MIMESIS INTERNATIONAL POLITICS n. 9 Amédée Turner dAvide TAcchini ISLAM AND DEMOCRACY Voices of Muslims Amongst Us Lay Muslims in the West Discuss Democracy Preface by Zeina M. Barakat MIMESIS INTERNATIONAL AbouT The AuThors Amédée Turner Queen’s Counsel, Member of the European Parliament, 1979-2004 Publications: – All the Qur’an in 100 pages by a Non-Muslim for non-Muslims, 2017, Champagne Cat Production. – The Law of Trade Secrets, 1964, 1967, Sweet & Maxwell, London & New York. – The Law of the European Patent, 1979, Garland, New York. dAvide TAcchini, Ph.d. Research Fellow, Jena Center for Reconciliation Studies, Friedrich-SchillerUniversität, Jena, Germany. Visiting Professor of Arabic Language and Literature, University of Parma, Italy. Publications: – Radicalismo islamico, Il diario del soggiorno di Sayyid Qutb, negli Stati Uniti dal 1948 al 1950, (Radical Islamism, the diary of Sayyid Quṭb’s trip to the US from 1948 to 1950), 2015, Obarrao Editore Milan-Italy. – Chiesa e Islam in Italia: Incontro e Dialogo (the Church and Islam in Italy, Encounters and Dialogue), 2019, EDB Editore, Bologna, Italy. (with Angelucci, A., Bombardieri, M. Cuciniello, A.). – Islam e Integrazione in Italia (Islam and Integration in Italy), MilanVenice, 2015, Marsilio Editore Milan-Venice, Italy (With Angelucci, A., Bombardieri, M.) – Sharh al-luġa al-‘arabiyya li’l-ītāliyyīn, Guida alla comprensione dei fondamenti della lingua araba con suggerimenti per migliorare la didattica dell’italiano agli studenti arabofoni (Introduction to Arabic Language, how to teach Italian to Arabic native speakers), 2006, Ed. Centro Studi e Ricerche Sociali, Cremona, Italy. © 2019 – mimesis inTernATionAl www.mimesisinternational.com e-mail: info@mimesisinternational.com Isbn: 9788869771774 Book series: Politics, n. 9 © MIM Edizioni Srl P.I. C.F. 02419370305 TABLE OF CONTENTS PrefAce Zeina M. Barakat 7 inTroducTion 9 1. from “islAm in The WesT” To “WesTern islAm” 1.1 islam and the Mosques of Europe 1.1.1 Mosques in Europe 1.2 Islam and the Issue of Mosques in the U.S.A. 1.2.1 Muslims in the U.S.A. 1.2.2 Mosques, Islamic Centers and Muslim Places of Worship in the U.S.A. 1.2.3 The New Frontier of Muslim Architecture: Mosques in Metropolitan Areas 2. islAm And democrAcy 2.1 What is “Democracy” to a Muslim? 2.2 Clash of Civilisations 2.3 The Relationship of Democracy to Islam 3. cooPerATion, conciliATion, comPromise 3.1 Muslims Pre-Requisites 3.2 Pragmatic Consultation in Islam 3.3 Politics and Governance in Early Islam 3.4 The Question of Minorities 25 33 39 41 44 50 57 65 65 68 71 77 78 79 82 85 conclusions 117 selecT bibliogrAPhy 125 Addendum: Address AT JenA universiTy 131 APPendix 145 ZeinA m. bArAkAT PREFACE Readers may wonder why Amédée Turner and Davide Tacchini have chosen to write on “Islam and Democracy”. The answer is because this topic is timely due to the ongoing events on the local and global sphere. The issue of whether Islam has anything in common with Western liberal thought still rings around the West. Many Muslim scholars have argued that Islam does share with Western civilization its democratic ideals but offering its peculiar democratic tradition. However, this has been a controversial issue because there are as many arguments raised by non-Muslims about the democratic nature of Islam as there are about the antidemocratic nature of religion in general. However, the fundamental flaw in the approach to understanding the Islamic way of democracy remains linked to the pervasive ignorance of the religious doctrine. Here lies the significance of this book which sheds light on the subtle bondage between Islam and democracy. The book Islam and Democracy aims to educate its readers on how to understand this thought-provoking topic and which ways to deal with its implications. A global religious resurgence and calls for greater political participation have been major forces in the post-Cold War period. Across the Muslim world, governments and Islamic movements grapple with issues of democratization and civil society. This book explores the Islamic sources (beliefs and institutions) relevant to the current debate over greater political participation and democratization. Many scholars have raised the questions: Are Islam and democracy on a collision course? How have governments in the Muslim world responded to the contemporary challenges of Islam and democracy? Why are the Muslim youth emigrating to the 8 Islam and Democracy West? Can these new immigrants reconcile their Islamic heritage with liberal Western values? Will focusing on education, media and policy offer viable solutions for anti-democratic trends within the Muslim World? Turner and Tacchini seek in their book answers to these crucial questions in one chapter after another capturing the reader to read on, especially those who seek to expand their knowledge on the topic. The authors argue that the Muslim Umma is now more than ever, an entity that goes beyond ethnic, cultural, geographic and national borders. Furthermore, Muslims who live as minorities in the West enjoy greater freedom to practice their religion, in comparison to their fellow Muslims who still live in the Islamic world. They feel free to experiment, to develop new ideas and approaches to faith and social life. They have the chance to reform their traditions. I find myself in this book – a Palestinian Muslim woman and scholar living away from the bondage of my traditional society and smelling the breeze of freedom in the West. That led me to ask myself which should I value more, my liberty or my society? The problem the authors tackle is of those Muslim clerics who criticize democracy without being aware of what democracy means. Islam today has been subjected to all forms of discrimination and criticisms. This remarkable book plows new ground by shedding light on the topic to help Christians understand Islam and be objective in dealing with it. Islam shares the core values of Western civilization – its goals are the same – happiness and justice. Accomplishing this would lead to a lasting accommodation between all three monotheistic religions. Adherents to the Abrahamic faith should heed the wisdom of Indian leader Gandhi: “Religions are different roads emerging to the same point. What does it matter that we take different roads so long as we reach the same goal.” May 13th 2019 INTRODUCTION In 2004 the Anglican Observer (of the established Anglican Church in Britain) to the United Nations was an Anglican Archdeaconess from Samoa, Taimalelagi Fagamalama Tuatagaloa-Leota. On her arrival in New York, she had previously had little contact with individual Muslims or with Islam in general. To better acclimatise her to global issues relevant to the Anglican church, her Advisory Council, comprised mostly of US Episcopalian priests, as well as some Anglican priests (fewer because the meetings took place in New York), selected a group amongst themselves of Anglican priests and Episcopalians on the Council who would address the issue of the compatibility of Islam and Christianity. The original incentive was the fact that the group of Anglican and Episcopalian clergy (and Amédée Turner, a layman) who were advising the Anglican Observer to the United Nations (Archdeacon Taimalelagi Fagamalama Tuatagaloa-Leota) happened upon the idea. The Anglican Observer had had no prior contact with Muslims, but attempting to fill this gap led her to an entirely separate examination of lay Muslim attitudes in the USA and Britain. This proposal arose out of a discussion in the Council of the famous adage of Professor Samuel Huntington of Harvard University, first made in 1993, that there is “a clash of civilizations” between Islam and the West. It was decided quickly, however, that the project should focus on the relationship of Islam and western democracy and that the relationship of Islam and Christianity was not central to the issue because democracy, rather than any religion, most identified the spirit of the West. It appeared that this issue, a rejection of democracy, was where, if anywhere, mutual incomprehension would eventually explode. The Council added 10 Islam and Democracy the limitation an “inherent” clash to Huntington’s dictum because it was clear that many conflicts can arise in international affairs from purely ephemeral political disputes. The Council decided that a potentially reliable answer to the question might most easily be found in discussions of lay Muslims living in the west with Anglican/Episcopalian congregations in Britain and the USA. The Council also decided that such discussions should be within its competence. Such Muslims, living in Britain and the US, could be expected to be reasonably knowledgeable of the basics and principles of Islam while also cognisant of western thinking and reactions to current affairs. As to both these outlooks, Muslim and westerner, their knowledge would be broad-brush and simplistic and to a degree subconscious but yet reasonably informed, and these factors might result in instinctive and generalised responses. It was therefore decided that one of the Council’s members, Amédée Turner, a lay Anglican member from London, should approach Anglican and Episcopalian parish priests by email throughout Britain and US asking each to invite a Muslim known to them, and local to their parish, to arrange for a group of local lay Muslims to meet with a group of Anglican/Episcopalian parishioners to discuss the compatibility or otherwise of Islam and democracy. Each group would hold three discussion meetings, each lasting two and a half hours in which two of their number would be delegated to make handwritten notes of what was said as the discussion progressed. The notes would not be amended or refined after each meeting. The instigators found that they could, through their various personal contacts with clerics throughout the US and Britain, set up discussion groups of Anglican/Episcopalian church members and their local Muslims. In total, over a period of two years, 38 groups in the US and Britain were successfully set up and discussions recorded. It proved reasonably easy to initiate these meetings throughout the US and Britain by finding, via email, a local priest willing to approach a Muslim in his/her area, and it was clear from the responses of local priests that it was not difficult or uncongenial for them to make such contact with their local Muslims. In retrospect, Introduction 11 however, the experience of reasonably friendly relationships between a local Episcopalian/Anglican priest and a local Muslim was greatly more felicitous and remarkable than we realised at the time. It was not at the time or afterwards precisely clear how many of these first contacts by the priests were with local imams or how many were with local lay Muslims. However, in each case, the local Muslim was asked to get together a group of, optimally, twelve to eighteen lay Muslims. Certainly it was only in a minority, probably a small minority of cases, that imams took the lead on the Muslim side, because there is no indication in the notes taken of any input by an imam. The reason for any lack of certainty over details relating to the set-up of the discussions (called “roundtable discussions”) is that, when carried out, there was no inkling that the results might be remarkable enough to warrant, or indeed call for, their wider propagation. The breadth of coverage in the US and Britain is clear from the list of the roundtable discussions. It is haphazard, depending on the personal contact with the clergy and others involved. It is in fact fairly comprehensive. Only lacking are more groups in the southern US states and in Britain among Midlands heavily Muslimpopulated towns. The lack in Britain is of greater significance than any gap in the United States. Fairly comprehensive written instructions (see Appendix) were sent out to all the conveners of groups giving the guidance to be read out verbatim at the meetings and, though no doubt the conveners studied these, it is almost certain that few were read out in extenso to those attending the roundtable discussions. Nonetheless it is clear from the reports received from the conveners that they had transmitted sufficient of the message of the purpose of the discussions and means to be employed, that all groups in fact produced handwritten notes taken down during the meetings of points made in the discussions and that none were “tidied up” afterwards, and that all the meetings were run on similar lines. Discussion was informal and made mostly of short comments. It was also clear from the records that there was no attempt to reach agreement. This observed our objective, stated to each group, that they should not to try to reach common ground. 12 Islam and Democracy This was specifically stressed in the instructions. Differences of opinion were most certainly, however, less than might have been expected. It appears from the contemporary notes that sometimes a number of those present worked out a common conclusion to one or another point in the discussion. It is clear that some statements by a member were jotted down by one or both recorders, while other statements are longer and were constructed by the discussion group as a whole, or by some of them, during the course of the meeting and taken down by the recorders in handwriting which was not subsequently altered. These records were in handwriting and often on not very tidy scraps of note paper, and normally the notes by the two recorders related to different comments rather than both recording the same point. Differences of emphasis and conflicting views in the records of any one meeting are found, as will be seen when the results are considered in detail. There were vital reservations as to unanimity on certain issues in some records of meetings. The resulting groups of Muslims in Britain and the US were extremely informal and often husbands came with wives and teenage children and the meetings generally comprised business people, engineers, school teachers and students. Precise proportions of each are not recorded. Academics and imams (other than the convener if he was an imam) were not invited. First contact made through imams occurred in only a small minority of cases. School teachers frequently were included. In many of the US and British discussion meetings, there were Anglican/Episcopalian hosts present, it is not exactly clear which statements recorded were theirs and which were of Muslims. However, comments made by the hosts were only intended to prime the pump of the discussions for the Muslims. Thus of the recorded statements, the very great majority were made by Muslims, those of their hosts normally not being recorded. Some discussions in fact in Britain and the US had no non-Muslims in them; e.g. student groups in Boston and London. It was decided that at a later stage there was no need for non-Muslims to attend the discussions. Indeed, subjective consideration of the British and US reports and those made later in Canada and New York seem Introduction 13 to indicate that the Muslim views were more readily obtained without the presence of non-Muslims. Of course a certain amount of pressure had to be regularly applied to keep those involved active in their enterprise. No contact was had with the local conveners except by email, though in the course of time, Amédée Turner met a number of conveners and attended at least one discussion meeting in the US and two or three in Britain. This indicates the remoteness of each discussion group from the organisers. In addition, no group had any contact at all with other discussion groups, or knew of their whereabouts or what they said. The ultimate result was the successful holding of 38 roundtable discussions in the US and Britain each holding three meetings. These meetings involved about 400 lay Muslims. The Report is found at www.muslimgrassrootsinthewestdiscussdemocracy.com. After the first few meetings there was a request from one group that the records should not list the names of those attending, but that they should be identified only by their first name and that the list of those present should simply describe them by gender and occupation and in some cases by “type” of Muslim. The nonMuslims were identified only by gender and occupation. The decision was instigated by a request from a group in the US which said that it feared the results might be seen by national security authorities. This request was agreed to and from then on full names of those attending were not listed and speakers were usually identified by their first name. There seems no doubt, in retrospect, that this procedure had a very positive effect in eliciting a fuller and franker discussion. All the original notes of the meetings have been preserved on the notepaper or loose sheets on which they were made by the two members of each group chosen to take the notes. They were all found in verbatim form. In the Canadian and the continental European reports the quotations are set out according to the discussion notes of the meetings in which they were given, i.e., in the order spoken at each meeting. From the start it was felt that the purpose of the exercise (apart from giving guidance to the Anglican Observer) was to examine the interface between Islam and western democracy and that this interface was to be found (apart from that in academic circles) 14 Islam and Democracy only where lay Muslims lived in a western democracy and so had experience of both the practicalities (rather than the academics) of Islam and the ones of western democracy. It was to attain this objective that their views should be given without the intervention of their imams even in those few cases where one was present at the discussions. It is however impossible to tell what influence the presence of an imam had but there is certainly no indication of any such influence. This result would have been reinforced by the presence of the Anglican/Episcopalian convener. In the US and British discussions in most cases the local Anglican/Episcopalian priest attended as convener with a roughly equal number of his Christian parishioners. The reason for this was that the means of instituting the discussions was via parish priest which was natural in view of the fact that the operation was run under the aegis of the Anglican Observers Advisory Council, and clearly the priests would be primarily concerned to involve their own parishioners in any advantages to be gained in such an exercise. It was certainly felt by the organisers that the active presence of ordinary members of the Anglican/Episcopalian congregations helped a spirit of hospitality and informality for the Muslims. The comments made by non-Muslims appear from the handwritten notes to have been designed only to encourage Muslim participation, to prime the pump of discussion. The student meetings, though they normally had a non-Muslim convener, did not involve Christian congregations because they were not based on churches but on university contacts. Certainly the presence of members of the Christian congregations of the churches involved was assumed to be basic to the objective of the Anglican/Episcopalian clerical convener and therefore fundamental to the project. However in the later discussions, after those in Britain and the US, non-Muslim attendees apart from the convener were dispensed with as being of little significance. The positive benefits of the absence of non-Muslims from the later discussions (apart from the convenor in many cases) only became expressedly clear in October 2010 when in an all-Muslim discussion group in Torino, Italy the following discussion which probably would have not have taken place so frankly if nonMuslims (apart from the convener) had been present: Introduction 15 “I recently read in a famous Italian newspaper that Democracy might be achieved only by “moderate Muslims”. But who are they? I have never met moderate Muslims in my life.” (Torino 2010) “I have heard that moderate Muslims are the ones who pray three times a day instead of five. (Torino 2010)“If they prayed three times they would be almost ok!” (Torino 2010) “Theoretically Islam is moderate in itself, as a whole. It is definitely a moderate religion, but in Italy the situation is different. So many controversial Muslim exponents are defined as moderate Muslims by politicians and the media.” (Torino 2010) “The ones you are talking about are not Muslims at all!” (Torino 2010) “…If you find a Muslim in a disco, for example, it does not mean he is moderate, in fact he is a sinner. Some terms, such as the one we are talking about, have been imposed by Western societies. Even democracy in some cases is something that has been imposed from outside Islam.” (Torino 2010) “I hate moderate Muslims. These are the ones who accept to see their peoples subjugated and their lands robbed and destroyed. Western democracy is not a solution.” (Torino 2010) “Being moderate Muslims means to be sinners. It means to forget Allah to please the westerners…”(Torino 2010) “Anyway the Muslim way to democracy will lead to something that will be different from the Western model of democracy.” (Torino 2010) “Islam is the basis of our life. Islam is everything in the ArabMuslim world.” (Torino 2010) “Islam has its own resources for democracy, the problem is to be able to use these resources with the ruling regimes that are currently subjugating us. Voting is our only way to freedom.” (Torino 2010) 16 Islam and Democracy “Who calls himself moderate, admits that his religion is difficult and unbearable.” (Torino 2010) “Islam has any single answer to any single problem in the texts and in the word of God. One person-one vote is a Muslim idea, it is not something borrowed from the West.” (Torino 2010) The point is then made that “one person one vote” does not guarantee the continuation of democracy, citing Hitler’s rise to power. In this respect Shura, continuing consultation in Islam, as distinct from any specific vote more effectively takes into account opinions and points of view. It is most unlikely that such frank discussions would have taken place if non-Muslims (other than the convener) had been present. The report of this discussion has been set out almost in toto. It is very unusual, being in fact the only discussion recorded in a continuous flow of argument. Normally the reports of discussions appear as individual points with little sequence. Recorded in this manner it acts as a vital illustration that much Muslim discussion starts from totally different launching pads than those which normal thinking in the western world find natural. In discussing the institution of the project, a number of the members of the Anglican Observer’s Advisory Council suggested enlarging the discussions to cover other subjects. The reasons for the selection of each of these varied and were not recorded at that time. Their wide scope indicates that the organisers at the start were not sure that a discussion on democracy alone would be of the greatest significance to the church or would be exhaustive of the basic issues relevant to the relationship of Islam and the west. Though it cannot be recalled, it looks from the selections of the other discussion subjects that clerical members of the Anglican Observer’s Advisory Council were adding their more “socially responsive” and religiously-oriented interests to Amédeé Turner’s more political interest in the democracy aspect. In fact however the roundtable discussions in Britain and the US showed that the subject of “democracy and Islam” alone was sufficiently representative of the interface between Islam and the West to give a clear indication of the basic relationship of the two attitudes. In all cases in the US and Britain the roundtable Introduction 17 discussions took up democracy first, and only when they had satisfied themselves that they had covered all aspects of that issue did they go on to the other subjects. These were treated much more shortly. They are all to be found in the Appendix: the full report of the roundtable discussions in Britain and the US 2004-6. In addition originally, there was a instinctive feeling by the organisers that embedding “Islam and democracy” in a substantial list of other similar subjects might make responses on Islam and democracy less self-conscious. However consideration later when all the results of the British and American reports were re-studied, made it apparent that normally a discussion group said everything it wanted to at the first two and a half hour meeting, and that this discussion of the other subjects altered little. As a consequence thereafter in Canada and on the continent of Europe only one meeting for each group was held. It was confined to the one subject “Islam and democracy”. The Islam/democracy discussions themselves were sufficiently robust, broad-viewed and confident so that the back-up of other subjects, though interesting, added little to the main point, and certainly put a far greater burden on the discussion meetings and their organisation. The report of the US and British discussions is based on the transcription of the handwritten records of the 38 roundtable discussions in the US and Britain on Islam and democracy. Thus these roundtable discussions also approached human rights, respect for the law and the rule of law, globally consistent justice and equity, materialism, cultural specificity, freedom and selfgovernment and civil society. But all the emphasis was on Islam and democracy. In the typescript Report of 2007 a section of “selected key statements” on all the subjects discussed at the meetings covering 23 pages is followed by 56 pages containing all statements recorded. There are 24 pages on “Is democracy compatible with Islam?” These are followed by six pages on Human Rights, five pages on Respect for Law and Rule of Law, six pages on Globally Consistent Justice and Equity, nine pages on Materialism, four pages on Cultural Specificity, two pages on the Freedom and SelfGovernment and two pages on Civil Society. 18 Islam and Democracy In retrospect reading through the comments on the seven subjects, other than “democracy”, it is clear that though quite interesting, they added little to the primary issue of Islam and the west. They represent reactions and views to civic life and its moral aspects experienced by lay Muslims living in the west. When the project was started the organisers could not tell that the other seven subjects would be of comparably little added significance. However it can be seen that these ensured beyond doubt that those attending the discussions truly had said all they wanted on democracy at the start of the meetings before they turned to the other subjects. In addition the mere existence of three two and a half hour meetings of discussions also ensured this. Consequently when it came to Canada and continent of Europe, it was, with the confidence of that prior experience, decided that one subject and one meeting of two and a half hours on Islam and democracy, was sufficient to obtain the full views of all the attendees on the topic. Canada and the Continent of Europe In January 2009 Dr Davide Tacchini, then Lecturer of Religious Studies at the Catholic University in Milan, approached Amédée Turner with the proposal that they produce a book on the results of the discussions in Britain and the US and it was agreed that discussions on the continent of Europe should be added, and, at a conference in London, Ontario in March 2012 an academic attending from Canada offered to organise meetings also in Canada. In these later roundtable discussions in Canada and on the continent of Europe, the conveners were not Christian priests and no non-Muslims (apart sometimes from the convener) took part. Each group met only once for two and a half hours; these changes were based on the experience in the US and Britain. Thus it was clear from experience that a discussion meeting of lay Muslims of twelve to eighteen did not need the incentive of an equal number of Anglican/Episcopalians taking part: indeed it is always possible that their presence could have had distorted the general drift of discussion. Introduction 19 Dr Tacchini in Italy was able to approach students in the universities with which he was connected and to chair their meetings. He held three meetings in Italy in Milan, Piacenza and Torino over the period 2010 and 2011 and one in Seville University in 2012. But it came as a very considerable shock to find how extraordinarily difficult it was to obtain lay Muslim opinions in France, and Spain and at first in Germany too. In Spain in 2012 and in France in 2013 discussion meetings were successfully held, but it proved to be practically impossible to penetrate these countries from the outside. The Catholic Church in France appeared, if interested, to have contact of a formalistic nature with Muslims only through imams, and all attempts through these routes failed ab initio. In France eventually only one meeting in Paris organised by a Muslim assistant of a French non-religious Islamic private foundation succeeded. Two most notable and disappointing failures were young Muslim civil servants in the Paris Arrondisement of St Denis who had seemed genuinely keen on being approached but failed repeatedly over two years to organise meetings. Direct approach to imams in Germany, though willingness was evinced, produced no results. A number of university contacts did their best, and eventually Muslims contacted originally through the German civil service succeeded in getting together two discussion groups in Germany in Bonn, and through quasi governmental and university contacts, another four discussion meetings were held in Frankfurt. Thus though setting up the roundtable discussions in the US and Britain through an Episcopalian or Anglican primarily by means of email contact was relatively easy, it has proved to be very much more difficult, in fact exceedingly and surprisingly difficult, to set up discussion groups in France and Spain. Success in Germany only followed a large number of failed attempts while in Italy Dr. Tacchini’s personal contacts were successful. It is not clear why in France and Spain it has proved so exceedingly difficult to find possible conveners to arrange discussion groups, or why even when agreement has been obtained with a local contact that a discussion group will be held in his/her town. There have been repeated disappointments over the failure 20 Islam and Democracy of these contacts actually to get together a group of lay Muslims to hold a meeting. As mentioned Catholic contacts made by the organisers were not successful and it seems possible that the relationship of Christian churches with Muslims in France and perhaps in Spain was different from that of Anglican/Episcopalian priests in the US and Britain. In Germany, too, it was through university related contacts, but only with the help of the German civil service, not via Christian links that success was eventually achieved. Anglican priests on the European continent, though very widely scattered, have shown considerable potential interest, but they are hard-pressed, being few in number and covering very wide areas, have been unable to help. In Canada, the academic contact has special interest in Muslim issues which enabled her successfully to call together meetings through her own wide personal contacts. In one successful case in Bonn, Germany, the Muslim convener, misunderstanding her instructions, invited lay Muslims from all over Germany to a meeting in Bonn. These Muslims however, as far as can be ascertained from the report, were exactly the same type of attendees as in any meeting of Muslims living locally in the place of the meeting. In other words, they did not appear to be exceptional or leading lay Muslims. Their results were identical to those of other groups. The only observable difference was the great cost of travel expenses in getting them together. It is difficult not to assume that there is some extra barrier to contacting Muslims especially in France and Spain not found in the Anglo Saxon world. Introduction 21 Attendance specifics in the US, Canada, Britain and the continent of Europe It is possible to give certain indications of the Muslims attending the roundtable discussions. They differed somewhat in the different countries where meetings were held. In the US it is reasonably clear from the known background of the Episcopalian-run discussions that the Muslims felt well at home and established in the part of the US in which they lived (it must be remembered also that friendly non-Muslim Americans attended these meetings). They also appear to give the impression of being generally, relatively, economically comfortable and confident. This also goes for students particularly in Boston. The one meeting when economic difficulty and unemployment may have been a slight factor was in Dearborn where the automobile industry predominates, but in fact no differences of opinion here from this meeting were apparent. It is however the fact that, unlike in Britain, Canada and the continent of Europe there were in some cases in the US suggestions of suspicion over the impartiality of the security authorities. There was no indication of such an attitude in the other countries, though in Milan in July 2010 one participant said “Today I have realised the fear that Muslims feel in Italy. Many people do not agree to come here and take part in this meeting, because they are suspicious, wary.” This probably reflected an attitude to Italian, western, society in general rather than suspicion of security authorities reflected in the US. In Britain, although no discussion groups were held in densely Muslim-majority urban areas in the Midlands and the North, so far as it is known, it is probable that the social level of those attending was on average not quite as high as in the US. In Canada, the Muslims were approached through student-related contacts and their discussions were relatively free of social bonds or backgrounds. The same can be said of the Italian groups, these also being primarily university-oriented. In Germany four discussion groups were organised by a teacher of intercultural communications and two more appeared to be relatively individualistically rather than being family oriented. 22 Islam and Democracy They were atypical for Germany only in that Turks were in a minority. The French discussion was of relatively young Parisians. Normally in all discussion groups the Muslims did not identify themselves as to type of Muslim, Sunni or Shia. In the US, there were one or two groups where both Sunni or Shia were reported to be present together, and in their cases, clearly, not the slightest problem arose from this. It is possible that there were undeclared Shia in some British meetings, but there was no indication of this. The same goes for Canada and the continent of Europe. In conclusion, the bringing together of about 550-650 lay Muslims from all over the western world in nearly 60 separate groups none of which had any knowledge of any of the others, could hardly have been more general and non-specific in every respect. From such a set-up as this it might be concluded that no general significance should be expected from the method described above other than an expression of a haphazard range of Muslim views, without any except the most lax indications of the relative commonness of the views expressed. It might be expected that no conclusions as to lay Muslim views in the west apart from their variety and scope could be obtained. In fact however, the homogeneity of their views and total lack of disagreement between any one attendee and another indicates the most remarkable singularity of attitude between Muslims of different persuasions, different national sources, different countries of origin, different countries of residence and over a period of ten years (2004-2014) which included the cataclysmic events of the Arab Spring of 2011. So what have we? Two hundred plus statements by lay Muslims living all over the western world which are practically unanimous in their attitude to Islam and democracy over a period of nine years despite many political developments, and the wide geography of where they live in the West and the very wide original nationality of the lay Muslims; and of course the incidence of the “Arab Spring” in the middle of the investigation. There is no scientific justification for the study because all the meetings of lay Muslims were set up fortuitously. But with the very widespread geography in the western world and the temporal scope, because, and only because, of the unanimity of their views Introduction 23 the results have clear significance, though any academic researcher would throw up his hands at their derivation. All one can do, basically, is to read through the reports. The message is clear and singular. The basic message is just as clear and the variations from it and their relative significance are also clear. The largest group of statements comprises those that find clear affinity between Islam and democracy about a hundred and twenty statements. Next come statements which concern only Islam and do not relate to democracy. About forty show reluctance concerning democracy. Eleven show attention to the imperfections of democracy. Two refer to the practical problems concerning democracy and three state that democracy is not a global concept. Thanks and acknowledgements The authors wish to record the invaluable help given by those who searched out, invited, persuaded to attend and saw to the proper carrying out of all the roundtable discussions. Most unfortunately it is not possible to name any of these organisers of the 38 US and British roundtable discussions because of the passage of time. The authors only hope that these early helpers will recognise their work in the reports, and, perhaps, let the publishers know who they are and their relevance to this report. But those concerned with Canada, Italy, Germany, France and Spain are noted below and the authors wish to thank them very much indeed for their invaluable help in marshalling and encouraging all the members of the discussion groups to carry out the discussions in accordance with the rules laid down. Canada- Dr. Kathy Bullock Germany- Dagdemir and Samet Er France- Sophie Gherardi Spain- Dr. Gracia Lopez Anguita 1. FROM “ISLAM IN THE WEST” TO “WESTERN ISLAM” The importance of living a time of change Millions of Muslims have become, in relatively recent years, citizens of “Western” countries. Other than their being a minority, they experience life in deeply secularized societies. In several areas of the West, Islam is not a religion of immigration any more, and Muslims may neither be considered, nor consider themselves, as foreigners. Muslims share all kinds of public spaces such as schools, workplaces, hospitals, prisons, even graveyards with Christians, Jews, atheists. The Capital cities of the Muslim world are not only Damascus, Baghdad, Cairo, Tehran or Dhaka any more. Cities like New York, Chicago, Detroit, London, Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Lyon, or even Rome must be considered cities of the Muslim world. The Muslim Umma is, now more than ever, an entity that goes beyond ethnic, cultural, geographic and national borders. Furthermore, Muslims who live as minorities in the West enjoy a greater freedom to practice their religion, in comparison to their fellow Muslims who still live in North Africa, the Middle East, or South East Asia. They feel free to experiment, to develop new ideas and approaches to religion and social life. They actually have the chance to reform Islam. Their minority condition, closer to the situation in Mecca before Hijra than to the more structured one in Medina, represents, for Western Muslims, an immense opportunity to shape the future of their religion. The globalizing message of Islam encounters, here at the beginning of the 21st century, the chance for a complete realization of the project that was begun more than 1400 years ago and re-dynamized by several movements in the first half of the 20th century. A new form of 26 Islam and Democracy contextual argument contextual type, is to be applied to an old project, the globality of Islam, in order to reinforce its relevance1. With the increasing number of purpose-built mosques that have been established in recent years, especially in Europe, Islam wants to proclaim itself. Muslims want everybody to know that they are there, active in the society in which they live, that has fully become their own society, too. They do not feel like guests or aliens anymore and they experience the need for affirmation. Muslim religious architecture shows a sort of new style which symbolizes the struggle to marry tradition with modernity2 and to set down roots in the West. This kind of statement (these mosques are actual statements of identity in themselves) may be dared only by Muslims who are confident enough to build stone and glass symbols of Islam’s growing strength. Sometimes these themes are used as tools for political purposes (the so-called Politics of Fear3), but, once again, we can learn from history – in this case it is the history of Islam we should keep an eye on. This process of step-by-step affirmation of Islamic identity in non-Muslim lands was undertaken by early Muslims when they realized they were outside the Arabian peninsula, and countless other times in the history of Islam. Let us think of minarets, for instance, which are still a hot topic, 1 2 3 Maréchal, Brigitte, The Muslim Brothers in Europe, Roots and Discourse, Leiden-Boston, Brill, 2009, p. 14. The heavy, complex and extremely topical issue of the relationship between Islam and modernity is not directly part of this research and there are plenty of recent resources on it. See Fārūq, Wā’il, Kayfa Yumārisu al-Muslimūna al-Ḥadātha wa yarfuḍūnahā fī nafs al-waqt (How Muslims Practice Modernity and Refuse it at the Same Time), in “Proceedings of the International Conference Western Islam, “New” Muslims Between Tradition and Modernity”, Piacenza, Italy, April 21, 2007, Annali di Scienze Religiose, December (2) 2009. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDjmXSEurL0 and following, about American Neo-Con movement, radical Islam and international terrorism. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 27 both in Europe and the USA4. They were not born with Islam, the first mosques did not have a minaret. We can find the earliest minarets in Bosra, Syria (about one hundred miles south of Damascus), between 665 and 705 AD. Omayyads have been the first caliphs to build one, and it is not difficult to guess why. A minaret (as well as, we can say, any purpose-built mosque in Europe or the USA nowadays) is a clear, high, visible statement of the presence of Islam. You need confidence to stand up and openly declare your presence in the public space. This confidence was reached only after the Omayyads had created a solid political structure. Furthermore, the so-called Omayyad civilization must be considered as the result of the meeting between Muslim conquerors coming from the Arabian peninsula and the Syriac world. We must not forget that the towers of Syriac churches in Damascus were used, from the 4th century AD onwards, both as places of worship for the monks and as towers for the call to prayer. Step by step they had become visible signs of the presence of Christianity. Even in Europe, from the 12th century on, in every town, village or neighborhood, churches started being built, with the specific purpose of affirming in the heart of Europe the victory of Christianity. As for the “mosque” there are two Arabic words (Masjid and Jāmi‘, place to prostrate before God and place to gather, respectively); for “minaret” we can find Ma’dhana and Manāra. The first means the place from which to perform the Adhan, the call to prayer, and the second a sort of lighthouse. In the USA, as well as in Europe, we can see aluminum-made minarets, walls with vast windows and openings in the façade, the interior of prayer rooms visible from the outside, etc. These are invitations to prayer for Muslims, but also invitations to get acquainted for non-Muslim fellow citizens. 4 See Haenni, Patrick and Lathion, Stéphane (ed.), Les Minarets de la Discorde, Gollion, Religioscope Infolio, 2009. 28 Islam and Democracy The example of a mosque in Penzberg, Germany, is, in this sense, extremely significant5. Unsurprisingly immigrant Muslim communities are pushing the biggest changes, and the Western mosque is fast becoming the site of contestation between the kind of Muslims who espouse the traditional mosque and those who want to win proportionate space for women, for example6. All this is giving life to a new trend in Muslim architecture. It may look revolutionary, but it is nothing but a physical representation of the change (should we call it reform?) that is taking place in Islam after its becoming a Western religion. Islam is facing challenges, difficulties and problems never experienced before, and mosques are definitely part of the game. Mosques, through history, have been shaped by the land in which they were built. We cannot hide the human side when approaching these topics. Religious architecture, as well as any other issue which involves personal feelings, does not belong to a sacred text, only. It is also the result of an historical and social process (text and context). The new situation of Muslims in Europe allows them to reread, through a contextualized lens. Their sources Islāh (fixing) and Tajdīd (renewal) of course do not mean changing the text but reading it from a new perspective, of a contextual kind. God gave us the Text, the intellectual tools to read it, and a social, political, articulated context to live it. If we separate these three elements (text, reason and context) we would not be able to actually live our religion to the full. Thanks to a generation of thinkers, among which we may choose Tariq Ramadan (the most well-known to the larger public at least until 2016), Mohammed Abid al-Jabri, Mohammed Arkoun and Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd (these last three passed away in 2010) and several others, some important concepts of Muslim tradition have gained a new status, have been considered from a completely different point of view. For example, Shūra (consultation) has become constitutionalism, 5 6 See chapter 1.2, Islam in Europe. Power, Carla, Rebuilding the Faith, p. 52. