A World Order Without Democracy?
U.S. Strategy and Political Change in the Muslim World
Organized by the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), and the Middle East Policy Council (MEPC).
The 24th Annual Conference of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID), organized in partnership with the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and the Middle East Policy Council (MEPC), convened policymakers, scholars, journalists, human rights advocates, and civil society leaders to address a question that is at the center of today's global crises: Can peace, stability, and prosperity endure in the absence of democracy, accountability, and respect for human rights?
Democratic backsliding continues in many parts of the world. Authoritarian governments have become more entrenched. Wars in Gaza, Sudan, Ukraine, and most recently in Iran have exposed the fragility of the international order and raised difficult questions about the future of global governance. At the same time, support for democracy promotion, once a central pillar of Western foreign policy, has come under increasing scrutiny.
Although participants approached these questions from different political and professional perspectives, a clear theme emerged throughout the day. Speakers challenged the assumption that authoritarian rule produces real stability. Whether discussing Tunisia, Syria, Egypt, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Libya, or Palestine, participants returned to a similar conclusion: repression may delay political crises, but it rarely resolves them. Systems that deny political participation, suppress dissent, and concentrate power in the hands of few people often appear stable on the surface while deeper grievances continue to grow and accumulate.
Several speakers argued that this lesson has important implications for U.S. foreign policy. For decades, Washington has often favored short-term stability, security cooperation, and geopolitical interests over democratic reform. While this approach has sometimes produced short-term gains, many participants and speakers questioned whether it has served long-term American interests. A recurring criticism throughout the conference was that support for authoritarian allies has frequently undermined democratic development, weakened public trust, fueled instability, and damaged U.S. credibility among the very populations whose partnership Washington seeks.
The conference explored these questions through a series of country case studies. Tunisia illustrated how democratic transitions can unravel when institutions remain fragile and democratic forces become divided. Syria highlighted the immense challenges of rebuilding a society after decades of dictatorship and fourteen years of civil war. Bangladesh offered a more hopeful but still uncertain example of democratic renewal following the collapse of an increasingly authoritarian system. Afghanistan demonstrated the devastating consequences of abandoning democratic and human rights commitments, particularly for women and civil society. Discussions of Palestine and Gaza served as a powerful reminder that security, justice, and human dignity cannot be separated for long without generating further conflict.
Another important thread running through the conference concerned the relationship between Islam and democracy. Several speakers challenged the persistent claim that Islam is inherently incompatible with democratic governance. Drawing on Islamic history, political thought, and contemporary experiences from Tunisia, Indonesia, Malaysia, and elsewhere, they argued that principles such as consultation, accountability, pluralism, equal citizenship, and religious freedom are deeply rooted within Islamic values and traditions. The obstacle, many suggested, is not Islam itself but authoritarian interpretations that seek to monopolize both political and religious authority.
The conference did not produce complete consensus on every issue. Participants differed on questions of sequencing, state-building, foreign intervention, and the pace of democratic change. Yet there was broad agreement on a central proposition: democracy is far more than elections. Durable democratic systems require independent institutions, the rule of law, free media, active civil society organizations, constitutional protections, and a political culture that accepts pluralism and peaceful competition.
By the end of the conference, one overarching conclusion stood out. Stability and democracy should not be viewed as competing objectives. While authoritarian systems may deliver order for a short time, lasting peace and sustainable development depend on governments that derive legitimacy from their citizens and remain accountable to them. The central lesson emerging from the conference was both simple and profound: freedom alone is not enough, but neither is stability without freedom. The most resilient societies are those that combine liberty, accountability, justice, and effective institutions.
The Limits of Authoritarian Stability
The most consistent theme throughout the conference was a challenge to the long-standing assumption that authoritarian governments are inherently more stable than democratic ones. Speakers from diverse ideological and geographic backgrounds repeatedly questioned this premise, drawing on experiences from several countries.
While authoritarian systems often succeed in suppressing opposition and projecting an image of order, participants noted that they frequently do so by postponing rather than resolving underlying political, economic, and social grievances. The apparent stability of such systems can mask deep public frustration, weak institutions, corruption, and the absence of peaceful mechanisms for political change and reform. When crises eventually emerge, they are often more severe and violent because avenues for reform have long been closed. Several speakers suggested that the upheavals witnessed across the Middle East over the past two decades should be understood not as failures of democracy, but as consequences of prolonged authoritarian rule.
Democracy Requires More Than Elections
Another recurring theme was the distinction between elections and democracy. While free and fair elections remain essential, participants cautioned against viewing them as sufficient indicators of democratic governance.
Across multiple panels, speakers emphasized that durable democracies depend on a broader ecosystem of institutions and norms, including an independent judiciary, professional security services, constitutional safeguards, free media, active civil society organizations, strong political parties, and a political culture that respects pluralism and peaceful competition. Several case studies demonstrated that elections held in the absence of these safeguards can reinforce authoritarian tendencies rather than constrain them.
Islam, Pluralism, and Democratic Governance
The relationship between Islam and democracy was a central focus of the conference and generated some of the most thoughtful discussions of the day. Speakers challenged the persistent claim that democratic governance is somehow foreign to Islamic traditions or incompatible with Muslim societies.
Drawing on Islamic history, political thought, and contemporary experiences from countries such as Tunisia, Indonesia, and Malaysia, participants highlighted concepts such as consultation (shura), equal citizenship, religious freedom, and accountable governance as principles deeply rooted within Islamic intellectual traditions. Several speakers argued that the real tension is not between Islam and democracy, but between democratic values and authoritarian interpretations that seek to monopolize political and religious authority. The discussions demonstrated that Muslim thinkers continue to make important contributions to contemporary debates on pluralism, constitutionalism, and democratic governance.
Human Rights and Security Are Not Competing Goals
A fourth theme that emerged repeatedly was the relationship between security and human rights. Participants broadly rejected the argument that governments must choose between protecting rights and maintaining stability.
Whether discussing Gaza, Syria, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, or other contexts, speakers argued that exclusion, repression, arbitrary governance, and the absence of accountability often generate the very insecurity they are intended to prevent. Human rights were therefore presented not simply as a moral principle, but as practical foundations for long-term stability. Societies that provide avenues for peaceful political participation, protect individual freedoms, and ensure equal treatment under the law are generally better equipped to manage conflict and withstand political shocks than those that rely primarily on coercion.
Rethinking U.S. Engagement with the Muslim World
The conference prompted a broader reassessment of U.S. policy toward the Middle East and the wider Muslim world. Many speakers questioned whether decades of support for authoritarian allies have advanced either democratic values or long-term American interests.
Participants acknowledged the difficult tradeoffs often faced by policymakers but argued that excessive reliance on short-term security partnerships has frequently come at the expense of democratic development and public legitimacy. Several speakers suggested that a more sustainable approach would place greater emphasis on accountable governance, civil society, rule of law, and respect for human rights.
These recommendations reflect recurring themes raised throughout the conference and are intended to inform policymakers, democratic reformers, civil society leaders, and international partners.
For U.S. Policymakers
- Integrating democratic governance, accountability, and rule of law into long-term regional engagement strategies.
- Applying human rights principles consistently across allies and adversaries alike, thereby strengthening U.S. credibility and moral leadership.
- Expanding support for independent media, civil society organizations, educational institutions, and other democratic actors.
- Avoiding the assumption that authoritarian governments are inherently more reliable or effective partners.
- Investing more heavily in diplomacy, conflict prevention, institution-building, and economic opportunity as alternatives to predominantly security-driven approaches.
- Supporting inclusive political processes that allow peaceful participation by a broad range of political, religious, and social actors.
For Democratic Reformers and Civil Society Leaders in the Muslim World
- Building alliances across ideological, religious, generational, and political divides around shared democratic principles and values.
- Strengthening democratic institutions, including legislatures, courts, local governments, and independent oversight bodies.
- Protecting constitutional guarantees for fundamental rights and freedoms.
- Investing in civic education, democratic culture, and leadership development, particularly among young people.
- Developing governance agendas that address citizens' everyday concerns, including economic opportunity, public services, corruption, and social justice.
- Promoting a political culture that values dialogue, compromise, and peaceful competition over exclusion and polarization.
For International Organizations, Foundations, and Donors
- Expanding long-term support for local civil society organizations, independent research institutions, and grassroots democratic initiatives.
- Increasing investment in judicial reform, media freedom, civic participation, and government accountability programs.
- Supporting initiatives that strengthen social cohesion, pluralism, and peaceful conflict resolution.
