The Potential for Co-existence between Islam and Democracy
Abd Al-Aziz bin Mohammad Al-Khaatir Al-Hayat - 08/07/06//
What is the common denominator between the democratic experiments in Iran, Lebanon and Kuwait? In my opinion, each experiment is incomplete. If we put Lebanon aside, because the formation of the Lebanese State was a political project, the Iranian and Kuwaiti experiments seem to be at odds with a problem that is dashing the hopes of completing two worthy and consummate experiments.
Under the slogan "every innovation is an aberration" and by protecting religion by closing the door on excuses, the Muslim nation has been drawn into centuries of oppression and tyranny. Under the mantle of the fear of new labels, such as socialism, democracy, and secularism; the ages of tyranny and toying with the fate of the nation have been prolonged.
This is why the cultural infrastructure has been so firm in rejecting everything new, relying as it does on this fear and terror. And so we must transcend what we have witnessed in the three aforementioned states. Iran as a religious state faces the predicament of guardianship over the people in the guise of Faith, while sectarianism in Lebanon has turned the country into fertile ground for internal and external power struggles accompanied by the absence of political parties. As for Kuwait, its inability to find a means for the rotation of power has led this experiment back to where it started.
Each state has every right to choose the economic system it considers best to fulfill its interests. But if it wants to make a transition to democracy or set up an appropriate milieu for it, the state must be impartial to the religious, sectarian and tribal structures of its society.
It should also be taken for granted that democracy is not a creed that rejects the principle of co-existence, whatever its cultural or social nature. There are many thinkers and politicians that assure us that Islam can coexist with democracy as long as it includes civil liberties, the right to self-determination and the protection of minorities. In other words, secularism is not necessary for the establishment of democracy. Among these political thinkers and researchers are Sheikh Rashid Al-Ghanushi and Hassan Al-Turabi. Many other thinkers, however, see that these assumptions have yet to be proven. They see that democracy is a necessity for worldly life, while all religions consider themselves to uphold freedoms and minority rights, but once a state is subservient to a religion, it becomes a religious state.
Discourse aimed at achieving democracy in the Arab countries demands an understanding of religion in a way that turns it into a driving force for progress, and gives it the ability to conform to changes in time and place after the long ages of tyranny and oppression from which the Muslim nation has suffered. Moreover, we must distinguish between the foundations of religion and religious thought, which continually changes with the passage of time. Religious thought is not necessarily religion, and the two are often confused and treated as one.
Reality tells us that democracy is the point of entry into this age and that Islam in essence aims at fulfilling the best interests of humanity in every part of the world. Islam can deal flexibly with such notions as secularism and democracy, among others that emerged in societies in historical stages, taking on different forms and meanings. For democracy does not take on the same form in all societies. The culture of every society exerts its influence on it separately. Culture interferes in such a way that democracy adapts itself to the reality of each place, and, in turn, it is reproduced domestically. In this way, democracy does not become a burden on society and its culture, or a foreign organ implanted in society only to be rejected when society refuses to submit to it.
A Qatari writer
|