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 29 Ijmā‘ (consensus) may be read as public opinion, Maṣlaḥa and Istiṣlāḥ (public interest) became seeking the common good and therefore, social justice and equity in the government, but also utilitarianism. Bay‘a is considered as something close to universal suffrage and Ijtihād (interpretation) has been stretched to the limit as freedom of thought!7 Sometimes, “rereading” traditional Muslim concepts spurred by the new condition of minority experienced by Islam in Europe or the USA, might mean going back to the word’s original meaning. Da‘wa, for example, means, literally to summon, to invite, to call. This is the reformation that only Muslims in the West may fruitfully achieve. Since 1990s ulema have been trying to provide guidelines for European Muslims on how to practice their faith while being good citizens. Sharī‘a, for example, is a general and global concept regarding the reading of scriptural sources. It is normative, of course, but it has, it itself, a global meaning. Therefore it enables the believer to fully practice his/her religion in any kind of society and social context. This is even more effective in societies like those in Europe and the USA, which, although secular, guarantee freedom of thought and speech. This perspective may be pivotal in the process of changing any hostile Muslim view of Europe. If Muslims define Shari’a as a global vision, then they will feel part of the Western Society they are living in and accept the ”good” in it as part of Shari’a. When I read the French or any European constitution, there are several articles which are in accordance with my vision of justice, I respect them not only because they are part of the constitution with which I have a moral contact but mostly because they meet a deep 7 Ramadan, T., To Be a European Muslim: a Study of Islamic Sources in the European Context. Leicester, UK: Islamic Foundation, 2003, p. 16 30 Islam and Democracy requirement of my religious consideration. In this way I am integrated at a social level, but I am integrating at a religious level too.8 Another point is that Muslim must differentiate between essential and secondary issues9. Being part of a secular non-Muslim society means dealing with a number of practical issues, too. Muslims should become aware that praying is more important than eating Halal food in Germany. Dealing with these core principles of Islam forces you to realise what is immutable (thābit) and what is changeable (mutaghaya): what is essential (asl) and what is secondary (far’). Western societies, as well as Muslim majority ones, but in a different and much faster way, keep on changing: they are liquid in shape, and Muslims have to deal with this process. The traditionally new environment they are living in forces them to study Islam in more depth. Traditional, normative (when not rural and local) Islam imported from Morocco or Egypt is not enough anymore. All this helps Muslims to develop their rational attitudes toward their environment. Once again, text and context are equally important. The results of the discussion groups that have been organized during the past 14 years confirm all this. As you can see in chapter 4 and reading the statements recorded during the meetings, collected in the appendix, not a single Muslim is against democracy in principle, although the reader finds statements of participation in European societies. European Muslims should be able to promote an Islamic culture as part of Western social structures. They should keep as something precious what, in Europe and the US, is in accordance with the principles of Islam and should respect European values which do not match them. At the same time, they should also be able to fruitfully contribute to the building of modern European societies. The place of Muslims in Europe or their future is no longer an issue, but their contribution to society is what matters now. There are many issues to which Muslims may actually contribute, 8 9 Ramadan, Tariq, ibi, p. 21 See the video: Ramadan, T., C’est quoi l’Islam? Available on youtube at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKG_bDLAVA0 From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 31 for instance plurality of education, intercultural programs or the growing secularization of our societies. Islam is not a religion of immigration for several non-Muslim majority areas of the world. Islam is not to be considered as a religion of immigration, any more, in many “western” countries. According to what we have analyzed above, the time of Islam in the west has made room for the birth and development of an Islam of Europe, or European Islam10. However the issue of migration has played and still plays a prominent role. The importance of migration in the history of religions is also worthy of analysis. In fact migration is present in the depth of the human being, it is part of our DNA. People have always moved from one place to another. Some of us have the opportunity to experience migration physically in our lifetimes, but everyone of us, even if born and raised in the same place, he has in himself the urge for migration. If we go back in the history of our families, even if we were born and raised in the same country/city, we will find somebody at some point, who has come from another part of the world. Furthermore today we are called upon to face challenges that are for many reasons, new, unpreceded and extremely stimulating. In New York City alone, children and boys whose families are from 190 different countries, every morning wake up and take the bus to go to school. Migration is the human face of globalization11. Thanks to the modern means of communication, we live, today, Local Lives in a Global Context. The Big Apple may look like a special example, too particular to be taken into serious consideration. In the schools of many 10 11 See the works of Tariq Ramadan, Tariq Modood, Tareq Oubrou, Stefano Allievi, Juergen Nielsen, Felice Dassetto and others. Keeley, Brian, International Migration, The Human face of Globalization, OECD International, available at: http://www.oecdbookshop.org/get-it.php?REF=5KZC3V3TJC0Q&T YPE=browse 32 Islam and Democracy small cities in Kansas as well as in southern France or Italy or in Leicestershire more than half of the students are not of local origin. The mass media and, frequently politicians when they approach religion, mostly focus on issues such as prophecy, or conversion (they may look more controversial). We are deeply convinced that the importance of migration is pivotal in the three monotheistic religions, too. Migration may sometimes be physical, practical, as we have said, or sometimes rhetorical, metaphorical. Let’s think of Judaism: the idea of Exodus, the migration from Egypt and, as a consequence, the journey to the Promised Land, are the backbone of its origin. Jesus Christ’s life is, basically, a long journey from Nazareth to Jerusalem. Go into all the world and proclaim the Gospel to the whole creation (Mark 16:15). Consider also the travels of S. Paul, or his message. Muhammad’s Hijra from Mecca to Medina is so important that Muslims started counting their years from 622 A.D. The concept of migration itself means to move from one place to another, to change one’s life. And the messages of Christianity and Islam are both, in their origin, messages of innovation, change, reform. Indeed the Latin root on which the word is based (migratio) indicates change and was supposed to be the opposite of conservatio (“conservation”, “preservation”). The process of migration is in all of us. It is very important to consider this when we approach our meeting with the other. Not only our direct interlocutor, but also his family, his friends, his history, all allow us to better understand who we are (the famous mirror effect, theorized by the Algerian sociologist Abdelmalek Sayad12). Our identity is shaped by our relationships with the other, and this other has no fixed or frozen identity. Every relationship or 12 Sayad, Abdelmalek, The suffering of the immigrant, trans. David Macey, Cambridge, U.K. and Malden, Mass., U.S.A., Polity Press, 2004. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 33 dialogue between two or more people is not a dialogue among people, but among multicultural identities. Each one of us is a melting pot of identities, and religion is a crucial point in culture and identity. We have to approach the other in his fluid, dynamic identity, and avoid that identity freezing. My interlocutor has to be the actual one, not the one I have imagined. Both native and immigrants, Muslims and non-Muslims are called to create a Hermeneutics of the other. Hermeneutics here is to be considered as the translation of the Arabic word Ta’wīl, in the way the famous contemporary Islamic thinker Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd used to conceive it. Our societies are changing at a fast pace. There will be no “Us” and “Them” anymore. Muslims and non-Muslims together are building future Western societies. Muslims, especially, are shaping the future of their religion, in a time of change. (…)Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves (…) Qur. 13:11 1.1 Islam and the Mosques of Europe Recently Europe has experienced a record influx of asylum seekers fleeing conflicts in Syria, coming from Sub-Saharan Africa and from Central Asia (Afghanistan and Pakistan). This wave of (mainly) Muslim migrants has prompted debate about immigration and security policies in numerous countries. The Muslim population in Europe (the 28 full member countries the European Union, plus Norway and Switzerland) as of mid2016, estimated at 25.8 million (4.9% of the overall population) – up from 19.5 million (3.8%) in 201013. Even if all migrations towards Europe were to immediately and 13 Stats provided by the Pew Research Center, as part of the PewTempleton Global Religious Futures project, which analyzes religious change and its impact on societies around the world. Funding for the Global Religious Futures project comes from The Pew Charitable Trusts and the John Templeton Foundation. Available online at http:// www.pewforum.org/2017/11/29/europes-growing-muslim-population/ pf_11-29-17_muslims-update-02/ accessed February 19, 2019. 34 Islam and Democracy permanently stop the Muslim population still would be expected to rise from the current level of 4.9% to 7.4% by the year 2050. This is because Muslims are younger (by 13 years, on average) and have higher fertility (one child more per woman, on average) than other Europeans. The refugee flows of the last few years, however, are extremely high compared with the historical average in recent decades, and already have begun to significantly decline as the European Union and many of its member states have made policy changes aimed at limiting refugee flows. Let us think of the shrinking of the arrivals on Italian coasts which has started back in 2017 (2016: 181.233, 2017: 119.369, 2018: 23.370)14. The overall number of migrants in the whole European Union dropped by 25% from 2017 to 2018 and had already decreased by 80% from 2016 to 2017. In 2016, the year of the largest migration wave in Europe arrived 4.6 migrants per 1000 inhabitants considering the EU as a whole, and, country by country, as follows15: 14 15 Source: the Italian Ministry of the Interior. Data available online at http://www.interno.gov.it/sites/default/files/cruscotto_statistico_ giornaliero_21-02-2019.pdf accessed February 20, 2019. Source: Eurostat, the European Union, data available online at https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Migration_ and_migrant_population_statistics. 35 From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” Country Luxembourg Iceland (non EU) Cyprus Ireland Switzerland (non EU) Liechtenstein (non EU) Sweden Austria Denmark Germany Norway (non EU) Estonia Netherlands Belgium Greece United Kingdom Spain Slovenia Lithuania Romania Finland Czech Rep. France Hungary Poland Italy Latvia Croatia Bulgaria Portugal Slovakia Migrants arrived in 2016 (‰) 39.2 26.0 20.4 17.9 17.8 16.2 16.4 14.8 13.0 12.5 11.7 11,3 11.1 10.9 10.8 9.0 8.9 8.0 7.0 7.0 6.4 6.1 5.7 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.3 4.3 3.0 2.9 1.4 36 Islam and Democracy From these data we can easily notice that some of the countries that have, after this year, started policies which aimed at reducing the number of immigrants, such as Italy and Hungary, are among the ones which have been affected less by the phenomenon. Regular migrants, asylum seekers and refugees Migrants: This broad category includes all people moving across international borders to live in another country. Regular migrants/other migrants: People who legally move to Europe for any reason other than seeking asylum – e.g., for economic, educational or family reasons. Asylum seekers: Migrants who apply for refugee status upon entry to Europe. Asylum seekers whose requests for asylum are rejected can appeal the decision but cannot legally stay in Europe if the appeal is denied. Refugees: Successful asylum seekers and those who are expected to receive legal status once their paperwork is processed. Estimates are based on recent rates of approval by European destination country for each origin country (among first-time applicants) and adjusted for withdrawals of asylum requests, which occur, for example, when asylum seekers move to another European country or outside of Europe. In limbo: Asylum seekers whose application for asylum has been or is expected to be denied. Though this population may remain temporarily or illegally in Europe, these migrants are excluded from the population estimates and projections in this report16. While Europe’s Muslim population is expected to grow, Europe’s non-Muslims, on the other hand, are projected to decline in total number. Taken as a whole, Europe’s population (including both Muslims and non-Muslims) would be expected to decline considerably 16 Source: the Pew Research Center. Available online at http://www. pewforum.org/2017/11/29/europes-growing-muslim-population/ pf_11-29-17_muslims-update-02/ accessed February 19, 2019. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 37 (from about 521 million to an estimated 482 million) by 2050 without any future migration. Although we are approaching Europe as a whole, due in large part to government policies, some countries are much more affected by migration than others. Countries that have received relatively large numbers of Muslim refugees in recent years may be projected to experience major changes, if migration will go back to the levels of 2016. For instance, Germany’s population (6% Muslim in 2016) would be projected to be about from 9% to 20% Muslim by 2050. Sweden, which also has accepted a relatively high number of refugees, would experience even greater effects, its population (8% Muslim in 2016) could grow to 11%-31%. By contrast, the countries projected to experience the biggest changes (such as the UK) tend to have been destinations for the highest numbers of regular Muslim migrants. And countries with Muslim populations that are especially young, or have a relatively large number of children, would see the most significant change, even if no Muslim migrants at all came in the next 30 years (France, Italy and Belgium). All this considered, we have to point out that coming up with an exact count of Muslims currently in Europe, is not easy at all. The 2016 estimates are based on Pew Research Center analysis and projections of the best available census and survey data in each country combined with data on immigration from Eurostat and other sources. While Muslim identity is often measured directly, in some cases it must be estimated indirectly based upon the national origins of migrants. As Mid 2016 (the most recent reliable stats available) the total number of Muslims in Europe is estimated to be 25.770.00017, divided as follows: 17 Source: The Pew Research Center, Since they are just estimates, these numbers may vary significantly in other surveys conducted by other institutions. http://www.pewforum.org/2017/11/29/europes-growingmuslim-population/pf_11-29-17_muslims-update-20/ The data of Italy are much higher than any other survey we are aware of. Caritas Migrantes, one of the most reliable Italian source for demographical surveys about minorities puts the number of Muslims in a range between 38 Islam and Democracy Country France Est. no. of Muslims 5.720.000 Germany United Kingdom 4.950.000 4.130.000 Italy 2.870.000 Netherlands 1.210.000 Spain 1.180.000 Countries of origin Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia Turkey India, Pakistan, Bangladesh Morocco, Albania, Bangladesh Turkey, Morocco, Somalia Morocco One source of uncertainty is the status of asylum seekers who are not granted refugee status. An estimated 3.7 million Muslims migrated to Europe between mid-2010 and mid-2016, including approximately 2.5 million regular migrants entering legally as workers, students, etc., as well as 1.3 million Muslims who have or are expected to be granted refugee status (including an estimated 980,000 Muslim refugees who arrived between 2014 and mid2016). Based on recent rates of approval of asylum applications, Pew Research Center estimates that nearly a million (970,000) additional Muslim asylum seekers who came to Europe in recent years will not have their applications for asylum accepted, based on past rates of approval on a country-by-country basis. These estimates also take into account expected rates of withdrawals of requests for refugee status. Where these asylum seekers “in limbo” ultimately will go is unclear: Some may leave Europe voluntarily or be deported, while others will remain at least temporarily while they appeal their asylum rejection. Some also could try to stay in Europe illegally18. 18 1.500.00 and 1.700.000 (https://www.agensir.it/quotidiano/2018/9/28/ rapporto-immigrazione-caritas-migrantes-cittadinanza-italia-al-primoposto-in-europa-ma-273-nel-2017/, accessed Februray 20, 2019). Only countries with 1 million of Muslims or more are listed here. Europe is defined as the 28 nations plus Norway and Switzerland. These estimates do not include those asylum seekers that are not expected to 39 From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” Muslims in Europe are a diverse population. Some Muslims were born in Europe and in a wide variety of non-European countries there are representatives of Sunni and Shia Islam. Levels of religious commitment and belief also vary. Some of the Muslims would not describe Muslim identity as salient in their daily lives. For others, Muslim identity profoundly shapes their daily lives. 1.1.1 Mosques in Europe19 Country Germany France United Kingdom Italy Spain Netherlands Greece Portugal Belgium Sweden Austria Switzerland (non-EU) Denmark Finland Norway 19 No. of Mosques / Islamic Centers 2.600 2.100 850-1500 764 668 432 <400 33 330 >50 >200 Population Muslims per Mosque 81.900.000 65.400.000 61.800.000 60.200.000 46.200.000 16.500.000 11.200.000 10.700.000 10.600.000 9.400.000 8.400.000 1269 1571 2824-1600 1702 1347 2315 625 1312 1364 8000 1500 >100 7.300.000 4000 115 30-40 120 5.500.000 5.400.000 4.900.000 1652 1143 1000 gain legal status to remain in Europe (source, the Pew Research Center, see link above). There are no post-2016 comprehensive studies about the number of Muslims and of Muslim places of worship in Europe. See Allievi, Stefano (Ed.) Mosques in Europe. Why a solution has become a problem. London, Alliance Publishing Trust, 2011, the full .pdf text is available online at: http://www.nef-europe.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ mosques-in-Europe-fullpdf.pdf, accessed February 20, 2019. 40 Islam and Democracy Muslim architecture has been developing for some decades, now. The first purpose built Mosque in the old continent was inaugurated in Paris in 1925. A very significant example of contemporary Islamic architecture is the one of the Mosque of Penzberg, in Southern Germany. Its aluminium made walls and large windows allow everyone what is going on inside. Furthermore, the Adhan (Call to prayer) engraved in the walls of the minaret: It does not call to prayer five times a day, but twenty-four hours a day, without disturbing the (non-Muslim) neighbors20. This symbolizes and emblematizes the situation of thousands of Muslims who live in the West, especially in metropolitan areas21. Penzberg represents an approach to Mosques that is radically innovative. It is a new view of Islam in the public space, within the framework of a plural society. The deep innovations that are being introduced by Muslim architecture in the West may play a prominent role for the future of Islam in Europe. Mosques are nothing but physical representations of identity, an identity that is going through a period of strong challenges. Mosques, their architecture and, more generally all religious buildings have always been deeply influenced by the time in which they were built. Islam has become a fully Western and European religion, therefore a western and European view of Muslim architecture is flourishing22. 20 21 22 Alen Jasarevic (architect) in Power, C., Rebuilding the Faith, in “Time”, April 13, 2009, p. 51. Compared to the Penzberg case, it looks very significant the position of ‘Abd al-Hamīd Kishk, who, in the 80s hoped that the loudspeakers of the Mosque deliver Khutbas (sermons) to the whole neiborghood around the Mosque. (Kishk, ‘A. al. H., Dawr al-masjid fī ’l-mujtama‘ al-Mu‘āsir –the role of the Mosque in modern society- no date – no publisher, pp 48-49. Allievi, Stefano (Ed.) Mosques in Europe. Why a solution has become a problem. London, Alliance Publishing Trust, 2011, the full .pdf text is available online at: http://www.nef-europe.org/wp-content/ uploads/2013/03/mosques-in-Europe-fullpdf.pdf, accessed February 20, 2019. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 41 Between mid-2010 and mid-2016, the number of Muslims in Europe grew, due to migration, by an estimated 3.5 million from net migration (i.e., the number of Muslims who arrived minus the number who left, including both regular migrants and refugees). Over the same period, there was a relatively small loss in the Muslim population due to religious switching – an estimated 160,000 more people switched their religious identity from Muslim to another religion (or to no religion) than switched into Islam from some other religion or no religion – although this had a modest impact compared with births, deaths and migration. By comparison, the non-Muslim population in Europe declined slightly between 2010 and 2016. A natural decrease of about 1.7 million people in the non-Muslim European population modestly outnumbered the net increase of non-Muslim migrants and a modest net change due to religious switching. Overall, regardless of religion or immigration status, there were an estimated 7 million migrants to Europe between mid-2010 and mid-2016 (not including 1.7 million asylum seekers who are not expected to have their applications for asylum approved). Historically, a relatively small share of migrants to Europe are refugees from violence or persecution in their home countries. This continued to be the case from mid-2010 to mid-2016 – roughly three-quarters of migrants to Europe in this period (5.4 million) were regular migrants (i.e., not refugees). 1.2 Islam and the issue of Mosques in the U.S.A. (…) Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote: “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims”. And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States, they have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel prizes, built our tallest 42 Islam and Democracy buildings, and lit the Olympic torch. And when the first MuslimAmerican was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Qur’an that one of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, kept in his personal library. (…) Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average. Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the US government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the Hijab, and to punish those who would deny it. So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. (Barack Obama, President of the United States of America, Cairo, Egypt, June 04, 2009). From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 43 The United States of America, a Nation Made Up by Immigrants Population 325.7 million (2017)23 Foreign-Born Population and Foreign-Born as Percentage of the Total US Population, 1850 to 2007 The term “foreign-born” refers to people residing in the United States who were not US citizens at birth. The foreignborn population includes naturalized citizens, lawful permanent residents (LPRs), certain legal non-immigrants (e.g. persons on student or work visas), those admitted under refugee or asylum status, and persons illegally residing in the United States. According to the US Census Bureau’s 2010 American Community Survey, there were 39,956,789 foreign-born in the United States, which represents 13.0% of the total US population. 23 https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=kf7tgg1uo9ude_ &met_y=population&hl=en&dl=en 44 Islam and Democracy Immigrants from Latin America accounted for 53% (29% from Mexico) of all foreign-born residing in the United States in 2010, by far the largest immigrant group in the Union. Among the remaining countries of origin, the Philippines accounted for 4.4% of all foreign-born, followed by China (excluding Taiwan) and India with 4.1% and 4.0% respectively. These four countries, together with Vietnam (3.0%), El Salvador (2.8%), Korea (2.7%), Cuba (2.5%), Canada (2.3%), and the United Kingdom (1.8%), made up 58.4% of all foreign-born residing in the United States in 200624. 1.2.1 Muslims in the U.S.A. Even though president Obama clearly spoke in terms of numbers (both of Muslims and mosques), since the US Census is prohibited from asking about religious affiliation, these are still hotly-debated issues with political overtones. There are currently several studies claiming between 1.5 and 6.0 million Muslims in the United States. To make up for the lack of solid numbers, different researchers have used different methodologies. A 2001 study titled The Mosque in America: A National Portrait25, reported 6 million Muslims in the United States. But Tom W. Smith of the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago said those numbers were inflated and that in fact, Muslims in the country were 1.9 million. 24 25 Source: the 2007 data are from the 2007 American Community Survey, the 2000 data are from Census 2000 (see www.census.gov). I have the 2010 census data, I am updating it. All other data are from Gibson, Campbell and Emily Lennon, US Census Bureau, Working Paper No. 29, Historical Census Statistics on the Foreign-Born Population of the United States: 1850 to 1990, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1999. Other sources: http://www.migrationinformation.org. Bagby, Ihsan - Perl, Paul M. – Froehle, Bryan T., The Mosque in America: a National Portrait, A Report from the Mosque Study Project, April 26, 2001. Council on American-Islamic Relations. Available online at http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/The_Mosque_in_America_A_ National_Portrait.pdf. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 45 A significant amount of literature is available on this subject but, of course, not all the data are accurate or updated. Internet resources must be taken into account to approach a research in this field. The Pluralism Project at Harvard University provides a wealth of updated information. Estimates It is actually difficult to have precise data about the Muslim presence in North America, especially in the U.S.A. As we mentioned above, the U.S. Census is prohibited from asking about religious affiliation26. It has traced the people’s ethnic ancestry, though, and this may help to construct an idea of the total number of Muslims. The political implications of these issues, especially in the post 9/11 world27 still play a prominent role. Studies and researches can vary significantly in their results. Another factor that may help to figure out how many Muslims actually live in the U.S.A. is the government of Canada. It tracks its population by religious affiliation, and the 1991 census counted 253,000 Muslims reflecting an increase of 263 % in just one decade. If this pattern of growth remained constant throughout the 1990s, Muslims could have reached more than 665,000 by 2002 in Canada. Furthermore in the US, we should consider that the number of immigrants increased rapidly after 1965, when the Congress 26 27 To give an idea of the complexity of the situation: if one assumes that the proportion of Muslim high school students represents their weight in the general population, then by 2000, Muslims numbered 2.8 million of America’s 281 million people. The College Board data, however, may represent an underestimation because more than 17% of the students did not indicate any religious preference. The sensitivity of the question may have led many minority students, Muslims included, not to disclose their faith. The College Board has, by the way, maintained data on the ethnic and religious profile of students. Number of U.S. Muslims Depends on Who’s Counting is the title of an article published on The Washington Post on November 24, 2001. 46 Islam and Democracy abandoned racial and national origin restrictions in immigration laws. The Immigration and Naturalization Service in the US shows that from 1966 to 1980 emigration from Muslim world regions jumped to 865,472. From 1966 to 1980, the average of yearly arrivals increased to 57,698 and in the following ten years it rose again to 99,700, peaking at 131,586 in the past seven years, until 201628. Since the early 19th century, the natural growth rate of the American Muslim population has been much higher than the one of the rest of the nation. On the basis of the College Board29 data, one can assume that Muslims from major American population groups represent roughly 18% of the total Muslim population. Their number, then, could be somewhere from 460,000 to 790,000, which raises the minimum Muslim total to a range of 2,560,000 to 4,390,000 or an average of 3.5 million, representing less than 2% of the United States population30. This wide range of different estimates is analyzed by Tom W. Smith of the American Jewish Committee in his Estimating the Muslim Population in the United States. 31 This study, that should be considered as a counterpart to some “Muslim” surveys, is interesting especially for its analysis of different researches. 28 29 30 31 Data during the Trump administration are not available, yet. An American no-profit organization the main mission of which is to expand access to higher education. It produces statistics annually. Abu Nimer, Mohamed. The North American Muslim Resource Guide: Muslim Community Life in the United States and Canada. New York, Routledge, 2002, pp. 21-22 and 26-27. Smith, Tom W., Estimating the Muslim Population in the United States, available online at http://cloud9.norc.uchicago.edu/dlib/muslm.htm. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 47 Media Estimates Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, the media has used estimates of the Muslim population in the United States of 5-8 million, with an average of 6.7 million or 2.4 % of the total population32. Range of Recent Estimates Over the years 1996-2001 estimates of the Muslim representation in the total population have ranged between 3 million and 9 million. Looking at 20 specific estimates, they spread out as follows: Less than 4 million 4-4.9 million 5-5.9 million 6-6.9 million 7 million + Average of Estimates Number of Estimates 1 2 8 7 2 5.65 million So, at the end of this overview of a multitude of methodologies, researches, results, political convictions and ideologies, we can affirm that statistics may vary from 4,200,000 (Encyclopedia Britannica Online estimate for 2000), to 5,500,000 (2000 World Almanac estimate, based on 1999 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches), to 4,132,000 (2002 Britannica Book of the Year estimate for 2000 -this includes 1,650,000 Black Muslims-) to 2,800,000 (2003 World Almanac) and 5-6 million (2004 World Almanac). 32 This excludes one very high estimate of “nearly 10 million American Arabs and Muslims” (Milbank and Wax, 2001). The eight media reports that were averaged were: Ahmed, 2001, Cavaan, 2001, Milbank and Wax, 2001, Sanchez, 2001, Sandstrom, 2001, Van Biema, 2001, and Vozzella, 2001. Source: Smith, Tom W., Estimating the Muslim Population in the United States, available online at http://cloud9.norc. uchicago.edu/dlib/muslm.htm. 48 Islam and Democracy In the view of the above, we can consider an estimate of 5-6 million as the most scholarly acceptable. The American Muslim community is deeply diverse. Nu‘man’s 1992 work33 put African-Americans at 42%, South Asians at 24.4%, Africans at 6.2%, Iranians at 3.6% of the total Muslim population. Another survey, conducted by Ba-Yunus and Siddiqui in 199934 shows that the two main groups of American Muslims are of Arab (33%) and South Asian origin (29%). That same survey highlightened that Shi‘a, Ismailis, Ahmadis and Druzes are also present in small groups allover the country. Even the largest groups of American Muslims are very different from each other, all these communities have been shaped historically by race and/or class struggles. African American Muslims Chronologically the first Muslims who arrived in the U.S.A. were African slaves and, although at least 10% of the slaves who came from Africa were Muslims35, there is no evidence that any family of slaves which had survived slavery had maintained its Muslim faith. In the early 20th century, some African Americans developed their own vision of Islam. In those years the Nation of Islam and other movements were born36. African-American Islam remained deeply connected to the economic and social history of the Black. Therefore it is part of the development of the so-called Black Nationalism the search for roots and alternatives to White Christian America. Islam is seen as a defense against racism, as a new and separate 33 34 35 36 Nu‘man, Fareed H., The Muslim Population in the United States, Washington, D.C., American Muslim Council, 1992. Ba-Yunus, Ilyas – Siddiqui, Mona, A Report on the Muslim Population in the United States, New York, Center for American-Muslim Research Information (CAMRI), 1999. Austin, Allan D., African Muslims in Antebellum America: a Sourcebook, New York, Garland, 1984. Curtis, Edward, Islam in Black America: Identity, Liberation, and Difference in African-American Islamic Thought. Albany, NY, State University of New York, 2002 and Dannin, Robert, Black Pilgrimage to Islam, New York, Oxford University Press, 2002. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 49 collective identity in the U.S.A. Furthermore, in this analysis, we must take into account that prisons and departments of corrections have been a major recruiting ground for Islam. The early stage of the contemporary Muslim immigration to America The first Muslim immigrants who retained their religion in America were from Lebanon, and arrived in the late 19th century. Mainly poorly educated single men, they settled in major urban areas such as Detroit, Chicago, New York City and Boston. As still happens in some European countries, probably they saw themselves at first as temporary immigrants37. With some discrepancies according to different periodisations, we can say that between 1875 and 1938 Arab immigrants did what their compatriots would be doing in Europe several decades later. Young single men paved the way for their families (family reunions and the arrival of more relatives) and for the whole new Arab population of the United States. The National Origin Quota Act of 1924 and the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 affected the flux of immigrants heavily. Lebanese and Iraqi Shi‘as, minorities in their homelands, are majorities in Dearborn! Interesting and scholarly works on local Muslim neighborhoods and particular situations are available38. Immigrants from British India, mostly Punjabi peasants, arrived in the US in early 1900’s, and their immigration was stopped by federal legislation during and after the First World War. In 1946 the Luce-Celler Act extended citizenship to Indians through naturalization. 37 38 Amghar, Samir - Boubekeur, Amel - Emerson, Michael (ed.), European Islam, Challenges for Society and Public Policy, Brussels, CEPS, 2007, pp. 14, 25 and o. and Abraham, Nabeel – Shryock, Andrew, Arab Detroit: from Margin to Mainstream, Detroit, 2000, Wayne State University Press. Takim, Likayat, Multiple Identities in a Pluralistic World: Shi‘ism in America, in Yatzbeck Haddad, Yvonne, Muslims in the West, From Sojourners to Citizens, New York, Oxford University Press, 2002. 50 Islam and Democracy Relatively homogeneous in terms of socioeconomic class, in 1990, Indians had the highest average family income, per-capita and number of educational degrees among foreign-born groups. 1.2.2 Mosques, Islamic Centers and Muslim Places of Worship in the U.S.A. In statistics about mosques, masjids and other Muslim places of worship, we can find a wide variety of results. A directory of religious centers (mosques, Islamic schools, but also associations and organizations) is available online at http://pluralism.org/directory/results.php?sort=state%2Ccity %2Ctitle&tradition=Islam and shows 1655 results39. Let us look at the situation state by state. State Alabama Alaska Arkansas Arizona California Colorado Connecticut Delaware D. of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana 39 No. of Mosques Population One Mosque or Islamic Center every no. of inhabitants 24 1 11 21 250 20 27 4 19 69 58 1 7 92 21 4,661,900 686,293 2,855,390 6,500,180 36,756,666 4,939,456 3,501,252 873,092 591,833 18,328,340 9,685,744 1,288,198 1,523,816 12,901,563 6,376,792 194,245.83 686,293.00 259,580.90 309,532.38 147,026.66 246,972.80 129,676.00 218,273.00 31,149.10 265,628.11 166,995.58 1,288,198.00 217,688.00 140,234.38 303,656.76 This result may seem to show a discrepancy with the one of the 2000 National Portrait, but here we are considering every Muslim association present in the country, not only mosques, but also Islamic schools, organizations, information and cultural centers. 51 From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming 17 13 21 29 3 43 43 98 21 12 19 2 3 5 4 86 7 147 39 2 57 18 13 49 8 28 4 23 76 9 1 47 42 5 22 2 3,002,555 2,802,134 4,269,245 4,410,796 1,316,456 5,633,597 6,497,967 10,003,422 5,220,393 2,938,618 5,911,605 967,440 1,783,432 2,600,167 1,315,809 8,682,661 1,984,356 19,490,297 9,222,414 641,481 11,485,910 3,642,361 3,790,060 12,448,279 1,050,788 4,479,800 804,194 6,214,888 24,326,974 2,736,424 621,270 7,769,089 6,549,224 1,814,468 5,627,967 532,668 176,620.88 215,548.76 203,297.38 152,096.41 438,818.66 131,013.88 151,115.51 102,075.73 248,590.14 244,884.83 311,137.19 483,720.00 594,477.33 520,033.40 328,952.25 100,961.17 283,479.42 132,587.05 236,472.15 320,740,50 201,507.19 202,353.38 291,543.07 254,046.51 131,348.50 159,992.85 201,048.50 270,212.52 320,091.76 304,047.11 621,270.00 165,299.76 155,934.38 362,893.60 255,816.68 266,334.00 Total 1643 304,059,724 185,063.74 52 Islam and Democracy More than the astonishing number of mosques concentrated in areas such as Chicago, Detroit or New York City, what seems to be more interesting to us are two other factors. The first is that in every single state there is at least one mosque, Islamic center, Muslim place of worship40, or Muslim information center (like in Hawaii). The second is the overall number of mosques in the country compared to the number of Muslims. Even considering the highest estimate of Muslim population (6 million), there is one Islamic entity or institution every 3,651 Muslims (the number drops to 1,625 according to the National Portrait, 40 Smaller mosques or informal and unofficial masjids are very difficult to locate for any survey, so we can expect these numbers to be smaller than actual ones. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 53 which registered 1,209 mosques, but considers only those who are actually involved in the life of the mosque, see below)41. Some Catholic parishes in Italy or Spain serve more people. Compared to identifying personal religious affiliation, finding the mosques and places of worship is easier to achieve. Politics and ideology play their role though in estimating figures, and both data and methodology may vary significantly42. The National Portrait43 Geographically and time-wise, the National Portrait, is the largest and most comprehensive survey of mosques to have been conducted in the United States. It is part of a larger study on American congregations, named Faith Communities Today, which was coordinated by Carl Dudley and David Roozen of Hartford Seminary’s Hartford Institute for Religious Research in Hartford, Connecticut. Telephone interviews of a mosque representative (usually an Imam, board member or president) consisted of over 160 questions on five basic areas of religious life: identity and worship, history, location and building, programs, leadership and organizational dynamics, number and kind of participants. 41 42 43 The precious database of the Pluralism Project at Harvard University provides the “profile” of 124 Muslim centers across the country. See http://www.riseofislam.com/islam_in_america_03.html for a typical militant Muslim “research”. See footnote 3. Despite its being organized in partnership with Muslim institutions and organizations, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Ministry of Imam W. Deen Mohammed and the Islamic Circle of North America, the research committee (Ihsan Bagby -Shaw University-, Lawrence Mamiya -Vassar College- and Mohamed Nimer -Director of Research, CAIR-) developed the research design, the questionnaire and guaranteed scholarly rigor. Dr. Bagby oversaw the data collection. The Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) at Georgetown University did the data entry, and Paul Perl and Bryan Froehle of CARA provided the data analysis and a preliminary report of the findings (Bagby, Ihsan - Perl Paul M. Froehle, Bryan T., The Mosque in America: A National Portrait, p. 1). 54 Islam and Democracy The mosque is defined as an organization that holds Jum‘a prayers and other Islamic activities. Of the 1,209 mosques counted, 631 were randomly sampled for the survey. Interviews were successfully conducted with representatives from 416 of the 631 mosques. Only 2% were founded prior to 1950 (the oldest dates back to 1925 in North Dakota44), and 13% earlier than 1970; 30% were established in the 1990s and 32% in the 1980s. A good 69% of 10-years-or-older mosques have moved at least once since their foundation, and 75% are located in metropolitan areas. African American mosques are more concentrated in the cities, while others, such as Arab and South Asian, are more evenly distributed. 55% of the mosques are owned by the community45, but only 26% of them are purpose built. 15% are rented and 4% are provided by institutions such as universities and private firms. Most mosques are ethnically diverse, attended by South Asians, African Americans and Arabs together. Specially on Friday, in the larger mosques, more than one Jum‘a (and Khutba) is performed, so different groups may attend at different times of day. Only 7% are attended by only one ethnic group. These last data may be misleading. In fact, later in the survey, it becomes a clear that 24% of the places of worship are by 90% attended by one ethnic group. For most of these the dominant ethnicity is not surprisingly the African American one. In some particularly large Muslim contexts, such as Chicago, where two thirds of the city’s mosques are Indian or IndoPakistani, socio-economic status is more important than 44 45 It did not look anything like a house of prayer. It was just a plain building, half underground and half above ground and just plain. They would gather and say their prayers by facing east towards Mecca, Sherman, Bill, in http://www.kfyrtv.com/ home/headlines/North-Dakota-Home-to-the-First-Mosque-Built-inAmerica-303228081.html. As far as their purchase is concerned, it might be interesting to study how the issue of Riba (loan interest) is perceived by the different groups, even though it is not of primary interest for this research. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 55 ethnicity in explaining the location of residences and religious establishments46. In the years 2002-2007 many Indian Muslim medical doctors bought a new house in a better neighborhood, and new mosques have been built recently in areas where Lebanese or Palestinian businessmen had been living for decades. Of the estimated 6 million Muslims living in the United States, more than 2 million are associated with the activity of a mosque. On average, there are over 1,625 Muslims47 associated in some way with the religious life of each of the 1,209 mosques located in 200048. Half of mosques have 500 or more Muslims associated with them. The average attendance at Friday prayer is 292 persons. The number of participants has increased at more than 75% of mosques between 1994 and 2000, and has kept on increasing even more strongly in the following years. Suburban mosques have experienced the greatest increases. It is therefore interesting to observe that 40% of mosque-goers travel more than 15 minutes to reach their mosque49. The comparison between the data of 2010 with the one of the other, more limited survey conducted in 1994 shows that the percentage of smaller mosques remained the same but the number of larger mosques has increased. Over 90% of mosques have had at least one convert to Islam during the past 12 months, and on average nearly 30% of mosque participants are converts. On average every mosque has 16 conversions per year. Other interesting data which would need to be updated are the ones according to which most mosque representatives report that their mosque is spiritually alive and vital (79%), their members are 46 47 48 49 Numrich, Paul D., Recent Immigrant Religions in a Reconstructing Metropolis, New Religious Landscapes in Chicago, in Journal of Cultural Geography 17 (1), pp. 55-76. See footnote 10. Bagby, Ihsan - Perl, Paul M. - Froehle Bryan T., The Mosque in America: a National Portrait, p. 16. Isaksen Leonard, Karen, Muslims in the Unites States, State of Research, p. 76. 56 Islam and Democracy excited about the future (80%). The survey was conducted before 9/11 and it would be very interesting to ask the same questions, now. Only about 15% of mosques are located in states of the Mountain or West regions. The remaining mosques are spread relatively evenly among the East, the South, and the Midwest50. 97% of mosques use English as their main language, or one of the main languages, for the message of the Jum‘a Khutba. The few mosques that do not use English most frequently use Arabic or Urdu, with a translation, or a summarized translation into English following the sermon. As far as leadership is concerned, 81% of the mosques has an Imam, frequently (in about 50% of the cases) he is the leader and spokesperson of the community, too. Both first generation immigrants and second generation citizens are involved in leadership. This trend is still developing, with more young, highly educated American-born Muslims who are working as chaplains in universities, prisons, hospitals, and as mosque leaders51. Turning to gender issues, in 2000, 78% of people attending Friday prayers were men, 22% were women. In more than 60% of the mosques women pray behind a curtain or in a different room. With more and more purpose-built mosques, a dedicated space for women is provided, usually with a separate entrance. 69% of the mosques with a governing body allow women to serve on the board, but in 2000 women were actually serving on the board of only 72% of the mosques who permitted it. Different sources indicate different data, patterns and attitudes towards women’s participation in mosques. Some practices, especially in immigrant and African American environments, are cultural rather than religious52. 50 51 52 See picture above. See www.hartsem.edu. Hartford Seminary still offers the only accredited Islamic Chaplaincy program in the country. McCloud, Amina Beverly, African American Islam, New York, Routledge, 1995, and Dannin, Robert, Black Pilgrimage to Islam, New York, Oxford University Press, 2002. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 57 The issue of women’s participation is still hotly debated within Muslim communities themselves, both because of the actual differences among different traditions and cultures and because of the high impact that this issue has on public opinion. Intra-Muslim debates in the West are heavily affected by nonMuslim perception53. Although it is generally held that women may not be imams, a large number of women is currently working as chaplains in prisons, hospitals and campuses all over the country. Mrs. Mu’mina Kowalski served as associate director of the Islamic Chaplaincy Program at Hartford Seminary, in Hartford, Connecticut (the only accredited program of its kind in the US) from 2006 to 2009 and Canadian born Dr. Ingrid Mattson has been president of the ISNA, Islamic Society of North America until 2010. Despite discrepancies, debates, misperceptions, misunderstandings and political issues which come up frequently, Muslim women’s participation in the public space in the US is not as difficult and controversial as in other western –mainly European- countries. 1.2.3 The New Frontier of Muslim Architecture: Mosques in Metropolitan Areas The urban mosque is undoubtedly one of the most prominent visual expressions of global Muslim religious identity in the USA. Furthermore, since metropolitan Islam in America shows a sort of transnational identity, the mosque itself frequently represents a reflection of a displaced Diaspora community. A range of cultural nuances, traditional styles, modern schemes or even hybrid features are involved in the planning and building of a contemporary urban mosque in a so called non-Muslim country54. 53 54 On the issue of perception and of the importance of the point of view of the opponent, see the works of Tāriq Ramaḍān, ‘Abdullahi Aḥmad An-Na‘īm, Naṣr Ḥāmid Abū Zayd, Muḥammad ‘Ābid al-Jabrī, Burhan Ghalioun, Wā’il Fārūq and others. Kahera, Akel – Abdulmalik, Latif – Anz, Craig, Design Criteria for Mosques and Islamic Centers: Art, Architecture and Worship, Oxford 2009, Architectural Press, pp. 1-17. 58 Islam and Democracy According to an article55 published in an exhibit catalogue put together by Public Affairs Germany at the U.S. Embassy in Berlin and the U.S. Consulates in Frankfurt and Düsseldorf (accompanied by Dr. Omar Khalidi’s photo exhibit Mosques in America) mosques in the United States, are still mostly housed in buildings originally built for other purposes. American mosques built in the last few decades, a period in which Islam has begun to feel at home in America, however, are almost universally architect-designed. Of nearly 1,000 mosques and Islamic centers surveyed in the mid-1990s, fewer than 100 had originally been built to be mosques and, of those, the older ones had not been designed by architects. Many of these simple buildings were meant to be used as cultural or community centers, with such facilities as classrooms, a library, a conference center, a bookshop, a kitchen and a social hall, residential apartments, and in some cases even a funeral home. They had a room for prayer, but they also served as clubs, with a hall for weddings and parties and a basement for bingo games. Islam’s first mosque, built in Madinah in 622, was a simple rectangular structure constructed of palm logs and adobe bricks. The United States’ first purpose-built mosque, completed in Cedar Rapids, Iowa in 1934, was a simple rectangular building of white clapboard on a cinder-block foundation, with a dome over the front door56. Mosques in the US began in houses and storefronts, and when mosques began to be built, their adherents initially wanted them to blend into the landscape. By the end of the 20th century, however, Muslims wanted their mosques to be statements of Islamic identity, for example through architecturally striking minarets and domes57. 55 56 57 Khalidi, Omar, Mosques in North America, in American Studies Journal, 52 (Winter 2008-2009). Available Online at http://asjournal. zusas.uni-halle.de/158.html Khalidi, Omar, Designed Mosques in the United States and Canada, in “Saudi Aramco World” November/December 2001 printed edition, pp. 24-33. Isaksen Leonard, Karen, Muslims in the Unites States, State of Research, New York, Russell Sage Foundation, 2003, p. 73. This book, which is a mainly bibliographical work, provides an immense wealth of information and has been very precious in our research. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 59 The mosque is perceived by Muslims in the US both as a private and a public place. It may be mainly private in the view of some African Americans, for instance, who look at their domestic space as a place to enhance spirituality with other Muslims (and consider the outside as a world of intolerance and racism). The place of worship is, in those views, a physical representation of the concept of self-seclusion and a defense against the corruption of the external world. This feeling is common to many Muslims in the West. Since 9/11 non-Muslims are increasingly being invited into Muslim spaces in America. This helps “non-believers” to know first-hand from the inside a physical representation of Muslim tradition, and should help Muslims themselves against selfseclusion. This “new trend”, that has been spurred by 9/11 and the other tragic events in the aftermath, gave life to a need for greater consideration on the Muslim side, and a need for more knowledge among non-Muslim citizens. A new atmosphere has affected the style and inspiration of new mosques, through which Muslims get creative and stir controversy and debate58. In the 20th century we may single out three main approaches to the building of a new Muslim place of worship and Islamic center. 