- Encouraging transparency, accountability, and good governance through development assistance and partnership programs.
- Strengthening protection mechanisms for human rights defenders, journalists, academics, and civil society leaders operating in restrictive environments.
Welcoming participants on behalf of the conference organizers, Dr. Radwan Masmoudi highlighted the timeliness of the conference theme and the significance of bringing together policymakers, scholars, human rights advocates, and civic leaders from diverse backgrounds and perspectives. He noted that debates over democracy, governance, and political reform have entered a critical new phase, both globally and within the Muslim world. The purpose of the conference, he explained, was not only to examine these challenges but also to explore practical pathways toward greater freedom, justice, accountability, and peaceful political change.
Prof. Asma Afsaruddin, Chair of CSID's Board of Directors, situated the conference within CSID's longstanding mission of promoting dialogue between Islamic and democratic political thought. Reflecting on more than two decades of work by the organization, she observed that the conference's central question, whether global stability can be sustained without democracy, accountability, and human rights, has become increasingly urgent. She warned that democratic institutions are under pressure in many parts of the world, including countries long considered stable democracies, such as the US, Europe, and India. Lasting peace and stability, she argued, depend on meaningful political participation, respect for human rights, and governments that remain accountable to their citizens.
In his remarks, MPAC President Salam Al-Marayati connected the conference theme to both American and Islamic traditions. Reflecting on the approaching 250th anniversary of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, he noted that the promise of freedom has often been applied unevenly, both within the United States and in American foreign policy. Drawing on the Medina Charter and foundational Islamic teachings, he argued that principles such as pluralism, consultation, shared citizenship, religious freedom, and accountable governance are deeply embedded in the Islamic tradition. He challenged efforts to portray Islam and democracy as incompatible and called for a more consistent commitment to human dignity, political inclusion, and democratic reform. Freedom and justice, he concluded, are not only moral imperatives but also essential foundations for lasting peace and stability.
▶ Watch the video
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)
In the conference's opening keynote address, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal argued that the challenges facing democracy abroad cannot be separated from the challenges confronting democracy within the United States itself. Drawing parallels between democratic backsliding in different regions of the world, she warned that democratic institutions, civil liberties, and the rule of law are facing mounting pressure both domestically and internationally.
Jayapal expressed concern about the concentration of executive power, the weakening of democratic checks and balances, growing attacks on immigrants and minority communities, and the resurgence of anti-Muslim prejudice in American political discourse. She argued that efforts to stigmatize religious communities or restrict political participation ultimately weaken democratic institutions and undermine the principles upon which democratic societies depend.
At the international level, she questioned the inconsistency of U.S. support for democracy and human rights, noting that short-term interests have too often overshadowed commitments to freedom, accountability, and representative government. Sustainable democratic progress, she suggested, requires greater consistency between the values the United States promotes abroad and the practices it upholds at home.
Despite these concerns, Jayapal delivered an optimistic message. Drawing on historical examples from the United States and around the world, she emphasized that democratic advances have rarely come from governments alone. Rather, they have been achieved through organized, persistent, and largely nonviolent civic action. She concluded by urging citizens to remain engaged in public life and to embrace what she described as the "discipline of hope" — the belief that democratic progress remains possible even during periods of profound uncertainty.
▶ Watch the video
Bahey El Din Hassan
Founder and Director, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies
Delivering the conference's opening policy keynote, Bahey El Din Hassan offered a sobering assessment of the state of democracy and human rights in the contemporary international system. Speaking from more than four decades of experience in the Arab human rights movement, he argued that the world is witnessing a growing erosion of international norms, democratic values, and commitments to human rights.
Hassan contended that authoritarianism is advancing at a time when many of the institutions designed to defend international law and protect fundamental freedoms appear increasingly weakened. He pointed to the selective application of human rights principles by major powers and the inconsistent support for democratic movements across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) as factors that have contributed to widespread public disillusionment.
Returning repeatedly to the question of stability, Hassan challenged the notion that repression, military rule, or centralized authority can provide a durable foundation for peace and development. The repeated failures of authoritarian projects across the region, whether nationalist, military, or ideological, demonstrate the limits of governance based on coercion rather than consent. While such systems may survive for short periods, he argued, they ultimately fail to address citizens' demands for dignity, freedom, participation, and accountability.
At the same time, Hassan cautioned against relying on external actors to drive democratic change. International support for democracy, he noted, has often been selective, inconsistent, and subordinate to geopolitical considerations. For this reason, he argued that the future of democracy in the Arab world will depend primarily on the ability of democratic actors themselves to build broad coalitions capable of transcending ideological, political, and social divisions.
One of the strongest themes of his address was the need for greater cooperation among democratic forces, including secular, liberal, leftist, and Islamist actors. Lasting democratic progress, he suggested, will require a shared commitment to pluralism, human rights, equal citizenship, and the peaceful transfer of power.
▶ Watch the video
Moderator: Dr. Radwan A. Masmoudi (CSID and MPAC)
The conference's first panel addressed a question that resurfaced throughout the day: Does authoritarianism provide greater stability than democracy, or does it merely postpone deeper political crises? Drawing on experiences from the Middle East, South Asia, and the international system, panelists examined the causes of democratic decline, the persistence of authoritarian governance, and the prospects for peaceful political reform.
Shadi Hamid
Georgetown University
Shadi Hamid opened the discussion by challenging what he described as Washington's long-standing "stability-first" approach to the Middle East. For decades, he argued, U.S. policymakers have often assumed that authoritarian governments are better positioned to preserve order, while democratic participation risks empowering irresponsible or destabilizing actors.
Hamid contended that the record of the past several decades points in the opposite direction. Authoritarian systems may appear stable for long periods, but their stability is often fragile because it rests on repression rather than legitimacy. The Arab Spring and the collapse of several long-standing regimes demonstrated how quickly apparently stable political orders can unravel when citizens are denied meaningful political participation.
While acknowledging that democratic transitions can generate short-term uncertainty and policy challenges, Hamid maintained that the region's recurring cycles of conflict, extremism, and state failure are not the result of excessive democracy but of its prolonged absence. He urged policymakers to adopt a longer time horizon and to view democratic governance not as a threat to stability but as its most reliable foundation.
▶ Watch the video
David Mednicoff
University of Massachusetts Amherst
David Mednicoff broadened the discussion beyond individual countries to examine the crisis facing the contemporary international order. He argued that institutions created after World War II were intended to promote collective security, peaceful dispute resolution, and equal application of international law. Yet many observers today increasingly perceive those principles as being applied selectively.
Rather than a truly rules-based order, Mednicoff suggested that the international system is often viewed as a "rules-biased" order, one in which power frequently determines how rules are interpreted and enforced. This perception has contributed to growing skepticism toward international institutions and weakened confidence in the global commitment to democracy and human rights.
At the same time, Mednicoff saw opportunities for renewal. He pointed to the growing role of regional organizations, civil society networks, and transnational partnerships in addressing global challenges. Restoring legitimacy to international governance, he argued, will require stronger institutions, greater consistency in the application of international law, and broader participation by both state and non-state actors.
▶ Watch the video
Sultan Alamer
Middle East Policy Council and Harvard University
Sultan Alamer offered a historical perspective on the trajectory of democratic thought in the Arab world. Challenging the common assumption that democracy is an imported Western concept, he argued that constitutionalism, representative government, and political reform have deep roots in modern Arab political history.
Alamer noted that by the early 2000s democracy had become a broadly shared aspiration across much of the Arab political spectrum. Liberals, Islamists, nationalists, civil society organizations, and even some governments increasingly embraced the language of reform, participation, and accountability. The Arab Spring emerged from this broader democratic moment rather than appearing suddenly, or unexpectedly.
Yet the democratic momentum of that period ultimately collided with a broader global democratic recession. Authoritarian resurgence, tighter control over media and public space, regional conflict, and declining international support for reform contributed to growing public disillusionment. While acknowledging these setbacks, Alamer argued that no alternative model has successfully addressed the region's persistent governance challenges. Reviving democratic aspirations, he suggested, remains essential for building accountable and inclusive political systems.
▶ Watch the video
Murad Batal Al-Shishani
Journalist and Researcher
Drawing on debates that emerged after 9/11, Murad Al-Shishani approached democracy primarily as a mechanism for managing political conflict rather than as an abstract ideal. He revisited long-standing discussions about whether political participation can reduce the appeal of extremism and violent movements.
