https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/10/opinion/what-the-west-should-know-about-political-islam/

*What the West should know about political Islam*

[image: Mohammed Nosseir]

*By **MOHAMMED NOSSEIR* <https://www.asiatimes.com/author/mohammed-nosseir/>



The founding of an “Islamic state” is the common underlying desire of
millions of Muslims engaged in what is defined as “political Islam,” an
aspiration that is widely craved by Islamic entities, whether they concur
with one another, are at variance, function secretly or openly. However,
conceptions vis-à-vis the form and function of an Islamic state differ from
one Muslim to another. Meanwhile, political Islam is articulated so that
Islam can serve to bring politicians to power while politics has nothing to
offer to Islam.

The ban on democracy in many Arab states has prompted Islamists to
capitalize on religion as a gateway to politics. There is certainly a
correlation, either candid or implicit, between Islamic entities that
believe in realizing power by democratic means and those that seek to
achieve change through violence. In fact, during the emergence of democracy
in any given Muslim nation, all conflicting Islamist entities unite
politically (similar to what occurred in Egypt after the 2011 revolution).

The absence of equality, freedom and justice, among many other Western
values in most Arab Muslim nations, is behind the emergence and expansion
of political Islamists – who ironically won’t abide by democratic tools
should they come into power. In fact, Islamic entities derive their
strength mainly from functioning as illegal underground bodies that use
totalitarian methods to discipline their large numbers of followers under
the pretense of applying what they claim are “Islamic principles.

Terrorists in essence are ignorant, narrow-minded people who are collective
victims of their violence-driven leaders, intensified by the autocratic
cruelty of their ruling regimes. In Islam, committing suicide is a sin that
clearly leads to hell; the use of suicide bombers to assassinate innocent
people is obviously unrelated to Islam. Nevertheless, otherwise
well-informed Westerners, prone to think in terms of cause and effect,
often claim that Islam is the spiritual source of terrorism, declining to
acknowledge that terrorism is simply a sociopolitical dilemma initiated by
criminal citizens who know little about the religion of Islam.

Terrorism, in fact, is a symptom of the present political era wherein two
vastly unequal political forces encounter one another: a relatively small
group of people who abide by a strong ideology is confronting the
comprehensive armed force and political power of a nation. In reality,
terrorism gains its strength by capitalizing on the increasing ignorance,
poverty and misery of millions of suffering Muslims.

Three Muslim Arab monarchies, Kuwait, Jordan and Morocco, have managed to
use their monarchical system of rule to enable Islamists to engage in what
might be defined as a restricted form of political participation that
allows them to compete fairly in legislative elections and participate in
the forming of government – as long as they don’t question the monarchy.
While this is an excellent political proposition for these nations, it is
difficult to apply in nations with republican rule such as Algeria and
Egypt, where the slightest hint of democracy will naturally lead to
cravings for the presidency.

In my country, Egypt, state entities, along with a segment of our society,
were able to do away with Muslim Brotherhood rule on June 30, 2013, only
365 days after it had come to power. Regardless of the method (revolution
or military coup), a legitimate ruling entity that had been waiting to
seize power since 1928 was ousted and immediately faced intensive terrorism
allegations. Although political Islamists have been engaged in countless
violent activities throughout their long, illegal lifespan, realizing power
democratically, and eventually losing it, has aggravated the pro-violence
arm of their organizations substantially.

Furthermore, President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who assumed power after
toppling Islamist rule, anticipated that the Western world, scared to death
of Islamic terrorism, would support him politically and morally, backed up
with endless financial grants from Arab Gulf states worried about the
spillover of political Islam into their nations. Sisi was shocked by the
implicit Western criticisms of his move, and although the Gulf states have
offered Egypt roughly US$92 billion in grants and loans since January 2011,
this is still much less than he had expected.

Meanwhile, Western nations have capitalized on this political crisis by
hosting many Islamist leaders, allowing them to operate politically as long
as they respect the host nations’ sovereignty and security. While this move
may offer Western nations temporary immunity from terrorism, it is not a
permanent cure for the universal disease of terrorism, which is driven by
diversified and fragmented entities operating independently.

Sisi eventually came up with an odd scheme; a couple of mega-projects would
instantly boost the Egyptian economy, thereby advancing his popularity at
the expense of political Islamists. During his tenure, Sisi has vastly
restricted the small window of freedom that Hosni Mubarak used to offer us,
expanded unjust rule, deteriorated the country’s economy, and vastly
reduced all forms of political participation – all of which has simply
strengthened political Islamists who often capitalize on rulers’ faults
instead of offering genuine scientific solutions.

Autocracy, naturally, leaves rulers blindsided, believing that their
projects are massively successful, that the economy is booming and their
popularity is rising. In fact, Egypt is sweeping its accumulated economic
and political wreckage under the rug; the number of people living beneath
the poverty threshold has increased to nearly one of every three citizens
and our external debt has almost tripled during Sisi’s tenure, reaching
$106 billion according to Central Bank of Egypt statistics. Nevertheless,
the state falsely believes that security measures will immunize our country
against political Islamists forever.

It is widely acknowledged that a copycat of the January 2011 revolution is
an almost impossible task, but because of our extensive socioeconomic and
political crisis, we are currently a volatile society that could explode
any time. Meanwhile, the true assessment of terrorists’ current
capabilities lies in measuring their ability to recruit more terrorists and
to obtain some sympathy from their Muslim fellows – two escalating factors
that present political developments are fortifying further.

Should Sisi run any form of free and fair elections, political Islamists
would have a good chance of returning to power, and their single goal would
be to get even with state entities, leading to widespread violence in
Egypt. The holding of genuine elections is therefore an inconceivable
political proposition. However, activating a “semi-functional” democratic
mechanism whereby the Egyptian state works to engage the millions of
energetic youth who are eager to reform our country is an effective
approach that would also prevent young people from turning to political
Islam – but since Sisi believes that politics is meant to serve his desires
exclusively, he will certainly despise this proposal.

The present reactive approach of Western nations toward terrorism leaves
everyone universally vulnerable to potential terrorist attacks. Terrorism
is a phenomenon that is best countered by its creators: Political
Islamists, many of whose leaders are living in Europe. Establishing a
dialogue among Western leaders, scholars and Islamists currently residing
in the West would be a constructive pre-emptive move that might engage
political Islam in universal democracy (if such a term exists); that is a
single step Western nations could take that may help the world to live in
peace.

Kirim email ke