the aggressions of the West,” and consequently find democracy to be an evil Western creation designed to keep the Muslim countries in their state of corruption and misery.

Mark Gould [bio, abstract], professor of sociology at Harverford College, structured his address around the title “Sovereignty of God: Constitutional Processes in Islam and Christianity,” [paper] in which he argued that while Shari’ah Law “can function as a constitution in Islamic states,” it generally lacks the fluidity necessary in an adaptable document like a constitution. Along the same lines, he said that in a democracy, a democratic constitution consists of laws drafted by the people and that are subject to amendments by the electorate, something that is impossible to do when the constitution is derived directly from God’s laws.

Amr Hamzawy [bio, abstract], Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, concluded the first session with his discussion of the “Draft party platform for the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood” [paper]. He noted the commitment of the Muslim Brotherhood to initiate democratic reforms and how these reforms should come about in recent years. He added that the diversity of the Muslim Brotherhood is the key to comprehending just how well it has been operating given the plurality of voices within the organization. The significance of the Muslim Brotherhood releasing this draft party platform is to show the ruling party that it will not resort to violence to achieve its ends, but will do so in a peaceful, legal manner.

The second session, part of which was broadcast live on Al-Jazeera News, was moderated by Abdelwahab Alkebsi, Director of Programs for Africa and the Middle East at the Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), who introduced the first speaker on the topic of the Muslim Brotherhood and democratic evolution, Radwan Ziadeh [bio, abstract]. Mr. Ziadeh, who is Senior Fellow at the United States Institute of Peace, spoke about “The Muslim Brotherhood in Syria and the concept of Democracy” [paper]. Despite its dark history with the Syrian government, which imprisoned and killed thousands of leaders from the Muslim Brotherhood, the organization released its “Gentleman’s Statement for Political Action,” in which it rejected all forms of violence and openly supported the principle of a civil state; it also vowed to work for democracy and equal rights for all citizens. In spite of such a statement, Mr. Ziadeh said, “there was no change in the authority’s dealing with them.”

Bahey eldin Hassan [bio, abstract], Director of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, began his presentation by stressing that he will not be analyzing Islam itself, rather how to reconcile the principles of Islam from the perspective of the Muslim Brotherhood to the challenges facing the Egyptian people. He outlined three main points about the platform recently released by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt [paper], including the fact that prior to its public release, the document was sent to political thinkers of varying backgrounds to give their comments and advice, something that Mr. Hassan sees as “unprecedented behavior” in relation to other political organizations and believes it is something that should be celebrated.

Ibrahim el-Houdaiby [bio, abstract], board member and columnist for the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s official English language website, Ikhwanweb.com, focused his presentation on the younger generation of the Muslim Brotherhood [paper]. He discussed the shift in the internal dynamics of the Muslim Brotherhood between the years of 2005 and 2007, “the former being a year of political openness and democratization while the latter being a year of political occlusion and repression.” Although in 2005, the traditional Muslim/Arab mindset that the West was anti-Islamic began to be shaken, the realities of 2007 have been quite different. Reminding the audience that it is in oppressive and closed political atmospheres that people tend toward extremism, he expresses concern over the impact that this new reality may have on the minds of the young members of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Najib Ghadbian [bio, abstract], associate professor of political science and Middle East studies at the University of Arkansas, presented on the subject of “Demystifying the positions of the Muslim Brotherhood toward democracy” [paper]. The Muslim Brotherhood in the countries of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan has come a long way to enforce procedural democracy but this has fallen short of leading to the adoption of a progressive agenda. One of the major causes of this, according to Dr. Ghadbian, is the hostile political environment of these Arab states where the freedom to discuss a number of progressive Islamic issues has been curtailed. Such an environment does not permit the proper discourse, especially when “some liberal secular political opponents of the Brotherhood have joined forces with the repressive Arab regimes to exclude Islamists from the political process.” Dr. Ghadbian concludes that it is unreasonable to expect that the Muslim Brotherhood develop a progressive democratic agenda while they continue to operate within regimes that refuse “to abide by the same democratic rules.”

CSID President Radwan Masmoudi opened the lunch roundtable discussion by introducingCarl Gershman [bio, abstract], President of the National Endowment for Democracy. In his address, he suggested that while there certainly are many problems contributing to the rigorous struggle for democracy, it is important to keep everything in perspective and realize that a discussion of a democratic Middle East did not exist even twenty years ago, which speaks to the reality of the considerable progress that has been made since then [paper]. As he sited historical examples of the struggle for democracy, from Germany overcoming its Nazi history to the United States being confronted with civil war over the issue of slavery, he reminded everyone that “democracy comes everywhere only with great difficulty,” and that Muslims must continue to strive for democracy if it is truly what they desire.