Using examples from Algeria, Egypt, Tunisia, Turkey, and Western democracies, Al-Shishani argued that exclusion and the absence of legitimate political channels often contribute to radicalization. Democratic institutions, when functioning properly, create opportunities for competition, dissent, and political expression without resorting to violence.
At the same time, he cautioned against simplistic assumptions. Democracy, he noted, does not automatically eliminate extremist ideologies, which can emerge even within established democratic societies. The critical challenge is building institutions capable of managing social and political conflict through the rule of law. Sustainable stability, he concluded, depends on creating systems in which disagreements are settled through ballots rather than bullets.
▶ Watch the video
Amar Mansuri
University of Florida
Amar Mansuri examined the relationship between democratic legitimacy, social inclusion, and long-term stability through the contemporary experience of India. While India is often cited as a democratic success story and an increasingly important strategic partner for the United States, Mansuri argued that growing concerns about minority rights and democratic backsliding deserve closer attention.
He pointed to developments such as the revocation of Kashmir's autonomy and the Citizenship Amendment Act as examples of policies that have raised concerns among large segments of India's Muslim population. Governments may retain legal authority and maintain public order, he noted, while simultaneously losing legitimacy among important sectors of society.
Mansuri argued that sustainable stability depends not only on economic growth or electoral success but also on equal citizenship, social inclusion, and public trust in state institutions. He urged policymakers to view democratic legitimacy as a strategic asset rather than a secondary concern, emphasizing that durable partnerships ultimately rest on governments that remain accountable to all their citizens.
Panel Discussion Highlights
The discussion that followed revealed broad agreement that democratic decline has contributed significantly to instability in many regions of the world. Panelists repeatedly challenged the notion that authoritarian governance offers a reliable path to peace or prosperity, arguing instead that repression often suppresses conflicts that later reemerge in more dangerous forms.
At the same time, participants acknowledged the difficulties associated with democratic transitions. Several speakers noted that elections alone are insufficient and that successful democratic systems require strong institutions, independent courts, free media, and a culture of political pluralism. The conversation also highlighted the growing disconnect between democratic ideals and contemporary international politics, particularly when major powers apply democratic principles selectively.
▶ Watch the video
Moderator: Nicholas A. Heras (Middle East Policy Council)
The second panel turned to one of the most pressing and contentious issues in contemporary international affairs: the war in Gaza and its implications for the future of peace, stability, and governance in the Middle East. While the panelists approached the issue from different professional and disciplinary perspectives, they shared a common concern that current policies have focused heavily on managing conflict rather than resolving its underlying causes. Questions of political legitimacy, human rights, accountability, displacement, and international law featured prominently throughout the discussion.
Several speakers argued that security, justice, and political inclusion are deeply interconnected and that lasting stability will remain elusive unless the underlying political grievances at the heart of the conflict are addressed.
Josh Paul
Co-Founder, A New Policy
Josh Paul situated the Israeli-Palestinian conflict within a broader regional and international context. He argued that the crisis cannot be understood separately from long-standing patterns in U.S. foreign policy, Israeli security doctrine, and the persistence of authoritarian governance across much of the Middle East.
Paul described the United States as a global power increasingly focused on preserving an unsustainable status quo through military partnerships and security arrangements rather than real political reforms and inclusive governance. He suggested that this approach has often prioritized short-term stability while neglecting the deeper drivers of conflict.
Turning to Israel, Paul argued that Israeli security policy has become heavily dependent on deterrence and overwhelming force, reflecting a persistent sense of insecurity that military superiority alone has been unable to overcome. While such policies may achieve temporary tactical objectives, he questioned whether they can produce lasting peace.
Paul maintained that sustainable stability requires confronting the political roots of the conflict, including the denial of Palestinian rights, the absence of meaningful accountability, and the failure to achieve a just political settlement. He concluded by calling for a more balanced U.S. approach that places greater emphasis on diplomacy, human rights, and representative governance as foundations for long-term regional stability.
▶ Watch the video
Omar Shakir
Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN)
Omar Shakir argued that the war in Gaza should be viewed not only as a humanitarian catastrophe but also as part of a broader regional struggle over accountability, democracy, and the rule of law.
He contended that decades of impunity surrounding the occupation of Palestinian territory have weakened international legal norms and contributed to a wider erosion of respect for international humanitarian law. According to Shakir, practices that became normalized in the Palestinian context, including large-scale displacement, attacks on civilian infrastructure, and the selective application of legal standards, have increasingly influenced conflicts elsewhere in the region.
Shakir also noted that shifting regional crises and geopolitical tensions have often diverted international attention from ongoing developments in Gaza and the West Bank, allowing patterns of abuse and exclusion to persist. He argued that the Palestinian struggle is closely linked to broader demands for dignity, political participation, and accountable governance throughout the Arab world.
For Shakir, meaningful progress toward peace requires more than humanitarian relief or diplomatic management. It requires accountability, respect for international law, and a willingness by both regional and international actors to challenge policies that perpetuate injustice and undermine democratic aspirations.
▶ Watch the video
Shannon Rockcliffe
Rutgers University
Drawing on her work as an anthropologist, Shannon Rockcliffe examined the conflict through the lens of political legitimacy and everyday lived experience. Rather than focusing primarily on diplomacy or security policy, she asked how political decisions are experienced by ordinary people living under conditions of conflict, displacement, and uncertainty.
Rockcliffe described what she called "governance by exception," a system in which normal expectations of democratic accountability, due process, and equal protection are suspended or selectively applied in the name of security. While institutions may continue to function administratively, she argued, their existence alone does not generate legitimacy if people experience governance as arbitrary, unequal, or unaccountable.
Returning repeatedly to the experiences of families and communities affected by conflict, Rockcliffe emphasized that stability cannot be measured solely through ceasefires, aid deliveries, or institutional continuity. Lasting stability depends on whether people believe that political institutions are fair, responsive, and accountable.
She concluded that security and human rights should not be viewed as competing priorities. Rather, accountability, equal treatment, and public trust are essential components of sustainable peace.
▶ Watch the video
Lein Sultan
UNRWA-USA
Lein Sultan focused on the human consequences of conflict, offering a sobering account of the humanitarian crisis facing Palestinian refugees, particularly in Gaza. Speaking both as a professional advocate and as the granddaughter of Nakba survivors, she connected the present crisis to a longer history of displacement that continues to shape Palestinian lives more than seven decades later.
Sultan described the devastating impact of war on civilians, including mass displacement, widespread food insecurity, the collapse of public services, and the growing psychological toll on children and families. She highlighted the enormous challenges facing humanitarian organizations attempting to provide assistance amid continuing violence, damaged infrastructure, and restrictions on access.
She also emphasized the critical role played by UNRWA in providing education, healthcare, psychosocial services, and humanitarian support to millions of Palestinian refugees across Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Yet she stressed that humanitarian assistance, however essential, cannot substitute for a real and lasting political solution.
Speaking on the anniversary of the Nakba, Sultan concluded with a reminder that lasting peace will require addressing the underlying causes of displacement and conflict. Humanitarian relief can save lives, she noted, but only a just and durable political settlement can secure dignity, rights, and long-term stability.
Panel Discussion Highlights
The discussion that followed centered on the relationship between security, justice, and political legitimacy. Panelists broadly agreed that attempts to manage the conflict through military deterrence, humanitarian assistance, or crisis containment alone have failed to produce lasting peace.
Several participants argued that the recurring cycles of violence reflect deeper political failures, including the absence of accountability, unequal application of rights, and the continued marginalization of Palestinian aspirations. Others emphasized the importance of strengthening international legal norms and rebuilding public confidence in institutions tasked with protecting civilians and resolving disputes peacefully.
▶ Watch the video
Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA)
Co-Chair, Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission
Delivering the conference's luncheon keynote, Congressman Jim McGovern offered a passionate defense of human rights, democratic accountability, and international law as essential components of effective American foreign policy. Rejecting the notion that values and interests are inherently in conflict, he argued that policies rooted in repression, impunity, and short-term geopolitical calculations ultimately undermine both moral credibility and long-term strategic objectives.
McGovern focused particular attention on the war in Gaza and its implications for America's standing in the world. He warned that continued U.S. support for policies associated with widespread civilian suffering has raised difficult questions about Washington's commitment to the principles it advocates globally. The selective application of human rights standards, he argued, weakens American credibility and fuels perceptions of double standards in international affairs.