1. There are mosques that embody a traditional design transplanted entirely from one or more Islamic lands. Examples are the Islamic Cultural Center in Washington, D.C. (built in 1957)59, the Islamic 58 59 Power, Carla, Rebuilding the Faith, in “Time”, April 13, 2009, p. 50. Architecturally it is still one of the most significant buildings that Muslims have built in the United States (it is listed, and thus protected, as a historical American building). It was designed by Mario Rossi, an Italian architect who practiced in Cairo. It took its inspiration from the Mamluk architecture of the capital city of Egypt, together with Ottoman Turkish and Andalusian decorative motifs. The interior furnishings are also a multi-ethnic mix: the wall tiles were donated by Turkey, the chandeliers are from Egypt and the rugs were presented by the Shah of Iran. See: Abdul Rauf, Muhammad, Al-Markaz al-Islāmī bi-Washington (The Islamic Center of Washington), Washington, DC, Colortone Press, 1978. The Albanian Islamic Center in Harper Woods, 60 Islam and Democracy Center of Greater Toledo, Ohio (in 1983), and the Islamic Center of West Virginia in South Charleston (established in 1989). This seems to be a fairly practical approach to a more complex situation. In these cases architects appear also to have disregarded the flexible spirit of Islam (this approach has been used by Muslims and nonMuslims alike), but we should understand that in this context, such buildings aimed to bring back the past, the familiar. 2. Other mosques represent a reinterpretation of tradition, sometimes combined with elements of American architecture. Examples are the Islamic Cultural Center in New York City (built in 1991) and the Dar al-Islam in Abiquiu, New Mexico (founded in 1981). These projects represent efforts to find an image that would please both Muslims and the larger, surrounding society. During the design stage of the project, the Islamic Center of Chicago (ICC) board appointed two advisory committees, one composed of Michigan is another example of transplanted Islamic architecture. Although all Muslims are welcome there, its façade proclaims the identity of its original founders, the Albanian Muslim immigrants of Michigan. From “Islam in the West” to “Western Islam” 61 “prominent members” of the Muslim community in New York, the other of architects, mostly non-Muslims. The debate between the two centered on the image of the mosque. The architects (some practitioners, some scholars) wanted a “mosque that belonged to the 21st century”. The Muslims wanted the designers to reproduce the style of a traditional mosque with literal versions of historic motifs60. After a long and thoughtful debate the two committees agreed on a “modernist” building and (…) because of the mosque’s location in one of the world’s financial and cultural capitals, the architects conceived it as providing a “welcoming image, which includes, rather than excludes the public”. Since its completion in 1991, the mosque has become a landmark in the area61. 60 61 It is interesting to know that David Rockefeller donated a large sum to finance the minaret of this mosque! See Khalidi, Omar, Designed Mosques in the United States and Canada, p. 28. Ibi, p. 29. The Islamic Cultural Center in New York City (built in 1991). 3. The third and more recent trend is characterized by designs that are entirely innovative, like those of the Islamic Society of North America’s headquarters in Plainfield, Indiana, built in 1979, the Islamic Center of Albuquerque, New Mexico, established in 1981, the Islamic Centers of Edmond, Oklahoma and Evansville, Indiana (both founded in 1992). This mosque has been the first to inaugurate a new approach towards Muslim architecture in the United States. Buildings should be expressive and understandable to all. It should employ a form of language that invokes in immigrant Muslims a sense of belonging in their present and hope in their future. To the indigenous Muslims it should represent a linkage with Muslims from other parts of the world and should underscore the universality and unity of Islam. To the new Muslim this architecture should invoke confidence in their new belief. For non-Muslims it should take the form of clearly identifiable buildings which are inviting and open, or at least not secretive, closed, or forbidding62. 62 Ibi, p. 31. The Islamic Society of North America’s headquarters in Plainfield, Indiana, built in 1979. If in some European countries we are still debating if building mosques and minarets should be allowed or not (Italy, Switzerland…), in the USA the strongest challenges are different. The contribution of Muslims in the different social strata of American life, their efforts in order not to be considered as something alien, foreign anymore, but as an indigenous factor, are issues which everyone of us (Muslim and non Muslim) is called to work on. Thus Islam may actually be an active part of America. 2. ISLAM AND DEMOCRACY 2.1 What is “Democracy” to a Muslim? The dominant message of the over 60 discussion groups, spread from California to Germany, is that no Muslim – at any meeting, in any of the countries studied and covering the wide scope of 10 years from 2004 to 2014 (that is, both well before and well after the “Arab Spring” in Tunisia in 2011) – placed democracy with regard to Islam in any position other than that it is merely a pragmatic way of providing government, and that, however good or bad, it bears no specific relation to Islam. Islam is the only absolute and prime principle relating to the life of mankind and to mankind’s relationship to God. Democracy does not impinge on Islam or mankind’s relationship to God and thus the conclusion is that there is no clash of civilizations. Not a single Muslim at any stage in any of the discussions said that democracy was incompatible with Islam. There are a few stray, but not central, statements suggesting that if democracy is to be regarded as the heart of human life and displacing God it could be incompatible with Islam. But these were scattered and undeveloped. By some Muslims, democracy was condemned for not working, but by none for being unworkable, and never for being incompatible with Islam. Now, it is very well known of course that there are absolutist Muslim views which hold that democracy is incompatible with Islam, particularly in Muslim academic and clerical circles and now increasingly among openly anarchic and violent sects. But a trawl of six or seven hundred lay non-academic Muslims in over 60 locations in the democratic West does not once reveal this view. It is clear, however, that at least in one meeting, as 66 Islam and Democracy already quoted above, those attending realised that they were selfselecting, and that this would colour any conclusions that could be reached. “Today I have realized the fear Muslims feel in Italy. Many people did not agree to come here and take part in this meeting, because they are suspicious, wary.” (Milan 2010) The views of the lay Muslims as to the efficacy of democracy ranged from its being the best form of government (Dearborn II), to East London students who said that in theory democracy sounds good but in practice it has many flaws. It can be said to express of the will of the people, but this is not what happens… MPs do not necessary reflect the views of the people… Democrats of western governments are good at creating myths and illusions. This statement was made when the 2003 Iraqi war was being debated in the House of Commons. It condemns democracy in Britain for failing to represent the people’s views in practice, not for being wrong in principle as a means of government. Of course it is obvious that had the question been “are Islam and Christianity compatible?” the answers would have swung from “obviously not because they believe different things”, to a rainbow of views on the degrees of compatibility and incompatibility of the components of belief of each religion, identifying features of each which were considered compatible or incompatible with the other. It may very well be that to many Muslims this issue and the measuring of their compatibility or incompatibility is the major world issue that they would wish to see debated, and they would wish to take part in such a debate. But it is not the question they actually debated. It is however clear that conflicting views, specifically arising out of the differences between the two religions, Islam and Christianity, would not nowadays be the cause of war, because the nature of modern Christianity, and its adherents, at any rate Christianity as known in the west, could never be the cause for war so far as Christians are concerned. Only in Africa, it would seem, is war between Christians and Muslims over religion a possibility, and indeed an actuality. But the Christians involved there do not form part of the Christian west. Islam and Democracy 67 However, religiously-motivated wars between Muslim sects, for instance Sunni and Shia or between Muslims and Hindus, are not only entirely possible, but are actually taking place at present. Naturally, wars between the west and Muslim countries for nonreligious reasons are in no way ruled out. But they would be irrelevant to the views of Muslims living in the west. Thus the only remaining possible casus belli relative to Islam in the west, other than conflicts relating to trade, the economy or territory, could be a conflict over the principles of western democracy and the principles of Islam. But on this issue the reactions of the lay Muslims in the discussions were quite clear: noone mentioned the western adherence to democracy as providing any possible ground for military conflict, because democracy is a mere pragmatic form of government which does not approach or challenge the ideals of Islam. And from the western Christian point of view a war over Christianity is no longer a possibility. One point at issue remains. Professor Samuel Huntington of Harvard referred to “a clash of civilisations”1, meaning that the civilisation of the west must clash with that of Islam. This would mean that a civilisation based on western democracy and one that is based on Islam must clash. In the discussions we added the word “inherent” to “clash”, which is clearly what Professor Huntington must have meant, because any issue can cause a military clash however inconsequential, but the only clash in the context that is relevant here would be a clash inherent in the character of modern day western democracy and that of Islam. None of the discussions accepted this. Secondly we narrowed Samuel Huntington’s dictum to “western democracy”, rather than “the west”. It is helpful to define what he must have meant by “the west”. If it is not religion, which surely he cannot have supposed to be the essence of the west. The essence of the west must be its democracy, the difference between the political way of life of the west and of the political ways associated with Islam. Mere economic interest or possible territorial claims he cannot have meant. He must have had in mind 1 Huntington, Samuel, Islam and the Clash of Civilizations, in «Foreign Affairs» 72 (1993). 68 Islam and Democracy some radical civilizational difference. He had in mind a clash of principles such as between the political system of the west and the governmental systems found in Islam. Thus by “Islam” Huntington must have meant those countries in the world where Islam is the basis of public life. Many of these have various degrees of democratic government (though of course with grave differences in practice). The leading examples are Turkey, Tunisia, Indonesia, and Malaysia with misplaced expectations in Pakistan. 2.2 Clash of Civilisations Professor Samuel Huntington proposed in 1993 in his article ‘The clash of civilizations?’ that the future conflict of a global nature would reflect contradictions between civilisations. He designated civilisations as the greatest distinguisher between nations. He referred particularly to Western, and what he called Confucian and Islamic civilisations, but also to Japanese, Hindu, SlavianOrthodox, Latin American and “possibly” African civilisations. He wrote that the conflicts in the future would be largely between these civilisations. He said that civilisations are “differentiated from one another by history, language, culture, tradition and, “most important,” religion. He concluded that fault lines between the civilisations would be the battle lines of the future. All this, once Samuel Huntington has said it, is rather selfevident. There are great and deep differences between people with different histories when the histories originate from different human political systems. In some cases, for instance Christian roots and Confucian roots, the different histories may not indicate the likelihood that conflicts which might arise between them on, say, territorial conflict issues would be likely to be augmented additionally by a civilisational clash, but rather that, though they are very two different civilisations, the clash would only be over some economic or territorial issue. Thus if hostilities broke out between the west and China or Russia or between Russia and China, the clash would be primarily economic or territorial. Yet it is commonly assumed that a clash between the west and Islamic nations wherever it arose would be a clash of civilisations. Islam and Democracy 69 This is, however, by no means necessarily the case. War over frontiers in the Middle East would almost certainly be caused by mere differences relating to territory or populations. If it were to be said that a local war in Syria, Lebanon, or the Persian Gulf, in which western countries were involved, were civilisational, then that would be an overdramatic and inaccurate characterisation. On the other hand, wars in Africa between local Muslim and Christian forces, perhaps joined in by western countries, could be said to be civilisational. The same would be true in the Indian subcontinent or (unthinkable) between Turkey and the west. Thus there are clearly cases which can be envisaged involving western conflict and Muslim forces which should be characterised as clashes between two civilisations. But not all such clashes. The question arises however, why are some clashes envisageable between the west and Islam to be classed as clashes of civilisation when potentially a far greater conflict, for instance between the west and China or Russia are not civilisational? In the case of Russia this is clear although the differences between the Russian way of life and the west are obvious, they are not great. Russians appear to value even the rudiments of democracy far lower down the scale, while its importance is primary in the west. But in so far as Russians value democracy they do so for the same reasons as does the west. This may explain why a western/Russian war would not be characterised primarily as civilisational. In contrast, on the other hand conflict between Soviet Russia and the west in the years 1947 to 1989 should clearly have been regarded as civilisational. In the case of China, appreciation of democracy and respect for individual rights may be low or nil, and it is possible or probable that moral precepts for private living are different, but is there any other feature of China or the west which is basically inimical to the other? These differences are not likely cases of casus belli. Westerners may assume moral precepts that are not insisted on in China to the same extent, and it may be that the Chinese see in the west a serious lack of personal and family loyalty, though we know so little of them that we hardly know how to articulate the point. But these differences would not be the casus belli in the event of hostilities. 70 Islam and Democracy Yet when we come to Islam, civilisational differences are at once assumed. There must be something in this. The relationship of man and God is probably not (at any rate in the present day) regarded as basically different. Historically and theologically the religions of Christianity and Islam are very similar and confessedly have many, even most tenets in common and from common sources. The actual differences of belief are largely confined to the difference of view over the nature of “one God” or “one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit”. But for Christian priests the least easy sermon of the year is that on Trinity Sunday when the Trinity of the “One God” has to be unravelled. The divinity of Jesus, which is a specific aspect of “one God and Trinity” is striking, but is it reason to declare that Christianity and Islam are civilisationally different and incompatible? Muslims probably do answer “yes” to this but Christians would not give the issue such priority. Yet if any political, acrimonious truly basic differences exist in the human race, they are assumed to be between Christianity and Islam. What can it be then? There is no deep chasm here and now between the two beliefs and even less between the practical human behaviour each calls for. Surely the answer must be the long and powerful history of their protagonism, the thirteen hundred years of fighting, are all to do with the assumption that there is something in principle to be fought over, an incompatibility, not just a difference of interest and territory. And this we call a “clash of civilisations”. It most certainly is not a clash of civilisations according to modern thinking on the western side. The difference is that the Christians no doubt feel there is something lacking in the fullness, and the elaboration of the religion of Islam; and much more strongly Islam objects with all its intellect and emotion to the concept of the Trinity through the divinity of Jesus. But above all the west has the overbearing realisation that religion cannot in this century be said the motive-spring for war. On the other hand this is certainly the motive spring for Islam. And so one has to question whether conflict between Islam and the west would be by common consent regarded as civilisational rather than a war over interests. It takes two to tango, and if one Islam and Democracy 71 considers that there is no civilisational difference while the other regards it as civilisational, is that a clash of civilisations? Regardless of all these extensions to the Samuel Huntington thesis, the question in all the lay Muslim discussions of the Project was put “is there a clash of civilisations between Islam and democracy?” And in all cases the answer from the lay Muslims was “No”. The lay Muslims in the discussions found no incompatibility between Islam and democracy. They might well have found that there was incompatibility between Islam and Christianity and even between Islam and the west whatever they considered the “west” to be. We cannot conjecture. But between Islam and democracy no clash of civilisations was found by them. The reason which we have conjectured for this result is that the Muslims in these discussions did not consider “Islam” and “democracy” on a similar footing. Any views on democracy were held alongside and regardless of the primacy of Islam. Democracy was not a principle to be weighed against Islam. All views on democracy were pragmatic: “Did it work?” and “How well?” These questions were irrelevant to the nature of Islam. Samuel Huntington (page 41) said, “…Kishore Mahbabari suggests that in the future there is likely a conflict between “the West and the Rest”2. But this lumping together of Islam, Hinduism and China against the West can hardly be helpful: the potential for clash between any of these cultures themselves, is as great or greater, as the potential for a clash between western democracy and any others. 2.3 The Relationship of Democracy to Islam For the purposes of the roundtable discussions democracy was defined as basically, and as simply as possible, and in a manner wholly understandable and acceptable to ordinary lay non-political Muslims. The definition was 2 Huntington, p. 41 72 Islam and Democracy • one person, one vote • not one person, one vote, one time • secret ballot • the government to follow the views of the majority • protection of minorities Now, of course, a lot has been written of the inadequacy of considering issues of democracy solely in relation to a simple mechanistic electoral formulae while ignoring attendant issues such as civil society, effective rule of law and protection of personal rights of all kinds. But the five conditions for democracy stipulated for the roundtable discussions clearly made sense to those attending them. This is borne out by the coherence of the responses to the subjects discussed in the meetings. The simple definition of democracy employed in all the roundtable discussions turned out to serve it purposes as well after the Arab Spring as well as before. Developments in Middle Eastern countries since the inception of the “Arab Spring” have been most notable; but more notable and in fact has been of the failure in the attempts at democracy in Egypt since 2011, and the apparent shortcomings of the democracy practiced in Turkey under the more recent leadership of the President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. These are counterbalanced only by the acceptance in the successful negotiations for the implementation of a practical form of democracy in Tunisia and of the need for social cohesion and compromise. These all underline the importance of the societal underpinning of democracy needed for its success and have led to aspersions being cast in academic circles on primary reliance on the outward indications of democracy, the secret ballot, one person one vote etc. However to the lay Muslims taking part in the roundtable discussions there appeared to be no call for a more deep-rooted definition of democracy than that of the five rules they were given. In fact, as it turned out eventually, the Arab Spring produced no watershed whatsoever in the lay Muslim roundtable discussions which took place after 2011. This is itself remarkable and of significance for the development or lack of it in the ten years 2004-2014. Islam and Democracy 73 Despite the lack of watershed in the roundtable discussions caused by the events of the Arab Spring, the discussions before it and those subsequent have been kept separate in this report. The Muslims said the same before, during and after, but in entirely different circumstances. The lay Muslim statements in the roundtable discussions clearly showed that Islam is first and foremost considered to be the essential framework for Muslim human life, and this means that God, and man’s relationship to Him, are the main-spring of human life first on earth, and then in the future life in heaven or hell. Therefore the question for a Muslim is what is democracy’s relevance to, and relationship with, this life-and-death view. It is clear from the responses that Islam is the controlling factor in the light of which all other principles and practices relevant to human life and death are to be seen and measured. Democracy is merely one such practice (or what many, or presumably most people, in the west would call a “principle”). Democracy in the Muslim context is not a stand-alone principle but a mere way of “doing” government. The practical nature of such government is described many times in the notes recording comments made in the roundtable discussions. Collective decision making, i.e., compromise or a coalition of views is to be stressed. “Thus if democracy provides a means by which to make decisions collectively then it appears to be compatible with Islam. Many Muslim scholars say that western democratic values are the same as traditional Islam, Justice (‘Adl), Right (Haqq), collective decisionmaking (Shura) and Equality (Musqwat). None of the Muslims at this discussion believe that secular rather than God-given laws were sinful.” (Boston II Students 2004/5) Democracy is a method of decision making, but keeping within the principles of Islam is required. “Democracy is part of Islam but principles are dictated in general in the Qur’an rather than written by people.” (Savannah 2004/5) 74 Islam and Democracy “Even the Government should be chosen by the people, not by parliament, according to Islam. The Parliaments we can see nowadays are a western invention.” (Milan 2010) “The majority of people is what really matters, if somebody is chosen by the parliament, it may be a fraud.” (Milan 2010) “According to Islam democracy should be in full swing in this world. Democracy is part of Islam!” (Milan 2010) “According to the Qur’an and the Sunna democracy is necessary, but practically, Muslims, because of their poverty and illiteracy did not fight for it and did not push Islam forward towards the application of the great examples of democracy we can find in the Qur’an. Theory has not been put into practice.” (Milan 2010) “Shura, for example, is pure democracy.” (Milan 2010) This of course is not so because Shura depends on discussion and though no doubt the numbers of those on any side count, they are not necessarily determinative as in democracy. “Even normal people like us should give their contribution, not only leaders.” (Milan 2010) “Nowadays, in the West speaking of Islam is like speaking of mafia, of crime. Italian children, after September 11, have been trained to consider Muslims as terrorists.” (Milan 2010) “The idea of majority, and not unanimity is at the heart of Muslim history. Abu Bakr had been elected by the majority, not unanimously.” (Milan 2010) “The parliament represents the people, therefore it may vote for the government. The majority of the parliament is the majority of people. So laws too should be approved by the majority of the parliament.” (Milan 2010) “Any change comes with pain. The road to democracy is extremely long, Muslim peoples are not ready.” (Torino 2010) Islam and Democracy 75 “Ignorance and these regimes are the main obstacle to the development of a modern Muslim way to democracy. We need a modernization of the idea of Shura, that is the most complete form of democracy ever invented in the history of the world!” (Torino 2010) “Islam has its own resources for democracy, the problem is to be able to use these resources with the ruling regimes that are currently subjugating us. Voting is our only way to freedom.” (Torino 2010) “In modern times Muslim people have been ruled by tyrants, once we get our freedom, democracy in its purest way will flourish.” (Torino 2010) “Muslim democracy (Shura) is more perfect that one person-one vote. Shura is consultation, it takes into account any opinion or point of view of any citizen.” (Torino 2010) The greatest fear and danger of the discussions has always been, for the organisers, the fear that the undemanding minimum requirement of Shūra, that is, simply and only consultation before decision with its flexibility, indeed, obscurantism, will divert Muslims from facing the rigours of one person one vote and the other pragmatic requirements of democracy. There is no doubt that stressing as the theoretical basis for democracy the sovereignty of the people immediately antagonises Muslims as it strikes at the sovereignty of God. Thus all the usual theoretical or ideal identifications of democracy immediately run into instinctive and basic Muslim objections. Westerners in addressing Muslims might make more headway if they attended primarily to the pragmatic purposes and methods of democracy rather than the dry principles. Such an attitude would probably tend to be more comprehensible to and inherent in Britain where there is no written constitution and therefore no written definition of the purpose or even the nature of government. Such an emphasis on practicalities would probably be more attractive to Muslims than accentuation of basic theoretic principles. Though the expression has not been heard for a number of years, there was a time in Britain when advice against “rocking the boat” would be the standard warning to indicate that a politician was getting too close to undermining the unwritten rules of the 76 Islam and Democracy constitution by suggesting short-cuts to overcome accepted norms, sailing too close to the wind. This attitude necessary for pragmatic reasons in Britain where there are no written constitutional rules is in fact completely in line with a Muslim pragmatic employment of democratic methods. To “sail too close to the wind” is to threaten the unwritten understanding of what is appropriate in government. It contrasts strongly with the attitude in the US where meticulously written constitutional rules are designed to protect democracy, but which invite politicians to take what advantage they can within the literal scope of the written text. This is seen at the present time in US politics where there is a tendency among some radical Republicans to use every constitutional tool available to upset what one might call the democratic government, to show pride in newly thoughtout means to do this without infringing the written constitution. Unwritten constitutions are interpreted leniently. However, it may be hoped that the US extreme legalistic approach would not be welcomed in western European democracies though they have written constitutions. In Germany, partly because of its political history it is essential to lean over backwards to be reasonable. In France under the Fourth Republic there has been no temptation to over-step the constitutional mark because the constitution itself gives such scope to the President that this is hardly necessary. But in the US strong-arm tactics are common. Nonetheless usually in the event in the US the results are the negation of action, with little positive in the way of government action being achieved. In Canada, Australia and New Zealand it is inconceivable that US-style, political-constitutional shenanigans would be accepted, possibly because their constitutions are relatively young, and thus more frangible, but also possibly as an indirect inheritance from the British practice of muddling through. With regard to all these western tendencies it is clear that Muslim democracies would instinctively shy away most strongly from the US example. Indeed the Muslim quotation from Savannah (above) specifically speaks against a constitution written by men. 3. COOPERATION, CONCILIATION, COMPROMISE Muslim democracy must not be based on the sovereignty of the people, but on decisions made in a pragmatic way within the confines of Islam and this of course leads to collective decisionmaking and to compromise. Thus, there is a stress on coalitiontype behaviour. “Democracy is not incompatible with Islam. Islam is not antidemocratic. Provided democracy is seen as a limited form of popular sovereignty, restricted and directed by God’s law, it is compatible with Islam. Secular western democracy is not compatible because it is based solely on the sovereignty of the people. Popular sovereignty is rejected completely because Islamic states should be based on consultation or Shura (interpretation of Sharia) and this is all-encompassing so humans cannot create their own legal system beyond the Qur’an and Sharia. Elections equate to blasphemy. When Muslim politicians and spiritual leaders say Al-Islam Huwa al-Hal they are saying that Islam is the solution to everything. To those who believe this, Islam is better than democracy. Yet the Qur’an does not offer an ideal political system. It praises collective decision-making for the common good, the Qur’an elevates collective decision-making from a recommendation to a requirement.” (Boston II Students 2004/5) When the speaker states “elections equate to blasphemy” it is clear from the remainder of the statement that the distinction meant is between the concept of elections expressing a principle rather than merely aiding pragmatic government. Standing back from this statement, it is clear that there is an underlying reliance on cooperation, conciliation and compromise rather than the tyranny of a majority. In Britain and France, a 78 Islam and Democracy tyranny of the majority does exist. In the USA, this is prevented by the checks and balances in the Constitution. In Germany, because of its political history, there seems to be a conscious desire for compromise above all. In many of the remaining European countries multi-party coalitions are endemic. In Britain and the old Commonwealth there is a tacit acceptance that there are basically two national viewpoints and that each mindset, because of the political swing of the pendulum, has to have a reasonable crack of the whip. But at present in Britain all generally accepted rules of normal behaviour and compromise are upset by the uncontrollable and unpredictable forces released by the struggle over Brexit. An interesting Muslim reaction to the pendulum of politics is “You cannot have true democracy without justice and justice is a fundamental concept in Islam. Democracy is the most contested concept in history and one person one vote cannot be the solution because if 60% agree on sex before marriage and 40% don’t, they become suicide bombers.” (Central London I 2004/5). This is the only statement advocating undemocratic responses to a democracy which exceeds the bounds of a Qur’an. The Speaker takes a snapshot view of politics and sees one party in majority and all-powerful, and the other party out; but he/she fails to see the whole picture, that next year the other party will, traditionally, be in power. 3.1 Muslim Pre-requisites There is a Muslim pre-requisite that Islamic (God’s) law shall be obeyed, and it is within this limit that democracy must operate. Indeed the second quotation below presumes that the guidance of the Qur’an will be willingly and inevitably followed; “Nothing contrary to Islam shall happen.” (Leicester 2004/5). “Government not going against views of elected representatives means operating within the spirit of divine guidance of the Qur’an.” (Minneapolis 2004/5). Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 79 “Many Muslims feel that democracy is compatible with Islam provided the person in power implements God’s laws. Extremists are not representative of Islam. How would an Islamic country be governed? Religion would be used as a guideline and new laws enacted to deal with new problems.” (South London I 2004/5) “Islam always is to hold to the concept of balance.” (New York I 2004/5) 3.2 Pragmatic Consultation In Islam The lay Muslims did not attempt a definition of Islam, and this would have not been relevant to their discussions, but aside from the principles of Islam, they did describe and consider the pragmatic procedures employed in Islam to conduct government. The prime requirement is consultation, and grafted on to this procedure in many cases is the attainment also of consensus arrived at through consultation. In itself consultation only requires discussion by rulers with the ruled before the former make their own decision over which, apart from having given their opinion, the ruled have no further say. This procedure is illustrated in some passages of the Qur’an in respect of Muhammad’s rule in Medina in a time of war. Consensus on the other hand requires recognition of the importance of the majority opinion on the issue under discussion. The underlying implication certainly appears to be the requirement of a general, if not, universal consensus on any issue. This would exclude decisions by a tight majority. It is this requirement for consensus which has recently been emphasised by some Muslim politicians and commentators on government affairs, notably since the overthrow of President Morsi’s government by the Egyptian military machine; the implication being that government by Morsi and his advisers in putting choices of policy out for general discussion was doing too little to demonstrate consensus. Some views hostile to the Muslim brotherhood and Morsi’s government complain that there was no coalition government including secular and liberal opinion. However it seems clear from press reports at the time of his premiership that the other political interest had rebuffed what 80 Islam and Democracy he had offered in the way of informal invitation to coalition. And since his overthrown all pretense at consensus has been abandoned. Somewhat ill-tempered actions and reactions gave rise to more use of the term “majoritarian” which in 2013 became a term of opprobrium indicating government by a parliamentary elected majority, on a first-past-the-post system such as that which has elected the AKP government in Turkey over the past dozen years and in the Turkish elections since 2014. The Muslim brotherhood government of Morsi, leader of the Freedom and Justice Party, was criticised justifiably or not on the ground that it did not welcome non-Muslim Brotherhood views and representatives into the Egyptian government. The Turkish government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan after some eight years of AKP government is acting in an authoritarian way. A notable example was Erdogan’s intemperate reactions to the Gezi demonstrations in Istanbul in the summer of 2013. Subsequently in December 2013 and the following months, Erdogan repeatedly took a verbally highly outspoken and authoritarian stance on successive issues. There have naturally been hostile reactions to strong-arm tactics in Turkey, and it must be stressed that similar “strong” government in western democracies is only acceptable because it goes hand and hand with public confidence in a constant swing of the pendulum between parties. This is totally absent in modern Turkey. The forcefulness of government in the west would be unacceptable to their electorates if this were not so. Among Muslims only Ghannouchi of Tunisia recommended majoritanism both in the discussions in Tunisia and at the annual Davos conference 2014. In Egypt in relation to Morsi and in Turkey in relation to Erdogan majoritarianism was attacked by their political opponents. The Importance of Consensus Long before these negative post-Arab-Spring developments in Egypt and Turkey, evidence of the support for a consensual attitude was quite clear from the 2004/5 roundtable discussions of British and US lay Muslims. The opposite concept of “majoritarianism”, Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 81 i.e., government by bare majority regardless of the minority opinion was deplored. “In Muslim politics there is a tradition of trying to achieve consensus after consultation in the community.” (Wimbledon 2004/5) “Islam is to do with how you get the sense of the people, how are their interests and needs represented, and all of them not just the majority.” (Boston I 2004/5) “Stress importance of community and consultation persisting until a common policy is arrived at. This gives a greater sense of community.” (New York I 2004/5) “Islam has the tradition of direct consultation. Before trying to organise democracy.” (South London I 2004/5) “Islamic legacy of governments is participatory and may be informal.” (New York I 2004/5) However Bury St. Edmunds pours some cold water on this enthusiasm. “There is a gap between ideal and reality and always has been with regard to Muslim principles of consultation.” (Bury St. Edmunds 2004/5) An important assumption is made by some discussion groups that Muslim MPs would naturally conform to Islam by following the guidance of the Qur’an. This reliance on such norms underlines the importance of consultation and conciliation. “Government not going against views of elected representatives means operating within the spirit of divine guidance of the Qur’an.” (Minneapolis 2004/5) “I look at democracy through my faith (Islam). I agree within the Muslim context. Laws should agree with the Constitution; the Constitution is the Qur’an which sets the legal tone. Islamic law is strict (Christians have more choice). Discipline, basis moral codes, respect. Democracy is an evolving thing and can be improved. Nomocracy.” (Dearborn I 2004/5) 82 Islam and Democracy “The Qur’an does not offer all the integers for an ideal political system, hence the legitimacy of attempting to find the best solution, while praising collective decision for the common good (Qur’an 42:48). Hence the Qur’an elevates collective decision-making for the common good from a recommendation to a requirement (Qur’an 3:159).” (Boston II Students 2004/5) “Muslims decide by debate and discussion and the majority view prevails.” (Bury St. Edmunds 2004/5) “We need a modernisation of the idea of Shura that is the most complete form of democracy ever invented in the history of the world.” (Torino October 2010) “A very educated man told me a few years ago that democracy is a western deformation of Shura, and that the last time in Islam one had actual democracy it was at the time of the Prophet. Let us keep this in mind and moderation would not be an issue anymore.” (Torino October 2010) 3.3 Politics and Governance in Early Islam Returning now to basic attitudes to democracy, lay Muslim views in the roundtable discussions as to the utility or practicality of democratic means of governing ranged from “probably the best form of government” at one extreme to the other extreme, asserting that democracy is unacceptable in practice because it does not work. This is an entirely a pragmatic attitude to the question of government, not a suggestion that it is wrong in principle. Consultation and consensus provide the most instinctive basis for government in the context of Islam, possibly echoing the common understanding that Muslims have of the early history of Islam in its first twenty-nine years before the advent of Abbasid dynasty. Looking back to the earliest Arabs who in the Qur’an are seen to follow Muhammad, although there is shown a strong authoritarianism in the Medina suras on government, there is a clear recognition, or at least acquiescence, that the consent of the inhabitants of Medina was desirable to back-up Muhammad’s governance. Muhammad is repeatedly shown to demand Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 83 unqualified support for his rule in general and for specific government decisions. True believers believe in God and His Messenger who, when they are gathered with him on a communal matter, do not depart until they have asked his permission. “Those who asked your permission, Prophet, are the ones who truly believe in God and His Messenger.” (Qur’an Med. 24/62) “Believers obey God and His Messenger and do not turn away from listening to Him and do not be like those who say ‘We heard,’ though in fact they were not listening.” ( Qur’an Med. 8/20) “Remember, Prophet, when the disbelievers plotted to take you captive, kill or expel you. They schemed and so did God. He is the best of schemers… Whenever Our Revelation is recited to them they say, ‘We have heard all this before – we could say something like this if we wanted – this is nothing but ancient fables.’ They also said ‘God, if this is really the truth from You, then rain stones on us from heaven,’ …but God would not send them punishment when you, Prophet, are in their midst.” ( Qur’an Med. 8/30) “If the hypocrites, the sick at heart and those who spread lies in the city do not desist, We shall rouse you, Prophet, against them and they will only be your neighbours in the city for a short time. They will be arrested and put to death.” ( Qur’an Med. 33/60) “Carry on with your jokes: God will bring about what you fear! Yet if you were to question them, they would be sure to say ‘We were chatting, just amusing ourselves.’ Say ‘You were making jokes about God, His Revelations and His Messenger’.” (Qur’an Med. 9/64)1 But Muhammad is also shown as recognising under the guidance of God the practical need to bring the inhabitants of Medina into his confidence to obtain their support for his governmental decisions. “When God and His Messenger have decided on the matter that concerns them, it is not fitting for any believing man or woman to 1 All quotations from the Qur’an are from MAS Abdel Haleem OUP, 2004, 2010. 84 Islam and Democracy claim freedom of choice in the matter. Whoever disobeys God and His Messenger is far astray.” (Qur’an Med.33/36) “Those who insult God and His Messenger will be rejected by God in this world and the next. He has prepared humiliating torment for them. Those who pledge loyalty to you, Prophet, are actually pledging loyalty to God Himself. God’s hand is placed on theirs.” (Qur’an Med. 48/10) “God was pleased with the believers when they swore allegiance to you (Prophet) under the tree: He knew what was in their hearts and so He sent tranquillity down to them and rewarded them with a speedy triumph and with many future gains.” (Qur’an Med.48/18) And on one occasion Mohammad is seen to follow the practical advice of God to placate his followers. “By an act of mercy from God, you, Prophet, were gentle in your dealings with them – had you been harsh, or hard-hearted, they would have dispersed and left you – so pardon them and ask for forgiveness for them. Consult with them about matters, then, when you (Muhammad) have decided on a course of action, put your trust in God.” (Qur’an Med. 3/159) But even here his followers do not have a determinative say in his decision, which is his alone. Government of the Muslims in the first twenty nine years after Muhammad’s death are considered to be exemplary of the ideal and best form of human government. Thus consultation can be said from the above quotations to be embryonic as an idea in the Qur’an, though it has indeed far less express emphasis than it’s commonly assumed. Indeed, as a process, it is only referred to twice. Qur’an Mec. 42:38 and Med. 3:159, apart from two references to consultation between husband and wife concerning children. There is no Christian equivalent to this concept or experience. And notably St. Paul’s Letters took the attitude that issues of government were outside the interest and purview of Christians. Not until Constantine in the fourth century did Christianity acquaint itself with worldly government in any enthusiastic manner. This looking back to a more ideal past where decisions were Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 85 arrived at in an informal way, being the result of pull and counterpull between people and governors, is thus in strong contrast to the early Christian experience where there had been little or no continuous interest in the possible characteristics of a desirable earthly civic organisation of government. This attitude is indicated in the description in the Acts of the Apostles of an early failure to attempt such an objective, when the Christians pooled their possessions and were said to have lived in common for a short time, an experience which was soon abandoned. Throughout early Christianity there is a marked and conscious inclination to a eschew contact with or interest in earthly governance. On the other hand, interest and participation in governance by all followers during the leadership of the first four “rightly guided Caliphs” before the despotic takeover by the Abbasids was clear. Thus though there is not the slightest foretaste of democracy by one-person-one-vote in early Christianity except for St. Peter’s failed attempt, the concept of government by assent is certainly present in embryonic form at the start of Islam, and this despite Muhammad’s necessarily autocratic rule in Medina as indicated in the Qur’an during the attacks from the Meccans. Though even in Medina, Muhammad in the Qur’an is advised by God to have regard to the importance of government which is influenced by the assent of the people. Interest in the ways of government therefore is basic to the Muslim experience and thus lay Muslims in the roundtable discussions discussed the nature of government with interest and confidence, not considering it to be an unworthy or irrelevant matter (as would have been the attitude in the early Christian church in the first two centuries, and could indeed be found in some manifestations of modern Christianity now). 3.4 The Question of Minorities Protection of minorities in a democracy where these exist requires special measures not found in most western countries, where in fact no substantial historic homogenous minorities exist. The failure of the political western party system outside the 86 Islam and Democracy west to obtain a true reflection of all the people’s needs and wishes because of the existence of coherent and consolidated minorities in Muslim countries, calls without a doubt for protection of minorities through the operation of the constitutional system. This calls for a form of entrenched rights for those who will never be part of, or the major constituent of government. Muslims might well say that in the west the basically two-party system, with the swing of the pendulum, leaves the interests of small but significant minorities unrecognised. “The party system is the only viable system but many Islamic countries are more ethnically diverse than Europe and there is a danger that minority rights will not be protected.” (City of London, young office workers 2004/5) “One participant spoke for us all in saying that, ‘Under the democracy, all minorities should be respected, and looked after and protected.’ We all recognised the right of the minority to express their views without suppression but nevertheless the need to accept the will of the majority.” (Oxford 2004/5) Simple methods of discovering the general will of the people. “Islam has the tradition of direct consultation. Before trying to organise democracy.” (South London I 2004/5) “Democracy is part of Islam but principles are dictated in general in the Qur’an rather than written by people.” (Savannah 2004/5) “Islamic legacy of governments is participatory and may be informal.” (New York I 2004/5) In Practice Consultation Falls Short of the Ideal “There is a gap between ideal and reality and always has been with regard to Muslim principles of consultation.” (Bury St. Edmunds 2004/5) “Democracy, demo, demon (devil), guided by devils. The west is master of democracy today but they are liars, there is not real democracy.” (South London I 2004/5) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 87 This is probably the most hostile comment in all discussions and it should be noted that democracy itself is not attacked, only its imperfect execution. Opinions of Democracy Before the Arab Spring of 2011 Opinions of democracy ranged all the way from support at one extreme to rejection of democracy on the pragmatic ground that it does not work, at the other extreme; never however on the ground of principle. Accepting that no view was for or against democracy as a system, democracy in principle, and that all views registered degrees of pragmatic support or opposition to the benefits or otherwise of operating democracy, the statements of the lay Muslims in the roundtable discussions show a bias towards optimism in gauging the utility of democracy. “One person one vote is an imperfect system but we all feel we had a positive experience with it. Education is essential to be able to act on one’s right to participate. However others with money have an amplified voice.” (Minneapolis 2004/5) “Accountability has always been a key component of traditional Islamic government and democracy is the best means of achieving this, and therefore democracy could be ideologically compatible with Islam.” (City of London, young office workers 2004/5) “There is not conflict between democracy and Islam provided it is a mechanism for ruling and checks and balances of government, and not an ideology that is a supremacist ideology.” (Bury St Edmunds 2004/5) Democracy is satisfactory: It is more acceptable than unacceptable when it is so organised that it results in consultation and involves minority opinion. “The prophetic system of government may be the only mode of government fundamentally compatible with Islamic ideology but it broke down so early that there is no ideal Islamic system that can be 88 Islam and Democracy used as a model and therefore democracy could be ideologically compatible with Islam.” (City of London, young office workers 2004/5) “All agreed on the introduction of democracy into Islamic countries. The only question being what is the ideological position of democracy in an Islamic state? Is it an ideal in itself or merely a pragmatic means of achieving better government? This should shape the way western governments presented democracy to the Islamic world.” (City of London, young office workers 2004/5) “Democracy is an evolving thing, and agreed with within this context. Consultation is important, as are transparency and checks and balances. They would give an unqualified ‘yes’ for representation. It is important, but a qualified ‘yes’ for individual freedom.” (New York I 2004/5) This last reservation is presumably a reference to the need to follow the Qur’an. “Islamic law is strict while Christians have more choice. Discipline, basic moral codes, respect, democracy is an evolving thing and can be improved.” (Dearborn I 2004/5) “If democracy provides a means by which to make decisions collectively then it appears to be compatible with Islam. Many Muslim scholars say that western democratic values are the same as traditional Islam: justice (‘Adl), right (Haqq) collective decisionmaking (Shura) and equality (Musqwat).” (Boston II Students 2004/5) “Rights of minorities: personal law according to religious preferences, criminal law the same for everyone. No suppression of freedom of religion. Proportional representation in government (note: not just in an election, but in the make-up of the government). Linguistic and cultural rights. Overall, Muslims are pessimistic of the role of the minority.” (Minneapolis 2004/5) “Everyone should have a voice in the political system, in the form of voting at the least (secret ballot) and more advanced political involvement.” (Dearborn II 2004/5) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 89 “For some places one person one vote works but cannot be applied in every country.” (South London I 2004/5) “Attitudes based on political parties is good when parties are healthy. This does not conflict with Islamic principles and it means that accountability is built into the system.” (Minneapolis 2004/5) “The passing of power back and forth: without this how would one want to keep the government accountable, people questioning and holding government accountable by full participation in the process.” (Minneapolis 2004/5) “Democracy according to its western definition can be adopted and applied to Muslim countries. The Islamic concepts and principles of the system of government as declared in the Sunnah have no objections whatsoever as far as justice, people’s freedom, speech, belief and practice and equality of all people.” (Savannah 2004/5) “When societies are small there is access to the ruler. In larger societies democracy functions because elections give a mandate to the government to act on behalf of the electorate for a specific period of time.” (Central London I 2004/5) “The relationship between Church and State seems to work all right in the UK where there is not a conflict between democracy and Islam provided it is a mechanism for ruling and checks and balances of government not an ideology i.e. a supremacist ideology.”(Bury St. Edmunds 2004/5) “‘One person one vote’ all agree, and ‘one person one vote one time’ is unacceptable.” (City of London, young office workers 2004/5) “Election fairness is essential (laughter). This needs judges.” (Ossening, -N.Y.-, I 2004/5) “1- The formation of checks and balances to keep corruption low. 2- Recognizing minorities and having a national discussion on the importance of protecting and securing the minority rights. 3- Defining the role of religious authorities, and drawing the legal path for religious figures to become political figures. No one shall abuse their religious powers for personal and political gains. If you are going to be part of the public life, then we need to know your religious beliefs 90 Islam and Democracy and biases and you may not use your religious influence to coerce the public to follow your will.” (Dearborn II 2004/5) “Cultural Specificity and Democracy: We considered the question of whether democracy has to be the same everywhere, or whether it must find unique cultural expressions in different countries. Our participants felt that it would inevitably vary from place to place depending on historical and cultural factors, including religion. Participants felt that despite universal features of democracy such as equal rights and ‘one person, one vote,’ it will mean different things to different people in different countries. The example of President Putin’s rebuke to President Bush for trying to instruct him about democracy highlights the fact that history, culture, traditions and expectations will shape the democratic institutions of each place. Religious traditions and beliefs, including Islamic faith and law will be part of this context and should be allowed to shape the institutions and embodiments of democracy. Another participant added sagely, ‘Democracy will only come when people understand what it offers them. When they see those benefits it will come, surely it will come. It is not going to come while someone else is saying “it’s got a very sweet root, if you eat this. Unless you have eaten the fruit, you could not take it from someone else.” (Dearborn II 2004/5) In one discussion group it was said that a constitution should combine Islamic fundamental beliefs together with democratic institutions providing a safeguard for key elements for Islamic belief: “A democratic constitution should enshrine Islamic fundamental belief, as in the west the US constitution does for belief for the West, and is open to change (as in the west; for example the right to private property) but like the West this is very unlikely, virtually impossible. This would safeguard key elements of Islamic belief.” (City of London young office workers 2004/5) “Even when the Prophet died to elect Abu Bakar, it was one person one vote.” (Milan July 2010) “The idea of majority, and not unanimity is at the heart of Muslim history. Abu Bakar has been elected by the majority not unanimously.” (Milan July 2010) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 91 “The parliament represents the people, therefore it may vote for the government. The majority of the parliament is the majority of the people. So laws should be approved by majority of the parliament.” (Milan July 2010) Support for government by the majority regardless of minority opinion forms the backbone of majoritarism. But this is unacceptable generally. The following quotations prior to the Arab Spring of January 2011 condemn majoritarianism (i.e., government carried on regardless of minority opinion). Apparently the word was first used in 1960 or 1965; however the term was not used in any of the roundtable discussions until after 2011. Some statements appeared to reach out towards democracy (in its broadest sense) emphasising the essential Muslim feature of consensus rather than majoritarianism. “In Muslim politics there is a tradition of trying to achieve consensus after consultation in the community.” (Wimbledon 2004/5) “Islam is to do with how you get the sense of the people, how are their interests and needs represented, and all of them not just the majority.” (Boston I 2004/5) “Stress importance of community and consultation persisting until a common policy is arrived at. This gives a greater sense of community.” (New York I 2004/5) “One member asked whether democracy is the way to decide in regard to the Iraq war, e.g., where there is strong opposition.” (South London I 2004/5) Pragmatic arguments against the efficacy of democracy: Democracy does not express the will of the people. “As Muslims we believe that Islam shows up the failure of democracy, of western democracy, MPs do not necessarily reflect the views of the people. As Muslims we believe that man has no right, God is sovereign, and democracies in western governments are good at creating myths, illusions.” (East London Students 2004/5) This 92 Islam and Democracy was said in the context of a House of Commons vote on the 2003 war in Iraq. “Islam has global aspirations but we are not interested in detonating bombs. In the west to vote you have no real choice you have to choose between two evils, you don’t have a real alternative, there is no point in going for the lesser evil. But how much knowledge do voters actually have? The influence of the media is strong and decisions are easily manipulated. You have to choose between two evils.” Another said “We use our votes to change it.” (East London Students 2004/5) A more basic objection to “one person one vote” was that it does not produce the best results because of deficiencies in the make-up of the general electorate. “In theory democracy sounds good but in practice it has many flaws, it can be said to express the will of the people, but this is not what happens. We should question the whole political system. As Muslims we believe that Islam shows up the failure of democracy, of western democracy, MPs do not necessarily reflect the views of the people. As Muslims we believe that man has no right, God is sovereign, democracies in western governments are good at creating myths, illusions.” (East London Students 2004/5) Statements claiming that the electorate is not the best judge. “But in Islam we have a system. There has always been consultation throughout Islamic history and if scholars cannot decide on a ruling they go for the majority view. A consensus is reached by scholars. We need to refer to the learned ones.” (East London Students2004/5) “As to one person one vote, all persons do not have the same value (as far as voting goes). Those with more knowledge have more weight concerning decisions. The way that governing should function under Islam is like a conciliation that might happen in a private company: seek out the appropriate people with knowledge and experience about an issue in order to make the right decision, using every available resource to get the best outcome. In the Qur’an those with authority are ordered to seek consultation to deliberate to get the right advice from the right advisers.” (Boston I 2004/5) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 93 “We need to find within the Qur’an a suitable system. Democracy is not suitable for several reasons. It is based on European ideas of the prime importance of the individual. In the M.E. the important thing is the community. The family, the clan, the tribe and on up. Historically it was the Qur’an that united warring tribes”. (Vermont II 2004/5) “Democracy is very much a western concept but we cannot accept it as a global concept because the US is not allowing democracy to flourish around the world. If the West actually honored democracy it would make a lot more sense.” (New York I 2004/5) The use of democracy as a “tool” or as a “technology”, as Prof. Ali Paya defined it2 may lead to undemocratic outcomes. Consider the 2011 Swiss referendum on minarets. Through democratic means the Swiss people took what might be considered a very undemocratic decision, a decision that attacks rather than supports minorities. A Swiss local Muslim community asked to build a 10cm high; yes, a mere 10cm high! minaret, since the referendum did not explain the features of the minaret. This formal and provocative request made another key jump in the game. Was that referendum (and some other populist speeches we have heard in the last few years) requiring the Swiss people to decide on a specific issue, or was it a democratic tool to make a decision concerning an idea? What concept is this concerning Islam? This is also the only reference to suicide bombers. It was recorded almost thirteen years ago3. What has been missing in recent years and, that, sadly is still missing, is a well-organized and just policy of “integration”. Repression causes radicalization, and repression may happen, or may be felt and perceived, even in a free country or and even out of jail. Muslim European citizens, often born and raised in Europe, rediscover their origins when they feel they have no hope in the country they have been living in for all of their lives. They feel themselves to be immigrants when others start to call them immigrants. Europe and the USA have dismembered Iraq, with the invasion 2 3 See page 118. See page 78. 94 Islam and Democracy of 2003 and, especially, in the management of the aftermath of that war4. In more recent years, when the outcome of the socalled Arab Spring was still uncertain, we, as western countries allowed the destruction of Syria. This country, the people of which have faced the choice between Bashar al-Asad and IS, have been completely destroyed, both socially and materially. It will take tens of years after the end of the civil war (which is still going on, mostly silently in western media) to rebuild a social infrastructure, and a new generation of politicians. Furthermore Turkey is playing a disingenuous role. Despite being still heavily financed by European money. Both the failure of domestic integration of Muslims in Europe and failure of foreign policy are important causes of suicide bombers. There are no short-term solutions. We need a different approach towards the structures of our societies, through schools and education, together with a deep re-consideration of foreign policies. Only with these factors, together, will the message of Daesh fail in the desert. European security services, well interconnected, together with some very higly targeted operations in the middle East may help to improve security. Polemics do not help either: “Golden rule: allow mosques in the Vatican, cathedrals in Mecca.” (Chicago 2004) This statement explains the polemic, often abused, often misused, of the idea of reciprocity. According to this way of thinking, very widespread among poorly educated Western public opinion, the main objective is not to be leaders in good, but rather considers what others could do more than what they should do. 4 Although there is a large literature on this topic, we may still recommend two books written at the end of the first decade of the 21st century: Galbraith, P.W.,The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War Without End, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2007 and Aziz, Barbara N. Swimming up the Tigris, real life encounters with Iraq, Gainesville, FL. University Press of Florida, 2007. Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 95 Most European citizens need a deeper knowledge of Islam and the Muslim world. In fact, mainstream media, which is for many the only source of information, rarely provides an accurate description of the situation in the Muslim world. Therefore the geography of Muslim majority countries is not clear for many Europeans. If we also consider that Islam is hot topic, which attracts exploitable views or purposely polemic points of view, the chance of having reliable information gets harder and harder. One of the aims of this work is to show another side of Islam, that is true, in the sense that comes directly from the voices of Muslims, who are part of Western societies and who therefore, know them well. “The process of choosing one representative is in the belief that this person would be able to make the right decisions. Democracy is not the way. It invites room for corruption, changing and worsening generations making matters of taboo into passed laws, condoning bad behaviour of political and religious groups. Democracy moves its goals especially for politicians. Politics has grasped religion as an instrument of emotion to control the masses. Islam is an acceptance of different governments, Muslims have traditionally voted for the best man for the job after our Prophet.” (South London I 2004/5) The following quotations in effect downplay the significance of democracy in any form. “The Qur’an is more than a religious text. It is a “code of life” defining limitations on behaviour in the affairs of men. In the west there are no limitations. In Islam as things change/evolve a group of people who know their religion decide how to adapt the rules extrapolating the Qur’an. This is a better form of democracy.” (Central London I 2004/5) “To appoint a just leader what would to need happen? One man would have to divinely rule.” (South London I 2004/5) “In Muslim countries the majority of the people is uneducated, and this adds problem to the problem. Illiteracy and poverty play a prominent role in the understanding of the importance of democracy in the Muslim world. How could we imagine that uneducated people may find a Muslim way to democracy?” (Milan July 2010) 96 Islam and Democracy “A potential system should take account of information which the people have, indicating that elections with universal suffrage do not necessarily answer all problems. The playing down of democracy in extreme.” (Chicago 2004/5) One member of a discussion group set up a choice, when not knowing what course to take, between following the Qur’an or majority opinion. Presumably the majority referred to is a parliamentary majority. “What shall I do when I don’t know right and wrong? Go with the majority or go with the word of God?” (Delaware 2004/5) All these statements challenge the appropriateness of democracy, they are only concerned with the working of democracy in practice; they do not condemn the principle; that is it is noticeable that they do not in fact condemn the principle of democracy, only it’s working. What happened in Belgium has shown, dramatically, that in that country, as in several others, there is a whole generation of disappointed young citizens, most of them of Moroccan, Tunisian, Algerian or Egyptian origin. The Arab Spring: the Watershed of January 2011 Note: the quotations or statements made at discussion group meetings are throughout the book in the language delivered to the authors. In some cases, for instance in Canada, the language is curious perhaps because in some cases French was used. In the case of the Bonn meeting the English language is certainly defective but it is as received from the organiser. The same goes for the Paris report. When the crytical watershed of the revolt in Tunisia against preseident Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali went suddenly to the world’s press, for politicians and commentators everything seemed possible in the Muslim world. Revolutions ended in a myriad of disappointments in Egypt, Libya, the Persian Gulf and Turkey. Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 97 Only in Tunisia have Muslim and secular interests so far appeared to compromise their respective political precepts and features to produce a potentially workable democratic and hopefully pragmatic political settlement. Of course it is of great interest to see how these events were reflected in the roundtable discussions that were held in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Canada after January 2011. The dog barked in the night very loudly and continuously for two and a half years. But it did not bite, except in the case of Tunisia, where the deeply impressive influence of Rashed Ghannouchi successfully (at least for seven years) has managed to harness the passions and interests, and realisation of mutual self-interest in that country, to achieve a successful constitution which respects the objectives of Islam while attempting to set up a modern democracy. Everyone interested in the world of politics expressed varying degrees of optimism for good outcomes from the Arab Spring. However, in all cases, except Tunisia, the hopes evinced were dashed. Egypt, Libya, Morocco and Algeria, all developed the way their well-wishers least desired. But while hopes lasted, there was a genuine very forceful gust of optimism among commentators in the news media and varying degrees of hope among the politicians and populations. The adoption of positive attitudes in all circles was quite clear in 2011 and 2012. But not a breath of this was observable in the roundtable discussions of lay Muslims being held at that time in Canada, France, Italy and Germany. First there was a discussion meeting in Piacenza in April 2011, then discussion meetings in March in Germany, and July, September and October (Seville and Torino). In 2012 in Germany, Canada and Italy and in May 2013 in France. These meetings reflected views extant during the Arab Spring before the grave reversals in Egypt in June 2013. Yet in none of these changes in fortune, hopes, fears and despair was there the slightest variation of views concerning democracy or Islamic governments over those expressed in the years 2004 to 2011. After the fall of President Morsi there were three discussion meetings in Germany. There was, of course, recognition in these discussions that something happened in 2011, but in fact some of the reactions 98 Islam and Democracy are rather pessimistic or negative. But apart from that all that needs to be noted is an absence of any development of ideas beyond those expressed in the earlier period. Therefore it is only necessary to select a few citations indicating mere continuation without development while picking on quotations, which at any rate recognise that the Arab Spring did occur. First it must be recorded that a meeting was held in Bonn in June 2012 which because of a misunderstanding comprised lay Muslims from all over Germany rather than from a single town as was the case in all other roundtable discussions. A careful study of the report strongly suggests that those attending were representative of the same groups of lay Muslims who came to individual discussion meetings which were each made up of lay Muslims from single localities. It is not possible to find any suggestion that these lay Muslims inaccurately designated as from Bonn this discussion in any sense selected so as to be more typical of Germany as a whole than of a particular locality. An important additional point is that unfortunately the original German of most of the record has not been preserved and the only record of this part of the discussion meeting is preserved in a very imperfect contemporary amateur translation. Acknowledgements of the Arab Spring “I do not think that the Arab revolts are Muslim revolts. They are simply fights for democracy.” (Piacenza April 2011) “Ok ok, the revolts, but… well… are we sure that these people are in the streets for democracy? I think that they are oppressed, and they want to get rid of the present regimes. I am not sure of what they actually want for their future. The say ‘Ben Ali Degage’, but each of them may wish something different after ‘Ben Ali’.”( Piacenza April 2011) “Arab Spring where US backed the revolution because they supported democracy, however when Egypt elected the Muslim brotherhood – leader- US are concerned about “Islamic” parties being elected.”( Winnipeg, September 2012) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 99 Democracy is satisfactory “The issue of compatibility is not between democracy and Islam, but between the governments of the Muslim countries and democracy! These revolts are showing the world that not only the words ‘Islam’ and ‘democracy’ can be put together, but that Islam needs democracy.” (Piacenza April 2011) Islam is independent of government systems “Man is Khalifa (man or woman). Islam is about the human condition with dignity. The legitimacy is always from below. Mohammed said, for example with the women, gave them rights so. In this sense, Islam is a grassroots movement. King and rulers came from the outside, not from the inside of Islam. Islam grants men their freedom. The Qur’an is against power.” (Bonn 2012) “Behind this question are Clichées. You might as well ask about the dichotomy between Islam and soccer rules.” (Bonn 2012) “To the time when Islam was democratic self-evident, that the term was not known. Gave political legitimacy that time only by the authority of the community. From Qur’an and Sunnah no state system is derived. Islam as a religion is inviolable. The problem is not Islam, but the ‘Muslimtum’. It is man who does not deal with the power and performs erratically. But on the other hand, arises for example The question of whether Europe is democratic if the proportion of Muslims is increasing?” (Bonn 2012) “There are a number of indications for being on the right way (religious) when you’re a religious Muslim who is active and democratic engaging.” (Bonn 2012) “It is blasphemy law in Pakistan. Minister killed, assassinated. If you grant security to everyone, regardless of the type of government, that is good enough. Everyone can voice their opinion and not be afraid of being killed.” (Toronto 2012) “Yes, but is that the Shura has to represent the people. The point is that historically that promise has never been fulfilled. Since the death of Muhammad, the community split between those who believed that the leader had to be religious-political, as the Prophet himself, and they did not think so. But the Prophet was sent by God, he was the 100 Islam and Democracy most important of all Prophets, since he was the Seal of Prophethood. This means that his death should have announced the final separation between the religious and political powers.” (Seville, October 2012) “The religious and political power are not compatible.” (Seville, October 2012) “In all both the Umayyad dynasty, as the Abbasid, the Fatimid, etc., None have been democratic. They were hereditary monarchies. Even the Umayyads, which initially were against the idea of inheriting the title. Since then the Muslim world has shifted from corrupt monarchies and despotic military regimes to other forms of government, even governments in which religion plays a role have proved not to be democratic. I think they are now more aware of the idea of Hakim (governor) and some of the clergy supports the separation between religion and politics.” (Seville October 2012) “Taqwa: weight in society does not depend on the number, dc shift and distorted notion minority. French fear of Islam, react with violence. Xenophobia human nature.” (Paris May 2013) “Religion is divine and bases on divine principles and rules.” (Bonn 2012) “Democracy is a development of the human (or of human gatherings), who accomplishes rules for itself, but who is not in competition with the monotheistic religions.” (Bonn 2012) “But back to Huntington. His thesis of the clash of Islam with contemporary Western civilization is completely evident on the normative level. You can not disavow with reference to the methodological and conceptual flaws in his overall argument. Still less can deal with logically nonsensical, politically naive, but “politically correct” speech wipe off the table, there is no clash of civilizations (His statement), but we would rather “dialogue between cultures” (ought lead-statement). This is certainly undeniable. But we can have a dialogue only when we insure our own normative references. We must be clear about what are the principle nonnegotiable principles and values of our civilization. We did these principles under the pressure of cheap accusations of ethnocentrism fall and we called on the multicultural indifference, then our normative beliefs would disappear in a cloud mixed bunch. Action, political action, especially lose, then its normative orientation, was arbitrary and opportunistic.” (Bonn 2012) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 101 “We must be clear about what are the principal non-negotiable principles and values of our civilization.” (Bonn 2012) “To add on to that, when approaching the topic, I think Muslims have a right to ask why are people targeting us, why we are disenfranchised, but I think a Muslim can critically say there are bigger issues. For example, when Israel says it’s the only democracy in ME, So before picking on Muslims and democracy, ask how other nations are faring. So analyse countries that say we are democracies and see if they are really “democratic” And it’s really concerning when you label yourself as a democracy, the world accepts it, but your actions speak other “Living in this interconnected world, there is a new form of hierarchy. There are people that disagree on foreign policy, but regard of the public opinion, they will go on with these opinions. There is no individual freedom. Democracy not favoured by governments all the time. The EU- countries don’t have the authority to make trade regulations without complying with stipulations in the UN. Freedom is becoming more restricted. Democracy isn’t ideal- you have to accept certain norms. You have to follow society where it’s going unfortunately.” (Toronto October 2012) “Islam is regarded by most Muslims as a religion of law. Being a Muslim is frequently limited to respect of the prescriptions of Islam. They divided the religious norms into categories: mandatory, recommended, forbidden, frowned upon, and permissible actions. This classification is based primarily on the assessments of human behavior in the Quran and the Sunnah and derives legal consequences as well as predictions for life from the afterlife. This view reduces Islam to normative aspects. And this comes at the expense of spiritual and ethical content - even though they occupy a central place in the Qur’an.” (Milan 2011) “Problems? Friction surface? Why is it us Muslims that question? The problem arises not from the (Quranic) verse.” (Bonn 2012) “In modern era, democracy is the form which is taking the society of the religions, of the cultures, and of the customs under one’s wing.” (Bonn 2012) “Religion means: To bow down to Allah (God), and to know that there’s somebody protecting us. Democracy isn’t the compensation to Islam and vice versa. The consensus adjusts itself and is balancing itself out.”(Bonn 2012) 102 Islam and Democracy “Islam and democracy are no contrast, because in the religious texts are no hints on that democracy is religious amiss - quite the contrary.” (Bonn 2012) What do Muslims in Europe think is their European image? “Taqwa: Question adaptation: yes with limits, degree in the practice of faith, religion, or not be better in religion, so it also depends on the way of life of the person. S adapting while his best flexibility in religion.” (Paris May 2013) “Walid: fear is understandable. So xenophobia is normal, but not to meet and combat is feeling over time.” (Paris May 2013) “Hela: do not accept xenophobia, as is in favor of the racists. Understanding is legitimized.”(Paris May 2013) “Emir: not innate xenophobia, plus a collective unconscious. In France, xenophobic, fear of strangers.” (Paris May 2013) “Farid: question of the relationship between Islam and democracy is who must adapt to that. Should Islam adapt to democracy or democracy to Islam. For me it is a question of power relations. But when it comes to Islam, what are we talking about? There is no Muslim community in France. There are only Muslim individuals.” (Paris May 2013) “From the intervention of Farid, Taqwa speaks and reacts to Farid on the issue of adaptation. III-Islam and the West.”(Paris May 2013) “Nizar: Islam experiencing rejection in the West because of the model of Islam promoted by Saudi Arabia and some Persian Gulf countries, this political purposes.” (Paris May 2013) “Farah: I totally agree with Nizar. Saudi Arabia has opened in Austria, Vienna, the largest interfaith center. However, on its own territory, that country has intolerant laws and does not respect its own minorities. What rhymes interfaith center in Vienna? This is a case of pure hypocrisy. Islam is used for political purposes. Nizar nods vigorously.” (Paris May 2013) “Emir: we have a problem of representation, image.” (Paris May 2013) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 103 “Taqwa: This image problem grows; some Muslims want to show something to prove something. Often this creates discomfort. The media play a very important role in this poor image. Especially looking for ‘Salafis’. The image problem is partly fed by the media.” (Paris May 2013) “Emir: Salafis are like the underclass used against the proletariat. In other words, Muslims completely deconstructed on identity and social plan used against the average Muslim majority. Like the Chouans. Caste peasants and people very low extraction, who had taken up arms to defend the bourgeois aristocracy in the west of France. To me, democracy means a republic consisting of citizens.” (Paris May 2013) “Farid: the deconstruction of some Muslims is historically explicable. The first generation of immigrants was discreet and did not claim anything. The children of these immigrants, they seek their place. Often they pass through an identity crisis and blame their parents for lack of demand.” (Paris May 2013) “Hela: when it comes to Islam, we always talk about negative things (like Salafism, or crime …). We are not talking positive things, universal values upheld by Islam, as to gender equality for example.” (Paris May 2013) “Walid: we must also denounce the stupid behavior of some of our fellow believers. Some of these behaviors are simply shocking.” (Paris May 2013) “Farid: these bad behaviors are related to issues of identity.” (Paris May 2013) Self-image of Muslims in Europe Male, Turkey/Köln / Köln – Lawyer “The consequence of such an interpretation of Islam:- and that empirical studies show - that young people feel faced with the choice of being either Muslim or European.” “More traditional views of Islam categorize every action as allowed or prohibited (Halal – Haram). The Qur’an is not a code of laws, therefore young people frequently rely on the interpretations of some Imams or look for answers on the Internet. This leads either to 104 Islam and Democracy a kind of segregation, or to a distance, turning away from religion. Although polls indicate many to be proud Muslims, but this has more to do with their search for identity: Looking for a collective umbrella, a big “we”. Their devotion to religion is therefore not a search for spirituality and for God’s experience, but only identity. This form of attachment to religion leads to its erosion.” (Milan 2011) The relationship of democracy and Islam “Democratic values are inherent to Islam, but if the democ starts making rules that go against Qur’an, there are problems. Spirit of democ, but not at the expense of Islam. I’m not totally sold on it [this defn]. I don’t have a problem with a leader being elected and then abolishing parliament if it is full of secularists.” (Ontario 2012) “Democ is a fantasy anyway. Eg the inconsistencies and anyway, who gets to define it? Yeah, this defn doesn’t go against Islam, but is given by white men, and then they use it as a standard against us. Democ means people being heard. Eg in Africa. Appeal to the elder, but might not match this defn. Islam has this spirit, might not look like western defn.” (Ontario 2012) Support for democracy within limits “All participants believe that Huntington’s theory is a ‘dumbing down’ of reality. Lots of examples of Muslim ‘culture’ working with Western Judeo-Christian culture, without there being any clash. E.g. Muslim Spain where Muslims, Jews and Christians lived together in peace. One participant argued that it led to the Spanish Inquisition, but this was countered by another participant that even in those circumstances, Muslims and Jews and Christians still fought together.” (Winnipeg September 2012) “In the West, there is a lot of political apathy towards voting. Not tyranny of the masses, it’s the tyranny of the ‘stupid’ people who vote for conservative governments.” (Winnipeg September 2012) “People in the West (not Muslims in particular) feel that their vote will not make much of a difference and so they don’t bother voting. Most participants prefer voting for candidates rather than ‘against’ other candidates.” (Winnipeg September 2012) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 105 “Generally, feel that Muslim community in Canada is politically engaged, though not sure whether this translates into voting, but they all vote and so do their circle of friends who are Muslim.” (Winnipeg September 2012) “Political engagement is usually around foreign policy issues rather than domestic issues, find foreign policy more interesting. One participant said that that was politically immature and that its important for Canadian Muslims to focus on domestic politics instead. He believes that if candidates can count on Muslim bloc voting because of their foreign policy, then as long as they just pander to that, then they can rely on their vote. Muslims need to be more nuanced.” (Winnipeg September 2012) Islam and the west “Person 3: Right now we are living in a very amoral society, philosophers talk above moral relativism, we go for instant gratifications. Islam threatens and undermines this way of life.” (Toronto October 2012) Democracy is compatible with Islam “I. Islam is perfectly compatible with democracy The first general observation is that all supported the idea of noncontradiction between democracy and Islam. One of the participants, Taqwa, has argued that the concept of democracy is contained in the reference texts (Qur’an and Sunnah-tradition-of the Prophet Muhammad) of the Muslim religion. Two of the participants, Farah and Hela (student and pharmacist) also defended the idea of noncontradiction, while highlighting the particular case of France because of his radical understanding of the concept of secularism. The pharmacist has even questioned the possibility of a real religious freedom in France because this particular secularism.” (Paris May 2013) “Another participant, Farid showed a form of skepticism. Analysis of his condition, the man began by asking the principle that all religions are political systems. But if religions are political, he asked whether the two political systems could live in harmony. According to him, the solution is to know who would fit the other, Islam and democracy. So he did not reject the idea of non-contradiction of these 106 Islam and Democracy two terms, but rather asked for clarification on how to understand the fit between the two terms.” (Paris May 2013) “We are given an illusion of freedom in democracy. We do have some freedoms –right of speech that you wouldn’t have in a dictatorship.” (Toronto 2012) “a) I am positive and I believe in human beings in general and its immense capacity, I think it is possible. The basis of Islam to me sitting on the Umma (the people), which previously had no religion. Yes, in Islam there is a Supreme Being, but tells your community that it is they who will have to govern. So I think there is an orthodox in Islam for democracy. Another thing is what governments, in historical reality, have done. Today there is still a massive expression of discontent of the people and I believe that democracy is possible in the Arab world. Islam is as likely to adopt democracy as any other religion, why should it be less than Christianity or Judaism.” (Seville October 2012) “Muslims need and call for democracy because that is (only) where they could express their opinion. The failure of democracy around the world, and in Muslim countries, is due to the capitalist system, not religion or their faithful.” (Seville October 2012) “There was a Khutba of Abu Bakr, who ruled for only two years, it said something like “no government is perfect, so if I’m wrong in acting correct me.” That was the model of government that, in my opinion, should have won, I think that the Arab world has not had experience of democracy since the death of Abu Bakr until today.” (Seville October 2012) “b) I am against you having to separate religion and power. It is in the identity of the people and is very difficult to separate. I think democracy can be compatible with Islam, even if it is a democracy adapted to Islam, that is different from the democracy that exists in the West.” (Seville October 2012) “d) We must change Islam, we can not apply what was done in the early days of Islam because Prophet’s time there were many things that do not exist now. Another problem related to the lack of democracy in Muslim countries is the lack of freedom of expression, today, can any Muslim express their views about religion? There is not even the freedom to say whether one is a believer or not.” (Seville October 2012) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 107 “Hela: for me, this issue is divided into two: - Is Islam compatible with democracy? - Can one live their religion in a country like France, which raises the question of the compatibility of Islam and secularism.” (Paris May 2012) “In my view, there is no contradiction between Islam and democracy. The two terms are perfectly compatible. The problem in France is the relationship with secularism. Taqwa: there is no contradiction between Islam and democracy. Democracy is a concept covered and defended by reference texts of Islam. The problem is not whether Islam is compatible with democracy, but rather a problem of understanding of how to apply Islam. Depending on the application of Islam by Muslims, public opinion in the West fluctuates. For example, in France, there is a fear of Islam by non-Muslims because of the actions of some Muslims.” (Paris May 2013) “Nizar: there is no contradiction between Islam and democracy. The problem comes from the action of some foreign countries such as Saudi Arabia. Influential people in this country describe themselves as intermediaries between man and God. They want to keep people in the dark, making Muslims in the West or elsewhere suffer the consequences of this self-appointed role in the conservative Persian Gulf.” (Paris May 2013) “Emir: several ways of seeing. Islam, including personally is compatible with democracy. After one should define the word “Islam.” It is a religion that includes rituals, and provides a framework. The application of democracy is based on the establishment of rules of rights and duties. So again, democracy is a part. In this context, we can understand the opposition between the two frames. In France, nothing in the text precludes a spiritual life. The problem is that the application and rejection. Application in the French secular framework; and the rejection of Muslims as the “other” group. So, according to the texts, religious and democratic constitutions (as the Qur’an), there is no contradiction between Islam and democracy. But in practice, this compatibility is very difficult to implement.” (Paris May 2013) “Farid: I return to my purpose just now. To influence the media for example, we need to be organized as a community. Community Anglo-Saxon model is not inconsistent with democracy.” (Paris May 2013) 108 Islam and Democracy Democracy but not majoritarianism “We have to make democracy our own as Muslims. Just as the West establishes precedence, we need to establish our own procedures. Allah would always be the ultimate sovereign. But how ideal is democracy? Here you need the funding and support. So everyone doesn’t have an equal, or equal candidates. You are choosing between the rich. So capitalist democracy is inherited to Islamic values. Majority vote of 50% is not ideal to Islam. Quebec referendumshows your society is still much split. Majority rules should be higherIslam would want to see a higher majority percentage. For rulers, Islam looks at the quality of leaders- not how much money or resourceful they are.” (Toronto October 2012). (Note on procedures in Paris) “Procedure: I first took the floor to present the study and recalled the theory of Samuel Huntington’s “clash of civilizations”. I entered the study, according to documents that were provided to me, in opposition to this theory movement and I presented the study as part of an effort to create debate among the general public in the West, that feeds too much “they say” about Islam and Muslims. I therefore argued that to give a statistical basis, and concrete for future broader discussions would aim to build bridges between cultures, and thus invalidate the theory of Mr. Huntington this study was to. What participants seemed very receptive. To start trading, I presented according to documents in my possession, what we mean by “democracy.” Whereupon I asked that each participant sharing, and very briefly, their overall views on the question of the relationship between Islam and democracy. This first brief exchange and a round, served as an introduction and to bring the participants in the discussion. Many did not know, and had trouble talking instantly. But after the introduction, trade began fairly bright, but in a serene atmosphere.” (Paris May 2013). Developments Since June 2013, the Second Phase of the Arab Spring After June 2013 when President Morsi had been overthrown and the military government installed itself thus underlining the ineffectiveness of the “Arab Spring”, further roundtable Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 109 discussions appeared uninfluenced either by the Arab Spring itself or by the subsequent unravelling of events in Egypt. At the Davos World Economic Forum in February 2014 Rachid al-Ghannouchi, the elder statesman of the Tunisian Ennahda (moderate Islamist Party) said, “A democracy of 51 percent [a majoritarian democracy] is not enough in a plural society like Tunisia. In a transitional democracy all ideas have to be represented… [The] biggest danger is the comeback of dictatorship in whatever forms it would be. [The] Tunisian model is based on the principle of consensus, not normal majority, and on an alliance between Islamists and seculars reaffirming local governance and distribution of power at the widest level. In a normal democracy normally 51 percent is enough to govern. But in a democracy at [the] transition phase 51 percent is not enough, even 60 percent acquired by one party will not be enough to govern. We want a coalition, an alliance between Islamists and seculars. We want to put an end to what is called the Arab exception. The Arabs, like others, are capable of enjoying democracy. Tunisia is a small country, but it could offer the world this culture of peaceful democratic transition.” (http:// en.cihan.com.tr/news/From-Turkish-model-to-Tunisian-model_9598-CHMTM0OTU5OC81;jsessionid=309weOtxkrl1Bru9LMz4wQg) Some would comment that Gannouchi appears to show undue acceptance of majoritarian democracy once a constitution in a new democracy has been fully accepted and bedded in but rule by 51% according to the quotations of lay Muslims in the discussions the subject of this book from 1994 to 2010 indicate that rule by 51% would be undesirable at any stage in the development of democracy. “These grumblings were kept under wraps by the Turkish media which has been subjected to a growing repression that put Turkey increasingly alongside China and Iran as one of the countries with the largest number of imprisoned journalists. The media repression was accompanied by the prime minister’s adoption of policies and a style of politics that increasingly polarized Turkish society. After 2011, Erdoğan’s commitment to a pluralist understanding of Turkish democracy eroded. His critics accused him of becoming majoritarian and intolerant of diversity as he began to interfere increasingly with people’s private lives by telling them how many children to have, 110 Islam and Democracy what to eat and drink, and how to socialize.” (http://www. turkishweekly.net/news/161146/turkey-39-s-democratic-institutionsbesieged.html) The more traditional Turkish democratic response is represented by President Abdullah Gul: “What we call democracy is essentially the national will. If we expand this a bit further, it is establishment of democratic states governed by the rule of law. When we say democratic state governed by the rule of law, it means a multi-party system, fair, free and proper elections, where everybody has clearly determined authorities and responsibilities along with the balance systems called ‘checks-balances’ within this system, that is government in harmony. When we speak about Turkey’s power parameters, it needs to have high democratic law standards in order to be prestigious, powerful, and have a prosperous population. The concept of checks and balances is a pillar of democratic states, allowing executive, judicial and legislative bodies to be separate, but have the power to check and balance one another”. (http://www. turkishweekly.net/news/161987/president-draws) In favour of democracy “Here is a brief summary of the statements of the teacher and the doctor: Islam is a religion that addresses all facets of life, it regulates basic and structured. Islam teaches man to change his life radically and practice to serve only the Creator and to attain the good pleasure of the Creator in all his actions. Democracy is a State or government. Muslims feel the need to live out their religion. If Muslims can live out their religion freely, can carry out their religious duties and rituals, can create religious institutions, can educate their children according to their religious values their thoughts can be expressed in public debates concerning religion and religious claims in accordance with the laws and can provide democratic principles they need to establish “Islamic” state no. It is a mistake to see Islam in conflict with democracy or vice versa. One could argue that democracy fits very well to the administrative principles of Islam, both in terms of the accountability of the rulers as well as the rejection of all forms of despotism, which is defined in Islam as a diabolical form of governance. Islam is well compatible with human rights, democratic elections, accountability, the primacy of law and other principles. Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 111 There are numerous implementations and types of democracy. It is not perfect yet, it is on the way to perfection.” (Germany Bonn 2014) “Is there a ‘clash of civilizations’ as claimed by Huntington?” (Germany Bonn 2014) “All participants were convinced that there is no ‘clash of civilizations’ according to the ideas of Huntington. They believe that Huntington has overlooked the phenomenon of globalization. We see every day that cultures and religions come together, even unconsciously. Nevertheless, there are also groups who want to prepare new conflict zones on the basis of religious and cultural differences, said the journalist among the discussants.” (Germany Bonn 2014) “On my second question of whether Islam is compatible with democracy, they all answered in unison with YES! For Islam would make no demands on the state, as a state to be set up, etc. but there would be in the Qur’an values and norms that have universal rating. Democracy would take several decades, the Qur’an or religions ordered these values thousands of years ago and recommended them. Therefore, the question of the compatibility of Islam with democracy is absurd.” (Germany Bonn 2014) “Islam can very well be live in a democracy… Other religions should have the rights to live out their religions, whether Jews, Hindus, etc.” (Germany Bonn 2014) “I then asked how then penalties in the Qur’an are to be applied in a democratic and Christian society at the same time. The doctor then said, that the Basic Law applies to him and the rules of the Qur’an are not to be taken literally… The engineer immediately gave an example, calling up a verse in which the infidels must be killed wherever they are found also. This is for example a Kriegsvers ( a verse of war) and accordingly the verse has nowadays no weight, since there is no state of war.” (Germany Bonn 2014) (Discussions in Frankfurt) Look to the Qur’an rather than the actions of present day Muslims. “The physiotherapist, was of the opinion that if you want to explore human rights in Islam, as a benchmark you should not take the 112 Islam and Democracy Muslims or the Islamic countries as a benchmark, but the Qur’an and the Sunna (the deeds of the Prophet ). Because the real Islam, with its freedoms and justice, is nowadays not seen, unfortunately, in the Muslim world. Rather, the present-day Muslims are influenced by their cultures.” (Frankfurt May 2014) “The teacher agreed with the physiotherapist and added that he had before he started with the self-study of Islam, initially thought that Islam agreed that no freedoms… But after he had the Qur’an, and the interpretations, he had found that there is a wide gap between the lives of Muslims and the rules of Islam.” (Frankfurt May 2014) “Islam, as another lawyer (32 years old) said, must be in Germany but understood anew and interpreted differently. “There is now also a different culture, a Christian culture.” Therefore, it was important not to accept the Islam of Turkey or the Arab States blindly, but to read the Qur’an as a new European and to understand it. When doing this, there would be no problems in terms of the compatibility of Islam with democracy.” (Frankfurt May 2014) Islam and democracy are compatible “The theologian, 27 years old, said that one should not generalize here, because there are also scholars who understand the Quran with current times. For example, Fethullah Gülen is firmly convinced that Islam is for freedom, justice, and human rights. The physiotherapist was yet another example, the Pakistanis Muhammad Iqba, who understood the religion as Fethullah Gülen does.” (Frankfurt May 2014) “The discussions continued mainly on the question of the compatibility of Islam with democracy. The beauty of religious life, the theologian said, that there is an opinion about it, and religion can be lived at any time and in any place. You can feel it in Germany. You have freedom of speech, justice and human rights in full swing in Europe, just as it says in the Qur’an. Accordingly, there should be no question of whether Islam and democracy are compatible… Then no aspect of either which contradict each other. The only reason why the Islamic religion was chosen because it was firmly decided that Islam is the religion that suits their interests in a modern society.” (Frankfurt May 2014) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 113 “The common discussion: “It may be that the thesis was voted 2030 years ago. Now we are in Germany the 4th generation of Muslim Turks and Arabs living together. The first generation who were guest workers in Germany. It may be that the Islamic and Christian culture was not seen in enough detail… Nowadays, however, there is more understanding of the different cultures by each other and there is no language barrier “The dentist among them continues.” (Frankfurt May 2014) “On the question of whether Islam is compatible with democracy, raised in this discussion, this is something very important and was not mentioned in the previous discussions. The accountant who deals very much with Islam and also is active in a communication means said that democracy is not a religiously legitimized domination or form of government, therefore one can not be “Christian” per se. This means that there would not be one democracy, but different opinions or forms of democracy. Accordingly, you should, if you have already made a comparison between a mainly Christian and Islamic influenced democracy, these also differ. People have different cultures, ways of life. But that universal values are the same everywhere… Since Islam also has universal values such as freedom, human righ… etc. endorsed or ignored, no contradiction between the two exists. One should not generalise, because Islamic democracy is contrary to Catholic opinion… Democracy encompasses many values and norms.” (Frankfurt May 2014) “The merchant says that justice, equality, freedom and responsibility are very important to him in life. These two he had both in Islam and in democratic Germany. Therefore, these two could be combined perfectly, and they are not in contradiction. But as soon as a democratic system prevents its religious exercise, such as eg. praying etc. he would do anything to stand for that right. For every one whether a Muslim, a Christian, Jew or Buddhist should have the opportunity to live out their religion in peace, even if the ruler is a Muslim, Christian or atheist. These are universal values which, although found in their religions nevertheless are valid for all people, and even are mandatory! By the way, could politics, thus derive democracy from the Quran: Shura, as it occurs in the Qur’an. This principle of consultation involves the mutual consultation in all aspects of life - this includes advising the ruler. Here, for example, the practice of democracy, in parliamentary bodies is compatible with the traditions of Islam. Multi-party parliamentary democracy could therefore be considered as a contemporary form of shura. So even the Qur’an writes of democracy, so… The fact is that the Islamic 114 Islam and Democracy principles are not quite identical with the democratic principles, but definitely they are not inconsistent!(Frankfurt May 2014) “On the whole, the participants completed this part of the discussion with the following statements: that Islam is not a philosophical, political or social ideology is but a religion based on revelation. The instructions from God as to who created the foundations of this religion and transmitted by the prophet:, the rules of conduct, values of people. And above all, even if there should be no democracy on earth: the preservation of peace, the balance and justice in the world would be needed!” (Frankfurt May 2014) Mingling German culture and Islam “I as a dentist have as many Christian patients who are very happy and very often come to me in practice. Yes, I can also confirm (The teacher, Turk, born and raised in Germany). As a teacher of many Christian students, I have had the experience that the parents were very critical and suspicious in the first weeks of the new school year. But actually thought that I was going to tell the children about the Turkish- Muslim culture. Although I am indeed a Muslim and a Turk, but I was born in Germany and grew up in Germany, thinking German, and living as a German and a Muslim. Only later did they noticed that I really think like German, but just have a different religion The Merchant continues: I sometimes still have problems. I must confess that of my clients 75% are non- German. But maybe I need to do more advertising for the German clientele.” (Frankfurt May 2014) “Following this discussion there was further lively discussion, there were also other critical issues. Whether or not a ‘German Islam’ would be created in Germany? (The question of a teacher, 45 years old) ‘I will not create a new Islam. But I am convinced that religions are influenced by the cultures in which they arise. Islam in Germany will receive its own coinage, but that takes time.’ (So the Rechtanswältin (32 years old) responded. During the debate a Muslim lawyer (32 years old) pursuing this development critically stated, ‘we get great popularity of the Muslim base in Germany’ so on.” (Frankfurt May 2014) Cooperation, Conciliation, Compromise 115 Samet Er, convener of both Frankfurt discussions Samet Er reported; “The discussion I, with the request that terminates at least one of the participants, a final word to serve as a summary of the project or the discussions in Germany. The accountant enlisted in the word: ?We Muslims in Germany, so my opinion, think how the Germans feel like the Germans; in short, we are German! German Muslims even better! For us it is important, but that we maintain contact with our fellow citizens, laugh with them, talk and exchange ideas. And all we can in addition to the practice of religion as it has prescribed for us God, do quite easily. We are happy that we can all live and practice Islam in peace, here in Germany, in a free and democratic state’.” (Frankfurt May 2014) CONCLUSIONS The first conclusion from studying the records of each discussion meeting is that it is virtually impossible to identify the geographic place in which a discussion took place. The second conclusion is that it is equally impossible to identify the national origin of the family of any speaker, or whether they are Sunni or Shia. It does seem rather remarkable that the similarity of response, whether from San Diego or Bonn, Winnipeg or Milan, results in the statements, and all sentiments in these statements, from all the meetings, being nearly indistinguishable. This suggests that there is an amazing and strong homogeneity in the opinions of Muslims living in the West, who are inevitably observers of Western democracy, and equal homogeneity in their understanding of the impact of such democracy on the Muslims who are living in a democracy. Their unanimous conclusions are as follows. First and foremost, democracy is not a global concept and is not a principle or ideal. It therefore is in no way comparable to Islam which is a, or the, principle or ideal of human life. Democracy is merely a “technology”. In fact, none of the meetings used the word “technology”, but referred to “a way of conducting government” or similar terms. The word “technology” was used by Professor Ali Paya1 in a public meeting at Westminster University in London in 2010, when replying to one of Amédée Turner’s presentations of the results of the project. However, the word perfectly reflects the position taken in all the lay Muslim discussions. 1 Senior Research Associate and Visiting Professor at the Centre for the Study of Democracy, Westminster University, London. 118 Islam and Democracy As to the effectiveness of this “technology”, opinions in the meetings went from probably the best (some adding of a bad lot), which was of course what, according to anecdote, Winston Churchill said many years ago. This was at one end of the scale. At the other end of the scale was the opinion of extremist students in East London who said democracy was no good because their MPs did not follow the views of their constituents. This was a complaint about the UK Parliament not responding to the antiwar demonstrations in Parliament Square over Iraq. They were complaining that democracy did not work in practice; they were not however saying that it was wrong or unacceptable in itself. Thus no one found a clash of civilizations in any of the discussions. Democracy is a mere way of doing things, while Islam is drawn down from Heaven as one discussion group said. It is impossible to tell at the present stage what forms democracy might take in the Muslim world. Mr Erdogan, then Prime Minister of Turkey said in a speech to the Egyptians in Cairo2 that they should adopt a secular state (like Turkey), adding however “a person is not a secular”. Essan Al-Erian, then deputy leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood responded with the well-established Muslim Brotherhood dictum that they look for a civil state with a religious reference in which the principles of Sharia Law would be an essential source of legislation. Since then Mohamed Morsi, when President of Egypt proposed that Christians and Jews should have their own tribunals, (not unlike the dhimma system of the Ottoman Empire?). While in a mass meeting Tahrir Square, Morsi stated that the government programme of the Muslim Brotherhood would be a distillation of Islam itself3. However, eventually all hope of democracy in any form was killed by the revolution which put Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in power. In Tunisia a more secular tendency than Morsi’s was indicated in practice though its existing and proposed constitution which state that Islam is the religion of the state. Tunisia’s father-figure Mohamed Ghannouchi indicated the probability of a hybrid partially presidential and partially parliamentary constitution. 2 3 Hurriyet Daily News, 15th September 2012. The New York Times, 23rd April 2012. Conclusions 119 The attitude of ordinary lay Muslims in the West shown in the discussions which took place before the Arab Spring shows confidence that Islam can contain democracy so long as it is not regarded as an independent and basic principle but only as a pragmatic way of conducting government. Typical illustrations of this attitude in the discussions are: “The government not going against the view of elected representatives means operating within the spirit of divine guidance of the Qur’an.” (Minneapolis 1994-6)4 “The constitution is the Qur’an which sets the legal tone. Islamic law is strict (Christians have more choice). Discipline, basic moral codes, respect. Democracy is an evolving thing that can be improved. Nomocracy.” (Dearborn I 1994-6)5 “Provided democracy is seen as a limited form of popular sovereignty, restricted and directed by God’s law, it is compatible with Islam.” (Boston II, Students 1994-6)6 “There is no conflict between democracy and Islam provided it is a mechanism for ruling and checks and balances of government, and not an ideology that is a supremacist ideology.” (Bury St Edmunds 1994-6)7 To give further examples, the following three sentences have been recorded during meetings in Northern Italy, July 2010, before the Arab spring. The second quotation from 2010 was a mixture of 30% of members of the previous discussion and the rest were new to the discussions. The last four are extracted from meetings after the commencement of the Arab spring. “Every ‘Muslim’ state has adjusted Islam according to its needs. Furthermore we have to consider that the great majority of citizens in ‘Muslim’ countries are not educated at all, and they know only either popular Islam or the one proposed by Salafiyya movements, which is 4 5 6 7 Muslim Grassroots in the West Discuss Democracy, p. 33 ibi, p. 33 ibi, p. 34 ibi, p. 41 120 Islam and Democracy of course against any form of democracy.” (Piacenza, Italy, July 2010) “(For example) in Iran scrutiny is secret, even though it is a Muslim State.” (Piacenza, Italy July 2010) “In Morocco democracy has been working in a Western way for many years, what should we learn?” (Piacenza, Italy July 2010) “The issue of compatibility is not between democracy and Islam, but between the governments of the Muslim countries and democracy! These revolts are showing the world that not only the words Islam and democracy can be put together, but that Islam needs democracy.” (Milan, Italy April 2011) “Ok ok, the revolts, but are we sure that these people are in the streets for democracy? I think that they are oppressed, and they want to get rid of the present regimes. I am not sure of what they actually want for their future. They shout BEN ALI DEGAGE, that is something all of them agree on, but each of them may wish something different after Ben Ali.” (Milan, Italy April 2011) “Muslim democracy may be different from the so called western Democracy. The idea of a new Muslim democracy is being shaped in these days in Tunisia and Egypt, and hopefully more countries will follow.” (Milan, Italy April 2011). “The people that are in streets of Tunis and Cairo are fighting to have one person one vote elections next time. In Egypt Mubarak always wins with 99% of the votes. Do you think that the Egyptians love him that much!? Come on!” (Milan, Italy, April 2011) “These uprisings are telling the world: hey, we are Arabs, we are Muslims, but we are not ignorant fellahin! It is a young revolution that is beginning.” (Milan, Italy April 2011) Sometimes these statements were an actual spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings, sparked by what they had watched on TV the previous night, but other occasions you could actually feel the passion in the participants’ words which clearly showed a renewed and young enthusiasm for the opportunities of the present. Conclusions 121 These sentiments teach those in continental Europe: passion for politics, for instance. A passion at least in some continental European countries, has been lost. At the same time the young protesters in the early stage of the so called Arab awakening showed a strong need for normal lives, in which you can live free, in which you can express yourself safely. The Arab spring, at least in its early developments, expressed a quest for normality, for a reliable rule of law. However, the situation is so fluid that we cannot know where the donkey will lead us. Despite nearly two years having passed since the beginning of the uprisings in North Africa, we are still in a time of deep and unpredictable change. One proviso repeatedly made in the discussions and that was that nothing in a Muslim democracy should happen contrary to the Qur’an. This might seem a sweeping exception, though, of course it is only a natural or indeed automatic limitation which a lay Muslim would take as read. Considering this limitation from the point of view of the work and procedure of a parliament, however, its effect is remarkably limited. Of course the Qur’an speaks (though only a little in fact) of consultation of which it approves, thus franking one general concept of democracy. As far as the legislative actions of a modern parliament is concerned, the Qur’an is only of concern with regard to a parliament’s activity in the passing of laws on crime and punishment and in legislation concerning the status and rights of women. As to crime and punishment, although many acts are forbidden in the Qur’an, only three have earthly consequences attached. All other forbidden acts are punished only in Hell (this includes apostasy and blasphemy). The four with earthly punishments are theft (cutting of the hand, unless the thief repents and restores the property), adultery and false accusations of adultery (100 and 80 strokes, respectively) and lewdness among men for which an unspecified earthly punishment is referred to. Finally, one should mention a fifth act, waging war against God and his Prophet, Muhammad. But this is literally impossible now, being clearly applicable to the war between Mecca and Medina, for which crucifixion etc., is specified. 122 Islam and Democracy The various versions of the Hadith which prescribe earthly punishments for these and many other actions are not agreed among Muslim scholars and imams, and therefore should not form the basis of an unquestionable constitution appropriate to the Muslim world. As to the status and rights of women, there are inequalities for women as witnesses and with regard to the right to inheritance, rights over children, divorce and, in marriage, “high-handedness” towards a husband is to be punished. In fact many of these inequalities have already in modern times been ameliorated in a considerable number of Muslim countries. These inequalities are important, but it could not be said that they, or the punishments for crime as listed above, would negate the whole purpose of a democratic parliament. As a postscript it may be added that there is, however, one indication of a basic difference of approach to democracy between the West and what would be natural and indeed essential to Muslims. This is the issue of blasphemy. This arose in acute form in late 2012. In the US, blasphemy has never been a federal crime (though it exists in some state laws). In Britain it was abandoned in 2008. It still exist in some continental European countries and indeed has been used against Muslims, but not in their favour for instance in France recently. However, though the issue never arose in the lay Muslim discussion of the Project, there is no doubt that Muslims in general would unquestionably support the exercise of blasphemy laws. The strength of feeling associated with the issue is indicated in a speech by President Morsi at the United Nations in New York in September 2012 when he said “we expect from others what they expect from us, that we will all respect our respective cultural specifics.”8 It is clear that he was unaware that this would not be the case in the West. The issue arose out of the “Innocence of Muslims”, a film put on the internet by a provocateur in the US. Without doubt all Muslims would support and indeed insist on a law against blasphemy. 8 New York Times 26 September 2012 Conclusions 123 Finally, as mentioned above, it must be reiterated that Western democracies, particularly the British, US and Canadian are robust, and though the pains and frustrations of being in opposition after losing an election are real, and though power passes from one to another usually on very small swings on the electorate, their political systems can bear the strain. This is most certainly not the case in new democracies where losing an election may lead to fears that the losers will not have a second chance. It is therefore essential that all voters in an election in a young democracy feel they own the parliament and the government. It is theirs whether they win or lose. They must have confidence in the system. It would seem therefore that coalition government should be a vital feature of any young democracy. This is in harmony with the three basic principles of Islam: conciliation, community and consultation. These principles call for coalitions of interests to be the cornerstone of Muslim democratic procedure. SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY Abū-Rabīʿ, Ibrāhīm (ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Contemporary Islamic Thought, Malden (USA)–Oxford, Blackwell, 2006. Akbar, Ahmed, Journey into America, the Challenge of Islam, Brookings Institution Press, 2010. Alharbi, Ibrahim S., Democracy in Islamic and international law, Bloomington, IN : AuthorHouse, 2011. Allievi Stefano, Dassetto Felice, Maréchal Brigitte, Nielsen Jørgen (ed.), Muslims in the Enlarged Europe, Leiden, Brill, 2003. Amghar, S., Boubekeur, A., Emerson, M. (ed.), European Islam, Challenges for Society and Public Policy, Brussels, CEPS, 2007. An-Na‘im, Abdullahi A., “Universality of Human Rights: An Islamic Perspective”, in Ando N. (ed), Japan and International Law: Past, Present and Future, The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 1999, pp. 311-325. An-Na‘im, Abdullahi A., Toward an Islamic Reformation: Civil Liberties, Human Rights and International Law, Syracuse/New York, AUC/Syracuse Univ. Press, 1990. An-Na‘im, Abdullahi A. (ed.), Proselytization and Communal SelfDetermination in Africa, Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books 1999. An-Na‘im, Abdullahi A., Towards an Islamic Reformation, civil liberties, human rights and international law, Syracuse, Syracuse University Press 1996. An-Na‘im, Abdullahi A., Islam and the Secular State: Negotiating the Future of Shari‘a, Atlanta, GA Harvard University Press, 2009. Apap, Joanna and Tchorbadjiyska, Angelina, What about the Neighbors? The Impact of Schengen along the EU’s External Borders, CEPS Working Document No. 210/October 2004, Brussels. Ardic, Nurullah, Islam and the Politics of Secularism: The Caliphate and Middle Eastern Modernization in the Early 20th Century, London, Routledge, 2012. Aroua, Ahmed, Islam et démocratie, Alger, Editions Maison des livres, 1990. Aziz, Barbara N. Swimming up the Tigris, real life encounters with Iraq, Gainesville, FL. University Press of Florida, 2007. 126 Islam and Democracy Bajt, Veronika, The Muslim Other in Slovenia. Intersections of a religious and ethnic minority. Benard, Cheryl, Civil democratic Islam: partners, resources, and strategies, Santa Monica, CA, RAND, National Security Research Division, 2003. Bhutto, Benazir, Reconciliation: Islam, democracy, and the West, New York : Harper, 2008. Bowen, J., L’islam à la française, Steinkis Editions, 2011. Bowen, John R., Why the French don’t like Headscarves: Islam, the State and Public Space, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2007. Bozzo Anna - Luizrad Pierre Jean, Les sociétés civiles dans le monde musulman, Paris, La Découverte, 2011. Cenker, Michal, From reified collectivities to multiple Islams: putting Muslim migrants in Slovakia into context. Cesari, Jocelyne, L’islam à l’épreuve de l’Occident, La Découverte, 2004. Cesari, Jocelyne, When Islam and Democracy Meet: Muslims in Europe and in the United States, New York, Palgrave MacMillan, 2004. Cianitto, Cristiana, L’incitamento all’odio religioso: Stati Uniti, India,Gran Bretagna, Italia, Giappichelli Editore Torino, 2012. Cochran, Judith, Democracy in the Middle East: the impact of religion and education, Lanham, Md. : Lexington Books, 2011. Cohen Joshua - Chasman Deborah (ed.), Islam and the challenge of democracy / Khaled Abou El Fadl, Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press, 2004. Cole Durham Jr, W., Torfs R., Kirkham, David M., Scott, C., Islam, Europe and Emerging Legal Issues, Ashgate Publishers 2012. Dabashi, Hamid, Islamic Liberation Theology: Resisting the Empire, London – New York, Routledge, 2008. Dallal, Ahmad, Appropriating the Past, Twentieth-Century reconstruction of pre-Modern Islamic Thought, Islamic Law & Society; Oct. 2000, Vol. 7 Issue 3, pp. 325-35. Dassetto, Felice, L’Iris et Le Croissant - Bruxelles et l’islam au défi de la co-inclusion, Universitaires de Louvain, 2011 (still being printed). Eidelberg, Paul, Democratizing Islam, Shaarei Tikva, Israel, Ariel Center for Policy Research, 2002. El Hassan bin Talal, His Royal Highness Prince, To be a Muslim: Islam, peace, and democracy, Brighton, UK - Portland, Or., Sussex Academic Press, 2004. Esposito, John – Mogahed, Dalia, Who speaks for Islam, what a billion Muslims really think, Washington DC, Gallup Press, 2007. Esposito, John – Voll, John, Islam and Democracy, New York-Oxford, Oxford Univ. press, 1996. Ettmueller, E. Ursula, Islam and Democracy, in Astrolabio, Revista Select Bibliography 127 Internacional de Filosofia, 2006, n. 3, available online at: http://www. ub.edu/astrolabio/Articulos3/ARTICULOEliane.pdf. Faizi Kabuli, Niaz, Democracy according to Islam, Pittsburgh, Pa., Dorrance Pub. Co., 1994. Fantelli, Paola, Islam en Italie. Relations entre Etat et culte musulman à la lumière de l’expérience francaise, Editions Universitaires Européennes, 2011. Feldman, Noah, After Jihad: America and the struggle for Islamic democracy, New York, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2003. Fetzer, Joel S. And Soper, Christopher J., Muslims and the State in Britain, France and Germany, New York, Cambridge University Press. Galbraith, P.W.,The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War Without End, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2007 Ghalyūn, Burhān, Islam politique. La modernité trahie, Paris, La Découverte, 1997. Ghalyūn, Burhān, La longue quête de justice du monde arabe, in “L’Événement Européen”, Mars 1991, pp. 81-94. Ghalyūn, Burhān, La malaise arabe. L’Etat contre la nation, Paris, La Découverte, 1991. Ghamari-Tabrizi, Behrooz, Islam and Dissent in Post-Revolutionary Iran: the religious politics of Abdolkarim Soroush, London-New York, I. B. Tauris, 2000. Ghodsee, Kristen, Islam in postsocialist Bulgaria: ethnicity, religious revival and social justice. Górak-Sosnowska, Muslims in Poland and Eastern Europe. Widening the European Discourse on Islam, K. (ed.), University of Warsaw, Warsaw 2011. Guolo, Renzo, L’ Islam è compatibile con la democrazia?, Laterza, 2007. Haenni, Patrick – Lathion, Stéphane (directed by), Les Minarets de la discorde, Gollion, SWI, Infolio Editions, 2009. Hashemi, Nadir, Islam, secularism and liberal democracy. Toward a Democratic Theory for Muslim Societies. Oxford University Press, 2009. Hefner, Robert W., Civil Islam: Muslims and democratization in Indonesia, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 2000. Hellyer, H.A., The Muslims of Europe, Edinburgh University Press, 2009. Hilmy Masdar, Islamism and democracy in Indonesia: piety and pragmatism, Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2010. Hourani, Albert, Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age 1798-1939, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995. Hunter, Shireen T., Islam, Europe’s Second Religion: The New Social, Cultural, and Political Landscape, New York, Praeger, 2002. Hunter, Shireen T., The future of Islam and the West: Clash of 128 Islam and Democracy civilizations or Peaceful coexistence?, Westport, CT, U.S.A., The Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1998. Huntington, Samuel, Islam and the Clash of Civilizations, in «Foreign Affairs» 72 (1993). Jenkins, Philip, God’s Continent: Christianity, Islam and Europe’s Religious Crisis, Oxford-New York, Oxford University Press, 2007. Kausar, Zeenath, Democratization and the contemporary Islamic resurgence: democracy versus shuracracy, Batu Caves, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia: Thinker’s Library, 2008. Kepel, Gilles, Á l’Ouest d’Allah, Paris, Editions du Seuil, 1994. Krotofil, Joanna, ‘If I am to be a Muslim, I have to be a good one’. Polish migrant women embracing Islam and reconstructing identity in dialogue with self and others. Kruase, Wanda (ed) (2009), Citizenship, Security & Democracy: Muslim Engagement with the West, London & Istanbul: AMSS UK & SETA. Lamghari, Younous, L’ islam en entreprise: la diversité culturelle en question, Academia, 2012. Laurence, Jonathan and Vaisse, Justin, Integrating Islam, Political and religious Challenges in Contemporary France, Washington D.C., The Brooking Institution Press, 2006. Lee, Robert D., Overcoming Tradition and Modernity. The Search for Islamic Authenticity, Boulder, CO., Westview Press, 1997. Maréchal, Brigitte, The Muslim Brothers in Europe: Roots and Discourse, Leiden-Boston, Brill 2008. Menendez de Valle, Emilio, Islam y democracia en el mundo que viene, Madrid: Instituto Universitario de Desarrollo y Cooperacion: Libros de la Catarata, 1997. Mernissi, F., Islam and Democracy, Fear of the Modern World, Berkeley, California, Basic Books, 2002. Millière, Guy, Qui a peur de l’islam! : la démocratie, est-elle soluble dans l’islam?, Paris, Michalon, 2004. Molodikova, Irina, Formation of new Muslim communities in new member states: the case of Hungary. Moussalli, Ahmad S., The Islamic quest for democracy, pluralism, and human rights, Gainesville, University Press of Florida, 2001. Muqtedar Khan, M.A. (ed.), Islamic democratic discourse: theory, debates, and philosophical perspectives, Lanham, MD, Lexington Books, 2006. Nalborczyk, Agata S., Mosques in Poland. Past and present. Nielsen Jørgen, Muslims in Western Europe, Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 1992. Nielsen, Jørgen S. - Akgönül, Samim - Alibašić, Ahmet - Maréchal Brigitte - Moe, Christian. Yearbook of Muslims in Europe, Brill, 2009. Select Bibliography 129 Nielsen, Jorgen S., Muslims in Europe in the Late Twentieth Century, in Yazbeck Haddad, Yvonne and Haddad, Wadi Z. (ed.), ChristianMuslim Encounters, Gainesville, FL, USA, University Press of Florida, 1995, pp. 314-327. Nonneman, Gerb – Noblock, Tim – Szajkovski, Bogdan (ed.), Muslim Communities in the New Europe, Reading-Berkshire, Ithaca Press, 1996. Nussbaum, Martha C., The New Religious Intolerance Overcoming the Politics of Fear in an Anxious Age, Harvard University Press, 2012. Osman, Fathi (known as Fatḥi ‘Uthmān), Monotheists and the Other: an Islamic Perspective in the Era of Religious Pluralism, in “The Muslim World” 88 (3-4), pp. 353-363. Peach, Ceri and Vertovec, Steven, Islam in Europe. The Politics of Religion and Community, London, Macmillan, 1997. Pędziwiatr, Konrad, “The Established and Newcomers” in Islam in Poland or the intergroup relations within the Polish Muslim community Peucker, M. and Akbarzadeh, S., Muslim Active Citizenship in the West, London-New York, Routledge, 2014. Platzdasch, Bernhard, Islamism in Indonesia : politics in the emerging democracy, Singapore : Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2009. Račius, Egdūnas, Islam in Lithuania: revival at the expense of survival? Rahman, Fazlur, Islam and Modernity. Transformation of an Intellectual Tradition, Chicago-London, The University of Chicago Press, 1982. Ramadan, Tariq, In the Footsteps of the Prophet, Lessons from the Life of Muhammad, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2006. Ramadan, Tariq, Islam, the West and the Challenges of Modernity, London, The Islamic Foundation, 2004. Ramadan, Tariq, Les Musulmans d’Occident et l’avenir de l’Islam, Paris, Sindbad, Actes Sud 2003. Ramadan, Tariq, Les musulmans dans la laïcité: responsabilités et droits des musulmans dans les sociétées occidentales, Lyon, Tawhid, 1998. Ramadan, Tariq, To be a European Muslim, London, The Islamic Foundation, 2004. Ramadan, Tariq, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, New York, Oxford University Press, 2004. Roy, Olivier, Vers un Islam Européen, Paris, Esprit, 1999. Sadri, M.- Sadri, S. (eds), Reason, Freedom and Democracy in Islam, New York-Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press, 2000. Sadri, Mahmoud - Sadri, Ahmad (ed. And Trans.), Reason, Freedom, & democracy in Islam: essential writings of Abdolkarim Soroush, New York, N.Y. : Oxford University Press, 2000. 130 Islam and Democracy Safi, Omid (ed.), Progressive Muslims: on Justice, Gender and Pluralism, Oxford, OneWorld, 2003. Salvatore, Armando – Eickelman, Dale F. (ed.), Public Islam and the common good, Leiden – Boston, Brill, 2004. Sevvindi, Navval, Contemporary Islamic Conversations, M. Fethullah Gülen on Turkey, Islam and the West, Albany, NY, State University of New York, 2008. Sezai Tezel, Yahya – Schoenbohm (ed.), Wulf, World, Islam, and democracy, Ankara, Konrad-Adenauer-Foundation, 1999. Sicard, Claude, L’islam au risque de la démocratie, Paris, FrançoisXavier de Guibert, 2011. Siddiqi, Shujaat Ullah, Islam versus democracy: vis-a-vis Pakistan, Karachi : Royal Book Co., 1992. Sisk, Timothy D., Islam and Democracy, Religion, Politics and Power in the Middle East, Washington, D.C. : United States Institute of Peace, 1992. Sughra, Ahmed, Seen and not heard, Voices of young British Muslims, Markfield, Policy research Centre, 2009. Tamimi, Azzam S., Rachid Ghannouchi: a democrat within Islamism, Oxford - New York, Oxford University Press, 2001. Telhine, Mohammed, Islam et les musulmans en France, Paris, Harmattan, 2010. Tirado Chase, Antony, Human Rights, Revolution, and Reform in the Muslim World, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, CO, USA, 2012. Todorov, Tzvetan, La peur des barbares: au-dela du choc des civilisations, Paris, R. Laffont, 2008. Valensi, Lucette, Ces étrangers familiers. Musulmans en Europe (XVIe-XVIIIe siècles), Payot, Paris, 2012. Vogt, Kari – Larsen, Lena – Moe, Christian, New Directions in Islamic Thought, The Middle East, 2009. Yarosh, Oleg - Brylov, Denys, Muslim communities and Islamic network institutions in Ukraine: contesting authorities in shaping of Islamic localities. Yatzbeck Haddad, Yvonne and I. Smith, Jane, Muslim Minorities in the West, Visible and Invisible, Oxford, Altamira Press, 2002. Zarka, Yves Charles, L’islam en France, Puf -Paris, 2009. Zolondek, Leon, The French Revolution in Arabic Literature of the Nineteenth Century, in «The Moslem World» (1967), pp. 202-211. Zucca, Lorenzo (ed.) Law, State and Religion in the New Europe. Debates and Dilemmas, Camil Ungureanu, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona. ADDENDUM: ADDRESS AT JENA UNIVERSITY By Amédée Turner 7 June 2018 in the presence of Dr. Davide Tacchini of the University Islam and Democracy I last spoke here in Jena in 1989 or 1990. I have not been back since. At that time the leader of the German Christian Democrats in the European Parliament of which I was a member, and I paid the first visit from the West to this part of Germany. He went on to make a speech somewhere else. The car journey here was through beautiful countryside completely untouched by modernity. But in the town there was the strong smell of Trabant cars, there was no paint on any doors or windows, - there was no one in the streets and I had great difficulty finding out where my three small meetings in the town were. The small audiences gave me a very quiet welcome. Earlier in 1989 I had been attending a meeting of the European Parliament in the Bundestag. It was next to the border and we had to confine our talks to the rooms on the west side of the building as the Soviets trained listening devices on all the rooms facing them. Much earlier in the 1980s I had designed a European flag with the German Christian Democrats. I had put a map of the Common Market which included, of course, only West Germany. The German MEPs naturally banned it as it excluded Eastern Germany. No one looking at the modern Europe knows what is the true relationship of Muslims in Europe to Europe itself, - or, just as important, the effect we have on them. In Germany Turks have been here as guest workers from the 1960s, now it is Muslims from all over the globe and of all religious types – Sunni and Shia. In France, it was north Africans, and in Britain Indians. 132 Islam and Democracy We know very little about them. We tend to forget they know us much better than we know them as they live amongst us. But they too, are most often relatively ignorant about the country they live in. In Britain, for instance, there are large groups in towns in the Midlands which are nearly 100% Muslim and who are quite unknowing about the native British, and not really particularly keen to learn more. In the US and Canada, the Muslims are much better integrated as they are relatively few and well scattered among native Americans. However, in Britain a large proportion of Muslims are in active positive contact with native British people among whom they live well-mixed apart from despite the towns where they form exclusive enclaves. I do not know enough about the position in Germany of Turks and Arabs. I know the situation in France is not good, and of course Italy is flooded with refugees who should have been spread over all of the European Union. So the problem of Muslim integration in Europe is great and no proactive solutions have been found or even proposed in Europe. In 2004 long before Islam became a major issue in Europe, there was a small group of Anglican and Episcopalian priests from Britain and America (of which I was the only non-ordained member) who had the duty of advising the Anglican Observer to the United Nations (a semi-diplomatic post in New York) we took up the issue of Islam and the West. At that time, 2004, Muslims in the West were not a pressing issue. We took up the matter simply because the then Anglican Observer was a woman priest from an island in the Pacific who had never met a Muslim when she arrived New York, and we felt she needed guidance. Almost by chance in the course of this, we decided without any particular objectives in mind to ask Anglican and Episcopalian priests in Britain and the US with whom any one of us had any personal contact to approach Muslims in their parish and arrange discussions with them with them and their own parishioners. The selection of parishes was purely haphazard and we contacted anyone we could think of anywhere in Britain or America. The result in the end was 38 groups in the US and Britain, Addendum: Address at Jena University 133 Muslim and Christian, each holding three two and a half-hour discussions and making handwritten notes by two of their number in each group of all that was said by the Muslims who were present. All these handwritten reports still exist on scrappy bits of paper and will be included in the book which Davide Tacchini and I are now publishing. Later the whole exercise was extended to Canada, Italy, France and Germany over the years from 2004 to 2014. Thus the exercise included the whole period of the Arab Spring and covered most of the western democratic world. Nevertheless, even after all this, the Muslims living in the West still know much more about us than we do about them. So what do Muslims in Europe nowadays think and feel? They are a huge rock just under the surface of the water. What will happen to society in Europe and US? Will we all adapt or will the differences become irreconcilable? Of course there are Muslims in the West who do not want accommodation and Europeans also who do not want it. I think so far only in Germany has European hostility to Islam been formalised as a political party. In France, UK and Italy, there seems to be basic sociological reasons why expressly antiimmigrant parties have not appeared there also. There is certainly no suggestion of such a reaction to Muslims in Canada and it is too soon to say what will be the long term effect of President Trump’s supporters’ attitude in the US. As I said, in 2004, long before any of these issues became active, the British and American priests who I referred to before made lists of questions which we felt would be challenging. These comprised; • Is democracy compatible with Islam? • human rights • respect for law and rule of law • globally consistent justice and equity • materialism • cultural specificity • and civil society. 134 Islam and Democracy It was certainly in the backs of our mind that in 1993 Samuel Huntington of Harvard had referred trenchantly to a “Clash of Civilizations” between Islam and the West. Although the subject “Islam and Democracy” was first on our list of subjects, we did not at that stage give it primacy. It was, we thought, merely first among equals. Certainly we considered discussing Islam and Christianity, but decided without difficulty that the real possibility of conflict of views was between Islam and western Democracy, because Democracy rather than Christianity was the more basic difference in the present age. But to jump ahead for a moment it turned out that the Muslims whom we approached in the US and Britain found that when they had fully explored their views on Islam and Democracy, they were able to dispose of all the other subjects quite quickly as being of far less significance. The attendees at these meetings were whole families, business people, engineers, school teachers and students, – school teachers forming an important part. But the meetings excluded imams except the imam of the local Muslims who had cooperated with the local Christian priest in bringing together those attending. University academics were excluded. No one group had any knowledge at all about the other groups that were meeting or where they were, how they were established, or what their views were. In the US and Britain, 38 groups completed their work. At an early stage, it was agreed that those attending would only be identified by their first name. This was at the request of one group in the US which was concerned that the US security authorities could take an interest in the meetings. But the age and occupation of each member were recorded. We called the meetings “roundtable discussions”. More details of these early meetings are not available as each group worked according to its own members’ inclination and there was little idea that the results might prove to be of wider significance. However all meetings received quite detailed written instructions as to how to proceed with their discussions, which the chairman was supposed to read out. Whether he did or not I have Addendum: Address at Jena University 135 no idea. But reading the handwritten notes later makes it clear that those attending realised they were doing something novel that might be of significance beyond their circle. Now to move on fast, nothing was done with the records though we were aware of the value of the results. Notably it seems pleasingly surprising that all the groups in the US and Britain were so remarkably similar in their discussions and conclusions. In 2007 Davide Tacchini joined the operation and we held discussion meetings throughout Canada. We also realised that the presence of Anglican/Episcopalian supporters at discussion meetings was not necessary, and the meetings could be comprised solely of Muslim. Conflicting views were specifically noted at all times. As I mentioned normally an imam, unless a source of contacts, was not present. Each discussion group was totally self-sufficient with no contact with other groups. 