Abderazzak Makri [bio, abstract], founding member of the Movement for the Society of Peace (MSP) and elected member of the Algerian Parliament, spoke to the sincere strides made towards democratization in Algeria, and more generally across the Arab countries as a whole [paper]. He echoed the statements that the main problem facing the Arab and Muslim World is the lack of democracy. Dr. Makri resented the criticisms made by the West when it sees the continued infractions against democratic ideals in the Muslim World, and asked for the West to “give [Arabs and Muslims] a chance to establish real democratic change in [their] countries, and then judge [them] on how truly democratic [they] are and how Sharia law is integrated with democracy.”

Mohamed Yatim [bio, abstract], Deputy Secretary General of the Party of Justice and Development (PJD) in Morocco, centered his presentation around the corrosive effects of the status quo in the Arab and Muslim World [paper]. Under the oppressive regimes, he says, “Islamic movements have become much more radical than they would be in openly democratic societies,” leading to the vicious circle of oppression and radicalization. Critical to the establishment of democratic governments in the Muslim World is the end of the double-standard practiced by the West. Both Mohamed Yatim and Abderazzak Makri agreed that it is not only possible, but desirable, to promote democracy alongside Islam.

Joshua Muravchik [bio, abstract], Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and author of “Exporting Democracy: Fulfilling America’s Destiny,” respectfully disagreed with his fellow panelists as he posited that “Islamism is a very unlikely path for the Muslim countries to follow” to democratization, and that promoting democracy through Islam is not the best way to go [paper]. He argued that limiting any religion, Islam in this case, to the mechanical and rigid manner of politics and government takes away from the beauty and spirituality of the religion, but believed that the difficulty to promote democracy stems not from Islam, but from certain characteristics of Muslim countries.

The third session, whose theme was “Negotiating Democracy: the North African context,” was chaired by CSID Board Member Anthony Sullivan, who presented Anwar N. Haddam[bio, abstract], the President and co-founder of the Movement for Liberty and Social Justice (MLJS) in Algeria. His talk centered around shedding light on the Algerian Islamic Movement and its stance on various issues, including democracy, freedom of thought and of belief, and the rights of minorities, including women, among many other topics [paper]. He also addressed the world’s reaction toward Algerian democracy in 1991, and how “myopic” thinking had cost Algeria years of unnecessary bloodshed and misery. He ended his address with a call to the international community to “return to constitutional legitimacy, the respect for popular will, and the rule of law.”

Laurel Rapp [bio, abstract], International Education Program Manager at the One Voice Movement, spent considerable time in Morocco conducting surveys on the status of women in the political and social scene. She presented many of her findings at the conference, including a discussion of the stances of two significant entities towards women in Morocco[paper], the Justice and Charity Movement and the Party for Justice and Development (PJD), as they both “offer very unique opportunities for women.” According to her findings, women have seen greater participation as leaders in various movements, particularly due to the quota system in place, although they still face considerable challenges overcoming the outdated interpretation of Shari’ah Law that prohibits women from participating in government. Moroccan society remains divided about the role women should play in politics, but things are changing.

Yusuf Fernandez [bio, abstract], Journalist and Editor of Webislam.com and Revistaamanecer.com, addressed the audience on the political situations of Islamic parties in Indonesia and Morocco [paper]. He spoke to the idea that Islamic parties in both of those countries are “well-equipped to promote an Islam more adaptable and amendable to social change and compatible with modern human achievements,” stressing that they prefer to establish their own Islamic democracies rather than follow the path of the West. He outlined the debates currently going on in Indonesia among the different Islamic parties concerning the implementation of Shari’ah Law to replace the conventional law. In Morocco, he said, the emphasis isn’t so much on implementing “a criminal code based on Shari’ah, but supporting other regulations that have to do with banking, Zakat (charity) management, and so on.”

In the fourth and final session before the Banquet Dinner, CSID board member Robert Schadler served as moderator and introduced the final panel of speakers, beginning withAnthony C. Bowyer [bio, abstract], Program Manager, Caucasus and Central Asia at the International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES), whose presentation focused on questioning the role Islam will play in the short and long term political developments of the Central Asian countries of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan [paper]. He described two case studies conducted with the Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan (IRPT) and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), the former attempted to gain power through legal means while the latter executed “attacks on government resources in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan and continues to call for the creation of an Islamic caliphate based on Shari’ah Law.” Given all this, he endeavored to discover the future of Islam and democracy in the region, considering the interesting dynamic operating between the aging authoritarian leadership and the youth-majority populations of the countries.