Throughout his remarks, McGovern emphasized the importance of consistency, both in defending human rights and in upholding international law. He expressed concern about growing attacks on international institutions, including the United Nations and the International Criminal Court, arguing that a functioning international system requires strong institutions capable of holding all actors accountable.
McGovern concluded that democracy, congressional oversight, respect for international law, and the protection of fundamental freedoms are not obstacles to stability but essential foundations for a more peaceful, secure, and just international order.
▶ Watch the video
Conversation Between Nader Hashemi and Robert Malley
The luncheon discussion between Nader Hashemi and Robert Malley explored the consequences of supporting authoritarian regimes, the future of U.S. engagement in the Middle East, and the ongoing crises involving Iran and Palestine.
Rather than treating the recent war with Iran as an isolated event, Malley argued that it should be understood within the broader context of decades of American and Western policies toward the Middle East. He suggested that dominant narratives portraying Iran, Palestinians, and the wider region primarily through the lens of extremism and instability have helped normalize sanctions, military interventions, and coercive approaches to conflict management. In his view, these policies have often failed to address underlying political realities while contributing to cycles of mistrust and confrontation.
Discussing Iran, Malley observed that the conflict produced contradictory outcomes. While the war imposed significant costs on Iran, it also reinforced the belief among many Iranian policymakers that nuclear deterrence may ultimately be necessary for national security. At the same time, he cautioned against simplistic assumptions regarding Iran's future nuclear intentions, noting that pursuing such a path would carry substantial risks and uncertainties.
The discussion then turned to Palestine and the future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Malley argued that U.S. policy has frequently prioritized short-term benefits and domestic political considerations over questions of justice, accountability, and equal rights. As a result, he suggested, Israeli leaders have faced limited incentives to alter existing policies. Nevertheless, he pointed to changing public attitudes within the United States, particularly among younger Americans, as a potentially significant factor that could reshape future debates and policy choices.
Throughout the conversation, Hashemi repeatedly returned to a central question: why successive American administrations continue to support authoritarian allies despite widespread recognition of the long-term risks. Malley acknowledged the contradiction, noting that many policymakers understand the dangers associated with supporting autocratic regimes but remain constrained by immediate political pressures and short-term strategic considerations.
Meaningful policy change, Malley argued, is unlikely to originate solely from governments or foreign policy institutions. Rather, it will depend on sustained civic engagement, public advocacy, and democratic mobilization capable of changing the political incentives that shape policymaking in Washington.
▶ Watch the videoDiscussion Highlights
Several themes emerged from the exchange. First, the participants suggested that the recent war with Iran reflects the continuation of long-standing assumptions in U.S. Middle East policy rather than a fundamentally new strategic doctrine. Second, military force and economic sanctions have become increasingly normalized instruments of statecraft despite their mixed record in producing durable political outcomes. Third, growing generational shifts within the United States may be reshaping debates surrounding Israel-Palestine, democracy, and human rights in ways that could eventually influence policy.
More broadly, the conversation reinforced one of the conference's central conclusions: foreign policies that prioritize short-term stability while neglecting accountability, political inclusion, and democratic legitimacy often contribute to the very crises they seek to prevent.
Moderator: Haris Tarin (MPAC)
The third panel shifted the discussion from broad questions of democratic theory and international policy to the practical realities of political transition and state-building. Through case studies from Libya, Syria, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, panelists examined the opportunities and challenges that emerge when societies confront authoritarian rule, political collapse, or democratic reversal.
Despite the significant differences among the four countries, a common theme emerged throughout the discussion. Removing an authoritarian ruler, ending a civil war, or holding an election does not automatically produce democracy. Sustainable democratic governance requires time to build legitimate institutions, public trust, accountable leadership, and a democratic culture that has the capacity to manage political conflict peacefully.
Ammar Elahi
Executive Director, Muslim Action Coalition
Using Libya as a case study, Amar Elahi examined the relationship between legitimacy, institution-building, and political stability. He argued that the apparent stability of Muammar Gaddafi's rule concealed deep structural weaknesses. Political authority rested largely on personal power, patronage networks, and fragmented security arrangements rather than functioning state institutions capable of surviving leadership change.
Elahi noted that the 2011 popular revolution succeeded in removing the regime but failed to establish a coherent strategy for rebuilding the state. The resulting vacuum allowed competing militias, rival governments, and external actors to fill the space once occupied by centralized authority. Libya's subsequent instability, he suggested, illustrates the dangers of focusing on regime change without equal attention to institutional development.
More broadly, Elahi challenged the idea that stability can be sustained through coercion alone. Durable peace requires institutions that enjoy public legitimacy, resolve disputes peacefully, and provide citizens with confidence in the political process. He argued that Libya's future will depend on strengthening civil institutions, reforming the security sector, improving governance of national resources, and fostering inclusive political participation. Democracy and stability, he concluded, should be understood as mutually reinforcing rather than competing objectives.
▶ Watch the video
Mir Salman Ali
Senior Advisor for International Affairs, AK Party in Türkiye
Mir Salman Ali focused on Syria's post-conflict future following the collapse of the Assad regime in 2024. Reflecting on more than fourteen years of war, he emphasized the resilience of Syrian civil society, the Syrian diaspora, and regional actors who continued to advocate for change despite widespread international pessimism about the country's future.
Ali argued that Syria's experience raises difficult questions about democratic sequencing in post-conflict environments. While acknowledging the importance of democratic governance, he cautioned against assuming that immediate elections or the rapid introduction of Western political models necessarily provide the best path forward for societies emerging from prolonged conflict.
Instead, he proposed what he described as an approach of "order with conditional accountability." Under this framework, stabilization, reconstruction, economic recovery, and national integration would precede a full democratic transition while remaining subject to measurable standards of accountability. He suggested that regional actors such as Türkiye, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia could play important roles in supporting Syria's recovery and reconstruction, while international engagement should focus on benchmarks related to minority protections, sanctions relief, national reconciliation, and counter-extremism efforts.
Ali concluded that democracy is most likely to succeed when it is built upon functioning institutions, public trust, and a minimum level of security rather than introduced into a political vacuum.
▶ Watch the video
Shamarukh Mohiuddin
Founder and President, The Bangladesh Project
Shamarukh Mohiuddin examined Bangladesh's ongoing democratic transition following the popular uprising that brought an end to fifteen years of increasingly authoritarian rule. She described the February 2026 elections and the accompanying approval of the "July Charter" reform agenda as potentially transformative moments in the country's political development.
The elections restored an important measure of political legitimacy, she argued, but Bangladesh now faces a more difficult challenge: transforming democratic aspirations into durable institutions. The reform agenda includes efforts to strengthen judicial independence, improve electoral integrity, limit executive power, expand civil liberties, and enhance government accountability.
Mohiuddin cautioned, however, that many of the legal, political, and security structures that enabled authoritarianism remain intact. Restrictions on free expression, weak accountability mechanisms, and entrenched political practices continue to threaten democratic consolidation. Bangladesh's future, she argued, will depend not simply on changing political leadership but on reforming the institutions that made authoritarian governance possible in the first place.
She remarked that democratic transitions succeed not when elections are held, but when institutions become strong enough to protect rights, constrain power, and earn public trust.
▶ Watch the video
Belquis Ahmadi
Human Rights Lawyer and Former Senior Program Officer, U.S. Institute of Peace
Belquis Ahmadi provided a sobering assessment of conditions in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. Challenging claims that democracy, women's rights, and human rights are foreign concepts imposed from outside, she emphasized that Afghans themselves have struggled for political participation, education, equality, and constitutional governance for generations.
Ahmadi described the Taliban's governing structure as highly centralized and deeply authoritarian, with power concentrated in a small religious leadership that has systematically dismantled constitutional protections, independent institutions, and legal safeguards. She detailed the severe restrictions imposed on women and girls, journalists, civil society organizations, and religious minorities, arguing that Afghanistan today represents one of the world's most restrictive political environments.
While acknowledging the complexity of international engagement with Afghanistan, Ahmadi warned against normalizing Taliban rule without meaningful reforms. Doing so, she argued, risks legitimizing systematic violations of fundamental rights and abandoning millions of Afghans who continue to seek dignity, opportunity, and political participation.
She called on democratic governments, international organizations, and Muslim-majority countries to maintain pressure for accountability while supporting Afghan citizens, particularly women and civil society activists, who continue to advocate for a more inclusive and representative future.
Panel Discussion Highlights
The discussion that followed highlighted both the diversity of democratic experiences and the common challenges confronting societies emerging from authoritarianism, conflict, or political transition.