38 of these groups in Britain and the US probably comprised about 400 lay Muslim members. I must stress here that normally all reports of discussions show completely haphazard matters being discussed with very little consistent development of themes. They appear disjointed comments and it is not clear who said what. But as I mentioned only the remarks of the Muslims present are recorded. The exception to the disjointed introduction of the discussions was a meeting in Torino by Davide Tacchini held in 2010, that is many years after the US and British discussions of 2004. For the first time those attending reported a remarkable extended discussion of the subject which undoubtedly had been in the back of many attendees’ minds from the start of the program but had never been set down on paper before. It produced a very developed consistent argument carried forward by a number of members of the group in concert which, for the first time, evidenced a group who wondered what the purpose and possible effects of these roundtable discussions might actually be. This was 6 years after the Project started. Torino 2010 “I recently read in a famous Italian newspaper that Democracy might be achieved only by “moderate Muslims”. But who are they? I have never met moderate Muslims in my life.” “I have heard that moderate Muslims are the ones who pray three times a day instead of five.” “If they prayed three times they would be almost ok!” “Theoretically Islam is moderate in itself, as a whole. It is definitely a moderate religion, but in Italy the situation is different. So many controversial Muslim exponents are defined as moderate Muslims by politicians and the media.” “The ones you are talking about are not Muslims at all!” “…If you find a Muslim in a disco, for example, it does not mean he is moderate, in fact he is a sinner. Some terms, such as the one we are talking about, have been imposed by Western societies. Even democracy in some cases is something that has been imposed from outside Islam.” “I hate moderate Muslims. These are the ones who accept to see their peoples subjugated and their lands robbed and destroyed. Western democracy is not a solution.” “Being moderate Muslims means to be sinners. It means to forget Allah to please the westerners…” “Anyway the Muslim way to democracy will lead to something that will be different from the Western model of democracy.” “Islam is the basis of our life. Islam is everything in the ArabMuslim world.” “Islam has its own resources for democracy, the problem is to be able to use these resources with the ruling regimes that are currently subjugating us. Voting is our only way to freedom.” “Who calls himself Moderate, admits that his religion is difficult and unbearable.” “Islam has any single answer to any single problem in the texts and in the word of God. One person-one vote is a Muslim idea, it is not something borrowed from the West.” Before this meeting in 2010 the 36 US and British, and then the 5 to 6 Canadian groups, had established a consistent series of lines of thought of the compatibility of Islam and democracy. Of course at any time, someone might have kicked over the traces and said that Christianity and Islam were incompatible. This view is well established in some strains of Islamic thought and opinion today, but in fact no such view was put forward at any time in any of the groups in the US, Canada or Europe. This of course is of no significance; it is attributable, in general to the first of the meetings arranged with Muslims on both continents being obtained through Christian churches, or in the case of Italy, a Christian university. In addition in France and Germany the meetings were arranged through organisations sympathetic to encouraging harmony with Muslims in those countries. Of course we know that Muslims exist who hold the view that Islam and democracy are incompatible, so it cannot be said that democracy is compatible with all current manifestations of Islam. Nonetheless, among different Muslims in Europe and the US, the totality of discussion indicates that Islam and democracy normally can co-exist. It is not possible to examine the attitudes: - friendly, supportive, quizzical, and chary of the members who attended the meetings from the records made. However one discussion group in Milan in 2010 recorded a comment by someone attending indicating the difficulties of gauging lay Muslim attitudes in Europe. Milan 2010 “Today I have realised the fear that Muslims feel in Italy. Many people do not agree to come here and take part in this meeting because they are suspicious, wary.” My general impression is that Muslim attitudes in the West to the communities they live in was most free and easy in the US and Canada, slightly less so in Britain, possibly because of large concentrations exclusively of Muslims who are less integrated in society. The atmosphere in France and Italy appears to be far less easy. It is more difficult to assess the position in Germany and notably whether there is any difference in the attitude between that of Turks and Arabs. In France, a very successful meeting was held in Paris run by a charitable organisation set up to support Muslims. On the other hand two senior Muslim civil servants in the Paris bureaucracy 138 Islam and Democracy responsible for the northern banlieu of Paris, which has a large population of Muslims, failed over a considerable number of years, despite repeated meetings with them, to set up a discussion meeting of Muslims. In addition in spite of repeated promises of action by the leading Muslim in Uzes, a small town in southern France with a large Muslim population where I have many long standing ties, no meeting has taken place. In Germany the contact was at first was with a number of imans, but these led nowhere and there was strong sense of bureaucratic inactivity among them. But eventually government authorities in Berlin achieved contacts for us with Muslims in Bonn who arranged a meeting of a large group of a range of typical classes of Muslims, according to occupation, who produced a very balanced report of their views. (The only problem being was that for some unaccountable reason this typical cross-section of perfectly ordinary Muslims was selected from all over Germany rather that in Bonn itself thus leading to enormous travelling and hotel costs). The results however were typical of any ordinary locally organised meeting. Four meetings were then arranged through a private contact in Frankfurt in 2014 and these were also wholly satisfactory. Conclusions Taking the more than 60 discussion groups in US, Canada, UK, France, Italy and Germany, before the occurrence of the “Arab Spring” and during the next three years after it, democracy was universally placed as acceptable, but only as a pragmatic way of providing government and having no specific relationship with Islam itself. Democracy does not impinge on, does not invalidate, the only absolute and prime principles relating to the life of mankind and mankind’s relationship to God. Democracy was condemned by some as not working but by none as unworkable. The contacts with six to seven hundred lay Muslims in over 60 locations in the democratic West did not find any of who we know to regard democracy as incompatible with Islam. But this is Addendum: Address at Jena University 139 a question of, as I mentioned, that there will have been a degree of self selection by those attending. Views on democracy ranged from “probably the best form of government”, (Central London students) on the one hand, to on the other hand to the most quizzical: “In theory democracy sounds good but in practice it has many flaws… Members of Parliament do not necessarily reflect the views of the people… Democrats of Western governments are good at creating myths and illusions.” (East London students) However this was during the Iraqi war. Islam versus Christianity could not now be the cause of war except perhaps in Africa. But in Islam, Sunni and Shia are actually fighting in Syria and one could well envisage wars with Hindus in Asia. If there was a war between a non-Muslim European country and an Islamic country, it would be territorial not civilisational. In the discussions the question was put “Is there a clash of civilizations between Islam and democracy?” and in all cases, the answer was “No”. Democracy for the purpose of all the discussions was defined as one person one vote and not one person one vote one time. Minorities were to be protected, the ballot was to be secret and the government was to follow the view of the majority. During the period of these studies there appeared the “Arab Spring” in 2011. Much, too much, but the Western press, was expected from this apparent watershed. But apart from favourable developments in Tunisia, it has failed to have any impact on events. And, the Arab Spring did not have any apparent effect on our Muslim discussions. It was never even referred to. In conclusion I would reinforce: - consultation, consensus and general consent were the key points of the discussions. The two extreme views were- first, democracy is “probably the best form of government” and at the other extreme, democracy is unacceptable in practice because it does not work. It should be well noted that this was a pragmatic view not an expression of principle. It might be noted that so far as the Qur’an is concerned Mohammed is urged by God to consult the people when ruling in Medina, but He is then left to make his own decision as to 140 Islam and Democracy what action should be taken. This of course cannot in any sense be called democracy. In fact even consultation is only referred to twice in the Qur’an. Typical views were: Savannah 2004/5 “Democracy is part of Islam but principles are dictated in general in the Qur’an rather than written by people.” Torino 2010 “In modern times Muslim people have been ruled by tyrants, once we get our freedom, democracy in its purest way will flourish.” Boston Students II 2004/5 “Popular sovereignty is rejected completely because Islamic states should be based on consultation or Shura (interpretation of Sharia) and this is all-encompassing so humans cannot create their own legal system beyond the Qur’an and Sharia. Yet the Qur’an does not offer an ideal political system. It praises collective decision-making for the common good, the Qur’an elevates collective decision-making from a recommendation to a requirement.” Minneapolis 2004/5 “Government not going against views of elected representatives means operating within the spirit of divine guidance of the Qur’an.” Wimbledon 2004/5 “In Muslim politics there is a tradition of trying to achieve consensus after consultation in the community.” Oxford 2004/5 “One participant spoke for us all in saying that, ‘Under the democracy, all minorities should be respected, and looked after and protected.’ We all recognised the right of the minority to express their Addendum: Address at Jena University 141 views without suppression but nevertheless the need to accept the will of the majority.” Bury St Edmunds 2004/5 “There is not conflict between democracy and Islam provided it is a mechanism for ruling and checks and balances of government, and not an ideology that is a supremacist ideology.” City of London, young office workers 2004/5 “All agreed on the introduction of democracy into Islamic countries. The only question being what is the ideological position of democracy in an Islamic state? Is it an ideal in itself or merely a pragmatic means of achieving better government? This should shape the way western governments presented democracy to the Islamic world.” Milan July 2010 “The idea of majority, and not unanimity is at the heart of Muslim history. Abu Bakar has been elected by the majority not unanimously.” Wimbledon 2004/5 “In Muslim politics there is a tradition of trying to achieve consensus after consultation in the community.” Boston I 2004/5 “Islam is to do with how you get the sense of the people, how are their interests and needs represented, and all of them not just the majority.” Vermont II 2004/5 “We need to find within the Qur’an a suitable system. Democracy is not suitable for several reasons. It is based on European ideas of the prime importance of the individual. In the M.E. the important thing is the community. The family, the clan, the tribe and on up. Historically it was the Qur’an that united warring tribes.” 142 Islam and Democracy A dentist, Frankfurt May 2014 “Now we are in Germany the 4th generation of Muslim Turks and Arabs living together. The first generation who were guest workers in Germany. It may be that the Islamic and Christian culture was not seen in enough detail… Nowadays, however, there is more understanding of the different cultures by each other and there is no language barrier.” Frankfurt May 2014 A merchant said “Justice, equality, freedom and responsibility are very important to him in life. These two he had both in Islam and in democratic Germany. Therefore, these two could be combined perfectly, and they are not in contradiction. But as soon as a democratic system prevents its religious exercise, such as eg. praying etc. he would do anything to stand for that right. For every one whether a Muslim, a Christian, Jew or Buddhist should have the opportunity to live out their religion in peace, even if the ruler is a Muslim, Christian or atheist.” Perhaps the one conclusion one can make at the present stage is that one gets a strong indication from the body of the comments that democracy leading to coalition by different groups is the answer rather than the majoritorian democratic practices common to Britain, France, US and to a lesser extent Germany. Finally, as mentioned above, it must be reiterated that Western democracies are governed solely by the party with the majority, particularly in Britain, the US and Canada. They are robust, and though the pains and frustrations of being in opposition after losing an election, which we will know are real, and though power passes from one to another, usually on very small swings on the electorate, their political systems can bear the strain. British, Americans, French and German democratic system confidently. This most certainly would not be the case in new democracies where losing an election may lead to fears that the losers will not have a second chance. It is therefore essential that all voters in an election in a young democracy feel they own the parliament and the government. It is Addendum: Address at Jena University 143 theirs whether they win or lose. They must have confidence in the system. It would seem therefore that coalition government should be a vital feature of any young democracy. This is in harmony with the three basic principles of Islam: conciliation, community and consultation. These principles call for coalitions of interests to be the cornerstone of Muslim democratic procedure. Now here is a rather alarming last minute post-script which I must mention but which I cannot explain. I must refer to a news report of March this year, about which I have no details but which reported a poll of German Muslims that; • 47% held that it was more important to abide by religious commands than by the laws of the state in which one lives • 32% would wish to try to re-erect the social order in Mohammed’s time • 50% regard Islam as the only one true religion APPENDIX The full report of the roundtable discussions in Britain and the US 2004-6 Methodological approach At the start of the discussion on democracy an introductory note was read out so that the participants knew the full range of the issues to be involved. They were asked not to be distracted by peculiarities in British, US or other countries’ democratic practices, but to consider the essentials of democracy as consisting of: -One person one vote. -The government to comply with the majority opinion of the elected representatives. -Protection of minorities in countries where there was likely to be a permanent minority (whether racial, ethnic or religious); and, that an election by one person-one vote resulting in the elected representative body giving up its powers and admitting an undemocratic form of government (“one person, one vote, one time”) was not to be regarded as government by democratic processes for the purposes of the discussions. 1. Is democracy compatible with Islam? 1.1 Essential reservation regarding democracy -Statements 1.2 Governance and Islam -The importance of consensus in Islam -The importance of consultation in Islam -Idealistic attitudes 1.3 Democracy through one person one vote 146 Islam and Democracy -Negative towards democracy -Neutral to democracy -Cautious statements about the merits and acceptability of democracy -Pragmatic acceptance of or support for democracy -Statements supportive of democracy 1.4 References to modern Muslim states -General -Malaysia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iran and Turkey -Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Syria, UAE, Jordan and Pakistan 1.5 Minorities 1.6 Political parties -Most comments show support for the presence of political parties 1.7 “One person one vote one time” 2. Human rights 2.1 Introduction 2.2 General and compendious statements 2.3 Women and family 2.4 Freedom of thought and belief 2.5 Freedom of speech 2.6 Equal Treatment 2.7 Human Rights and Punishment 3. Respect for law and rule of the law 3.1 Perceived weaknesses in the Western rule of law 3.2 Perceived weaknesses in the law and the rule of law in Islam or in particular Muslim states 3.3 Muslims in some groups commented on international law 3.4 Explanations of and comment on Sharī‘a 4. Globally consistent justice and equity 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Concepts of justice and equity Appendix 147 4.3 Criticisms of the West 4.4 Criticisms of particular Muslim states 4.5 Solutions to injustice 5. Materialism 5.1 Introduction 5.2 General statements on the nature of materialism 5.3 How materialism affects society 5.4 Global effects 6. Cultural Specificity 6.1 Introduction 6.2 General statements by Muslims on culture 6.3 Lists and descriptions of cultural conduct 7. Freedom and self-government 7.1 Introduction 7.2 General Statements 7.3 Aspects of freedom and self-government of concern to Muslims 7.4 Muslim action 8. Civil Society 8.1 Introduction 8.2 Comments on civil society 8.3 Order of priority in the institutions of civil government 8.4 Activities of the institutions of civil society 148 Islam and Democracy Statements made in the roundtable discussions in Britain and the USA “Nothing contrary to Islam shall happen.” (Leicester). 149 “A democratic constitution should enshrine Islamic fundamental belief, as in the west the US constitution does for belief for the West, and is open to change (as in the west; for example the right to private property) but like the West this is very unlikely, virtually impossible. This would safeguard key elements of Islamic belief.” (City of London young office workers). “To appoint a just leader what would need to happen? One man would have to divinely rule.” (South London I). “Many Muslims feel that democracy is compatible with Islam provided the person in power implement’s God’s laws. Extremists are not representative of Islam. How would an Islamic country be governed? Religion would be used as a guideline and new laws enacted to deal with new problems.” (South London I). “Government not going against views of elected representatives means operating within the spirit of divine guidance of the Qur’an.” (Minneapolis). “I look at democracy through my faith (Islam). I agree within the Muslim context. Laws should agree with the Constitution; the Constitution is the Qur’an which sets the legal tone. Islamic law is strict (Christians have more choice). Discipline, basis moral codes, respect. Democracy is an evolving thing and can be improved. Nomocracy.” (Dearborn I). 150 “Sharia is critically important. They did not expect Christians or secular friends to live according to Muslim standards or vice versa (this is in a college). Muslim religion is a way of life and hard to separate their religion from the surrounding country.” (San Diego). 151 “The process of choosing one representative is in the belief that this person would be able to make the right decisions. Democracy is not the way. It invites room for corruption, changing and worsening generations making matters of taboo into passedlaws, condoning bad behaviour of political and religious groups. Democracy moves its goals especially for politicians. Politics has grasped religion as an Appendix 149 instrument of emotion to control the masses. Islam is an acceptance of different governments, Muslims have traditionally voted for the best man for the job after our Prophet.” (South London I). “Many Muslims feel that democracy is compatible with Islam provided the person in power implements God’s laws. Extremists are not representative of Islam. How would an Islamic country be governed? Religion would be used as a guideline and new laws enacted to deal with new problems.” (South London I). “Democracy is part of Islam but principles are dictated in general in the Qur’an rather than written by people.” (Savannah). “As Muslims we believe that man has no rights, God is sovereign. Democracy and western governments are good at creating myths. In Islam everyone is subject to the Sharia. In western society everyone is allowed to pursue their own conception of the good.” (San Diego). “Religious institutions with a prophetic voice are required particularly in a secular society, though they would not advocate the role of the Ayatollah in Iran, and that where Islam is a minority religion as in the UK they want the Church of England to remain established to maintain the prophetic/spiritual voice.” (Leicester). “Democracy is not incompatible with Islam. Islam is not antidemocratic. Provided democracy is seen as a limited form of popular sovereignty, restricted and directed by God’s law, it is compatible with Islam. Secular western democracy is not compatible because it is based solely on the sovereignty of the people. Popular sovereignty is rejected completely because Islamic states should be based on consultation or Shura (interpretation of Sharia) and this is allencompassing so humans cannot create their own legal system beyond the Qur’an and Sharia. Elections equate to blasphemy. When Muslim politicians and spiritual leader say Al-Islam Huwa al-Hal they are saying that Islam is the solution to everything. To those who believe this Islam is better than democracy. Yet the Qur’an does not offer an ideal political system. It praises collective decision-making for the common good (42:38), the Qur’an elevates collective decisionmaking from a recommendation to a requirement (3:159). Thus if democracy provides a means by which to make decisions collectively then it appears to be compatible with Islam. Many Muslim scholars say that western democratic values are the same as traditional Islam, Justice (’Adl), Right (Haqq), collective decisionmaking (Shura) and Equality (Musqwat). None of the Muslims at this 150 Islam and Democracy discussion believe that secular rather than God-given laws were sinful.” (Boston II Students). “You cannot have true democracy without justice and justice is a fundamental concept in Islam. Democracy is the most contested concept in history and one person one vote cannot be the solution because if 60% agree on sex before marriage and 40% don’t, they become suicide bombers.” (Central London I). Editor’s Note: This is the only statement advocating undemocratic responses to a democracy which exceeds the bounds of the Qur’an. “The government not going against the views of elected representatives means operating within the spirit of divine guidance of the Qur’an.” (Minneapolis). “Laws should agree with the Constitution. The Constitution is the Qur’an which sets the legal tone.”(Dearborn I). Editor’s Note: The statement below qualifies the above regarding religious authorities taking part in government. “Defining the role of religious authorities, and drawing the legal path for religious figures to become political figures. No one shall abuse their religious powers for personal and political gains. If you are going to be part of the public life, then we need to know your religious beliefs and biases and you may not use your religious influence to coerce the public to follow your will.” (Dearborn II). 9.2 Governance and Islam The starting point for Muslims in considering government seems to be, as seen from these discussion meetings, the place of consensus and/or consultation in the Qur’an and among Mohammed’s immediate successors. The following statements show the strength of the influence of traditional consensus and consultation on attitudes to democracy. Appendix 151 Statements. The importance of consensus in Islam “In Muslim politics there is a tradition of trying to achieve consensus after consultation in the community.” (Wimbledon). “Islam is to do with how you get the sense of the people, how are their interest and needs represented, and all of them not just the majority.” (Boston I). “The Qur’an does not offer all the integers for an ideal political system, hence the legitimacy of attempting to find the best solution, while praising collective decision for the common good (Qur’an 42:48). Hence the Qur’an elevates collective decision-making for the common good from a recommendation to a requirement (Qur’an 3:159).” (Boston II Students). “Stress importance of community and consultation persisting until a common policy is arrived at. This gives a greater sense of community.” (New York I). “Consultation for a consensus.” (Mauritius). Relaxation of requirement for consensus “As we really work at trying to create structures for society where we are up against some really tough things like where should we be making decisions on majority rule vs. consensus. So specifically I have a wish that we be able to continue talking about some of these things as we are beginning to trust each other and get to some harder topics.” (Delaware). 155 “Muslims decide by debate and discussion and the majority view prevails.” (Bury St. Edmunds). 156 “But in Islam we have a system. There has always been consultation throughout Islamic history and if scholars cannot decide on a ruling they go for the majority view. A consensus is reached by scholars. We need to refer to the learned ones.” (East London Students). 152 Islam and Democracy The importance of consultation in Islam In other statements consultation without the necessity of consensus is called for. 157 “The essential features in democracy: education, respect, inclusion, freedom, liberty, result of education, choice, responsibility, Shura that is consultation, a type of democracy in Islam.” (San Diego). “Should take account of information which the people have.” (Leicester). “Islamic legacy of governments is participatory and may be informal.” (New York I). 158 “All should have the opportunity to pronounce on important subjects.” (Mauritius). “Christian members of the discussions call for one man one vote, power sharing, preference for the poor (liberal theology), separation of powers spiritual and temporal, local and regional representation to enable minorities to be represented, that MPs are representatives not delegates, accountability of elected representatives. The Muslim participants commented that all this takes note of the individual whereas the Muslim view takes more account of the community.” (Leicester). “There is a gap between ideal and reality and always has been with regard to Muslim principles of consultation.” (Bury St. Edmunds). “Islam has the tradition of direct consultation. Before trying to organise democracy you must organise people into groups and discuss the family.” (South London I). “A potential system should take account of information which the people have, indicating that elections with universal suffrage do not necessarily answer all problems. The playing down of democracy in extreme.” (Chicago). 161 “Islamic councils should “remind” rather than dictate important principles in Islam to give others the right to their point of view.” (Central London I). Appendix 153 333 “Islam embraces consultation and is watchful for oppression of a minority.” (New York I). “The model for governing in Islam keeps coming back to justice and consultation, working with others to get the right outcome.” (Boston I). “Consultation means you go to the leader and meet and discuss a problem. For some places one person one vote works but cannot be applied in every country.” (South London I). 164 “Muslims decline the position of parties and groups. The leader does not ask to lead, he is acknowledged and chosen by the people because of his honesty, religion and devotion to God. Things are done through the Shura. Democracy is western, consultation is Islamic. Education is an important part of a democratic country.” (San Diego). 165 “However another member of this somewhat extreme student group replied that the learned ones are ‘stooges’ of the western system. We should not listen to them.” (East London Students). “As to one person one vote, all persons do not have the same value (as far as voting goes). Those with more knowledge have more weight concerning decisions. The way that governing should function under Islam is like a conciliation that might happen in a private company: seek out the appropriate people with knowledge and experience about an issue in order to make the right decision, using every available resource to get the best outcome. In the Qur’an those with authority are ordered to seek consultation to deliberate to get the right advice from the right advisers.” (Boston I). 166 “Moses was ruling by Islam: Implementing Islam. The word of God that never changes; Then the word of Mohamed, that tells how to rule. Islam is a complete way of life. The mutual consultation, this tells us how to rule people: People choose the leader, and then the leader and the people are all bound by the rules of God.” (Delaware). 167 “We don’t say a clergy said to kill this man. No, we say what God said, what is mandatory (prayers, fasting), forbidden (alcohol, murder…) recommended (charity), detested (smoking) allowed or permitted ( but this never goes against the first four).” (Delaware). 154 Islam and Democracy Idealistic attitudes 168 “Of Muslim forms of government it was said that ‘leadership is not for personal power and the leader’s motives are different from those in the West’.” (North West London). 169 “In normal Muslim society the corrupt do not get into power, it being immediately added that currently there is no true Islamic system operating anywhere.” (North West London). “The prophetic system of government may be the only mode of government fundamentally compatible with Islamic ideology but it broke down so early that there is no ideal Islamic system that can be used as a model and therefore democracy could be ideologically compatible with Islam.” (City of London, young office workers). 170 “The ideal Islamic ruler would be decided by the majority and should be the most competent person.” (Mauritius). 171 “Islam does include different systems to represent the faith taking different forms of government. Islam is an acceptance of different governments. Muslims have traditionally voted for the best man for the job after our Prophet.” (South London I). “To appoint a just leader what would to need happen? One man would have to divinely rule.” (South London I). 173 “But as Muslims say Islam ruled for 1000 years: the human nature was there to submit to God: honesty was there. God created all people with these values. The ceiling the law of God is the same for all people. In Islam we don’t have any conflict, because we all have the Qu’ran.” (Delaware). “Islam always is to hold to the concept of balance.” (New York I). “Islam desires discipline, basic moral codes and respect.” (Dearborn I). “The common good must be the aim of democracy.” (Mauritius). “We need to find within the Qur’an a suitable system. Democracy is not suitable forseveral reasons. It is based on European ideas of the prime importance of the individual. In the M.E. the important thing is Appendix 155 the community. The family, the clan, the tribe and on up. Historically it was the Qur’an that united warring tribes.” (Vermont II). “I did not say I was a Muslim [during the introductions] because I am your brother. I was raised with rules. If I obey God, God rewards us most generously. But if we disobey his way he tells us what is in store for us. I am to treat you better than myself. That is Democracy. That is the word from God how to live together.” (Delaware). 178 “Islam is to submit to God. There is no coercion, the truth stands out clear from error. We have to reject people who try to coerce towards change.” (Delaware). “Our group discussed inconclusively whether there should be more focus on moving away from electing people to appointing them in the platonic style.” (Leicester). “The Qur’an is more than a religious text. It is a “code of life” defining limitations on behaviour in the affairs of men. In the west there are no limitations. In Islam as things change/evolve a group of people who know their religion decide how to adapt the rules extrapolating the Qur’an. This is a better form of democracy.” (Central London I). Democracy through one person one vote The following sections set out the full statements on democracy by one person one vote. It should be noted that the statements least supportive of one person one vote have been put first followed by more supportive statements. Statements. Negative towards democracy Statements referring to democracy which, in varying degrees are negative as to democracy, but it might be concluded, only on pragmatic grounds. “Democracy is very much a western concept but we cannot accept it as a global concept because the US is not allowing democracy to flourish around the world. If the West actually honored democracy it would make a lot more sense.” (New York I). 156 Islam and Democracy “Before trying to organise democracy you must organise people into groups and discuss. The family is the nucleus and key determining society, if it is strongly based on culture and religion. But today religion has no influence. Democracy without religion is anarchy. There is also corruption in western democratic countries e.g. Switzerland. Democracy can also be a tool to work against religion e.g. the ban on religious symbols at school. The democratic leader has a lot of control depending on the faith and belief and guidance of the leader.” (South London I). “There is a danger that votes are a sham. Votes lead to an elected dictatorship. The individual gets lost in a democratic bureaucracy. The representatives and the government they select may be selfish and not the best. Groups, for example lobbies, can hijack democracies. In the US there is criticism of the close relationship between funding and campaigning and the undue influence of the rich.” (Leicester). “A more subtle approach than in Iraq must be pursued. It is impossible to do away with an ideology by force of weapons. Democracy cannot be implemented from outside nor by subversive means. It is quite possible that the western model of democracy may not be, and most likely is not applicable to the Islamic world.” (Central London II, written statement). “Democracy does not develop quickly or easily and the US should not try to impose its form of democracy on the world. Democracy comes from a western perspective; Muslims are not necessarily ‘antidemocratic’. The West created nation states and now they say they must go: it puts you off democracy. This is a complaint about how the Arab world was carved up after the First World War.” (New York I). “There is no existing model US or western European as a model for all others to follow. Each system has strengths and weaknesses. Greed for power and wealth especially in the US is a powerful deterrent to a truly democratic state. No Islamic country has had enough experience of democracy to be helpful to others in finding a workable compatible structure congenial to a democratic government.” (Louisville). “In theory democracy sounds good but in practice it has many flaws, it can be said to express the will of the people, but this is not what happens. We should question to whole political system. As Muslims we believe that Islam shows up the failure of democracy, of western democracy, MPs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Appendix 157 people. As Muslims we believe that man has no right, God is sovereign, democracies in western governments are good at creating myths, illusions.” (East London Students). “Democracy is more like propaganda. In US it is a lie, it is propaganda. If you have money and power you control. The common people cannot get their voice heard. It is against human nature. Man will see himself as the oppressor when he sees himself as selfsufficient.” (Delaware). “Islam has global aspirations but we are not interested in detonating bombs. In the west to vote you have no real choice you have to choose between two evils, you don’t have a real alternative, there is no point of going for the lesser evil. But how much knowledge do voters actually have? The influence of the media is strong and decisions are easily manipulated. You have to choose between two evils.” Another replied: “Muslims should respect the law of the land and use our votes to change it.” (East London Students). “What shall I do when I don’t know right and wrong? Go with the majority or go with the word of God?” (Delaware). 186 “Democracy, demo, demon (devil), guided by devils. The west is master of democracy today but they are liars, there is not real democracy.” (South London I). 187 “In Islam you settle your affairs by counselling among yourselves, a body of people decides interpolation (sic) while in western democracy it is an elected dictatorship. We do not need this type of system as the greatest setback to democracy is the supporting of dictatorship.” (Minneapolis). Neutral to democracy “For some places one person one vote works but it cannot be applied in every country. We need a secular government to represent more fully the numbers of religions like in India.” (South London I). “What is the ideological position of democracy in an Islamic state? Is it an ideal in itself or merely a pragmatic means of achieving better government? This should shape the way western governments presented democracy to the Islamic world.” (City of London, young office workers). 158 Islam and Democracy “There is not a political climate for debate and the free exchange of ideas in the Middle East. Opportunities for developing this stopped in the 13th Century. The electorate needs to be involved for a democracy to be effective; and that means heavy voter participation, education, through the school system and grass-roots organizations that produce leaders. The elements working against a truly democratic government are poverty, illiteracy, dominant military, instability, imported structures, and greed.” (Louisville). “The process of choosing one representative is in the belief that this person would be able to make the right decisions. Democracy is not the way. It invites room for corruption, changing and worsening generations making matters of taboo into passed laws, condoning bad behaviour of political and religious groups. Democracy moves its goals especially for politicians. Politics has grasped religion as an instrument of emotion to control the masses. Islam is an acceptance of different governments, Muslims have traditionally voted for the best man for the job after our Prophet.” “Many Muslims feel that democracy is compatible with Islam provided the person in power implements God’s laws. Extremists are not representative of Islam. How would an Islamic country be governed? Religion would be used as a guideline and new laws enacted to deal with new problems.” (South London I). “One member asked whether democracy is the way to decide in regard to the Iraq war, e.g., where there is strong opposition.” (South London I). “The need to promote constructive ideas and street level understanding; there is concern at some of the media. In Muslim polity there is a tradition of trying to achieve consensus after consultation in the community. Islamic countries are evolving and this natural process must be allowed. However one of the participants said what is the point of voting and another added one needs NGOs, civil society as well as democracy.” (Wimbledon). “Is it possible to see Democracy as an ideal or only as we see it today?” (Delaware). Appendix 159 “Religious institutions with a prophetic voice are required particularly in a secular society, though they would not advocate the role of the ayatollah in Iran, and that where Islam is a minority religion, as in the UK, they want the Church of England to remain established to maintain the prophetic/spiritual voice.” (Leicester). Cautious Statements concerning the merits and acceptability of democracy 194 “There was a call to get people involved in the democratic process and to encourage respect for elected representatives which indicated a sense that ‘one person one vote’ does not provide an automatic answer to the issue of good government.” (Leicester). “There is no conflict between democracy and Islam provided it is a mechanism for ruling and checks and balances on governments and not an ideology, that is a supremacist ideology.” (Bury St. Edmunds). 196 “One person one vote is best by default of other solutions, with room for improvement.” (Chicago). “The limitations on democracy should not be an excuse for not allowing democratic government.” (Mauritius). “Linking Islam to authoritarianism creates the false impression that Islam and democracy are incompatible, colonialism may have been a major cause of the ability of authoritarianism to take root in the Middle East but this does not mean that a movement from within cannot put it right by the immense collective powers which the citizens of the Middle East possess.” (New York III, written statement). 198A “One person one vote is an imperfect system but we all feel we had a positive experience with it. Education is essential to be able to act on one’s right to participate. However others with money have an amplified voice.” (Minneapolis). “I look at democracy through my faith and agree within the Muslim context.” (Dearborn I). “Islamic law is strict while Christians have more choice. Discipline, basic moral codes, respect, democracy is an evolving thing and can be improved.” (Dearborn I). 160 Islam and Democracy “The government should not go against the views of elected representatives operating within the spirit of divine guidance of the Qur’an.” (Minneapolis). “Democracy represents the people who vote, only the silent majority do not participate, causing dissatisfaction with the election results and misrepresentation. The individual has responsibility for the nation to make his or her vote heard otherwise it is a fake democracy.” (Savannah). “We need a vehicle, but at the same time, we (the US) have evolved. Maybe when our country first started those things were more true. We need a vehicle but at the same time we have evolved to a state where we think democracy is the best model. Now we offer democracy to others whether they like it or not. We are not going to teach them. If we go and assimilate side by side, eat with them, show respect for elders, women folk, then they begin to start learning.” (Delaware). “Freedom of speech, especially for minorities and the ease of voting access is essential to have more participation and hence better representation for the populace.” (Savannah). 204 “There is no clash between Islam and democracy as long as there is a separation between religion and the state. There is a clash because of the notion of sovereignty in Islam, what is right is defined by God and the Qur’an. The democratic idea is that sovereignty is defined by the majority of the people. This is a fundamental clash with Islamic principles. Islam is a better and a more real form of democracy than exists in the west where democracy is really an elected dictatorship.” (Central London I). “The Qur’an is more than a religious text, it is a code for life defining limitations on behaviour in their affairs of men. In the west there are no limitations. In Islam things change or evolve. A group of people who know their religion decide how to adapt the rules extrapolating the Qur’an; this is a better form of democracy.” 204A “Can Islam be separated from Government? Islam is a way of life not just a religion, the Qur’an providing a kind of Constitution. Using the Qur’an it is very hard to come up with a single unified political system. It is in Arabic and most of us are not Arabic speakers. Even for Arabic speakers the Qur’an is difficult to read. It is possible to have a successful functioning state under Islam. For centuries the Appendix 161 Islamic world was the civilized world. Maybe it is possible to have different spheres of influence; the state is responsible for finances and Islamic authorities for other areas. But at the end of the day in Islam they must come together somehow. Malaysia is a good example of a wellfunctioning Islamic state. It is not because religion is less important in Malaysia, religion is very important to the people from the top to the bottom. Are democracy and pluralism inherently conflicted with Islam, not the Islamic religion but the Islamic state? Some thinkers in Iran are examining the concept of Islamic secularism. A central issue would be that the ‘wise one’ need not be turbaned. This participant concluded. ‘We’ve got to do it.’ (i.e., achieve democracy).” (Central London I). “Awareness for instance is shown that the individual can get lost in the democratic bureaucracy because it was so large.” (Leicester). Pragmatic acceptance of or support for democracy 206 “They were faithful and in their faithfulness live in a democracy, fully aware of its excesses and problems as well as opportunities.” (San Diego). “Groups can hijack democracy i.e. lobbies. Is one person one vote a sham? Essential features of the sort of democratic government Muslims would accept in order of preference are: ability to challenge the ruler, ability to remove the ruler, nothing contrary to Islam to happen, each person to have a voice, division of power of the government from the judiciary.” (Leicester). “In the 1920’s Muslims began to have some consensus that there should be more democracy, there will never be complete consensus, always have the different sets but they must have some way to agree.” (Chicago). “Iran is not a democracy because theocratic rule on top. Ditto Turkey (the Army on top).” (Central London II, individual written statement). “Rights of minorities: personal law according to religious preferences, criminal law the same for everyone. No suppression of freedom of religion. Proportional representation in government (note: not just in an election, but in the make-up of the government). 162 Islam and Democracy Linguistic and cultural rights. Overall, Muslims are pessimistic of the role of the minority.” (Minneapolis). Statements supportive of democracy “One person one vote is a practical means of achieving the opinion of the masses and also reflects the sanctity of the individual. This is relevant because Islam has no Community punishment. Everyone is accountable for himself.” (Minneapolis). 211 “Democracy according to its western definition can be adopted and applied to Muslim countries. The Islamic concepts and principles of the system of government as declared in the Sunnah have no objections whatsoever as far as justice, people’s freedom, speech, belief and practice and equality of all people.” (Savannah). “Muslims say yes we are in agreement with democracy, but with individual freedom come individual responsibility and restraint.” (Dearborn I). 212 “A Sunni woman said: there is no conflict of democracy and Islam. You do not see democracy in Muslim countries but Mohammad said that if you see something wrong put it right, which is what democracy is supposed to do.” (Bury St. Edmunds). “Service should be before self in relation to democracy.” (Mauritius). “When societies are small there is access to the ruler. In larger societies democracy functions because elections give a mandate to the government to act on behalf of the electorate for a specific period of time.” (Central London I). 213 “Democracy is the best guarantee against totalitarianism.” (Chicago). 214 “Democracy provides the most efficient way of removing corruption and self-serving governments and the best way to maintain the interest of the people.” (City of London, young office workers). “Accountability has always been a key component of traditional Islamic government and democracy is the best means of achieving Appendix 163 this, and therefore democracy could be ideologically compatible with Islam.” (City of London, young office workers). 215 “10% of the followers of Mohammed should have accepted the decision of the 90%, and the Shia has been undemocratic ever since. The 90% of Muslims always believed in democracy.” (Central London II, individual written statement). “There is no single answer, no single right form of government nor single right form of democracy.” (Bury St. Edmunds). “Democracy is an evolving thing, and agreed with this within this context. Consultation is important as are transparency and checks and balances. They would give an unqualified ‘yes’ for representation.” It is important, but a qualified ‘yes’ for individual freedom.” (New York I). “So Democracy was ‘a western idea that should not be forced on the Muslim world’ but something everyone in Muslim countries wants but is suppressed by the current regimes which are not really Muslim.” (Bury St. Edmunds). “Each generation is changing opinions and behaviour and democracy is opening up new understanding and respect.” (South London I). 219 “Beyond that, their ideal is the fusion of the sacred and secular with an Islamic way of life re-instated as the presiding model. The younger Muslim would like to see ‘one man one vote’ but deferred to his elders for a representative model.” (Vermont I, discussions with a Muslim family). “Clearly the opposition should be the next government. If this is unlikely, civil society should create counter-groups with a voice in the press. Proportional representation would help avoid the problem and one would need an independent person for instance an Ombudsman.” (Mauritius). “It is up to the people to impeach their representatives and governors if they do not keep their promises to the people. The representatives and the governor in Islam should be given ample time to correct problems, but they should not be re-elected if they are defective.” (Savannah). 164 Islam and Democracy “One person one vote and more than one candidate is the most important feature of democracy. There must be a fair process not rigged either by power or money. The two key abuses of our age or any age.” (Ossening, NY.) I. 262B “An Iranian said: ‘There is no consensus on democracy in Islam yet. There are functioning democracies in the Muslim world, Malaysia, Turkey, Bangladesh. People want to have more freedom. Any scholar can say what the will of God is if he has enough following. The mechanism for coming to consensus may not look like US democracy. Iran has some hierarchy of religious leaders (the religious Council has to pass the laws), one would not see this in a Sunni country.” (Chicago). “The government cannot go against the views of the elected representatives of the people, which equals a veto power.” (Ossening, NY.) I. “If democracy provides a means by which to make decisions collectively then it appears to be compatible with Islam. Many Muslims scholars say that western democratic values are the same as traditional Islam: justice (ʼAdl), right (Haqq) collective decisionmaking (Shura) and equality (Musqwat).” (Boston II Students). “One person one vote with the largest possible community in mind.” (Ossening, NY.) II. “The executive should be separated from the legislative and should have a majority in Parliament.” (Mauritius). “The relationship between Church and State seems to work all right in the UK where there is not a conflict between democracy and Islam provided it is a mechanism for ruling and checks and balances of government not an ideology i.e. a supremacist ideology.”