America and the Islamist Parties
Published in Sawt al-Iraq
(Iraq) on 5 October 2012
by Ghasaan Tawfiq al-Hassini (link to original)
After the American invasion in 2003, Iraq undoubtedly became a breeding ground for political parties — liberal, secular and religious. Their members ran the Iraqi interim government in large numbers, but after elections were held, Islamic parties largely won out, both Shi’a and Sunni.
The Islamists want to take control of political affairs in Iraq until the winds of sectarianism blow these parties apart and Iraq becomes caught in their ebb and flow. The revolutions of the Arab Spring enjoy American logistical support, despite the lack of American and NATO involvement in the fall of Ben Ali in Tunisia. There have been official government statements from the American Secretary of State supporting the elections in Tunisia. In these elections, the Islamic Revival Party won a majority of seats in the constituent assembly. Hillary Clinton’s support, then, is characterized by acceptance of the Islamists’ hold on power.
The situation is the same in Egypt, where the revolution had American support and Hillary Clinton demanded that Mubarak step down. In the same context, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney stated the Obama administration was committed to increasing its involvement with Egypt’s emerging political parties. This led to the White House attempting to guide Egypt’s burgeoning government to a secular solution throughout Egypt’s first presidential election, which resulted in a run-off election between Ahmed Shafiq and Mohamed Mursi, who is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood.
The American press has said that they do not fear the ascendance of Islamists to power in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt, which are dominated by Islamist groups, noting that the United States is connected with governments of a predominantly Islamic nature, especially while attempting to develop a new strategy to deal with Middle East issues; this is the situation in Saudi Arabia. Here is the question: Is American support for these revolutions that have taken on a religious spirit a coincidence or not? And is the Arab street offended by the secular, inclusive systems that they have been stifled by for long years? Do they want to change these secular, inclusive systems and come up with an Islamic system that applies Islamic law just as they claim?
After the success of the Arab revolutions, the Islamist parties are now rising to the political foreground in the region and preparing to shape the future character and positions of the region. So I wonder if a full opportunity for participation in political life was afforded to these parties, which lay in the shadow of dictatorial governments as opposition in parliament or in the national councils; did they gain sufficient experience in how to manage the institutions of the state in all their systemic complexities in a country with divergent demographics? It will not be easy for these parties to avoid failures caused by their lack of experience, and in the decades to come to be at the forefront of administrations managing governments of the Arab people. Will they be successful?
The Islamists want to take control of political affairs in Iraq until the winds of sectarianism blow these parties apart and Iraq becomes caught in their ebb and flow. The revolutions of the Arab Spring enjoy American logistical support, despite the lack of American and NATO involvement in the fall of Ben Ali in Tunisia. There have been official government statements from the American Secretary of State supporting the elections in Tunisia. In these elections, the Islamic Revival Party won a majority of seats in the constituent assembly. Hillary Clinton’s support, then, is characterized by acceptance of the Islamists’ hold on power.
The situation is the same in Egypt, where the revolution had American support and Hillary Clinton demanded that Mubarak step down. In the same context, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney stated the Obama administration was committed to increasing its involvement with Egypt’s emerging political parties. This led to the White House attempting to guide Egypt’s burgeoning government to a secular solution throughout Egypt’s first presidential election, which resulted in a run-off election between Ahmed Shafiq and Mohamed Mursi, who is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood.
The American press has said that they do not fear the ascendance of Islamists to power in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt, which are dominated by Islamist groups, noting that the United States is connected with governments of a predominantly Islamic nature, especially while attempting to develop a new strategy to deal with Middle East issues; this is the situation in Saudi Arabia. Here is the question: Is American support for these revolutions that have taken on a religious spirit a coincidence or not? And is the Arab street offended by the secular, inclusive systems that they have been stifled by for long years? Do they want to change these secular, inclusive systems and come up with an Islamic system that applies Islamic law just as they claim?
After the success of the Arab revolutions, the Islamist parties are now rising to the political foreground in the region and preparing to shape the future character and positions of the region. So I wonder if a full opportunity for participation in political life was afforded to these parties, which lay in the shadow of dictatorial governments as opposition in parliament or in the national councils; did they gain sufficient experience in how to manage the institutions of the state in all their systemic complexities in a country with divergent demographics? It will not be easy for these parties to avoid failures caused by their lack of experience, and in the decades to come to be at the forefront of administrations managing governments of the Arab people. Will they be successful?