There was broad agreement that elections alone do not sustain democracy. Effective democratic governance requires institutions capable of constraining power, protecting rights, resolving disputes peacefully, and maintaining public confidence. The conversation also underscored the importance of local ownership in democratic transitions, with several speakers cautioning against externally imposed solutions that fail to account for domestic realities.
Taken together, the panel reinforced the fact that democratic change is a process and not a single event. It is a long-term process of building legitimate institutions, expanding political participation, and creating systems of governance that citizens view as representative, effective, and accountable.
▶ Watch the video
Moderator: Asma Afsaruddin (CSID)
The final panel addressed one of the most enduring and frequently misunderstood questions in contemporary political discourse: whether Islam and Sharia are compatible with democracy, pluralism, and modern constitutional governance. While public debates often portray Islam and democracy as inherently in tension, the panelists challenged that assumption, arguing that the real divide is not between Islam and democracy but between authoritarian and pluralistic interpretations of religion and politics.
Drawing on Islamic history, political thought, contemporary case studies, and the experiences of Muslim-majority societies, the discussion explored how Islamic values can coexist with democratic institutions, human rights, religious freedom, and accountable governance.
Mustafa Akyol
Senior Fellow, Cato Institute
Mustafa Akyol examined the relationship between Islam, Sharia, democracy, and religious freedom, arguing that many contemporary conflicts arise from authoritarian interpretations of religion rather than from Islamic teachings themselves. Drawing on Islamic history, Ottoman legal traditions, and modern political debates, he emphasized that authentic religious commitment must be voluntary and cannot be imposed through state coercion.
Central to his argument was the Quranic principle that there should be "no compulsion in religion." Akyol maintained that religious freedom is not a concession to modernity but a value deeply rooted within the Islamic tradition. He distinguished between Sharia as a moral and ethical framework that guides individual conduct and Sharia as a state-enforced ideological project. Confusing these two concepts, he argued, has contributed to many contemporary misunderstandings.
Using examples from Afghanistan, Syria, and other Muslim societies, Akyol criticized systems that merge religious authority with unchecked political power. At the same time, he expressed cautious optimism that emerging political models in parts of the Muslim world may offer more pluralistic alternatives. He concluded that democracy, human rights, and religious freedom are fully compatible with Islam when religion is understood as a matter of conscience rather than state coercion.
▶ Watch the video
Dr. Ermin Sinanović
Executive Director, Center for Islam in the Contemporary World, Shenandoah University
Ermin Sinanović challenged the widespread assumption that political Islam has failed or entered a post-Islamist era. Drawing primarily on the experiences of Indonesia and Malaysia, he argued that many Islamist movements have achieved influence not through revolutionary change or electoral dominance but through gradual institutional integration.
Introducing the concept of "embedded Islamism," Sinanović explained how Islamic values and policy preferences have become incorporated into state institutions, educational systems, regulatory structures, and public policy while operating within democratic political frameworks. Rather than replacing democratic competition, these developments have often occurred through democratic processes themselves.
He noted that in both Indonesia and Malaysia, mainstream political parties increasingly adopted policies and priorities originally associated with Islamist movements, demonstrating how democratic systems can absorb and institutionalize religious values without abandoning pluralism or electoral competition.
Sinanović argued that Southeast Asia offers an important alternative to both authoritarian secularism and revolutionary Islamism. The experiences of these countries suggest that democratic governance, peaceful transfers of power, effective state institutions, and a meaningful public role for religion can coexist within stable and pluralistic political systems.
▶ Watch the video
Ali Dabaj
Harvard University
Ali Dabaj explored the democratic dimensions of Islamic political thought through the work of the late Lebanese Shi'a scholar Muhammad Mahdi Shamsuddin. He argued that discussions of Shi'a political theory are often dominated by Iran's doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist), obscuring alternative traditions that are far more compatible with democracy and pluralism.
Drawing on Shamsuddin's writings, Dabaj presented a vision of governance rooted in parliamentary democracy, equal citizenship, political participation, and civic integration. Shamsuddin rejected both theocratic rule and sectarian exclusivism, advocating instead for what he described as a "civil state" that respects religious values while remaining accountable to citizens.
A particularly important aspect of Shamsuddin's thought, Dabaj noted, was his emphasis on relationships among citizens rather than simply between citizens and the state. Democratic stability depends not only on institutions but also on the willingness of diverse communities to view one another as legitimate partners in a shared political project.
Dabaj concluded that civic engagement, mutual respect, and resistance to sectarian polarization are essential safeguards against democratic decline. These lessons, he suggested, remain relevant not only for the Middle East, but also for democracies around the world grappling with rising polarization and identity-based politics.
▶ Watch the video
Dr. Omair Anas
Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University
Omair Anas examined the intellectual evolution of Tunisian thinker and statesman Rached Ghannouchi, presenting him as one of the most significant contemporary Muslim advocates of democracy, pluralism, and constitutional governance.
Anas argued that Ghannouchi departed from earlier Islamist thinkers who often viewed modernity and democracy with suspicion. Instead, Ghannouchi developed an approach that sought to reconcile Islamic values with democratic institutions, human rights, political pluralism, and constitutional rule.
Central to Ghannouchi's thought, Anas explained, is the concept of the dawla madaniyya, or civil state, which offers an alternative both to authoritarian secularism and to theocratic governance. Ghannouchi consistently emphasized freedom of conscience, political participation, the protection of individual rights, and the importance of civil society as safeguards against authoritarianism.
Anas highlighted Ghannouchi's willingness to engage in dialogue, compromise, and coalition-building, even when such positions attracted criticism from some Islamist circles. He argued that Ghannouchi's intellectual and political legacy represents one of the most developed contemporary models of Muslim democracy and offers important lessons for societies seeking to reconcile faith, freedom, and democratic governance.
Panel Discussion Highlights
The panel broadly rejected the claim that Islam is inherently incompatible with democracy, pluralism, or human rights. The participants emphasized that many contemporary tensions arise not from Islamic teachings themselves, but from efforts to monopolize religious authority and concentrate political power.
The discussion also highlighted the distinction between religion as a source of ethical guidance and religion as an instrument of state coercion. Across multiple case studies, speakers argued that democratic governance is strengthened, not weakened, when religious belief remains voluntary and political authority remains accountable.
Taken together, the panel suggested that the future debate is no longer whether Islam and democracy can coexist, but how Muslim societies can continue developing political models that combine faith, freedom, pluralism, and effective governance. In that sense, the panel emphasized that democracy, accountability, and human dignity are not foreign concepts imposed upon Muslim societies, but values that can draw support from both universal principles and rich traditions within Islamic thought itself.
▶ Watch the video
Ambassador Akbar Ahmed
Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies, American University
In a wide-ranging and deeply reflective closing keynote, Ambassador Akbar Ahmed placed the conference's discussions within a broader historical and civilizational context. Drawing on decades of scholarship, field research, and public service, he argued that humanity is living through a period of profound uncertainty in which old political assumptions are being challenged while new global realities remain unsettled.
Ahmed suggested that the central question facing the world today extends beyond geopolitics, military competition, or economic power. At its core, he argued, lies a more fundamental challenge: whether humanity can build a global order grounded in justice, dignity, and mutual respect rather than domination, exclusion, and fear.
Reflecting on the rise and decline of empires, the changing position of Muslim societies in global affairs, and the growing tensions between security and human rights, Ahmed warned against the dehumanization that increasingly shapes political discourse around the world. Drawing on examples from Islamic history, American democratic traditions, and his anthropological work across diverse societies and continents, he emphasized the importance of empathy, dialogue, and genuine understanding across religious, cultural, and political divides.
A recurring theme throughout his remarks was that democracy cannot be sustained by institutions alone. Democratic governance requires an ethical foundation rooted in justice, inclusion, compassion, and respect for human dignity. Without those values, political systems risk becoming hollow and disconnected from the societies they seek to serve.
Ahmed concluded with a call to scholars, policymakers, religious leaders, and civil society actors to continue building bridges across communities and nations. At a moment when polarization and conflict appear to be deepening in many parts of the world, he argued that the pursuit of democracy must remain connected to a broader commitment to human dignity, coexistence, and the common good.
▶ Watch the video
Dr. John L. Esposito
University Professor of Religion and International Affairs, Georgetown University; Founder, Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding
Following Ambassador Ahmed's keynote, CSID and MPAC presented their Lifetime Achievement Award to Dr. John L. Esposito in recognition of his extraordinary contributions to the study of Islam, interfaith understanding, and public education over more than five decades.
