First and foremost, there is essentially no problem in terms of compatibility, not a foundational problem at least that would make it impossible for a country with a majority of Muslims to be governed according to the requirements of a constitutional democracy. In other words, the notion of Islam being diametrically opposed to democracy and its principles is a fallacy.
Islam enjoins the faithful to uphold equality, justice, and human dignity. If violence and terror are being spread by Muslims in the name of Islam then it is an aberration reflective of such people and the focus should rightly be on the underlying causes of such actions, not Islam. Blaming Islam won’t solve the problem as long as the underlying causes are not addressed and resolved.
But detractors say that Islam not only condones but urges the faithful to commit acts of violence in the name of jihad. This is nonsense. But they cite chapter and verse to support this view. Yes, but it is only by extreme distorting of the textual interpretation. On the contrary, the truth is that Islam prohibits violence and terror by virtue of the principles of moderation and the protection of life, limb and property.
This is subsumed under the doctrine of the maqasid al-Shari’ah, a most crucial and significant tool for the progress of Muslim societies, a tool which unfortunately has been much ignored. By virtue of this doctrine for example, jihad is a call to the faithful to fulfill the tenets of the religion by doing good and averting evil, establishing justice, promoting charity and helping the weak and the marginalized. It is not a battle cry for war, let alone one to justify mayhem and murder. Above all, jihad enjoins Muslims to maintain peace and harmony and safeguard the sanctity of life and property. These are ideals completely in consonance with the dictates of democracy.
But what about this incarceration/liberation dichotomy? The answer lies in debunking the school of ideological rigidity which is largely responsible for making the religion very rigid and exclusive. The fact is that Islam is amenable to adapting to modern times with its defining feature being its inclusive nature. Empirically, we know that Islam in Southeast Asia is a case in point. So is Turkey though the same may not be said about the Islam of the Middle East but that ought to be seen in the context of the geopolitical situation there.
The modernity of Islam in Southeast Asia is reflected for instance in the adoption of the principles of freedom and democracy for the establishment of an independent state. In this regard, the region’s transition to democracy debunks the notion of incompatibility between Islam and democracy.
As for equating Islam with intolerance and violence, that again finds no basis in reality. Muslim rule for centuries in Spain remains in the history books as clear testimony to the tolerance and spirit of convivencia among Muslims, Christians and Jews. In Southeast Asia, traders and Sufis spread the religion through their accommodative style of proselytizing which attracted adherents who have also kept some significant aspects of their pre-Islamic cultures. This explains why multi-cultural and multi-religious societies evolved in Muslim majority countries.
Today, those who call for violence and terror in the name of jihad can find little traction for their brand of Islam. A case in point is Indonesia two elections back when the people overwhelmingly rejected the radicals who rode on the jihad ticket. This is significant in debunking the notion that democracy in a Muslim majority nation can be easily hijacked by extremists and radicals.
Turkey is a fine example of what a Muslim nation can achieve if its leaders remain steadfast in observing the basic tenets of Islamic statecraft: modernist, moderate, progressive and tolerant with justice and the rule of law as a motto for governance. The recent referendum of the Turkish people in favor of fundamental constitutional changes to further strengthen democracy speaks volumes. In this regard, Turkey’s leaders stand in sharp contrast to the autocrats and dictators in some other Muslim countries who continue to deny the people democracy by raising the hijacking by extremists’ spectre.
The question arises as to whether there has been any real progress in political reform in the Muslim world apart from Turkey and Indonesia? Isn’t it true that certain states continue to be under one-man or one-party rule despite the trappings of reform? And even though certain states appear to moving on the path to real democracy, the rhetoric often exceeds the reality. There must therefore be greater resolve for Muslim countries to embrace constitutional democracy and translate that into reality: hold free and fair elections, ensure the separation of powers and guarantee fundamental civil liberties including allowing the full participation of women in political life. Vindictive prosecutions, arbitrary arrests, and the use of the state apparatus to silence political dissent must be a thing of the past. Unless and until such reforms are in place, the convergence of Islam and democracy will only be a mirage.
As for the process of democratization itself, there is the troubling question of the real intention of certain Western powers. You cannot turn a blind eye to blatant human rights violations in some countries and condemn these practices in others. You cannot say to one country, give us your support in this current war we’re waging, and we won’t interfere in your administration. The “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” diplomacy may be good realpolitik but it is a betrayal of the cause of democracy and freedom.
