Search

Begin New Search Topic Secularism Political Geography Middle East

1. Detecting the Ideological Position of Political Islam Towards Liberal Democracy in Muslim Countries

Author:
Nikola Gjorshoski and Goran Ilik
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
The question of the correlation between Islam, political Islam, and liberal democracy has so far been the most exposed topic in exploring the democratic capacity of political Islam and Islamic societies in general. What is particularly intriguing about the relationship between political Islam and liberal democracy is the fact of its westernized triviality that has received a pejorative tone in Islamic political circles. Simplified, the triviality of liberal democracy for the Islamic political campus implies imposing a model of democracy that cannot be fully compatible with the original Muslim notion of society and government. Hence, the following paper analyzes exactly the relations of political Islam to specific inherent categories of liberal democracy such as the rule of law, representative government, the separation of powers, and secularism as diferenta specifica of liberal western democratic discourse. Through the methods of induction and deduction, the author will illustrate how appropriate tangent or divergence is illustrated and how this is reflected in the general ideological positioning of political Islam towards liberal democracy in Muslim countries through an axiological and praxeological perspective.
Topic:
Democracy, Rule of Law, Islamism, Liberalism, Secularism, and Sharia
Political Geography:
Middle East, North Africa, and Global Focus

2. The Proposed Changes to Judicial Oversight of Government Powers: Justified Measures or an Erosion of Democracy?

Author:
Pnina Sharvit Baruch
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
Amid the coalition negotiations underway in Israel there is a heated debate over various proposals regarding significant changes to the legal oversight of governmental and parliamentary work. Remarkable throughout the debate of these proposals is the lack of regard to their impact on the preservation and promotion of the character of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, and instead, there is a worrisome focus on political and personal motives. Against this background, it is possible to propose several recommendations. First, in the current debate, the Court is accused of "stealing democracy" and of being a political institution with a blatantly left wing agenda. This incorrect premise, which undermines the ability to conduct a public debate in constructive fashion and erodes the legitimacy of the Court and the public's faith in the Court, must be reversed. Second, there is room for discussion on appropriate constitutional changes. Democratic countries around the world have differing successful constitutional structures, and there is no "one right answer." Yet any future change must be carried out through a focused discussion that incorporates all relevant parties, including politicians, judges, and academics with expertise in the field. Finally, whatever the eventual constitutional changes, they must not undermine the basic principles of the separation of powers, the rule of law, and the power of the Court to practice effective oversight of the government. These are essential building blocks for proper democratic rule.
Topic:
Governance, Democracy, Constitution, and Secularism
Political Geography:
Middle East and Israel

3. The U.S. in Afghanistan: From Military-Political Euphoria to the Dilemma of Troop Withdrawal

Author:
M. Konarovsky
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
East View Information Services
Abstract:
The seizure of power in Afghanistan by the Mujahiddin (“war- riors of faith”), in 1992, opened a new but certainly not peaceful chapter in the modern history of the country. The new bosses in Kabul, who were linked at one point only by the common interest of overthrowing the pro- communist regime, were now not only unable to consolidate power, but could not get around an almost open split in their leadership. The result- ing wobbly system of rotating leadership was bound to be unable to sat- isfy everyone’s wants. The inability of the Mujahiddin to achieve consensus led to the col- lapse of their hopes to unify even in the face of a direct challenge from the Taliban in the early 1990s. In 1996, in the wake of the popular disappointment with the rule of these “warriors of faith” (with whom the Taliban were connected not only by an ideological umbilical cord, but by some active participants), the Taliban seized Kabul and usurped power with direct support from Pakistan. They pushed supporters of President Burhanuddin Rabbani out to northern regions along the borders with the former Soviet Central Asian republics.
Topic:
Military Affairs, Taliban, Leadership, Secularism, and Civil-Military Relations
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and Middle East

4. Pakistan and its Militants: Who is Mainstreaming Whom?

Author:
James M Dorsey
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS)
Abstract:
Pakistani militants of various stripes collectively won just under ten per cent of the vote in the July 2018 parliamentary elections. Some represented long-standing legal Islamist parties, others newly established groups or fronts for organisations that have been banned as terrorists by Pakistan and/or the United Nations and the United States. The militants failed to secure a single seat in the national assembly but have maintained, if not increased, their ability to shape national debate and mainstream politics and societal attitudes. Their ability to field candidates in almost all constituencies, and, in many cases, their performance as debutants enhanced their legitimacy. The militants’ performance has fueled debate about the Pakistani military’s effort to expand its long- standing support for militants that serve its regional and domestic goals to nudge them into mainstream politics. It also raises the question of who benefits most, mainstream politics or the militants. Political parties help mainstream militants, but militants with deep societal roots and significant following are frequently key to a mainstream candidate’s electoral success. Perceptions that the militants may stand to gain the most are enhanced by the fact that decades of successive military and civilian governments, abetted and aided by Saudi Arabia, have deeply embedded ultra-conservative, intolerant, anti-pluralist, and supremacist strands of Sunni Islam in significant segments of Pakistani society. Former international cricket player Imran Khan’s electoral victory may constitute a break with the country’s corrupt dynastic policies that ensured that civilian power alternated between two clans, the Bhuttos and the Sharifs. However, his alignment with ultra-conservatism’s social and religious views, as well as with militant groups, offers little hope for Pakistan becoming a more tolerant, pluralistic society, and moving away from a social environment that breeds extremism and militancy. On the contrary, policies enacted by Khan and his ministers since taking office suggest that ultra- conservatism and intolerance are the name of the game. If anything, Khan’s political history, his 2018 election campaign, and his actions since coming to office reflect the degree to which aspects of militancy, intolerance, anti-pluralism, and supremacist ultra- conservative Sunni Muslim Islam have, over decades, been woven into the fabric of segments of society and elements of the state. The roots of Pakistan’s extremism problem date to the immediate wake of the 1947 partition of British India when using militants as proxies was a way to compensate for Pakistan’s economic and military weakness. They were entrenched by Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in the 1970s and General Zia ul-Haq’s Islamization of Pakistani society in the 1980s. The rise of Islamist militants in the US-Saudi supported war against Soviet occupation troops in Afghanistan and opportunistic policies by politicians and rulers since then have shaped contemporary Pakistan.
Topic:
Islam, Religion, Terrorism, United Nations, Violent Extremism, Secularism, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
Pakistan, United States, and Middle East

5. Secularist and Islamist Constitutional and Political Concepctions in the Modern Muslim World: The Cases of Kemalist Turkey and Khomeini’s Iran

Author:
Nikola Gjorshoski
Publication Date:
05-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
Modern constitutional and political concepts, in a broad sense, represent an expressed codification of the elements of value that structure the relevant society or the particular group that tries to project or channel them through the existing order. The secularism vs. Islamism dichotomy is a part of such a conceptual framework. The author elaborates and compares both ultimate constitutional and political designs, specifying them through the example of Turkey and Iran, as well as to shows the basic characteristics through the prism of their political legitimacy, the organization of power, the human rights and freedoms, as well as the possibility of political activism. The thesis that the author notes develop in the direction of a warning that the extremes contained in the constitutional provisions in the vividly ideologically divided societies can be a source of conflict and/or can generate instability or suffocation of the pluralism in the political arena.
Topic:
Islam, Politics, Constitution, Islamism, and Secularism
Political Geography:
Iran, Turkey, and Middle East