Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Islamist Governments Not the Enemy, Say Mideast Experts

U.S. policy must end its misguided fear of Islamist parties and concentrate on human rights, experts assert in open letter to Obama.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

(Inter Press Service)

Scores of Middle East and democracy experts released an open letter last week to U.S. President Barack Obama asking him to focus more of his foreign policy efforts at making reforms in the region, including boosting human rights.

Signed by over 120 academics, scholars, experts, and others, the letter said that previous U.S. policy had been "misguided" and "produced a region increasingly tormented by rampant corruption, extremism, and instability."

The signatories, ranging from liberal Democrats to neoconservatives, called for the Obama administration to "encourage political reform not through wars, threats, or imposition, but through peaceful policies that reward governments that take active and measurable steps towards genuine democratic reforms."

In doing so, the letter said the United States should end its "fear of Islamist parties coming to power" because most of them are "nonviolent and respect the democratic process."

Citing Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, the group said "the U.S. should not hesitate to speak out in condemnation when opposition activists are unjustly imprisoned."

The letter was coordinated by Radwan Masmoudi of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy; Shadi Hamid of the Project on Middle East Democracy; Geneive Abdo of the Century Foundation; Michele Dunne of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Stanford University professor Larry Diamond; and Freedom House‘s Jennifer Windsor.

The conventional wisdom in Washington is that Obama has scaled back the lofty rhetoric delivered by his predecessor, George W. Bush, about "promoting democracy" across the globe, which was implemented in a way that many critics charge was selective and hypocritical.

While Bush spoke glowingly of elections in Iraq, for example, he rallied forces against an elected government in the Palestinian Authority containing the unpalatable Hamas, and, in the name of stability, maintained relations with authoritarian dictators like Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

What the signatories are asking for is not a "continuation" of Bush policies, but instead "a new initiative" for democracy in the Middle East, said Geneive Abdo, a former journalist and fellow at the Century Foundation, at a press briefing launching the letter.

Abdo, an expert on Islamic studies, told a packed room of reporters at the National Press Club Tuesday that the repressive political situation in the region should not be seen as a battle between Islamism and authoritarianism.

She pointed out that opening up the political process will force all parties—not just Islamists—to be "more accountable to their electorate and republics."

Citing specific examples in Turkey, Indonesia, and Morocco, the letter said that, despite disagreement with some illiberal Islamist viewpoints, "the right to participate in reasonably credible and open elections has moderated Islamist parties and enhanced their commitment to democratic norms."

"There is no system I know where Islamists put in power by democracy have cancelled elections," said Saad Eddin Ibrahim, an Egyptian democracy activist, as he rose from a chair provided for him on the dais, apologizing for his bad legs due to torture he received in prison.

But embracing Islamists as legitimate political actors and democratic forces will have far-reaching goals for U.S. policy Saad Eddin Ibrahim—from the commonly named case of talking with a potential unity government in Palestine containing Hamas to negotiating with other religious groups like relatively moderate elements of the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Stanford University professor Larry Diamond said that in retrospect, those decisions aren’t always as difficult as they seem. At the press briefing, he looked to the example of the Sahwa, or Awakening movement, in Iraq, which co-opted former Sunni insurgents.

The members of the Sahwa, said Diamond, had almost certainly committed horrific acts against the United States and its allies, including possible terrorism, but the move to incorporate them is widely seen as having drastically improved security and stability there.

What’s clear from the letter and press conference, however, is that not making mention of human rights and democracy—or more strikingly, playing down expectations for them, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did on a recent trip to China—is unacceptable for U.S. goals around the globe.

"This is urgently in the American national interest," said Diamond, echoing the common criticism that repealing a predecessor’s policy is not enough. "We don’t have a policy now. Simply rejecting what Bush did is not a policy."

Diamond suggested that if the administration was serious about promoting democracy, it would begin crafting country-by-country policies.