Jonathan Upton [bio, abstract], founding member of the pro-democracy New Maldives faction and Managing Director of a UK consultancy specializing in political, social, and cause related managing, presented what could become a model for democratization for all other Muslim countries, the “small but strategically significant” Muslim island nation of the Maldives [paper]. Although after the publication of the government’s “Roadmap for Reform” the country seemed set on the path to exemplifying the perfect fusion between Islamic and democratic ideals, tensions between forces of tradition and modernity have put the reform agenda on hold. Given the fact that half the population is under the age of 30, a desire of democratic change is inevitable, though pressure from the international community on the Maldivian government is important to ensure that the reforms will take place.

Eric Bordenkircher [bio, abstract], doctoral student in the Islamic studies program at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), titled his presentation “Islamists and a Pluralist Society: Hezbollah and Jama’ah al-Islamiyah’s Cosociational Experience in Lebanon” [paper]. He began by explaining that “the political behavior of Jama’ah al-Islamiyah and Hezbollah is largely contingent on inter/intra-elite game of politics, which is the two-level game, where the political actor is involved in multiple arenas.” The Jama’ah al-Islamiyah seemed to be “straddling the fence” except around the 2006 Hezbollah war with Israel, when it showed ties to Hezbollah because, as Mr. Bordenkircher put it, resistance to Israel is the one issue that unites the Sunni and Shiite Muslims in Lebanon. He concluded by positing that if the situation in Lebanon is to become stable, the large Shiite population must be acknowledged and allowed due representation in government.

The final event of the conference was the Banquet Dinner, which Dr. Asma Afsaruddin chaired. Dr. Afsaruddin introduced the first keynote speaker of the night, ProfessorMohammed Ayoob [bio, abstract], University Distinguished Professor of International Relations at Michigan State University and author of “The Many Faces of Political Islam: Religion and Politics in the Muslim World” [paper]. Professor Ayoob addressed the wide range of beliefs within Political Islam, ranging from one extreme of simply wanting Islam to be duly recognized within the government to the other extreme of striving for, and working towards, the creation of a theocracy. These very different characterizations of Islamic movements are found throughout the Arab and Muslim World, even within each individual country, and fluctuate between being out in the open, and operating on the sidelines or in secret. He also discussed the debate between ideology and pragmatism of Islamists along with the multiple voices of Islam, reminding the audience that there is no single person, group, or nation that can duly speak for Islam and Muslims.

The second distinguished speaker of the night was Saad Eddine Ibrahim [bio, abstract], Founder and Director of the Ibn Khaldoun Center in Cairo, Egypt, who talked about the political situation in Turkey, the shifting dynamics between Islamists and extreme secularists, and Turkey’s earnest efforts to democratize and fix some of the political divides to gain membership into the European Union [paper]. In this particular case, the pro-Islamic parties in Turkey have been able to modernize their thinking, accept secularism, and are some of the most moderate Muslims in the region, and as such, Turkey is very often seen as the ideal in terms of being an Islamic, democratic state. He finished his presentation with a startling fact that while two-thirds of the world’s Muslim population live in democratically-elected countries, the remaining one-third lives mainly in the Middle East and North Africa.

The final speaker of the evening was Ambassador Francis J. Ricciardone [bio, abstract], former Ambassador of the United States in Egypt and Visiting Scholar at the United States Institute for Peace, expounded on three main points, beginning with refuting the notion that US policymakers “lump all Islamists into the category of terrorists and extremists,” explaining that U.S. policymakers are aware of distinctions and have been careful not to make sweeping generalizations [paper]. He also refuted the idea that the United States has abandoned its push for democracy in the Arab and Muslim World, which he ensured is still of top priority to the U.S. foreign policy throughout the world. He concluded ending with a discussion of the US Embassy’s difficult relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

When the conference ended at nearly 10 o’clock, after listening to the incredibly perceptive presentations of almost twenty renowned speakers from around the world, there were surprisingly few things that were made clear compared to the unanswered questions that had mounted from morning to evening and sparked discussions between those who attended the conference and the speakers. One thing remained absolutely clear, however, which is that while there certainly has been significant progress over the last few years, there remains much work in the years and decades ahead. The road to democracy in the Muslim World is bound to be a very long and tiring one, but it is critical to remember that nothing worth having comes easily and that establishing real democratic change in the Muslim World will in the end be well worth the efforts.

This report was written by Mariem R. Masmoudi, currently an intern at CSID and a student in International Politics, at NC State University, in Raleigh, North Carolina.

The Conference was Co-sponsored and supported by The Heinrich Boell Foundation, The Kingdom Foundation, and the Muslim Students Association (MSA) of George Washington University