POLS 1822 E

After our last class, human rights were discussed for the first time with regards to democracy. I have attached a piece by Mahmood Monshipouri, called The Muslim World Half a Century After the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Progress and Obstacles, about Muslims’ relationship to human rights norms so far and their perception on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

Monshipouri argues that Islamic societies have an “extricable link” between religion and rights, the reason being Islam’s historical role in both politics and the state. He explains that Islam “permeates and directs all spheres of human life”. The cultural factor within Islamic society is therefore the root of conflict with the modern, UDHR, notion of human rights. Monshipouri barely differentiates between human dignity and human rights, stating that in Muslim countries, values such as distributive justice and economic protection are prioritized. According to him, Islam focuses more on these principles and positive rights such as “the right to life, the right to self-determination and the right to development”, rather than rights that are claims and entitlements against the state.

Monshipouri raises two examples of social and economic factors of Islam that are controversial with regards to the UDHR: the treatment of women and the persecution of non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries. 

Monshipouri proposes two solutions for Muslim countries to the contemporary discourse of human rights: “(1) reconcile the sources of cardinal Islamic truth with those of an emerging transnational society or (2) re-establish the relevance of their authentic ideas to international normative standards”. (314)

Francesca

You might find this helpful…

Human beliefs and values: a cross-cultural sourcebook (data 1999-2002) by Ronald Inglehart.

It’s check out of the Rock, but available (in part) on Google Books: http://books.google.com/books?id=UVPMESnqY0AC&printsec=frontcover&cd=1&source=gbs_ViewAPI#v=onepage&q&f=false

Interestingly, mosque attendance in Iran is less than 30%, Turkey 35%, Egypt 40%, and Morocco 45%. U.S. church attendance? 44%

Hope this helps for the essays!

Sam

<!— /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:”Lucida Grande”; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:”“; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} —>

In response to Dan’s post the other day about Mubarak’s extension of Egypt’s State of Emergency, I would point readers to the Obama administration’s baffling response.

-Jeb

A relatively interesting (if a bit vague) article on a renewed focus towards women’s rights issues in Saudi Arabia.

-Jeb

Going against promises made in the 2005 “re-election campaign” President Mubarak has renewed Egypt’s Emergency Laws for another two years. As we have read, these laws have been used to perpetrate human rights abuses and keep in check political organizations that oppose the Mubarak Regime.

Here is an Al Jazeera article discussing Mubarak’s decision to renew the laws.

Yesterday, I published a blogpost on the political inclusion of Islamist groups in the Middle East. I would like to recommend another article on this topic entitled “Do Muslims Vote Islamic.” It directly addresses the anxiety surrounding the “democratic paradox” by analyzing how effective Islamist parties are in winning Muslim votes. 

- Steve Ford

For the last few weeks we have been discussing (at some point or another) the Muslim Brotherhood. As an individual who had a very superficial understanding of the organization I looked for an independent source that would explain the organization, its platform, and the political challenges it faces under Pres. Mubarak’s regime. I found all of this and more in a publication produced by the Carnagie Endowment for International Peace entitled “The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood: Islamist Participation in a Closing Political Environment.” It provides an excellent analysis of the political environment, the relationship between the organization and other domestic political actors, and the future of the organization. 

Enjoy!

- Steve Ford  

In class, Huss recommended that we read a commencement speech given by the POTUS at the University of Michigan. Although the speech concerned strengthening and perpetuating democracy in the United States, his speech contains some insightful comments on democracy that can be broadly applied. Click here for text and video of the speech.

- Steve Ford 

Throughout the semester we have debated the merits of including Islamist parties in the democratic political process.

Both in our readings and during our class discussions there seem to have been two dominant perspectives. One perspective calls for the inclusion of Islamist parties based on the belief that providing them with a forum to express their opinions will lead to moderation. The other perspective, most notably espoused by Egyptian President Mubarak, calls for the exclusion of Islamist parties because of the democratic paradox – “the idea that democratic processes might [permanently] empower…non-democratic actors with no commitment to democratic norms.”

I have become interested in this debate over the last few weeks because I feel as if we have not moved beyond discussing the aforementioned pros and cons of inclusion.  With the hope of enriching this debate I sought out empirical data on the effect of political inclusion on Islamist Parties in the Middle East.

To this end, one of the most insightful articles that I found is called “Democratization, Inclusion and the Moderation of Islamist Parties”. 

The author concludes that “inclusion is far more likely to produce an overall moderate political sphere, though it is unlikely to eliminate all forms of radicalism.”

Yet, there is another key point:

Data on Islamist participation in elections shows that the first time they “field candidates” they are quite successful in winning seats in the legislature. However, they “consistently lose seats in subsequent elections…as ‘Islam is the Solution’ becomes empty rhetoric.”

The arguments made in favor of inclusion are generally based on the idea that it will provide a space for all groups to express themselves. While this is true, the above data seems to suggest that inclusion is beneficial in that it demonstrates to voters that Islamist parties are just as incapable of delivering resources and holding promises as non-Islamist parties. In short, inclusion will give Islamist parties an opportunity to publicly fail to represent the interests of their constituencies. This is important. As long as Islamist parties are excluded from the political process, their rhetoric will continue to resonate with the people because they will not be required to deliver on their promises. I am by no means arguing that inclusion will eliminate Islamist parties, but rather that it will eliminate those parties that cannot provide for their constituencies. Constructing a more interest driven form of politics will only serve to cultivate and fortify democracy in the Middle East. 

 - Steve Ford

Two weeks ago, Candace raised a number of thought-provoking discussion questions during her presentation. One of these questions dealt with Alexis de Tocqueville’s view on the compatibility of Islam and democracy:

“Muhammad professed to derive from Heaven, and he has inserted in the Koran, not only a body of religious doctrines, but political maxims, civil and criminal laws, and theories of science. The gospel, on the contrary, only speaks of the general relations of men to God and to each other -beyond which it inculcates and imposes no point of faith. This alone, besides a thousand other reasons, would suffice to prove that the former of these religions will never long predominate in a cultivated and democratic age, whilst the latter is destined to retain its sway at these as at all other periods”

The above quotation is just one of many that indicate Tocqueville’s belief in the incompatibility of Islam and democracy.  As I conducted further research on Tocqueville’s view on Islam and Democracy, I stumbled upon a very interesting 1998 CNN interview of then Iranian President Mohammad Khatami. What is most striking about this interview is the way in which the President uses Tocqeville to defend the compatibility of Islam and democracy in Iran. Overall, it is an excellent interview not only because of how the Iranian president leverages Tocqueville in defense of the Islamic republic, but also because of his characterization of U.S. foreign policy as suppressive of interpretations of Islam that seek “democracy, progress, development.”

I encourage you to read this CNN interview. However, if you would like to view it here is part 2, part 3, part 4, and part 5. I could not find part 1 of the interview. I apologize in advance. 

Steve Ford