(Bury St. Edmunds). “‘One person one vote’ all agree, and ‘one person one vote one time’ is unacceptable.” (City of London, young office workers). “Parliaments should reflect the wish of the people.” (Mauritius). “Accountability has always been a key component of traditional Islamic government and democracy is the best means of achieving this.” (City of London, young office workers). Appendix 165 “There must be accountability of elected representatives.” (Leicester). “Monitoring is essential to ensure free and fair elections.” (Mauritius). “Election fairness is essential (laughter). This needs judges.” (Ossening, (NY.), I). “Monitoring elections is essential.” (Central London I). “There is a need for proportional representation.” (Mauritius). “However we are ruled, we have to look at the results whether the populace is harmed or whether they are happy. Democracy allows people to express their beliefs; to be able to have a change of government is important. You must never leave God out of anything. To desire to vote for someone to control your lifestyle can lead to believing in God. God always does justice for people. Have you ever seen a democracy run properly? People are never completely satisfied. A democratically elected government is important but you need to have a proper choice, and opposition party. Christians would argue less if they had more faith in God. He gives the ultimate judgment and there is no need to argue. I do not mind secularity, but don’t want anti-religion.” (South London II, Turkish Students). 235 “I did have a brief conversation with several Turkish Muslims in Queens yesterday, and described the list of topics. I think it is fair to say that they come down very strongly on this position: that it is very important to work together on our definitions of terms. They have been living and working in the NYC area for 3 to 22 years. They all affirm that there is no conflict between their rather mysticismoriented style of Sunni Islam and traditional American political doctrine.” (New York II). “Democracy does not necessarily mean elections and voting, and they recognized democracy as advancing so long as the government represents what people want. Democracy was the best thing and electing a government is the best way. However they are ruled, they have to look at results whether the people are harmed or whether they are happy. To be able to have a change of government is important and democracy allows people to express their beliefs. In Turkey education improves but traditional values disappear. Individually 166 Islam and Democracy democracy is OK but we need targets of peace in the world as well. Democracy is not enough.” (South London II, Turkish Students). “Everyone should have a voice in the political system, in the form of voting at the least (secret ballot) and more advanced political involvement.” (Dearborn II). “Limiting power of the government: the government should not override that which is in the interest of the public.” (Dearborn II). “1- Fair representation of the population. 2- Equal access to government positions. 3- Public opinion has to make a difference. 4A no-tolerance policy towards corruption. 5- Public education and awareness about their rights and involvement in the democratic process. 6- International cooperation rather than one nation dominating and interfering with other nations. 7- Strong economies that are designed for the well-being of the public not just the wealthy individuals who have all power. 8- Clear separation between personal and public interests. Government officials CAN NEVER benefit from public assets. 9- A culture change in the definition of a ruling system. The government and the President shall serve the public not the other way around. President can serve one and only one term. Elections have to be fair by regulating campaign financing. 10- The army and police shall protect the constitution and the law, not their bosses and interests.” (Dearborn II). “1- The formation of checks and balances to keep corruption low. 2- Recognizing minorities and having a national discussion on the importance of protecting and securing the minority rights. 3- Defining the role of religious authorities, and drawing the legal path for religious figures to become political figures. No one shall abuse their religious powers for personal and political gains. If you are going to be part of the public life, then we need to know your religious beliefs and biases and you may not use your religious influence to coerce the public to follow your will. (Dearborn II). “We recognized that ‘One person, one vote’ is fundamental to any system which calls itself democratic. One of the consequences of this is the need to accept things which you do not necessarily agree with, especially when you are in a minority.” (Dearborn II). “Freedom of Speech and Expression: We recognized that democracy entails the right of any person to express their opinions, to agree or disagree with others and not be suppressed in any way as long as those opinions are reasonable and not going to harm others. Appendix 167 Hence democracy has to be manifested in freedom of speech and the freedom to assert the opinions we hold through public channels and the ballot box.” (Dearborn II). “Equality of Rights: We recognized that we all value democracy because it grants us equal rights. In safeguarding those rights it protects us against tyranny and its consequences, enabling us to force governments which are not respecting the equal rights of the people to step aside. One participant described it as, ‘an efficient way of replacing people when they have been in long enough that power has corrupted them.” (Dearborn II). “Human Flourishing: We recognized that democracy, while important, is not the ‘be all and end all’ and that other things in our societies are important for human flourishing. Other aspects of the state help to create an environment where people feel free and can make the most of their creative, physical and spiritual abilities. We expressed concern that in many places such conditions do not exist and that the gap between places where such flourishing can take place and where it is hampered by war, injustice or poverty seems to be increasing. This inequality of experience and opportunity is a hazard to all the world’s people. The need for democracy is only part of this problem.” (Dearborn II). “Flawed and Failing Democracy: We agreed that ‘Nobody has found a perfect form of democracy – its always flawed in one way or another.’ At the same time we felt that ‘It’s more important to have imperfect democracy than no democracy.’ Our discussion recognized that western nations often have forms of democracy which are far from the ideal. In Britain the infrequency of parliamentary elections means in a sense that the country is only democratic on polling day, and their lack of a system of proportional representation means that many people will never be represented in parliament by the people or even the party they voted for. Clearly some people have more power in our system than others, which can seem and feel unjust. Most of all the role of the media and of financial power were criticized for distorting the democratic process in Britain and in the United States of America, putting leaders and governments in place who are then free to pursue the policies which are in the interests not of the people, but of benefit to themselves, their ideology and their friends. Muslim and Christian participants alike were highly critical of the way in which government in America and Britain had not listened to protests over the war against Iraq, leading to frustration and an increasing disillusionment with the voting system and with our forms of 168 Islam and Democracy democracy, especially among young people. Despite the weaknesses in our systems however, it was still believed by our participants that democracy is the best form of government.” (Dearborn II). 243 “The Inclusion of Women: Participants were asked whether a society which excludes women from the democratic process could still be called democratic. There was clear agreement that such a society was not democratic since democracy entails equal rights for all. One Muslim participant summed up by saying that, ‘If it’s a democracy then I think democracy means men and women, both of them, not just for one. And I think the vote should be for women as well, they should vote.” (Dearborn II). “Cultural Specificity and Democracy: We considered the question of whether democracy has to be the same everywhere, or whether it must find unique cultural expressions in different countries. Our participants felt that it would inevitably vary from place to place depending on historical and cultural factors, including religion. Participants felt that despite universal features of democracy such as equal rights and ‘one person, one vote,’ it will mean different things to different people in different countries. The example of President Putin’s rebuke to President Bush for trying to instruct him about democracy highlights the fact that history, culture, traditions and expectations will shape the democratic institutions of each place. Religious traditions and beliefs, including Islamic faith and law will be part of this context and should be allowed to shape the institutions and embodiments of democracy. Another participant added sagely, ‘Democracy will only come when people understand what it offers them. When they see those benefits it will come, surely it will come. It is not going to come while someone else is saying “it’s got a very sweet root, if you eat this. Unless you have eaten the fruit, you could not take it from someone else.” (Dearborn II). 245 “Democracy, Legitimate or Representative Government: Another participant pointed out that some Islamic countries have a form of democracy which is like that of Britain in the past, which is not yet ‘one person, one vote.’ In this system only some have the right to vote, and vote on behalf of others. There was broad agreement that this was not democracy, but could be considered representative and legitimate.” (Dearborn II). “The Qur’an presents a code of conduct with parameters for behaviour and within these parameters there is scope. There is a danger that once you get educated people you will move away from Appendix 169 the very spirituality which is supposed to legitimize the leadership’s right to government.” (Central London II, individual written statement). “Equality of Rights: We recognized that we all value democracy because it grants us equal rights. In safeguarding those rights it protects us against tyranny and its consequences, enabling us to force governments which are not respecting the equal rights of the people to step aside. One participant described it as, ‘an efficient way of replacing people when they have been in long enough that power has corrupted them.” (Dearborn II). [from discussion on Human Rights] 9.4 References to modern Muslim states General “The Imposition of Democracy. 247 We considered whether democracy can be successfully imposed where it does not exist, and all agreed that there are great dangers in trying to make other people take on a system like our own. We reflected on the possibility that in young democracies a leader could move the country towards dictatorship and oppression as has happened in Zimbabwe. The situation there has interesting parallels to other young democracies, as democracy was imposed in Zimbabwe upon a society which had no history of democratic processes. The gradual development and adjustment of our own system of democracy was given as a reason to allow other countries to find their own route to democracy. Participants strongly believed that democracy which is imposed on people who have not already come to want it can only fail. One participant commented that ‘it is not a freedom if you are going to impose a system, its not a freedom then, and I think these are the problems which are being faced in Iraq.’ Another said, ‘I think other religions, other cultures, they should build on their own democracy and say ‘if we did not allow women to vote in the past, then now is the time to bring them back in’--- but they have to do it in their own way, not imposed on them like has been done Iraq.” (Dearborn II). “In Islam there is election at the lowest level and the representatives are elected upwards.” (North West London). “Muslims have not practised democracy.” (Bury St. Edmunds). 170 Islam and Democracy 250 “It was conceded that tribal mullahs now have limited autonomy only within their geographic areas and at present, there are no functioning models for the Muslim ideal. The countries that are closest to the evolution of this model are Palestine and Iran, and if left alone to thrash out the mechanisms, will move toward this system of Islamic governance. There was anger towards western colonialism. It is not an historical fact but a continuing insult. Colonialization was responsible for the destruction of - and remains an obstacle to - the reinstatement of the ‘Islamic’ system of governance.” (Vermont II). 252 “There is a need to control rulers because Islam is marred by widespread illegitimacy and authoritarianism.” (Leicester). 253 “Within Islam there is Shura. Shura means discussion; this has been councils, could also be parliaments. But it is based on community. Community councils make decisions and it is they at local levels and on up through levels of government who represent the people and ensure fairness and protect minority interests. Shura decides who will be mayor, president. At each level the council chooses its leaders and they lead consulting with the councils.” (Vermont II). “They would use the tribal system of tiered representation. Family/ tribal ‘Mullahs’ represent the people. The tribal leaders hold regional councils to decide on issues to be brought before a smaller Shura’s council. The decisions of that council are voiced by an executive leader whose powers are limited by the Shura council. This ensures that all factions have a say and that minority rights are voiced and respected if not necessarily followed. The issue of ‘fairness’ is relevant only in the discussions taking place at the tribal level. Issues between opposing groups are resolved largely by the ascendancy of one tribal/family mullah over another. Acceptance of the tribal system and confidence in Sharia law allows for consent of the governed. This is the way tribal villages in which I have lived in function today, except that there are no links between the tribal leaders and the Shura courts and the courts and the executive.” (Vermont II). 255 “The critical point made was that regardless of model used for governance (and theirs was close to the British model) the vocabulary should be shifted to the use of indigenous terms. The use of the term ‘democracy’ implies the imposition of a ‘western’ model for governance which will be rejected outright before any discussion can begin.”(Vermont II). Appendix 171 “Islamic countries are evolving and this natural process must be allowed.”(South London I). “Defending separation of church and state because they saw threats to that particular aspect of the constitution. The theocracy is our anticipation and would be ideal. Leaders were without fault in being spokesmen for God. But there have been many abuses all over the world. These conflicts put Islam on the cross with political leaders valuing selfinterest.” (Delaware). 258 “The main thing is we have to get the religion out of the Government because there are too many people who don’t believe the way you do.” (Delaware). “Democracy is part of Islam but the principles are dictated in general in the Qur’an rather than written by people. The Qur’an does not specify a particular pattern of government but allows people to choose their government’s style and structure according to different times and circumstances that people live in. Islam dictates many laws but leaves to people the details of laws and regulations. But people will choose their representatives (imams, judges, etc.) without the well-organized voting we see in present elections. Voting is not organized in Islam and is somewhat similar to the old world (Greek, Roman) voting procedure. Imams and Mujahidin (law interpreters and advisers) who are agreed on by the neighbourhood and towns in general consensus, and when qualifications are equal people supported the older and wiser person.” (Savannah). 260 “The word democracy started being used in Muslim countries only recently. Islam and Muslims use the name ‘consultation’ to refer to heads of states, political decision-making making powers with discussions among various chiefs of tribes so an appropriate decision can be made. The consultation principle is an order from God to be followed.”(Savannah). Malaysia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iran and Turkey “In Malaysia, by many measures it works, high standard of living, widespread education, no prison torture, why? (a) because of a stable political system based on constitutional monarchy, (b) hard work (eastern culture, Chinese), (c) it has oil. It is a secular government with freedom; seeing women in veils walking next to men, and still 172 Islam and Democracy religion is important. So that you can have church/state separation in a Muslim country if the leaders are respectful.” (Central London I). 262A “An Iranian said: ‘religious scholars should rule, they are best suited by moral authority, not democracy. People can be led astray, too liberal. After that there is no consensus people are rebelling, there needs to be accountable leadership with tolerance. Prevent conflict with tolerance. There is growing understanding of this, a warning of too hasty democracy leads to hatred. There is no consensus on democracy in Islam yet. There are functioning democracies in the Muslim world, Malaysia, Turkey, Bangladesh. People want to have more freedom. Any scholar can say what the will of God is if he has enough following. The mechanism for coming to consensus may not look like US democracy. Iran has some hierarchy of religious leaders (the religious Council has to pass the laws), one would not see this in a Sunni country.’” (Chicago). “Education is needed for democracy for an informed choice, for democracy to work. But give Muslims the vote now and then bring education as in India where democracy has become better and better. In 2004 a stable government was thrown out by a democratic vote; therefore don’t hold back till you have education. Bangladesh is a democracy and that is better than dictatorship and it will be as good as India in 50 years. Malaysia is the best example of democracy. In Indonesia there have been too many upheavals and it is too soon to comment. We cannot tell if it will succeed as they have only had two elections.” (Central London II, individual written statement). “But at the end of the day in Islam they must come together somehow. Malaysia is a good example of a well-functioning Islamic state. It is not because religion is less important in Malaysia, religion is very important to the people from the top to the bottom. Are democracy and pluralism inherently conflicted with Islam, not the Islamic religion but the Islamic state? Some thinkers in Iran are examining the concept of Islamic secularism. A central issue would be that the ‘wise one’ need not be turbaned. This participant then immediately after concluded. ‘We’ve got to do it.’(i.e., achieve democracy).” (Central London I). “Some historic manifestations: Ayatollah Khomeini; the brand of Islam he was presenting was a theocracy.” (Delaware). 265 “Most people in the west have the belief that the opposite of democracy is theocracy. People got out of the yoke of the church in Appendix 173 the west. Khomeini believed that leadership is inherited, but the prophet told us we choose our leaders.” (Delaware). “Indonesia is an example of democracy and Islam working together from autonomy to chaos to democracy. Elections free, equal and in good spirit. This puts to rest the idea that democracy and Islam will never coexist. Malaysia is an example. President Bush tried to get stability, democracy or freedom in militaristic government but got neither. Loses credibility without follow-through. Indonesia was kind of do-it yourself.” (Chicago). 266 “Turkey is the only country where democracy and Islam are together. Elected government is best but not enough on its own, it has to be a target, a commitment for improving proper happiness and peace. The younger generation in Turkey are very keen on democracy.” (South London II, Turkish Students). “Failed States. One Christian participant accused most Muslim states of being ‘failed’ states and undemocratic, despite the presence of certain good leaders. Others responded that there were examples of Islamic states which are certainly not failed, such as Indonesia, and most especially Malaysia. A lively exchange of views took place over the government of Iran. One participant described the way the revolution in Iran in 1979 led to elections and the democratic choice of an Islamic republic as their form of government. He described the creation of the constitution and the way in which elections have been held every four years for the parliament and presidency. Another participant described this as a sham democracy, but the first responded by comparing the fair and effective elections in Iran with the election of George Bush as President in the USA, which generated considerable laughter. Both agreed that people in Iran were unhappy, and the first participant suggested that this was because of poverty, and the desire for the decadent liberalism in UAE, which is broadcast on Arab TV, rather than a lack of democracy.” (Dearborn II). Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Syria, UAE, Jordan and Pakistan “The second objection is that Democracy is tainted by colonialism. It was imposed on colonized, occupied peoples. And in those countries in the ME which claim to be democracies, ‘it is corrupt’. Look at Algeria, Egypt, Syria. Denial of access to vote, banning of Muslim parties, 20 + years in power, passing power from father to son. 174 Islam and Democracy 461 Even the word democracy is negative because it is foreign. We need Shura to be the word.” (Vermont II). “In most Muslim countries democracy would not work because there are no effective means of disseminating information. The fluidity of population means that an accurate census is virtually impossible, there are practical difficulties, for instance in Jordan there are no addresses on people’s houses so you cannot introduce any system of voting.” (Central London I). “Our discussion, however, highlighted deep dissatisfaction with the injustices which are created, allowed and perpetuated elsewhere in the world by western nations in the name of democracy. The West and its apparently democratic governments was criticised for supporting unjust regimes when they served western interests. The support of the United States of America for the regime in Pakistan was an example of the double standards applied by the West when their own economic or strategic interests were at stake. The regimes in UAE and Saudi Arabia were also cited as examples of undemocratic governments supported by the West. One Muslim participant referred to ‘dictators…put there by the West.’ A Christian participant rejected this view. While admitting that western nations do interfere in the process of government in other countries, including Islamic states, he believed that the idea that the West imposes dictators on other nations was a myth. Some of the participants, however, did not believe it was a myth and referred to the way in which America and Britain have supported the government of Saudi Arabia as a prime example of western double standards – attacking countries like Russia for being undemocratic while preventing democracy in other places.” (Leicester). “Our discussion also considered the way in which western nations had connived at corruption and injustice in the abuse of UN Aid for Oil funding and felt deeply offended that powerful western nations can behave in such a self-interested way. Such failures within apparently democratic nations do not help other nations to welcome democracy. Some of our participants felt strongly that the West had both hindered the development of democracy, as in Iran, and rejected democratically elected governments if they claimed to be Islamic. The examples of Turkey and Algeria were given as places where democratically elected governments had been rejected by the West. It was suspected that western nations were fearful of what would happen if an elected Islamic government took over, in case this harmed western interests or led to the abolition of laws and civil Appendix 175 rights. On the contrary, participants suggested that the regimes which preceded such governments were often oppressive dictatorships and should be replaced by elected civilian governments, even if they are not of the kind the West would like. It was felt that the experience of responsibility in government would help elected Islamic leaders to act in the interests of all their people, and that elected leaders would not destroy what they had won. Such governments should be allowed to flourish. The attitude of most Muslim and Christian participants was summed up by the comment that in looking at the relationship between democratic western nations and the rest of the world, ‘there is no fairness’.” (Leicester). 9.5 Minorities The notes provided for the discussions pointed out that in both Britain and the US government swings from one party to the other main party at fairly regular intervals, but in countries where there is likely to be a permanent majority of one party or religious, ethnic or other group there would be a need to ensure the rights of the minority by express provisions. The discussions show that the minority issue was well to the fore of Muslim responses, being referred to by one third of the groups, notably in Leicester, two in New York, two in Ossening, (NY.), Mauritius, two in South London, Boston, Minneapolis, Savannah, two in Central London and City of London. In each these were statements simply that the political system must respect and uphold the right of minorities, without further elaboration. As they are uniform, these are the only statements made during the round-table discussions which are not set out in full in this Report. There follow the few statements on minorities where the issue is enlarged on. “The party system is the only viable system but many Islamic countries are more ethnically diverse than Europe and there is a danger that minority rights will not be protected.” (City of London, young office workers). “Some governments reserve particular seats for minorities, women or Christians.” (Boston I). “Rights of minorities: personal law according to religious preferences, criminal law the same for everyone. No suppression of 176 Islam and Democracy freedom of religion. Proportional representation in government (note: not just in an election, but in the make-up of the government). Linguistic and cultural rights. Overall, Muslims are pessimistic of the role of the minority.” (Minneapolis). “We discussed the dangers faced by minorities within a democratic system and the possibility that elected leaders may fail to respect the rights, faith or custom of part of their population. We recognised that minorities are vulnerable even under democratic rule unless measures such as written rights are built into a constitution to safeguard their interests. The Pakistani constitution was offered as an example of how minority rights could be protected in law. The constitution there, it was suggested, contained safeguards which were designed to be changed later as circumstances allowed.” (Oxford). “One participant spoke for us all in saying that, ‘Under the democracy, all minorities should be respected, and looked after and protected.’ We all recognised the right of the minority to express their views without suppression but nevertheless the need to accept the will of the majority.” (Oxford). “1-The formation of checks and balances to keep corruption low. 2- Recognizing minorities and having a national discussion on the importance of protecting and securing the minority rights. 3- Defining the role of religious authorities, and drawing the legal path for religious figures to become political figures. No one shall abuse their religious powers for personal and political gains. If you are going to be part of the public life, then we need to know your religious beliefs and biases and you may not use your religious influence to coerce the public to follow your will.” (Dearborn II). “The West had intervened - though very belatedly - to protect Muslims in the Balkans. Democracy or majority rule was important because it placed the Muslims of Bosnia and more especially Kosovo in a strong position. When the Turks had ruled this part of Europe they had tolerated and protected the different religious communities; it was the contemporary ‘Christian’ rulers who wanted ethnically and religiously pure states and refused to recognise that their fellow countrymen might have chosen Islam [a reference to the practice of non-Muslims in ex-Yugoslavia to call Muslim fellow Slavs ’Turks’].” (North West London). Appendix 177 9.6 Political Parties The notes for reading out at the start of the discussion noted that political parties could be a significant feature of a democratic system and that when swings in support represent shifts in public opinion this should lead to government going back and forth between parties. Most comments show support for the presence of political parties. “Clearly the opposition should be the next government. If this is unlikely civil society should create counter-groups with a voice in the press. Proportional representation would help avoid the problem and one would need an independent person - for instance an Ombudsman.” (Mauritius). “The party system is the only viable system, but many Islamic countries are more ethnically diverse than European countries and there is a danger that minority rights would not be protected.” (City of London, young office workers). “We have no fundamental opposition to government passing back and forth, it is an inherent part of the democratic system.” (City of London, young office workers). “Attitudes based on political parties is good when parties are healthy. This does not conflict with Islamic principles and it means that accountability is built into the system.” (Minneapolis). “The passing of power back and forth: without this how would one work to keep the government accountable, people questioning and holding government accountable by full participation in the process.” (Minneapolis). “Attitudes based on political parties allow parties to crystallize around opinions and issues, discourage manipulation of the party in power. One party does not always meet an individual’s needs. Being able to move is important.” (Minneapolis). “The more political parties the more democratic.” (Ossening, (NY.) II). 178 Islam and Democracy “Parties should reflect the mix of society. You should have more small parties in the US to guarantee their views are heard, and also when there is a change in the governing party changes in national politics and decision will be less drastic and more gradual. Secret ballots guarantee true elections and protect the vote of small parties. Electing multiple parties helps the government avoid continuing poor policies. It is always helpful to have someone else look at the issues from a different point of view.” (Savannah). “Should or do people stay loyal to one party?” (Leicester). Two statements disagree the above views: 276 “Muslims decline the position of parties and groups. The leader does not ask to lead. He is acknowledged and chosen by the people.” (San Diego). “Votes should be based on conscience rather than on the party line.” (Mauritius). 9.7 “One person one vote one time” The concept of a democratic vote which terminates democracy by electing a representative institution which then dissolves itself giving way to an autocratic form of government, as happened in Germany under Hitler, was specifically highlighted in the introductory comments to the discussion groups. It was there stated that such a procedure should not be considered to be a form of democracy for the purpose of the discussions. In fact, only one group specifically referred to this point, but perhaps it may be presumed, when the reader studies all the statements, that by implication the groups excluded “one person one vote one time” from the concept of democracy. Certainly none suggested that such a vote would legalise a non-democratic government. “‘One person one vote all agree’, and ‘one person one vote one time’ is unacceptable.” (City of London, young office workers). “Some of our participants felt strongly that the West had both hindered the development of democracy, as in Iran, and rejected democratically elected governments if they claimed to be Islamic. Appendix 179 The examples of Turkey and Algeria were given as places where democratically elected governments had been rejected by the West. It was suspected that western nations were fearful of what would happen if an elected Islamic government took over, in case this harmed western interests or led to the abolition of laws and civil rights. On the contrary, participants suggested that the regimes which preceded such governments were often oppressive dictatorships and should be replaced by elected civilian governments, even if they are not of the kind the West would like. It was felt that the experience of responsibility in government would help elected Islamic leaders to act in the interests of all their people, and that elected leaders would not destroy what they had won. Such governments should be allowed to flourish. The attitude of most Muslim (and Christian) participants was summed up by the comment that in looking at the relationship between democratic western nations and the rest of the world, ‘there is no fairness.’” (Leicester). Editor’s note: This is a case of an authoritarian government being replaced by a democratically elected Islamic government, the reverse of a one vote, one person, one time scenario. But because the election was annulled, the suspicion that the democratically elected Islamic successor government would betray the vote and become authoritarian could not be tested. 10.1 Introduction Some of the Muslim comments are directed to Islamic personal and family law, and the exclusion from Human Rights of culturally specific matters, and others to Muslim conduct, or to concern about lapses of human rights in the US or Britain or the West as a whole. Statements 10.2 General and compendious statements “Human rights in order of importance: - Freedom of thought, expression, opinion, association, conscience and religion; - Equal treatment of all people; - Social rights, social collective rights; - Right to survival and livelihood; 180 Islam and Democracy - Right to global equilibrium; - Freedom of subsistence without preconditions; - Clarifications: for example poor countries should not be held poor by rich countries; - Subsistence/dignity; - It is ethically intolerable to have starving in countries while other countries have no limit to their consumption; - Social rights: e.g. equal pay for equal work; - Collective success: all individuals need to be at the dignity level for all to be successful; - Wealth is a serious responsibility.” (Dearborn II). “The record of human rights violation in Muslim states today is unbelievable as well as unprecedented. The abject poverty and hunger, the prevalence of disease and human suffering, the high levels of ignorance and disregard for human dignity, the political oppression by rulers and governments with unjust barbaric legal systems that permit inhuman torture of prisoners and the innocent, the extravagant waste of national resources by the privileged are all alien to Islamic practice and in direct contradiction to Qur’anic injunctions.” (South London III, individual written statement of a Muslim relative of a participant). “Equal treatment is essential because all people have equal dignity. Including equal treatment of oneself (must not sell oneself into slavery).” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “Importance of harmony: all people since they are different must be accepted as who or what they are, leading to coexistence with mutual respect.”(Ossening, (NY.) I). “It is hard for Muslims to accept different things, the Prophet said in a Hadith that “difference is not a curse, it is a mercy”. It is not a human right but a human gift to enjoy differences.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “Economics within a country have a lot to do with how many rights can be guaranteed. Problems of race are very real for those living in the US.” (Louisville). “The five basic Muslim principles which legitimize human rights are: the primacy of life and dignity of the human person, the protection against restraint in religion, the respect for the home, the right of Appendix 181 asylum and the duty of care for others. In Islamic culture legal capacity has been determined by one’s religion. Only Muslims have been recognized as full citizens of the state. Sharia law allows a Muslim to be put to death for converting to another religion.” (Boston II Students). “Golden rule: allow mosques in the Vatican, cathedrals in Mecca.” (Chicago). “Rights: life, food, survival, bear arms, defend self, gain freedom.”(Chicago). “Human rights have become complicated by various cultural issues: the right to make good things better; the right to thinking revolutionary opinions; are we willing to take from the rich to pay for food for the poor?” (Chicago). “Especially minorities are made to feel inferior vs. the individual.” (Chicago). “Each individual decides what makes them happy, this becomes problematical when there is conflict over what is good for the larger community. Individual rights to take drugs/alcohol so long as you do not hurt someone else.” (Chicago). “Family, marriage, gender, sexuality, they don’t prevent those who do not agree to this understanding to be coercive or violent.” (Chicago). “Traditional Muslim cultural matters: dress.” (Chicago). Women and family “Muslims are more concerned with poverty amid plenty than with gender equity.” (Boston II Students). “Fundamental religions create one of the largest obstacles to gender equity.” (Boston II Students). “The right to education and a peaceful and orderly society, the rule of law and freedom from insecurity and arbitrary arrest. Freedom from all forms of discrimination against women. There should be positive discrimination in favour of the poor and the old. Apparent 182 Islam and Democracy discrimination in Islamic law between males and females with regard to unequal distribution of inheritance is explained by the fact that men are given responsibility of looking after old parents and sisters.” (Mauritius). “Non-discrimination is high on the list. Often people are confused about the rights of women in Islam. They have strong rights. In a true Islamic community the poor are provided for. The family is important, you could argue that women in Islam have more rights; women have many rights, to work and inheritance, etc. They are equal but different.” (North West London). “When some so-called Muslim countries oppress women it is more a matter of culture and unjust rulers.” (North West London). “Women and children’s rights should be protected. It is not Islamic what is done to women in some Muslim countries. It is usually a matter of culture and tradition that we should not follow in the US.” (Savannah). “Children working is important in any setting, working on their farms, as this is how they make a connection to the family, bringing them up to feel loyal to them. Work also helps you develop because work matures you, begin to feel pride. It has always been true that children and young people work, and this has not been a problem; there have not been any lasting ill-effects. Someone who spent his childhood working on a farm still grew up to become a doctor.” (Boston I). “The rights of women are protected by law. The problem is that we do not adhere completely to the laws. Women’s rights in some countries are violated by governments who do not respect human rights of all their citizens and have neither religious morals nor respect for the law.” (Savannah). “It is important for parents who can afford education to provide it for their children as well as health. It is an obligation as a Muslim to take care of not only their family i.e. children, wife, husband but also it is mandatory as a Muslim to take care for the elderly, financially disabled as well as physically and mentally disabled.” (Savannah). “It is a very important duty to take care of our neighbor; this is acknowledged by many Muslims as it is a strong Sunnah.” (San Diego). Appendix 183 “In Islam there is room for women to do what they want to do, and the very element making the difference was education. Women in Egypt in the 1920s protested at wearing the veil, but have now largely gone back to it.” (Louisville). “Divorce is mostly a prerogative of Muslim men until recently, in Egypt at least. A woman may request a divorce but a man has a right to one.” (Louisville). “Things that can be altered: women’s role in employment, as doctors, lawyers and teachers.” (Chicago). “Tolerance must be recognized between a man, a woman and family. Women have many rights in Islam; e.g. a woman has the choice of having employment, because islamically it is the man’s obligation to provide for his family. Another example is that a Muslim’s woman does not have to change her last name to that of her husband’s family, as women are not identified as property.” (San Diego). “The question of polygamy and inheritance has become an emotional community and politically provocative issue. According to Muslim law you must abide by the laws of the country you are in unless they are blatantly oppressive or go against fundamental principles of Islam.” (Mauritius). “The right of children is abrogated by materialism. Because of economic pressure or desire children are often forced to work, both parents often work and therefore neglect their children who are therefore raised in an ethical vacuum.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “Social security should be available but rarely necessary. Families should be able to take care of their elderly. Because of economic pressure driven by materialism this is often not the case.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “Work is not a right but an obligation.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “We add the right to education and the right to environment for all its creatures.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). 184 Islam and Democracy Freedom of thought and belief “Most important for Muslims is freedom of thought and equal treatment of all persons which are vital, with no geographical boundaries. Other rights follow from these for example issues to do with faith, family, wealth are all-important in Islam but in the context of equality the core value connected with them is human dignity rather than “rights”. The Muslim overview of rights is to consider people first as human beings, secondly religion and thirdly as citizens. All people should be treated equally in a country, non-citizens, citizens and refugees.” (Leicester). “Muslims are not different from any other religion in respect to human rights. Equality in the eyes of the law is the base of human rights. Religious persecution should not be tolerated. Separation of state and religion help the government maintains good judgement, fair mindedness and a willingness to disentangle moral values from the law.” (Savannah). “As a minority religion in the US we understand how minorities feel in other countries. It is very important to allow freedom of thought and to practise your religion so long as it does not restrict other people’s freedom.” (Savannah). “Equality and freedom of belief are essential parts of democracy. In any society there are extremists. Extremists are usually the product of dictatorship and theocracy. By allowing people to express themselves and, more importantly, by treating people equally we reduce hardship and therefore hatred among people of different religions and beliefs. This will reflect positively on the security of the citizen as well as that of the country.” (Savannah). “Freedom of thought, conscience and religion is important. In Turkey people are not free to practice Islam, which is humiliating: girls cannot wear headscarves in college.” (South London II, Turkish Students). 10.5 Freedom of speech “Freedom: people need to be free to express their political, economic, religious, social, or other ideological opinions if done in an appropriate manner, and provided such expressions do not lead to threatening the public good.” (Dearborn II). Appendix 185 “In the east there seems to be more awareness of the consequences of actions or of speech, so there is self-censorship.” (Boston I). “Social pressure is higher in the east so that even when someone knows he is right, if this goes against the general public opinion, that person may withhold his thought or speech.” (Boston I). “If freedom of speech and belief are allowed, citizens would be more satisfied and productive as a result there would be much less human rights abuse. The government should not have the right to censorship and in return the media should be more sensitive and, more importantly, honest in its reporting. It is the right of the citizen to discriminate between what is good and what is bad for himself.” (Savannah). “Freedom of opinion and expression are important but a bit more complicated. I am proud to be in a country with freedom of speech, but what about the National Front? It means they are allowed to spread offensive material.” (South London II, Turkish Students). “Freedom of Speech and Expression: We recognized that democracy entails the right of any person to express their opinions, to agree or disagree with others and not be suppressed in any way, as long as those opinions are reasonable and not going to harm others. Hence democracy has to be manifested in freedom of speech and the freedom to assert the opinions we hold through public channels and the ballot box.” (Dearborn II). Equal Treatment “Freedom of thought, expression, opinion, association, conscience, religion, equal treatment of all people.” (Dearborn II). “Poor countries should not be held poor by rich countries.” (Dearborn II). “Equality of Rights: We recognized that we all value democracy because it grants us equal rights. In safeguarding those rights it protects us against tyranny and its consequences, enabling us to force governments which are not respecting the equal rights of the people to step aside. One participant described it as, ‘an efficient way of replacing people when they have been in long enough that power has corrupted them.” (Dearborn II). 186 Islam and Democracy “Muslims should enact those verses of the Qur’an previously not made the source of legally binding rules, that is the verses emphasizing freedom of choice and individual responsibility for such choice before God, these should be the basis of modern Islamic law.” (Dearborn II). “Equal rights/human rights- everyone has basic rights that should not be infringed upon, even if one is part of a minority group.” (Dearborn II). “Social security and employment should be independent from color and religious belief. Is that not the point of human rigthts? Discrimination is a violation of human rights.” (Savannah). “We all agree that discrimination is a violation of human rights. Equal treatment by government and the private sector are part of human rights which are protected by freedom of speech and beliefs.” (Savannah). “Equal treatment for all persons: is important but still does not happen in this country where class discrimination is still active as well as racism. Things are getting better. Freedom of desire leads to imprisonment by your desire.” (South London II, Turkish Students). “Islam believes in equal and adequate treatment and education as well as access to education and necessities such as health. Obtaining and enforcing these qualities as well as obligations leads the Muslims to their ultimate goal: heaven.” (San Diego). 10.7 Human Rights and Punishment (See also “Respect for Law and the Rule of Law.”) “If someone steals in Islamic society the whole society looks at itself and asks why the poor haven’t been provided for.” (North West London). “Punishments, e.g. amputations need a whole Sharia system for their implementation. If a person steals out of necessity they are not punished in this way. The punishment is atonement for the sin. Most of us would prefer to have punishment here rather than in the hereafter.” (North West London). Appendix 187 “Fundamental religions create one of the largest obstacles to gender equity. Islam prescribes extreme punishment for gay men and lesbians. Homosexuals should be split in two with a sword or burnt alive. There are not similar punishments for other offences.” (Boston II Students). “The only time certain rights may be taken away is if one commits an offense, and even then a judicial system is in place to ensure proof is available and punishment is appropriate.” (Dearborn II). 11. Respect for law and rule of law 11.1 Perceived weaknesses in western rule of law “Weaknesses in western national judicial proceedings are: - Judgments not based on general moral boundaries; - Expensive; barriers to access; - Law not the search for essential truth but based on evidence; - Certifies immunity from prosecution; - Corruption inherent not apparent; - Appointed judiciary’ - Race and gender imbalance.” (Leicester). “What improvement should be arrived at in the US/British systems: - Legal aid should be back and means tested; - Closer links between the judiciary and those affected; - Independent commission to consider immunity; - Locally elected or appointed judiciary.” (Leicester). 