http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=ODQ5NTUyMTY=
Special Report Redefining liberalism in Kuwait Published Date: April 17, 2009 By Hussain Al-Qatari, Staff writer The term 'liberal' in Kuwait is very difficult to define. Liberals tend to be open-minded, tolerant and nonpartisan. But in many Muslim countries the term liberal has been distorted by fundamentalists and become a direct accusation of being an atheist, steeped in immorality, and even corrupt. This misconception, argues renowned columnist and one of the founders of the Democratic Forum Ahmad Al-Sarraf, is due to people's ignorance. Being a liberal has no relation to any of these accusations. To be a liberal, Al-Sarraf says, simply means believing in the differences and rights of others. "When you are a liberal, you must give others the chance to believe, to express, to act and to talk according to their beliefs, as is their right," he says. Therefore, according to Al-Sarraf the term 'liberal' is not applicable to Kuwaiti politicians. Being 'liberal' in Kuwait is no more than an adjective given to any person whose political views are not influenced by any religion, sect, tribe or clan. For example, anyone who runs for the parliamentary elections in Kuwait without being supported by any of these affiliations is automatically called 'liberal', and that is very wrong," Al-Sarraf explained. Al-Saraf who is also a political analyst explains that the concept of liberalism is much deeper than being a mere opposition to tribalism, conservatism and social elitism. "The fact of the matter is that Kuwait is a country that is very much immersed in conservatism, tribalism and sectarianism," noted Al-Sarraf. "Individuals in Kuwait have a very strong sense of loyalty and belonging to their tribes, clans, and sects. These beliefs can never ever coexist with liberalism. Therefore, their claims of being liberals do not hold true." Giving a concrete definition of liberalism, therefore, becomes a difficult task. What can we call parliamentary candidates and former MPs who are supportive of concepts that Kuwaiti society considers to be 'liberal,' like co-education, giving women their full rights and liberating the country's politics from extreme religious influences? Under what category do we categorize politicians like Aseel Al-Awadhi, Ali Al-Rashed, Mohammad Al-Saqer and Abdullah Al-Naibari? Al-Sarraf proposes the use of the term 'nationalist' instead of 'liberal' in this case. THE LIBERAL FRONTIER Kuwait's only progressive liberal affiliation that encompasses most of the characteristics inherited from the liberal school of thought is the Democratic Forum, an offspring of the Movement of Kuwaiti Democratic Progressives formed in the 1970's. "The Forum is composed of multifarious members of Kuwaiti society who come from different backgrounds and share the same belief in equality and tolerance for difference," he explained. He was quick to note that the Forum's inactivity nowadays gave way to the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) - which Al-Sarraf believes to be shameful and fraudulent - to take over as the sole liberal frontier in Kuwait, which he believes it does not represent. The sad reality is that members of the Alliance who claim to be liberal and open-minded would switch immediately to being extremely conservative and prejudiced against others when it comes to serious matters like marriage and business partnership. He illustrated his point of view with this example: "Let us imagine that one of these liberal politicians finds out that there is a relative of theirs who intends to marry someone from a different, perhaps lower, class. Or maybe that relative is starting a business with someone who is tribal. Would this person who claims to be a liberal readily accept this? Of course not. They see themselves as superior to others, and they have money to help them have this elevated status in society." DIVIDED FROM WITHIN The concept of Liberalism in Kuwait, he said, is something that is becoming exclusive for upper-class society members, which is in itself against the grain of liberal ideology. The sad reality that he drew attention to is that Kuwait's so-called liberals use a selective method in choosing which liberal values to retain and which to discard in accordance with whatever best serves their own purposes. This, he argues, is unequivocally manifested in the behavior of the National Democratic Alliance. "The NDA is kalem fadi (pathetic). It is good-for-nothing and it cannot prove to do anything that deserves credibility if it is ever put to any real test. It is just a false affiliation that has no concepts and has done nothing that it can be proud of. It is no more than a lousy affiliation, completely based on wealth and status and is totally retrogressive. The Alliance can never participate in democracy at all. It cannot bring any good results for Kuwait." Al-Sarraf continued, saying that the only reason that makes some of Kuwait's young people - who form the base of the NDA - participate in its activities is the fact that the NDA is the only option available. "This does not mean that what they do is good. The current situation, sadly, is that it is either the NDA or the extremist conservative affiliations. Of course the young will opt for the NDA, but that doesn't mean that they're good." The columnist stated with a rather pessimistic tone that nothing can be done to change the status quo. "The Parliament will never improve for as long as we have no official political parties in the country. The positive energies of good candidates need to be united under the umbrella of a party. Without political parties that have the freedom to function fully and officially in society, there won't be any faint change to the better - there probably will be change, but only for the worse," he concluded. This is the second in a three part series examining the political factions in Kuwait. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