In his acceptance remarks, Esposito reflected on the remarkable transformation of the field during his career. When he began his academic work, the study of contemporary Islam occupied only a marginal place within universities, government institutions, and public discourse. Through decades of scholarship, teaching, institution-building, and public engagement, he helped establish Islamic studies as a major academic field while challenging stereotypes and misconceptions about Islam and Muslim societies.
Esposito emphasized that many of the issues discussed throughout the conference, including democracy, human rights, religious freedom, and pluralism, remain among the defining challenges of our time. He noted that democratic values must be defended not only internationally, but also within established democracies that increasingly face polarization, distrust, and pressures on democratic institutions.
Reflecting on the responsibilities of scholars and citizens alike, Esposito stressed the importance of education, civic engagement, coalition-building, and public participation in democratic life. Progress, he argued, is not inevitable; it depends on the willingness of individuals and institutions to remain actively engaged in the pursuit of justice and the defense of democratic principles.
His remarks served as both a reflection on a distinguished career and a reminder that the work of advancing democracy, mutual understanding, and human dignity remains unfinished. Esposito's message echoed one of the central conclusions of the conference itself: democracy and pluralism are sustained not by rhetoric alone, but by the long-term commitment of citizens, scholars, policymakers, and civil society leaders willing to defend them.
▶ Watch the videoThe conference concluded on a note of cautious optimism. While participants expressed deep concern about democratic backsliding, armed conflict, rising authoritarianism, and the erosion of international norms, they also pointed to the resilience of democratic ideals and the continued efforts of citizens, scholars, and civil society movements around the world to advance freedom, accountability, and human dignity.
Across a wide range of perspectives and country experiences, a common message emerged. Stable and prosperous societies cannot be built solely through military power, coercion, or authoritarian control. Lasting peace depends on accountable institutions, political inclusion, respect for rights, and public legitimacy. Democracy remains imperfect and often difficult, but the conference repeatedly affirmed that it offers the most promising framework for managing political differences peacefully and building a more just and sustainable future.
Watch the full library of conference talks and panel discussions
"Freedom alone is not enough, but neither is stability without freedom."
Opening Remarks
Rep. Pramila Jayapal
Bshey Eldin Hassan
Sultan Alamer
David Medincoff
Murad Batala
Ammar Mansuri
Shadi Hamid
Josh Paul
Omar Shakir
Shannan Rawcliffe
Lein Soltan
Rep. Jim McGovern
Robert Malley
Shamarukh Mohiuddin
Belquis Ahmadi
Mir Sulaiman Ali
Ammar Elahi
Panel 3 Q&A
Mustafa Akyol
Dr. Ermin Sinanović
Ali Dabaje
Dr. Omair Anas
Panel 4 Q&A
Closing Keynote – Prof. Akbar Ahmed
Lifetime Achievement Award – Prof. John L. Esposito
Speaker Biographies
Pramila Jayapal is a U.S. Representative for Washington's 7th Congressional District and serves as Senior Whip of the House Democratic Caucus. She is the first South Asian American woman elected to the U.S. House of Representatives and a leading voice on democracy, human rights, and U.S. global engagement.
Congresswoman Jayapal serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the House Judiciary Committee — where she is Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement — and the House Budget Committee. Her work spans U.S. foreign policy, civil liberties, and the intersection of domestic and international governance.
She has been an outspoken advocate for a values-driven U.S. foreign policy, emphasizing human rights, democratic accountability, and the protection of civilian populations in conflict settings. Prior to Congress, she spent over two decades in global public health, development, and human rights advocacy, including founding OneAmerica, a leading immigrant rights organization.
Jim McGovern is a U.S. Representative for Massachusetts' 2nd Congressional District and a leading voice in Congress on human rights, global food security, and U.S. foreign policy. He serves as Ranking Member of the House Rules Committee and is Co-Chair of the bipartisan Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission.
Congressman McGovern has built a national and international reputation for advancing a values-driven U.S. foreign policy grounded in human rights, accountability, and the rule of law. He has played a central role in shaping legislation to combat corruption and hold human rights abusers accountable, including measures addressing abuses in China, Tibet, and Hong Kong.
In addition to his foreign policy leadership, he has been a global advocate in the fight to end hunger, helping to elevate food security as a national and international priority. His commitment to human rights dates back to his early career, when he led a congressional investigation into abuses in El Salvador that helped shift U.S. policy toward stronger human rights conditions.
Akbar Ahmed is the Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies at American University and a Global Fellow at the Wilson Center. A distinguished scholar, diplomat, and public intellectual, he is widely regarded as one of the leading authorities on contemporary Islam and Muslim societies.
His career spans academia and public service, including senior roles in the Civil Service of Pakistan and service as Pakistan's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom and Ireland. He has held academic appointments at the U.S. Naval Academy, the University of Cambridge, Harvard University, and Princeton University.
Professor Ahmed is the author of numerous influential works examining Islam, globalization, and relations between the Muslim world and the West, including his widely recognized "Journey into" series published by Brookings. Throughout his career, he has been a leading voice for dialogue, pluralism, and mutual understanding.
John L. Esposito is Distinguished University Professor of Religion and International Affairs, and Professor of Islamic Studies at Georgetown University. He is the Founding Director of the Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding and The Bridge Initiative, which focuses on protecting pluralism and countering Islamophobia.
A globally recognized authority on Islam, political Islam, and religion in international affairs, Professor Esposito has advised governments, international organizations, and corporations worldwide, including the U.S. Department of State. He was elected President of both the American Academy of Religion and the Middle East Studies Association — the only scholar to ever hold both roles — and has served with the World Economic Forum and the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations.
He is the author or editor of more than 55 books, many translated into over 45 languages, including Who Speaks for Islam?, The Future of Islam, and Islam and Democracy after the Arab Spring. His scholarship has shaped academic and policy debates on Islam, governance, and global security for decades.
Robert Malley is a Senior Fellow and Lecturer at the Yale Jackson School of Global Affairs and a leading authority on U.S. foreign policy and Middle East diplomacy. He most recently served as U.S. Special Envoy for Iran from 2021 to 2023.
Malley previously served as President and CEO of the International Crisis Group, where he led conflict prevention and resolution efforts. During the Obama administration, he held senior White House roles including Special Assistant to the President, Senior Advisor for the Counter-ISIL campaign, and Coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa, and the Gulf Region. Earlier, he served on the National Security Council under President Clinton, where he played a key role in Arab–Israeli negotiations.
A graduate of Yale, Harvard Law School, and Oxford University as a Rhodes Scholar, Malley has written extensively on conflict, diplomacy, and international affairs. His most recent book, Tomorrow is Yesterday, examines the challenges of peace efforts in Israel–Palestine.
Bahey eldin Hassan is a leading Egyptian human rights defender and one of the founders of the modern Arab human rights movement. He is the Director of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) and has been at the forefront of advocacy for human rights, democratic reform, and accountability in the Middle East for over four decades.
Due to his outspoken criticism of human rights abuses in Egypt, he has faced severe reprisals, including asset freezes and a prison sentence in absentia, and has lived in exile in Europe since 2014. His work has made him a prominent international voice on authoritarianism, civic space, and the rule of law in the Arab world.
Hassan has served on the boards and advisory bodies of major international organizations, including Human Rights Watch and the International Center for Transitional Justice. He is the recipient of the Human Rights Watch Award and remains a central figure in advancing human rights and democratic values in the region.
Asma Afsaruddin is the Chair of the Board of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) and Class of 1950 Herman B Wells Endowed Professor and Professor of Middle Eastern Languages and Cultures at Indiana University, Bloomington. She is a leading scholar of Islamic Studies whose research focuses on Islamic political and religious thought, the Qur'an and hadith, religious pluralism, and the role of gender in Islam.
She is the author and editor of several influential books, including Jihad: What Everyone Needs to Know (2023), Contemporary Issues in Islam (2015), Striving in the Path of God (2013), and The First Muslims: History and Memory (2009). She has held academic appointments at Harvard and the University of Notre Dame and has served as a consultant to the Pew Research Center and the United States Institute of Peace.
Her work bridges scholarship and public discourse, contributing to a deeper understanding of Islam, pluralism, and governance in contemporary global contexts. In 2019 she was inducted into the Johns Hopkins Society of Scholars in recognition of her academic and professional achievements.
Salam Al-Maryati is President and Co-Founder of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and a leading voice on Islam in the West, U.S. national security, and Middle East policy. His work focuses on advancing civil rights, promoting democratic values, and strengthening engagement between American Muslim communities and policymakers.