Unfortunately, however, it is partly because of this hypocritical approach to democratization that we still see many Muslim societies languishing under sham democracies. These are governments with the trappings of democracy but are in fact masquerades perpetuating injustice, human rights abuses and corruption. These ‘democracies’ employ the entire state apparatus and exploit the people’s hard earned money to promote their personal and vested interests. They plunder the state coffers, parcel out vast tracts of prime commercial land to relatives and cronies, and expropriate millions of hectares of virgin forests transforming them into wasteland.
So, the truth is that the assault on freedom and democracy is not from Islam, though the bulk of the perpetrators are Muslims. Indonesia and Turkey have demonstrated that democracy is not only acceptable but essential to Islam and that the enemy of Islam is not democracy but injustice, corruption, tyranny and greed. Indeed, freedom and democracy is part and parcel of the self-evident truths that would set mankind apart from the rest of God’s creatures.
The real issue is not whether Islam and democracy are destined to coincide but whether those in power in Muslim majority countries will uphold freedom and democracy, respect the rule of law and fulfil their duties to the people. If that doesn’t happen then it is incumbent on us to make it happen. And that is a cause worth fighting for.
(Keynote address by Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysian Parliamentary Opposition Leader at Brussels, 28th September, 2010)
“These are governments with the trappings of democracy but are in fact masquerades perpetuating injustice, human rights abuses and corruption. These ‘democracies’ employ the entire state apparatus and exploit the people’s hard earned money to promote their personal and vested interests. They plunder the state coffers, parcel out vast tracts of prime commercial land to relatives and cronies, and expropriate millions of hectares of virgin forests transforming them into wasteland.”
Who could Anwar be referring to ? Cintanegara, can you give an example of such a country ?
My English is not good but even though my English is very poor, I don’t think “coincide” is the right word. I think “Why Islam And Democracy Are Destined to Clash” is more accurate.
Can you really name one good true Islamic country?
Malaysia, despite being declared as Islamic country by Mahathir Mohammad is actually a secular country whose success mainly depend on the hardworking non-Muslims.
True Islamic countries are Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan before 9/11 where Sharia law is implemented. That is what PAS is trying to turn Malaysia into.
So despite the fact that DAP is working with PAS right now to dethrone corrupt UMNO, I hope DAP will not neglect its struggle to turn Malaysia into a true secular democratic country.
The countries that perpetuate injustice, human rights abuses and corruption are mostly Islamic countries. If you are a Muslim, please don’t feel offended as this is a fact.
In Islamic countries, you will be persecuted if you tried to leave Islam. If that is not human rights abuse, then stealing is a righteous act.
In citing Turkey and Indonesia as examples of nations with majority Muslim population that show compatibility or “coincidence” of Islam and Democracy, Anwar has not emphasized the important distinguishing feature of both these countries whose Constitutions establish and proclaim their countries as secular states providing for freedom of religion(s) with no particular religion being specially promoted by the State over others. Would Anwar agree that Democracy and Islam can, as he argues, intersect provided only that the state and the basic law/constitution is secular (in the above stated sense)? If agrees, I have never heard him said so here!
In fact he ducked the question. In Nutgraph interview of Anwar as recent as on 9th March 2010 (reported by Deborah Loh) I quote:
Question No. 2 : “Do you think Malaysia should be a secular or an Islamic state? Why?”
Anwar’s answer: “Muslims are averse to the western notion of secularity because to them it means the public square is naked, void of any space for religion. Malaysia should continue to be a state where the public domain is influenced by the universal values of Islamic religion, particularly justice and equality for all.”
My point is: If “Muslims are averse to the western notion of secularity because to them it means the public square is naked” then how do Muslims in his view or Islam accommodate all the democratic concepts of “constitutional democracy, separation of powers and guarantee fundamental civil liberties including allowing the full participation of women in political life” etc which are part and parcel of the amalgam of Western values and beliefs?
Speaking of this amalgam of values underlying democracy with particular regard to aspects of freedom of individual, equality of men regardless of race creed and gender, can Anwar cite some examples where these “coincide” with Islam? I am sure there is no coincidence in the case of polygamy versus monogamy.
Tunku Aziz said that Anwar “waved his magic and thrilled European audiences” by this speech. Obviously they were thrilled because he told them what they liked to hear. However the issue is : was he telling them the situation as it is or as it ought to be the case?
So far Anwar has not elaborated or cited many or for that matter any specific and concrete example from real situations and felt experience here or elsewhere in support of this “coincidence” that he enraptured his European audiences.