311 “Perversions have crept into the rule of law.” (Mauritius). “Weakness of western national judicial procedures:- You are at the mercy of your representation and this comes down to money. The legal aid system should ensure that all can be represented. Media creates prejudice in minds, prior to trial. UK law is continually improving and trying to improve.” (North West London). “British and US constitutions are not applied e.g. invasion of Iraq, the detention without trial at Guantanamo Bay, the British decree that Chagos Islanders could not return to Chagos despite the verdict of British courts. But Britain insists that a country must practice the rule of law before assistance can be given.” (Mauritius). 188 Islam and Democracy “Legal systems could be improved by minimizing the role of money and power, the ability of the rich and powerful to manipulate laws for their own purposes. The same improvements could be made in international laws.” (Ossening,(NY.) I). 11.2 Perceived weaknesses in the law and the rule of law in Islam or in particular Muslim states “In the Muslim judicial system are the following weaknesses: - It is subject to external economic pressures; - Corruption is rife and apparent; - Economic and class barriers to access; - Lack of judicial accountability leading to inconsistency in judgment; - Appointed judges; - Lack of independence; - Gender and race imbalance; Improvements needed in Muslim countries: - The need to contextualise Muslim laws with contemporary world realities; - Need democratic change; - Raising economic and cultural standards.” (Leicester). “There is not a single real democracy in the Muslim world except perhaps Malaysia. Any legal system requires social stability over a period of time to evolve. Muslim countries have never benefited from this, as they have been colonies until only a few decades ago.” (Mauritius). “Turkey is not an Islamic state and is making efforts to develop its legal system along western lines.” (Mauritius). “I can’t think of a Muslim country applying Islamic Sharia fully. This is laid down by God in the Qur’an and further explained by the prophets. There is a need to look at the person giving the Sharia law and are they just.” (North West London). “An elementary form of justice is dispensed by Mullahs who apply 14th Century rules to modern times and with no popular representation and undeveloped legal structures. In these countries, such as Saudi Appendix 189 Arabia there is no protection for the individual and his rights.” (Mauritius). “No Islamic country has a pure Sharia system, though some parts are operated. The most notorious systems are not truly Sharia.” (North West London). “Civil or criminal; again wealth, social-economic status and gender play a part in the application of the law.” (Dearborn II). “Weakness in Islamic law is not in the concept but in the application. Equal access is not working: wealthy vs. the poor and/or weak. The wealthy have better representation, counsel, etc.” (North West London). “Weaknesses: hand chopping, adultery stomping.” (Dearborn II). “Rulings by a judge may or may not be right, it often depends on the quality of the lawyers.” (Boston I). “Legal systems could be improved by minimizing the rule of money and power, the ability of the rich and powerful to manipulate laws for their own purposes.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “Corruption among Palestinian leaders is resented, but becomes a back-burner issue in the light of the external power of Israel.” (Boston I). 11.3 Muslims in some groups commented on international law “A fully functional and international court of law is required.” (Leicester). “The UN needs to be autonomous.” (Leicester). “With respect to international law, the question seems always to be: how does it fit into the economic needs of a country? It is never just what is right or wrong, it also appears that the wrong becomes right over time: Israel’s occupation of the Gaza strip and the West Bank, now seen as acceptable.” (Boston I). “There is a need to address legal black holes, e.g. Guantanamo.” (Leicester). 190 Islam and Democracy “The same improvements could be made in international law where the system is manipulated by rich and powerful countries.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). 11.4 Explanations of and comments on Sharia “People misunderstand the true Sharia law, they don’t realise that the physical punishment within it is rare and the last resort, and not as extreme as is often thought; for example you would not cut off someone’s hand, only the tip of their finger, and this would only be in a rare case.” (North West London). “The law is in the Qur’an and judgments are made by consultation.” (North West London). “Concerning punishment, the Sharia tries to check serious crime, and this is right. Non-Muslims say ‘surely physical punishment is not civilized.’ In Islam we don’t believe in incarceration.” (North West London). “Sharia law has developed but injunctions are in the Qur’an and sayings of Mohammad, they are therefore ‘taken as given.’ But where it is not obvious how a case comes under the Sharia, a judgment can be made.” (North West London). 326 “Before the Prophet, if the powerful committed a crime it was often forgiven, and when the poor committed a crime it was often prosecuted. For Muslims, it is all about the here-after, everything goes to God on Judgment Day.” (Boston). “In Islam when selecting people to be judges you select the most honest people. It is often hard to get people to agree to be a judge, because they feel inadequate ‘I might make a mistake.’” (Boston). “A scholar system ensures that a lawyer cannot make a decision by himself.” (North West London). “There are at least five schools of Islamic law. This accounts for some of the variations.” (Dearborn II). “People are born free, this is Islam’s understanding.” (Boston). Appendix 191 “Judges can consult anyone in order to find the truth. They are fully empowered, they have unlimited power to find the truth. They don’t have to rely merely on what the lawyers present.” (Boston). “Military courts take security cases even if not involving the military. So if anyone is politically active, a trouble-maker is seen as a security threat, they are tried by the military.” (Boston). “Justice is taken with severe measures.” (San Diego). “Under Islam, there is no forced conversion; the rights of the conquered people are always respected.” (Boston). “In the Middle-East, law school is not popular. People are more interested in becoming doctors, engineers and teachers than lawyers. People don’t seek to make a living this way: it is seen as a profession of last resort. People don’t sue each other, most disputes are mediated before going to court.” (Boston). “Saudi Arabia implements total Islamic law, Sharia, which with many cases of crime, a severe punishment is presented, such as the cutting of the hand of the one who stole something. Yet a huge factor in this form of criminal justice is that a witness is always needed. Justice is used more with severe consequences for crime. Islam also has a strong foundation of “Divine Justice”. If a crime is not justified within this world, God will reward/punish in the hereafter.” (San Diego). “In Arabia, pre-Islam, they established international laws, as many merchants would come and meet in Mecca, a central location for business. This was formed to establish a balanced way of implementing law with foreigners as a non-discriminatory act.” (San Diego). “Islam recognizes the death penalty, for example a person who is killed has the right to have the death justified by having the murderer killed.” (San Diego). “Islam embraces innocence until proven guilty.” (New York I). “We know that Sharia law experienced a phenomenal growth and development during the first six centuries. The stagnation we have today has existed from that time when the door of Ijtihad (development of the law) was virtually closed. The full and proper use of Islamic principle, such as will certainly ensure the ongoing process of fresh 192 Islam and Democracy thinking, and influence some creative and desirable adjustment to that body of laws.” (South London III, written statement by relative of a participant). “Islam implements rules of hospitality. The Islamic system of respect and rule of law is based on implementing more extreme laws to have, as a result, less crime committed. There is a lack of checks and balances.” (San Diego). “The Qur’an is a living source of jurisprudence and as such provides for changes. That will keep it relevant and alive. The old interpretations of legal theories in many areas of Muslim life, though obsolete, are still being used by some contemporary scholars to deliver fatwas that create greater hardships and quite often embarrassment to the believer.” (South London III, individual written statement by Muslim relative of a participant). “Muslims must not remain silent and be condemned to live under rules that were established in the 8th and the 9th centuries.” (South London III, written statement by relative of a participant). “One is innocent until proven guilty.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “One has representation in court.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “Judicial independence and impartiality.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). 341 “Muslims address the burden of proof.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “The need to tell the truth and the necessity of not lying.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). .Justice Justice is shown to be the paramount principle of Islam in relation to what the West calls governance. International justice is emphasized perhaps because of the current climate in world events, both political and economic. Appendix 193 Key Statements Concepts of justice and equity “Muslims value justice as a thing held particularly dear, sacred, in the non-religious sense. It is the core value in Islam. It concerns the father and son relationship; it concerns dispute over land and fairness, because of the consequences in the next world.” (Leicester). “The purpose of the Muslim life is to achieve justice; it can’t be achieved by mankind, only God can achieve it perfectly. Concerning God and man, God forgives and dispenses Justice. Concerning man and man, each one pays for past wrongs.” (Leicester). 343 “Justice is very important with regard to God in the hereafter, just as love is very important to Christians. For Muslims justice is logical and from the mind (in contrast to love). Flexibility leads to confusion and acrimony.” (Leicester). “Muslims consider that Christians should be more vocal about world injustice and that Christianity is unable to challenge the ethics of the western world, political justice, trade and economic justice.” (Leicester). “Our discussion, however, highlighted deep dissatisfaction with the injustices which are created, allowed and perpetuated elsewhere in the world by western nations in the name of democracy. The West and its apparently democratic governments were criticised for supporting unjust regimes when they served western interests. The support of the United States of America for the regime in Pakistan was given as an example of the double standards applied by the West when their own economic or strategic interests were at stake. The regimes in the UAE and Saudi Arabia were also cited as examples of undemocratic governments supported by the West. One Muslim participant referred to ‘dictators put there by the West.’ A Christian participant rejected this view. While admitting that western nations do interfere in the process of government in other countries, including Islamic states, he believed that the idea that the West imposes dictators on other nations was a myth. Some of the participants, however, did not believe it was a myth and referred to the way in which America and Britain have supported the government of Saudi Arabia as a prime example of western double standards – attacking countries like 194 Islam and Democracy Russia for being undemocratic while preventing democracy in other places.” (Leicester). “Our discussion also considered the way in which western nations had connived at corruption and injustice in the abuse of UN Aid for oil funding and felt deeply offended that powerful western nations can behave in such a self-interested way. Such failures within apparently democratic nations do not help other nations to welcome democracy. Some of our participants felt strongly that the West had both hindered the development of democracy, as in Iran, and rejected democratically elected governments if they claimed to be Islamic. The examples of Turkey and Algeria were given as places where democratically elected governments had been rejected by the West. It was suspected that western nations were fearful of what would happen if an elected Islamic government took over, in case this harmed western interests or led to the abolition of laws and civil rights.” (Leicester). “On the contrary, participants suggested that the regimes which preceded such governments were often oppressive dictatorships and should be replaced by electedcivilian governments, even if they are not of the kind the West would like. It was felt that the experience of responsibility in government would help elected Islamic leaders to act in the interests of all their people, and that elected leaders would not destroy what they had won. Such governments should be allowed to flourish. The attitude of most Muslim (and Christian) participants was summed up by the comment that in looking at the relationship between democratic western nations and the rest of the world, ‘there is no fairness.’” (Leicester). See section 9.7 for important considerations indirectly possibly relating to democracy in the last statement. 345 “Justice in the Qur’an includes returning a kindness and doing a kindness when none is received. Justice concerns the welfare of the human race as a whole.” (Mauritius). 346 “Justice islamically underpins social, political and economic areas, all areas. For some Muslims the Palestine issue generates a great deal of hostility, but I do not agree with the violent responses of some because Islam gives us many ways to fight back.” (North West London). Appendix 195 “The saving of life is a priority. Killing one person is an affront to the whole of humanity. Justice should be applied to everyone and all religions.” (Mauritius). “The Saudi Arabian regime does not represent all Muslims. The issue will not be resolved until there is re-education in the ways of the great prophets, e.g. Mohammed and Jesus. People should be dealt with equally. It should not be a matter of who has money. Justice is not seen in terms of blame, instead, equity, tolerance and common teachings. Only with this we will get peace in the Middle East.” (North West London). “Justice is tied to the psyche of Muslims because it is referenced repetitively in the Qur’an. Islam teaches equality of all humanity and everyone has a right to justice. Most Muslims live in the third world where there is misdistribution of wealth. Mercy is also very important to Muslims. Muslims cannot look at themselves as superior, they must apply justice equally.” (Dearborn I). 349 “To be poor does not mean injustice from the Islamic perspective. We don’t have the luxury to keep responsible only at the individual level; we need to look at the world around us.” (Dearborn I). 350 “Compassion and love leads to justice.” (Dearborn I). “Equal access to food, education, healthcare (the individual’s basic needs) based on the Qur’an should be equitable, not based on geographical boundaries.” (Minneapolis). “Equity is accessibility and availability to basic human needs including information services and natural resources.” (Minneapolis). “Everyone has an equal right to justice”. (Dearborn I). “Unjust rulers will be punished by God.” (Dearborn I). 354 “The importance of justice to Islam was the key reason why she (the speaker) was drawn to that faith.” (Dearborn I). “One of the names of God is Justice; Justice is the preservation of person, family, property and religious faith.” (Minneapolis). 356 “Mercy is above justice.” (Minneapolis). 196 Islam and Democracy 357“Justice involves the basic needs of everyone, vigilant for the whole.” (Minneapolis). “There is no difference in justice toward people you hate and people you love or justice for rich people and justice for those with no resources or power, whether you are Muslim or non-Muslim.” (Boston I). “An example of injustice had to do with the continuing birth defects suffered by the Vietnamese as an aftermath of the war, and the lack of acknowledgment or apology on the part of the US for its responsibility in this.” (Boston I). “If it is customary don’t change it unless it is not useful.” (Minneapolis). “Attainment of equality for all human beings in all spheres of life (God,self, family, community, environment, Muslims, non-Muslims, society, nation, world).” (Minneapolis). “When fishing or hunting don’t take more than one needs.” (Minneapolis). “When people who perpetuated injustice define justice there is a problem,” (Boston I). “Justice comes with rights and responsibilities, and starts with individuals. Each person has to act justly and each person has the right to be treated justly.” (Boston I). 363 “On Justice there is not a clash of civilizations but a dialogue of civilizations.” (Chicago). “One woman said :Equity is not necessarily justice. It is justice tempered with mercy.” (New York I). “If we speak of justice is there inherent in it a notion of tolerance?” (Chicago). “Toleration of different beliefs is essential to get along.” (Chicago). “Is it possible to be intolerant if you believe you have the truth. If you have the truth why give the people freedom, because they will only ruin their soul.” (Chicago). Appendix 197 “Tolerance is important west and east.” (Chicago). “The priority of justice over equality.” (New York I). “Economic equity is more important than equity of freedom.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “There is concern at the inclination of nations to use perceived injustices as rationalizations for the defense of what are in fact economic/political interests.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “Equity comprises equal distribution of resources without disallowing for individual initiative.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “Wealth distribution and gender equality are unbalanced and causes of social disharmony.” (Boston II Students). “Remedying injustice on a global level requires taking personal responsibility for those in need.” (Ossening, (NY.) I). “Benevolent use of personal resources is the best means of redistribution of wealth rather than secular progressive tax structures.” (Boston II Students). “To understand how God works with us, if your faith is right, you move on it. Yes we have those documents of the Founding Father, they were based on the Fathers of our Faith, on prophets. So those of us who believe in God have a mighty power.” (Delaware). 373 “The West has lost its moral bearings and the rest of the world is suffering the consequences.” (Boston II Students). “The society is only as good as whoever speaks truth, speaks out. Our society spent 3— million $ on aid and 87 billion to the war. I say reverse it because we CAN change the people and be of the people, but only righteous people, not all people.” (Delaware). “I desire and long for and pray for a time when I can be a citizen in a world where it really is true that no child is left behind and no poor is left behind.” (Delaware). “I don’t, disagree with any of these big issues. But I am reminded of the saying ‘think globally.’ We have the opportunity to create a situation in this community where everyone can trust and depend on 198 Islam and Democracy one another and address the needs right here and be a model of what we want to see in the world.” (Delaware). Criticisms of the West “Individual injustices: double standards in the West, e.g. Israel/ Palestine, a great source of discontent.” (Mauritius). “Unilateralist policy of the US in Iraq.” (Mauritius). “Other injustices in order of importance: global famine, food not linked to need, the European Common Agricultural Policy; Global trade: unfair political support by wealthy western nations and unfair trade practises.” (Mauritius). “Injustice: lack of clean drinking water.” (Mauritius). “Injustice: pollution/dumping of nuclear waste, poor countries are bribed to accept it.”(Mauritius). “EU trade relations with some others are unjust, e.g. tariffs on some goods. Certain people are kept in poverty and the money kept in the EU.” (North West London). “Solving the Palestine problem would not end terrorism because now other problems have been created.” (North West London). “Equity in distribution of wealth, proper education, good administration and justice, meritorious promotions equal for all, equal access to credit for the poor.” (Mauritius). “We would have problems anyway due to the USA’s domination.” (North West London). “During the first election of Bush, the Florida vote was rigged. If you can’t even trust the system when you vote, there is a chain reaction.” (North West London). “As Muslims we feel we are the target of injustice and this forms our opinion of what justice is. A clash of civilisations is manufactured.” (North West London). Appendix 199 “Need to sort out the sovereignty in Palestine and Iraq before we can look further at justice.” (North West London). “In the UN there is often not timely action on the part of the UN, so that resolutions are passed but often nothing is done, but when US sponsored resolutions (e.g. on Iraq) are passed there is often action right away. When powerful interests are affected by these resolutions, the resolutions are enacted.” (Boston I). “Democracy in US foreign policy (unilateral vs. multilateral) “with us or against us” is very bothersome to Muslims. The universal idea of brotherhood is difficult to embrace when the brothers you aspire to, apply universal ideas but not universally (drop bombs, apply different views re: genocide (Bosnia, as an example). When Saudi Arabia is openly supported by the USA, the appeal of universal justice rings hollow for many Muslims. There is the belief that they are very much under western control / CIA payroll, etc. It is no longer colonial, but tyranny all the same. They did not allow for democracies that oppose the West, e.g. Morocco, Iran, Algeria, Brunei.” ((Chicago). “The problem is that security is now more fundamental than justice. After 9/11 a rebalance took place of human rights as against security. September 11th, traumatic. Equilibrium from early 1950’s was disturbed: very dangerous. This government took it as an excuse to do what they wanted to do anyway. Now there is no real sense of justice with respect to people whose rights are being impaired, especially Muslims. We will probably not have the freedom to go back to the same equilibrium.” (Chicago). “The large amount of US arms being channelled to Egypt and elsewhere must be acknowledged and reduced.” (New York I). “The Israel/Palestine conflict is the key global issue that needs to be solved. This and Iraq have reduced faith in the US and international institutions such as the UN.” (New York I). “Concrete recommendations: how to create mechanisms within each society to discuss the issues.” (Chicago). “If there is another military conflict we (Muslims in the US) could be under military control. There is fear, insecurity. If you don’t have security you don’t care about justice. If injustice goes so far that you are willing to risk your own life: revenge.” (Chicago). 200 Islam and Democracy “Global justice issues are typically handled by international organizations (UN, World Bank, etc.) whose discussions are more influenced by political/economic drives, particularly the interests of its more powerful members. Thus these organizations seem often to become instead tools of inequity/injustice.” (New York I). “Muslims are relatively poor under-developed nations and are unjustly dealt with by western states e.g. Bangladesh and several African states.” (Boston II Students). “Justice loses meaning when those organizations do not have power to hold their powerful members accountable to their rules of law, further rendering moot the notion of consultation.” (New York I). “The average American is far wealthier than most people in the world but does not feel obligated to share with those less fortunate who live in other countries. Americans have not been taught to feel they are part of the global community.” (Boston II Students). Criticisms of particular Muslim states “Darfur/Khartoum governments manipulating the situation.” (Mauritius). “Saudi Arabia an unjust country, wealth is accumulated in the hands of the ruling family.” (Mauritius). “Jordan and Syria are unjust.” (Mauritius). 12.5 Solutions to injustice “Iraq/Afghan wars reinforce UN status as a world power. International law must be acted on.” (Mauritius). 13. Materialism The character of materialism and its perceived identification with the West was discussed. Appendix 201 General statements on the nature of materialism 395 “There is a religious solution to materialism (i.e. the belief that goods and services can fulfil the ultimate good of personal life). Materialism is the sin of modern western civilisation and the western consumer society wastes natural resources to produce disposable goods.” (Boston II Students). “What is considered most shocking about western behaviour and attitudes is sexual morals, free sex (both heterosexual and homosexual) and the fact that this is formalised by legislation. Gay weddings are totally unacceptable.” (Mauritius). “The basic problem with western society is that the dimension of their souls’ eternity and life after death has been relegated to the background as well as the fundamental principle of accountability for deeds.” (Mauritius). “All people of faith find materialism offensive in the US and outside the US.” (Dearborn II). “Muslims are offended by creating a want rather than addressing a need, by psychological manipulation.” (Leicester). “Greater importance should be given to prayer and spiritual meditation through silence. Globalisation should be reinvented through religion, and global solidarity and understanding promoted.” (Mauritius). “Most participants felt that there is hope for the future as after every period of decline truth regains its position.” (Mauritius). “Muslims are reassessing the consumerism that has crept into Dubai, Abu Dhabi and even Jeddah.” (Mauritius). “In Islam it is an unforgiven sin to worship other than God.” (North West London). “Materialism is a worship of money and goods.” (North West London). 202 Islam and Democracy “Western marketing offends the Muslim world, it is aggressive. Is the role of the women the object in advertizing voyeurism?” (Chicago). “Advertizing takes up so much mind-space; identifying with brands and popular culture.” “Poverty and despair; people hope to have the same things as blond-haired people. How do you make them feel equal?” (Chicago). 403 “Psychological and social content is there to tame discontent. Al-Jazeera’s use of good-looking women dressed in western clothing selling the latest luxury item.” (Chicago). 404 “The goal for a Muslim is freedom. Not freedom to drink but freedom to worship. So any society who gives us freedom to worship that is fine with us.” (Delaware). 405 “Istanbul, a great city of the world, materialism has affected the growth and made it more western, but culturally Turkish people are of eastern culture, and live on a first name basis.” (Chicago). 406 “Muslims should be humble in their wealth and financial dealings.” (San Diego). “Notions of generosity, notion of a lack of hospitality. In the Muslim world the host would put out all the best, would not consider accepting dollars or taking dollars.” (Chicago). “It is mandatory for each Muslim to pay a portion of their income to charity in order to take care of the poor and financially disadvantaged people.” (San Diego). “One should turn over wealth to society to help each other. One should oppose hedonism, it is never too late. Other civilizations have gone through high and low. Those who say it is too late go to the hills with Bin Laden.” (Chicago). “It is important for the Muslim to acknowledge that wealth and success in this world are temporary and that true success is for the believer who will be rewarded with heaven.” (San Diego). “Material desire is considered a sin, and, though it is part of everyone, Muslims should try to fight wanting more, of having too Appendix 203 much, because everything is accounted for in this world, and the way they spend their wealth is extremely important.” (San Diego). 411 “Even if that culture has things we do not believe in, like prostitution, we are ok with it as long as we are free to worship.” (Delaware). “My wish: destruction of capitalism and greed.” (Delaware). 13.3 How materialism affects society “A form of exploitation by people is commercially influencing others to focus their lives on obtaining goods, keeping them away from the spiritual aspect and the self.” (North West London). “Exploitation of labour to meet wants.” (Leicester). “Growth of indecency and nudity in the media. The media are responsible for a general degradation of morality.” (Mauritius). “Immorality and dishonesty in business practices.” (Mauritius). “Money-men putting people into debt to satisfy their wants, creating a cultural borrowing and dependency in an interest-led economy (usery).” (Leicester). “Speed of acquisition of commodities, giving a false impression of “quick fixings” like taking drugs.” (Leicester). “Western society has lost its guidelines and has become completely unchristianed. It has plunged wholeheartedly into materialism.” (Mauritius). “Muslims are annoyed by USA’s patronizing attitude. They tell other countries not to be materialistic while they are themselves.” (North West London). “It is felt that French secularism has an anti-religious component and excessive measures have been introduced, such as the banning of overt religious signs in schools.” (Mauritius). (Editor’s note: this comment is not directed to materialism, though it was reported in a discussion on this subject). 204 Islam and Democracy “Muslims are offended by Christian proselytizers, handing out food with conversion as a part of the equation. Locally Christians tried to convert Muslims with a party. Halal hot dogs.” (Dearborn II). “‘The overworked American:’ people work longer: more $$$ to spend. They are very tired, do not have time for meaningful activities; they reward themselves with something materialistic. The line is blurred between work and home, one never escapes from all cell phones. Two-income couples become standard, women in the 1970’s with young children went to work, there was a decline in the number of children.” (Chicago). “The role of house-wife declined, it did not occupy all existence.” (Chicago). “Two incomes adds to income, adds to materialism, two cars and child carers.” (Chicago). “Until Muslims are people of wealth, instead of third world states, there will be no respect from the rest of the world.” (Dearborn II). “Critique of materialism – it is a ceaseless quest for pleasure, hedonism.” (Chicago). “Britney Spears and Madonna want to dabble in religion to show they have a mind as well as a body.” (Chicago). 427 “The elites in developing countries are subject to materialism.” (Chicago). “The growth of consumerism results in excess which in turn robs the poor of their share leading to famine. Consumerism denies poorer people in less developed countries human food (e.g. soy beans) in favour of using it to feed cattle for the western market.” (Mauritius). “Religious purists: Afghanistan, the Islamic tradition adheres to the purist tradition of poverty; take a salary but give it away. The Shah (Iran) for his ‘4,000 Year’ party flew in food from Maxim’s; nothing was from Iran. No Iranians were invited. Don’t mention poverty to the Shah, he does not want to know about it.” (Chicago). 430 “The Taliban is the opposite extreme, literature, music, art, any leisure equals guilt; there is an absolute pursuit of virtue, a ban on kite flying.” (Chicago). Appendix 205 431 “Turkey has a more secular and western majority, one misses the religious aspects within the government. Some rebel against that now. They worry about becoming too western. They are training children to be less westernized in regard to materialism.” (Chicago). 13.4 Global effects “The long-term impact of debt on third-world countries is highlighted by Jubilee 2000 and the IMF.” (Leicester). “The exploitation of global resources due to western materialism has its direct impact on politics, e.g. oil.” (Leicester). “Rulers are propped up so that they can satisfy the requirements of the west even though the rights of the people of those countries are trodden on.” (Leicester). “Bin Laden wants to represent the impoverished masses.” (Chicago). “Bin Laden wants to identify materialism of the West as being evil.” (Chicago). 14. Cultural Specificity This subject was introduced to enable views on the cultural aspects of human rights to be expressed, however the discussions were broader. General statements by Muslims on culture “One can’t define “Muslim society” because Islam accepts cultural norms wherever they are so long as they don’t contravene Islamic laws. So Islam does not have culturally specific norms wherever they are.” (Mauritius). “Religion and culture should not be confused, as people having varying customs may share a common religion. Within the same religion there are a wide variety of accepted modes of dress, behaviour, eating, habits and social morals.” (Mauritius). 206 Islam and Democracy “Political: in many Muslim-dominated countries culture and religion are narrowly defined even to the point where some people may try and use religion as a justification for culture. First and foremost as Muslims we have not the right nor can we introduce new laws into Islam. It is a known thing in Islam to differentiate over culture between one’s religion and if one’s culture interferes with one’s way of life then it is no longer a consistent part of their culture, it is ruled out by religion. There is no cultural uniformity as Muslims cover many different ethnicities.” (San Diego). “After an hour of discussion participants felt that the theme proved difficult to handle. In some cases (as for youth at school or university) Islam is the initial assumption about other groups and causes one to believe differently initially with people of different cultural backgrounds. As one gets to know the others, the attitude automatically changes.” (Mauritius). “The devotee is not called upon to alter his appearance or change his identity and dress, cultural customs and language except in cases where they patently offend the basic principles on which the pillars of Islam are founded.” (South London III, individual written statement by Muslim relative of a participant). 438 “A variety of dress codes coexists and basically people must be allowed to adopt the mode they want. Some Muslim participants said that Islam only requires women to be decent and modest. A Muslim lady said it is an Islamic injunction that a woman should cover her head, but she (the speaker) chooses freely not to adhere to this.” (Mauritius). “It is common practice in most Islamic communities today to make a convert to Islam feel as if he is changing his national identity to that of someone of a different tribe or nation. A Canadian convert recently was made to believe that his western dress was inappropriate for the ceremony of Shahad. But the Qur’an (49:13) states that the intention is to keep the identity of the convert intact.” (South London III, individual written statement by Muslim relative of a participant). “Today Muslims are faced with the dilemma of being caught unprepared to confront the new social paradigm in the West. To escape and avoid the challenge Muslims are encouraged to return to the practice of Islam of the 7th and 8th centuries to reject the reality of the environment in which we live now. They are busy struggling with insignificant issues of the Hijab, and the right to polygamy.”(South Appendix 207 London III, individual written statement by Muslim relative of a participant). “It is ironic to have so many Muslims scholars and leaders to be engaged busily propagating and recommending the return of early practises in Islam. Living in the past is not what Mohammed recommended.” (South London III, individual written statement by relative of a Muslim participant). “Concern is felt about the use of religious texts to support entrenched discriminatory socio-cultural attitudes particularly in the spheres of sex, race and religion. Broad-based education should form the bedrock of society which must promote inclusion and social integration. The fundamental objectives of the Islamic social policy call for the affirmation and consolidation of the integrity and dignity of the individual protecting and strengthening the family unit and ensuring that women enjoy the full legal, social, cultural and economic, educational and political rights guaranteed to them in Islam. Culture is an argument often put by governments to excuse themselves from the need to know the rights and responsibility taught by our religion. Human rights are universal.” (South London III, written statement by Muslim relative of a participant). 14.3 Lists and descriptions of cultural conduct 441 “Today there are many situations when the controversy over covering is seen globally, as in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, where many stereotypes come from, as women in these Middle Eastern countries are seen wearing full clothing or even hijab, leading many people uneducated on the subject of covering into a negative point of view and leading to malicious acts of hate crimes.” (San Diego). “Even in a more westerned setting as France, hijab is an issue, as the French government is wanting to bar wearing of the head scarf as it is a “symbol of religion”. Yet what concerns Muslims is that (A) hijab is not a symbol but an act of worship (Khadija Mostafu) and (B) banning it would not stop Muslim women who do cover on a daily basis from wearing it. Hijab for Muslim women is a sign of respect and modesty. Why is it that when a women covers more she is perceived as oppressed, yet when a woman is covered yet she is liberated?” (San Diego). 208 Islam and Democracy 442 “The position accrued to women in many Muslim societies sprang from local traditions and were not ordained by Islam. Islam never forbids women to work outside the home but gave priority to her role as wife and mother. Similarly Islam did not forbid women to pray in mosques. This is a measure taken by the second Caliph Omar for various practical reasons, most Muslim participants express the view that this tradition is worthy of modification.” (Mauritius). 131 “A second example: shaking hands in Islam between a woman and a man who are not related or married is extremely prohibited. In general women and men who are not related/married are not to touch AT ALL; this fact of Islam differs from other religions. The physical interaction between male and female is prohibited, as Muslims believe that it is not proper, and it may even lead to sinful acts; not to say a simple handshake is equal to sex, but in essence the intermingling has major effects, as many relationships begin in simple social settings. Dating in Islam is also prohibited for both genders. Marriage is the only formal and recognised form of companionship between Muslim males and females. The male and female should lower their gaze and ward off any sinful temptations.” (San Diego). 443 “Forced, arranged marriages, equality between men and women and the ritual of female circumcision are cultural issues not specific to Islam.” (Leicester). “Among Muslims and Christians contraception, education and work for women are widely accepted. Besides the traditional rolesharing between the sexes is changing from patriarchal to a more consensual egalitarian pattern.” (Mauritius). “Differences are cultural in Arabic life, often more cultural than religious.” (Dearborn II). “Women’s first priority is the family and the house.” (Dearborn II). 446 “Unquestioning acceptance of authority of the elder.” (Dearborn II). “Dress modest.” (Dearborn II). 448 “Education; Islam requires women to be educated.” (Dearborn II). Appendix 209 “Culturally specific aspects of traditional Muslim society: congregational prayer, daily prayer, neighbour and family, sense of community, charity, avoidance of financial exploitation, usery, dress code, diet, the month of Ramadan, reflecting on God, propriety in dealings between men and women, burial laws. We would not modify any.” (North West London). “Double standards in Muslim life: - Muslim boys take advantage of Christian girls not of Muslim girls. It is not right; - Boy’s word taken over girl’s.” (Dearborn II). “Islamic women at the beginning had more rights than any women in the world; however they have lost many of them.” (Dearborn II). “The Qur’an talks about the right to life.” (New York I). “This group senses that our religions are close, but the cultures may not be.” (Dearborn II). 450A “The Hijab or head scarf is many times negatively portrayed through the media, causing a mass misconception on it and Muslim women. The Hijab is not worn as a symbol of religion such as the cross in Christianity, it is obligatory for every believing Muslim woman to wear it. It is not worn for a man because of oppression; on the contrary many Muslims view it as liberating.” (San Diego). “Culture is dress, genital mutilation, honour killing and most gender roles. Islamic law allows for local custom.” (New York I). “The Qur’an does affirm the full humanity of the female. It is not inherently paternalistic.” (New York I). 15. Freedom and Self-Government This subject was introduced to give the opportunity for views on colonialism and post-colonialism to be expressed. The subject is an aspect of global justice, howeverthe subject was treated more broadly. 210 Islam and Democracy General statements “Muslims felt they acted less actively in taking action and lobbying those in power, but Muslims have less freedom to speak out in Muslim countries.”(Leicester). “The ‘home situation’ was identified as one the root causes of global and intercountry abuses. A country where politics, the economically and military powerful, abuse the poor and the weak, is more likely to oppress other countries.” (Mauritius). “People aren’t ready for democracy. Women are not educated, it won’t happen until a chance to vote and democracy happens.”(Chicago). “On Tunisia: now we can’t afford reforms because the US with the guns will come. US needs to show consistency in dealing with leaders.” (Chicago). “Freedom from colonialism is now threatened by ‘economic colonisation’. Wealthy nations, including the G7, are imposing a new type of servitude on weaker countries. Powerful lobbies in developed countries are dictating policies that affect poorer nations. Much injustice is apparent in trade agreements. Those of the WTO as well as the European Common Agricultural Policy have further impoverished many nations. Powerful nations do not consider generosity towards weaker ones.”(Mauritius). “Change is needed in the Islamic world, representative government and economic justice.”(Chicago). Aspects of freedom and self-government of concern to Muslims “Concerns in order of importance: - Economic pressure is the biggest issue e.g. ownership of scarce resources, dumping surplus resources; - Technological differences; - Political differences; - Social and ethnic differences.” (Leicester). “Europe is more charitable giving towards Islamic development aid. US gives the least in foreign aid in terms of GNP, and it is tied to military aid. America’s role is military force. Feel we can never keep Appendix 211 countries in line by making alliances with authoritarian regimes.” (Chicago). “US has become their lifeline of Morocco, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria and Tunisia.” (Chicago). Muslim action “Agencies outside governments should be more accountable in global activities in different countries, more transparency in their activities, a universal moral/ethical code.” (Mauritius). “UN development should provide equal and just access to the big stick against the country going against the code.”(Mauritius). “Muslims differ from Christians on how economies should be run, e.g. capitalism and no interest on debt.”(Mauritius). Note: this is not directed to the subject. “With regard to Egypt: - Egypt is the heart and soul of the Muslim Arab world; - Arab nationalism and the Muslim world; - Civil societies, artists and Parliament, all stalled under martial law; - They have well-formed groups, but they are not allowed to meet; - Receives an enormous amount of dollars from the US; - Has leverage; - Civil groups in the US could make contact with groups in Egypt; - Whatever dollars come from the US do not trickle down to the society; - The Middle class is living precariously and they have awareness but no opportunity: they get crushed; -The Muslim brotherhood is Middle Class and it has helped in Pakistan and Egypt.” (Chicago). “Christians as a whole should dispel the myth that there is NOT total support for Right- Wing Religion (i.e. the religious Christian Right in the US). Presumably the intention of the statement is the reverse of its actual wording. They should correct misunderstanding and marginalize the extremists on both sides.” (Chicago). 460 “Democracy is tainted by colonialism. It was imposed on colonized, occupied peoples. And in those countries in the ME which claim to be democracies, it is corrupt. Look at Algeria, Egypt, Syria. 212 Islam and Democracy Denial of access to vote, the banning of Muslim parties, rulers, twenty+ years in power, passing power from father to son.” (Vermont II). “Even the word democracy is negative because it is foreign. We need Shura to be the word.” (Vermont II). This subject was introduced to enable Muslims to comment on the non-political aspects of governance. 16.2 Comments on civil society “Civil society is flourishing in a society like Britain.” (Leicester). “It would be a good thing if government funded political parties. This would ensure independence from donors.” (Mauritius). “In Islam you do not need conflict and pluralism in society, because you would be moving towards a common goal. Islam is a whole system, there are rules in Islam for the government, so the government and all organisations work according to the same religious guidelines. This would only work perfectly with a perfect leader. Otherwise there may be variances due to interpretation.” (North West London). “In Islamic society you would not all have to be Muslims. Islam is tolerant.”( North West London). Note: This is not directly relevant to the subject. Order of priority in the institutions of civil government “Most important institutions are: - Independent judiciary; - Accountability of elected representatives; - Functional watchdogs e.g. commission on the press association; - Religious institutions with a “prophetic voice” especially regarding security; Though one would not advocate the role of the Ayatollah in Iran; - Must maintain the establishment of the Church of England to maintain the prophetic and spiritual voice (in Britain); - Education and access to it for all.; Independent organisations e.g. charities and action groups.” ( Leicester). Appendix 213 Activities of the institutions of civil society “NGO attempts to sustain a deep dialogue with Muslim society and in a parallel approach to tell American policy-makers how much this affects our whole relationship with other parts of the world.” (Chicago). “4- Putting social issues on the national agenda. Poverty, literacy, crime, marriage and other social issues should be addressed through civil organizations that can compete for funding by the government. Such non-profit organizations can have a vital role in improving the quality of life of the public. 5- Rejecting all forms of discrimination based on religion, color or ethnicity. 6- Defining the true identity of the nation, and planting the seeds of national loyalty. Stable nations and cultures should not feel threatened by other cultures. But if a nation is unsure about its true identity then it will react negatively to other ideas and prefer isolation.” (Dearborn II). “The only people who get invited (in Washington DC to advise on civil society needs in the third world) are ‘crazy Right Wingers’, they have organizations and power and the ear of the people in position.” (Chicago). “Mauritius youth feel a bit frustrated with Muslims dignitaries whose ways of thinking and teaching religion are often outmoded, narrow-minded and irrelevant. The idea is to rely less on Islamic principles in the modern world, which would make it easier to establish bridges with other such associations or other groups and perhaps, have some common activities.”(Mauritius). “The Evangelical Lutheran church in America is becoming more persistent, pushing for positions and having people behind them. Lutherans are organizers and providers of international aid, but with controversy their relief could be cut off immediately. The Government gives funds, but works through church organizations; the largest is the Lutheran World Federation/Lutheran World Relief.” (Chicago). “It would be helpful if some government funding were made available to NGOs without any threat to their independence.” (Mauritius). 214 Islam and Democracy “Wherever there is resettlement of people the government has no mechanism to provide for them and turns to church organizations.” (Chicago). “NGO’s are becoming more assertive but walk a fine line of which threatens their abilities to provide aid.” (Chicago). MIMESIS GROUP www.mimesis-group.com MIMESIS INTERNATIONAL www.mimesisinternational.com info@mimesisinternational.com MIMESIS EDIZIONI www.mimesisedizioni.it mimesis@mimesisedizioni.it ÉDITIONS MIMÉSIS www.editionsmimesis.fr info@editionsmimesis.fr MIMESIS COMMUNICATION www.mim-c.net MIMESIS EU www.mim-eu.com Printed by Geca Industrie Grafiche – San Giuliano Milanese (MI) September 2019