 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 16 - 22 December 1999 Issue No. 460 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 16 - 22 December 1999 Issue No. 460
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Debate Focus Profile Living Travel Sports People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters From rifles to referendums?
By Omayma Abdel-LatifWhen the Committee on Political Parties, a semi-governmental body responsible for issuing permits to political parties, rejected the request of Mamdouh Ismail, a former Gama'a Islamyia member, to form the Shari'a party, the decision seemed to confirm the state's categorical refusal to grant the Islamists, particularly those who have used violence against it during the past 25 years, any legal existence on the political scene. The move came shortly after Osama El-Baz, the President's bureau chief, announced that no parties formed on the basis of religion would be part of the political landscape. While Ismail has vowed to apply again, it remains highly unlikely that the answer will change anytime soon.
When former members of Al-Gama'a Al-Islamyia and Al-Jihad attempted to set up political parties, the two groups appeared to be turning their backs on the principles they had embraced for over quarter of a century. The move was viewed as a radical transformation in the defining contours of these movements, which embraced violence as the means of changing the existing political and social order. Some even argued that political Islam in the 21st century would bear scant resemblance to its current incarnation.
But such arguments said very little about the inherent difficulties these groups will face when introducing and implementing their world-view. In other words, it was difficult to deduce whether or not these groups have the political tolerance and dexterity to create a national consensus and rule effectively within a democratic framework. "The impact of religious ideology ranges from symbols to terms of reference to tactics and strategy. It will be very difficult to make the transition into a civil movement," says Wahid Abdel-Meguid, editor-in-chief of the Arab Strategic Report. The arguments forwarded also ignore the state's policy of preventing the Islamists from functioning as a legal political group.
Some political observers, however, argue that it is actually in the state's interest that these groups be regarded as legitimate actors in the political game and be granted the right to participate in elections, as long as they forsake violence. "By being part of the democratic process, their radical doctrines will be diluted since they will be deemed unsuitable for implementation on the ground," as Abdel-Meguid puts it. But other analysts feel that abandoning violence is not sufficient, and demand that the Islamists' literature attacking the nation-state be completely revised.
While it is true that the "Otherisation" of the state has been a constant theme in the Islamist discourse, some political experts feel that the literature on violence should be contextualised. They argue that the ideology of political Islam is shaped by the character of the polities in which and in relation to which they emerge. "The experiences of the '60s are the crucial formative moments in the consciousness of those who joined the movements during the following decades," explains Nevine Mos'ad of Cairo University's Faculty of Economics and Political Science, who has done extensive research on political Islam. "A vast body of literature legitimating violence against the state thus emerged," she notes.
The '90s, however, represent a watershed in the evolution of a new discourse. "The early '90s witnessed some of the worst confrontations between Islamists and state, yet there has been an opening up of party politics. Political life in Egypt acquired a pluralistic nature, as it seemed to be integrating all voices of dissent," Mos'ad explains. The challenge for the Islamists, therefore, may be creating a synthesis of radicalism and reform.
It is precisely this point that many observers debate, questioning the groups' ability to transcend their anti-state position and articulate a political programme that brings together divine references and human elements. In the eyes of their opponents, the Islamists have no genuine political programme. Some argue that an Islamist platform that does not take into account the principle of popular sovereignty and the possibility of man-made laws is merely an empty expression of utopian goals. Choosing to be part of the peaceful political action, one observer noted, does not offer any guarantees for successful integration into political life. "These groups must be judged in terms of their effectiveness and methods of actually dealing with crises of political participation, identity and legitimacy as well as the issue of order and stability," said one analyst.
So are there any real possibilities of cohabitation between Islamists and state as the century draws to a close? "Only when the Islamists show a genuine commitment to constructive change in their discourse on the state," answers Abdel-Meguid.
In other words, he explains, they could be accommodated if they are transformed into modern social movements able to deal with the modern world. "Turning into a political movement is more often a sign of decay than of efflorescence where the Islamists are concerned," Abdel-Meguid adds.