He certainly did not explain how his idea of “coincidence” matches that of his coalition partner, PAS’s idea of Islam in relation to Democracy.
In Malayisa there is NO Real Genuine Democracy and Meritocracy practises.
This will happen Only when PR Marches into PUTRAJAYA hopefully in the next coming GE.
Not only are Rakyats not given extraordinary rights, they are being denied what are supposed to be their inviolable human rights, to their natives BaKum Daming land etc .
Furthermore Not only are laws being enforced with great prejudices and prides to the benefit of their 1 Malaysia Malays race and are being enforced with great prejudice against the others race creed and religion .
All Malaysia Rakyats do not want a virtual democracy-inname- only where the rights of minorities be systematically denied!
Malay-sia Umno BN Govt Bank Negara, Govt sovereign wealth dwindling and will continue to decline with with the rate of these on going process of Economy –degradation ,Political Instabilty and social Polarisation ,Unreversible Brains draining which was what we could all current see and have were mainly due to a situation in which UMNOists are two sets of rules – one for Malay and one for their so called bumi -pendatangs kadazan iban chinese or indians orang asli .
There is hardly any Righteous Unbiased Justicial practises anymore today ….AG solely relying on their Evil Gilallah Inhumane ISA Umno Lawlessness and discriminations to nail their National Umno coffin.
All these Cruel and Cold lessons were clear enough.
PR leaders should make a decision when the next GE Victory comes and also take the necessary steps to protect and strengthen our liberal democracy where the rule of law is defended and the principle of equality before the Merdeka Constitution law is upheld?
BTW we all knew that Rakyats Malaysia were NOT illegal Squatters,maybe the filipinos -nas in sabah.
Rather Rakyats were holders of Citizenship rights…malaysian identity cards and passports….therefore we should be enjoying equal job opportunties,university intakes and welfare services etc….BUT too sad indeed…these were forbidden during Umnoist Mamak Koyakty PM 20+ yrs tenure .
Stand-Up All Rakyat Malaysia Stand for yr right and Vote PR into Putrajaya by next GE.
BeWare OF Umno BN component lawmakers Big Insincere Political Gimmicks Promises ie free scholarship ,stop racism anticorruption 1 Malay-sai nonsenses Hooligan Madrempitis trumpetings and Racial tension Fear Tactics before any election…already immune to their Daily Public Media Natiowide TV123 news slanderings and lies about their white elephant developments projects moo here moo there.
God Bless PR. and PR supporters
///These are governments with the trappings of democracy but are in fact masquerades perpetuating injustice, human rights abuses and corruption. These ‘democracies’ employ the entire state apparatus and exploit the people’s hard earned money to promote their personal and vested interests. They plunder the state coffers, parcel out vast tracts of prime commercial land to relatives and cronies, and expropriate millions of hectares of virgin forests transforming them into wasteland.///– Anwar Ibrahim
The above has inspiration from how UMNO runs Malaysian government.
///Turkey is a fine example of what a Muslim nation can achieve if its leaders remain steadfast in observing the basic tenets of Islamic statecraft: modernist, moderate, progressive and tolerant with justice and the rule of law as a motto for governance. ///– AI
Turkey declared ages ago that it was secular, and the government divorces itself from the religion. Malaysia has also been declared by the founder Tunku as a secular state, but Mamakthir declared that Malaysia was an Islamic state. So, it is not the religion but the people who had the power not to observe rule of law. Unfortunately the persons are said to be faithful to Islam. Are we to believe that they learned the wrong things from the right religion, or they had deeper knowledge than others in interpreting Islamic teachings?
///In Southeast Asia, traders and Sufis spread the religion through their accommodative style of proselytizing which attracted adherents who have also kept some significant aspects of their pre-Islamic cultures. This explains why multi-cultural and multi-religious societies evolved in Muslim majority countries.///– AI
Yes, Islam caused no trouble then. But since the religion offers the basic classification criterion to avail of unfair advantage, it has been politicized. Thus, as soon as Islamic religion is mixed with governing, the country would soon revert to mono-everything, race, religion, culture, language and whatnots.
I have a difficult time agreeing with all these which just sounds nice but experience tells me otherwise. The whites are not easily stupidified when they see the face of Islam in nearly all bombings taking place. They will enjoy hearing these nice words of Anuar, but even here where there is no freedom of religion for Malays and too many social problems between Muslims and non-Muslims to begin naming them all, all this will remain as rethoric and water running off a ducks back.