Al-Marayati has testified before the U.S. Congress and regularly engages with government officials, media, and civil society on issues including human rights, countering extremism, and U.S. foreign policy. A frequent media commentator, his analysis has appeared in major outlets including The Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today. He also serves as adjunct faculty at Bayan Claremont and has held leadership roles in interfaith initiatives, including co-chairing the Interfaith Coalition to Heal Los Angeles.
Radwan Masmoudi is Founder and President of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) and Senior Advisor for Strategic and Philanthropic Initiatives at the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) in Washington, DC. He is a leading expert on democracy, governance, and U.S. policy in the Muslim world, with more than two decades of experience at the intersection of public policy, civil society, and international affairs.
Since founding CSID in 1999, Dr. Masmoudi has made it a global platform for policy dialogue, research, and civic engagement, with programs and partnerships in over 20 countries. He has raised more than $12 million in funding and convened over 20 international policy conferences, bringing together senior policymakers, scholars, and civic leaders.
His work focuses on democratic reform, countering authoritarianism, and advancing values-based U.S. engagement globally. Dr. Masmoudi is a frequent media commentator and has published widely on Islam, democracy, and human rights.
Nader Hashemi is Director of the Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding and Associate Professor of Middle East and Islamic Politics at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. A leading scholar of religion and politics, his work focuses on authoritarianism, democracy, political Islam, secularism, and U.S. policy in the Middle East.
Previously, he founded and directed the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Denver's Josef Korbel School of International Studies. Professor Hashemi is the author and editor of several influential books, including Islam, Secularism and Liberal Democracy and Sectarianization: Mapping the New Politics of the Middle East. He is also a Non-Resident Fellow at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN) and a member of the Board of CSID.
Haris Tarin is Vice President of Policy and Programming at the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC). He previously served in senior roles at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, where he advised leadership on immigration, civil rights, national security, and counterterrorism policy.
Most recently, Tarin served as Chief of Staff for Operation Allies Welcome, the largest refugee evacuation and resettlement effort in modern U.S. history, coordinating aspects of the U.S. response to the evacuation of Afghan allies and refugees. He is the author of An Introduction to Muslim America and co-author of Rethinking the Red Line: Free Speech, Religious Freedom and Social Change. A frequent commentator on public policy and national security, he has appeared on CNN, BBC, MSNBC, and Fox News.
Nicholas A. Heras is the Interim Executive Director and a Board Member of MEPC. He also serves as Senior Director at the New Lines Institute for Strategy and Policy, where he is Program Chair for the M.A. in Strategy and Policy and a Lecturer in Political Science at George Washington University, specializing in Middle East affairs.
Before joining MEPC and New Lines, Professor Heras held a range of national security and policy research positions, including Director of Government Relations and Middle East Security Program Manager at the Institute for the Study of War, and Senior Analyst at the Jamestown Foundation. He frequently engages with U.S. government, military, and nongovernmental organizations and is a regular media commentator on Middle East security issues.
Shadi Hamid is a columnist at The Washington Post and a senior fellow at Georgetown University's Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, where he co-directs the Faith and Future of Democracy Initiative. From 2023 to 2024, he was a member of the Post's Editorial Board. Previously, he was a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a contributing writer at The Atlantic.
Hamid is the author of several books, including The Case For American Power (Simon & Schuster) and The Problem of Democracy (Oxford). His book Islamic Exceptionalism was shortlisted for the 2017 Lionel Gelber Prize. In 2019, Hamid was named one of the world's top 50 thinkers by Prospect magazine. He is also the co-founder of Wisdom of Crowds, a podcast, newsletter, and debate platform. He received his Ph.D. in political science from Oxford University, where he was a Marshall Scholar.
David Mednicoff is a lawyer and political scientist holding a BA from Princeton, and AM, JD, and PhD degrees from Harvard University. He is Associate Professor of Middle Eastern Studies and Public Policy at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst and a Fellow at the Middle East Initiative in the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard.
His teaching and publications focus on intersections of comparative legal ideas, institutions, politics, and public policy in the Middle East and North Africa. A former Fulbright Scholar in Morocco and Qatar, he has been awarded over $1 million in research grants on legal politics and policy. He is completing a book manuscript on the politics of the rule of law across the Middle East.
Sultan Alamer is a Resident Senior Fellow at the New Lines Institute's Middle East Center, a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Harvard University, and a member of the editorial committee of Alpheratz magazine. His research focuses on nationalism, state formation, governance, and regional politics in the Middle East, with a particular emphasis on the Arabian Peninsula.
He earned his PhD in political science from George Washington University. Alamer is the author and editor of several works on Arab nationalism, Gulf politics, and political reform, and has contributed to leading platforms including Carnegie, MERIP, the Arab Reform Initiative, and New Lines Magazine. He is a co-founder of the Arab Political Science Network.
Murad Batal Shishani is a Resident Senior Fellow at the Middle East Policy Council (MEPC) and a member of the editorial committee of Alpheratz. He previously served as a Resident Senior Fellow at the New Lines Institute's Middle East Center.
He focuses on political violence, insurgent movements, and Islamist organizations across the Middle East and the North Caucasus. With more than 25 years of experience spanning field reporting, policy analysis, and advisory work, he spent over 16 years with the BBC World Service (Arabic and English), reporting from major conflict zones including Iraq, Ukraine, Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza. He is the founder of the London-based consultancy Remarks on Political Violence and the author of three Arabic-language books on the North Caucasus conflict.
Ammar Mansuri has an academic interest in Finance and Political Science. He serves on the board of the Muslim Student Organization at the University of Florida and is an active member of the broader Muslim community. Ammar has gained significant public service experience through his work on Capitol Hill for his district representative and as a judicial intern in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit of Florida. He remains deeply involved in nonprofit work and campus initiatives and is committed to public service and community advocacy.
Josh Paul is Co-Founder of A New Policy, a nonprofit advocacy organization focused on aligning U.S. policy toward Israel and Palestine with international law, human rights, and long-term American strategic interests. He is also a Non-Resident Fellow and Senior Advisor at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), where his work focuses on U.S. security assistance, arms transfers, and Middle East policy.
Paul previously served for more than eleven years at the U.S. Department of State in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs. In October 2023, he resigned from the State Department in protest over U.S. military support to Israel during the Gaza war, drawing international attention to debates over U.S. policy, arms transfers, and civilian protection. Earlier in his career, he worked on security sector reform in Iraq and the West Bank.
Omar Shakir is Executive Director of Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), the organization founded by the late Jamal Khashoggi to promote democratic accountability and human rights in the Middle East. A leading international human rights advocate, his work focuses on Israel/Palestine, authoritarianism, and U.S. policy in the region.
Prior to joining DAWN, Shakir served for nearly a decade as Israel and Palestine Director at Human Rights Watch, where he led investigations into human rights abuses and authored influential reports on apartheid, persecution, and the humanitarian consequences of the conflict. His advocacy led to his deportation by the Israeli government in 2019. Shakir has spoken before international institutions including the United Nations and the European Parliament.
Shannan Rawcliffe is an anthropologist who earned her MA from Rutgers University in the field of Peace and Conflict. Her work focuses on policy-relevant analysis of governance, rights, and everyday life in conflict settings, with particular attention to how external security strategies reshape political legitimacy on the ground. Her work bridges ethnographic sensitivity to lived experience with practical policy design, translating field-centered insights into actionable recommendations for decision-makers.
Lein Soltan is Senior Advocacy Manager at UNRWA USA, where she leads advocacy and public engagement efforts focused on Palestinian refugees and humanitarian policy. A Palestinian American born to refugee parents displaced during the Gulf War, her work is shaped by both professional expertise and personal experience connected to displacement and global justice.
Soltan spent several years as a marine biologist and research manager at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill before transitioning into global health and advocacy. Her work at UNRWA USA focuses on raising awareness about the conditions facing Palestinian refugees and advancing policies grounded in dignity, human rights, and international responsibility. She holds a Master of Public Health with a focus in Global Health and a degree in Biology and Marine Science from UNC Chapel Hill.
Ammar Elahi is Executive Director of the Muslim Action Coalition (MAC), a New York–based civic engagement and public policy organization focused on political mobilization and community advocacy. His work centers on grassroots organizing, coalition-building, and strengthening civic participation within Muslim communities.