At the press briefing, the signatories on hand said that, as well as diplomatic measures, so far absent in Clinton’s recent trips through Asia and the Middle East, economic measures could be taken to pressure for reform.

The groups suggested making economic aid conditional upon democratic and human rights reform—a tack that is not unprecedented. But Michelle Dunne, an expert on Arab politics, said that such pressures would need to be undertaken delicately without being too "blunt."

Dunne also cautioned against "picking players" and said that the whole focus on democracy was that the people of nations needed to choose their representatives for themselves.

The strength of the letter, said Diamond, was that it was not only a bipartisan effort, but more importantly, the signatories cut across ideological lines. 

Ali Gharib writes for the Inter Press Service and for PRA’s Right Web (www.rightweb.irc-online.org).

Citations

By Ali Gharib, 'Islamist Governments Not the Enemy, Say Mideast Experts”' Right Web with permission from Inter Press Service (Somerville, MA: PRA, 2009). Web location:
https://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4988.html Production Information:
Author(s): Right Web
Editor(s): Right Web
Production: Political Research Associates   IRC logo 1310 Broadway, #201, Somerville, MA   02144 | pra@publiceye.org

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Jon Lerner is a conservative political strategist and top adviser to US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley. He was a key figure in the “Never Trump” Campaign, which appears to have led to his being ousted as Vice President Mike Pence’s national security adviser.


Pamela Geller is a controversial anti-Islam activist who has founded several “hate groups” and likes to repeat debunked myths, including about the alleged existence of “no-go” Muslim zones in Europe.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Although overlooked by President Trump for cabinet post, Gingrich has tried to shape affairs in the administration, including by conspiring with government officials to “purge the State Department of staffers they viewed as insufficiently loyal” to the president.


Former Sen Mark Kirk (R-IL) is an advisor for United Against Nuclear Iran. He is an outspoken advocate for aggressive action against Iran and a fierce defender of right-wing Israeli policies.


A military historian, Kimberly Kagan heads the Institute for the Study of War, where she has promoted the continuation of U.S. war in Afghanistan.


A “non-partisan” policy institute that purports to defend democracies from “militant Islamism,” the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) is an influential base of hawkish advocacy on Middle East policy.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Other than the cynical political interests in Moscow and Tehran, there is no conceivable rationale for wanting Bashar al-Assad to stay in power. But the simple fact is, he has won the war. And while Donald Trump has reveled in positive press coverage of the recent attacks on the country, it is clear that they were little more than a symbolic act.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The reality is that the Assad regime is winning the Syrian civil war, and this matters far less to U.S. interests than it does to that regime or its allies in Russia and Iran, who see Syria as their strongest and most consistent entrée into the Arab world. Those incontrovertible facts undermine any notion of using U.S. military force as leverage to gain a better deal for the Syrian people.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

An effective rhetorical tool to normalize military build-ups is to characterize spending increases “modernization.”


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Pentagon has officially announced that that “long war” against terrorism is drawing to a close — even as many counterinsurgency conflicts  rage across the Greater Middle East — and a new long war has begun, a permanent campaign to contain China and Russia in Eurasia.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Revelations that data-consulting firm Cambridge Analytica used ill-gotten personal information from Facebook for the Trump campaign masks the more scandalous reality that the company is firmly ensconced in the U.S. military-industrial complex. It should come as no surprise then that the scandal has been linked to Erik Prince, co-founder of Blackwater.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

As the United States enters the second spring of the Trump era, it’s creeping ever closer to more war. McMaster and Mattis may have written the National Defense Strategy that over-hyped the threats on this planet, but Bolton and Pompeo will have the opportunity to address these inflated threats in the worst way possible: by force of arms.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

We meet Donald Trump in the media every hour of every day, which blots out much of the rest of the world and much of what’s meaningful in it.  Such largely unexamined, never-ending coverage of his doings represents a triumph of the first order both for him and for an American cult of personality.


RightWeb
share