Elahi has been actively involved in electoral organizing and candidate engagement efforts in New York, supporting campaigns and outreach initiatives aimed at increasing political participation and representation. He has also worked with community advocacy organizations, including the Bangladeshi American Advocacy Group (BAAG), on local policy engagement. Earlier in his career, he held leadership positions within MUNA Youth in Brooklyn, focusing on youth education and civic awareness programs.
Mir Sulaiman Ali is the Senior Foreign & Government Policy Advisor for AK Party USA, the representative office of Türkiye's governing party and President Erdoğan in the United States. In this role, he engages members of Congress, the U.S. Department of State, and think tanks to strengthen U.S.–Türkiye relations and discuss U.S. strategy in the Muslim world. Previously, he served as Community Manager of Muslim Advocates and Community Liaison for the New York City Mayor's Office.
Shamarukh Mohiuddin is a Director at Cadmus Group and Founder and President of The Bangladesh Project, a nonprofit initiative supporting US-Bangladesh relations. She is also co-chair of the board at Goodweave International, a human rights nonprofit, and a board member of leading Bangladeshi publishing firm UPL.
Shamarukh is an expert on women's economic empowerment. In her current role at Cadmus Group she advises the U.S. Department of State and other U.S. government agencies on Asia policy. Her previous experience includes the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the World Bank. She holds an M.A. in International Relations from Johns Hopkins University, School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS).
Belquis Ahmadi is a human rights lawyer with 20+ years of experience leading women's rights, civil society, rule of law, peacebuilding, and governance initiatives. She has authored numerous briefs on women's rights, democracy, women's participation in peace processes, and countering violent extremism.
With over 11 years at the U.S. Institute of Peace, she led Afghanistan-focused programs to strengthen peacebuilding, civil society, and justice accountability. Ahmadi has advocated for recognizing gender apartheid and documenting Taliban abuses as crimes against humanity. She also served as a political advisor for the first post-Saddam Hussein parliamentary elections' out-of-country voting process in Jordan, and for the first post-Taliban elections in Afghanistan in 2004.
Mustafa Akyol is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute's Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity and a leading public intellectual on Islam, democracy, and religious reform. He is the author of several widely acclaimed books, including Reopening Muslim Minds, The Islamic Jesus, Islam without Extremes, and most recently The Islamic Moses. In 2021, Prospect magazine named him among the world's top 50 thinkers.
In addition to his work at Cato, Akyol is a Senior Lecturer in the Islamic Civilization and Societies Program at Boston College and directs courses on Islam and the Muslim world at the U.S. Foreign Service Institute. A longtime journalist, he has written for The New York Times, Foreign Affairs, The Wall Street Journal, and frequently appears on CNN, BBC, NPR, and Al Jazeera.
Ermin Sinanović is a scholar, educator, and thought leader in contemporary Islamic studies whose work bridges academic research, policy analysis, and community engagement. He serves as the Executive Director of the Center for Islam in the Contemporary World (CICW), where he leads initiatives that advance research on Muslims in global contexts, cultivate American Muslim leadership, and deepen intellectual engagement between Islamic tradition and modern challenges.
Under his leadership, CICW has expanded its scholarly programming, built international partnerships, and established new platforms for research on Muslim futures and American Muslim institutions. He also holds an appointment as a faculty associate in the Southeast Asia Program, Einaudi Center for International Studies at Cornell University.
Ali Dabaje is a Program Coordinator for the Brzezinski Chair in Global Security and Geostrategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), where he contributes to research on global order and emerging powers. He previously worked with CSIS's Middle East Program, supporting projects on regional foreign policy.
Beyond his policy work, Ali's scholarship sits at the intersection of Islamic legal theory and political thought, engaging questions on the role of Islamic jurisprudence in modern governance and the interaction between religious traditions and contemporary state structures. He is also the project lead of The Mainstay Foundation's Law and Policy Network. He holds a BA in Government and Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations from Harvard University.
Omair Anas is an Assistant Professor of International Relations at Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University in Türkiye, specializing in political Islam, comparative politics, and global political thought. His work focuses on the evolution of Islamist movements and their interaction with democratic governance, pluralism, and state institutions.
His research examines how political Islam has adapted to changing domestic and international contexts, with a particular focus on North Africa, Türkiye, and South Asia. He has written on the intellectual trajectory of Rached Ghannouchi and the transformation of Tunisia's Ennahda movement, contributing to broader debates on "Muslim democracy" and post-Islamism. Dr. Anas also engages in policy-oriented analysis on global governance, emerging powers, and democratic change in the Global South.
CSID–MPAC 24th Annual Conference
Democracy, Islam & the Future of the Middle East
CSID–MPAC 24th Annual Conference
A World Order Without Democracy? U.S. Strategy and Political Change in the Muslim World
Friday, May 15, 2026 | Georgetown University Capitol Campus, Washington, DC
At a moment when authoritarianism is rising and democratic norms are under strain worldwide, this timely conference will bring together leading policymakers, scholars, and practitioners to examine one urgent question: Can the United States advance its interests while abandoning its commitment to democracy and human rights?
The program features high-level discussions on democratic backsliding, political reform, and U.S. strategy across the Middle East and beyond. Panels will explore the role of Islam and pluralism in governance, the future of democracy in countries such as Libya, Syria, and Iran, and the evolving dynamics of Israel–Palestine.
The conference will include keynote addresses by leading voices such as Bahey eldin Hassan and Professor Akbar Ahmed, and a keynote luncheon with Robert Malley. Members of Congress are also invited to share their perspectives on U.S. policy and global leadership.
This is a unique opportunity to engage directly with experts and decision-makers shaping the future of democracy and US Foreign Policy.
final Program — Friday, May 15, 2026
Registration & Breakfast
PhotoChair, CSID Board of Directors
Co-founder of several Egyptian and international human rights institutions, and Former Director of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS)
Democratic Backsliding and Stalled Reform
Senior Fellow, Georgetown University's Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding
University of Massachusetts
Member of the Editorial Committee, Alpheratz
in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit of Florida.
Islam, Pluralism, and Governance
Keynote Remarks:
Democracy and U.S. Foreign Policy: Aligning Strategy with Values in a Changing World
U.S. Representative for Massachusetts 2nd District Ranking Member of the House Rules Committee
Co-chair of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission Longtime advocate for peace, social justice, and international development (Confirmed)
Formerly U.S. Special Envoy for Iran (2021–2023)
Former President & CEO, International Crisis Group
Georgetown University
Country Case Studies
Focused on civic engagement and public policy advocacy
Former Community Manager, Muslim Advocates & Community Liaison, New York City Mayor's Office
Islam, pluralism, and governance:
Is Shariah Law compatible with Democracy?
From Islamism to Muslim Democracy: The Evolution of Ghannouchi’s Political Thought
Ambassador (Ret) and Distinguished Professor
Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies
School of International Service, American University
Former Pakistani High Commissioner to the United Kingdom
Closing Remarks
A pioneering scholar of Islam and global affairs, Professor John L. Esposito has shaped how policymakers, scholars, and the public understand Islam, democracy, and U.S.–Muslim relations for over four decades.
His work has helped replace fear with knowledge and division with dialogue, making him one of the most influential voices in advancing understanding, pluralism, and informed policy.
Join us as we celebrate a lifetime dedicated to scholarship, bridge-building, and public impact.
🥂 Reception
In honor of all our Speakers and Participants
Co-Sponsored by:
CSID–MPAC 24th Annual Conference
Democracy, Islam & the Future of the Middle East
CSID–MPAC 24th Annual Conference
A World Order Without Democracy? U.S. Strategy and Political Change in the Muslim World
Friday, May 15, 2026 | Georgetown University Capitol Campus, Washington, DC
At a moment when authoritarianism is rising and democratic norms are under strain worldwide, this timely conference will bring together leading policymakers, scholars, and practitioners to examine one urgent question: Can the United States advance its interests while abandoning its commitment to democracy and human rights?
The program features high-level discussions on democratic backsliding, political reform, and U.S. strategy across the Middle East and beyond. Panels will explore the role of Islam and pluralism in governance, the future of democracy in countries such as Libya, Syria, and Iran, and the evolving dynamics of Israel–Palestine.
The conference included keynote addresses by leading voices such as Bahey eldin Hassan and Professor Akbar Ahmed, and a keynote luncheon with Robert Malley. Members of Congress are also invited to share their perspectives on U.S. policy and global leadership.
It was a unique opportunity to engage directly with experts and decision-makers shaping the future of democracy and US Foreign Policy.
Co-Sponsored by
