Iraqis know democracy is a Muslim's duty
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=1217\
9
By Dia Al-Sharkarchi

Saturday, January 29, 2005


During the last 25 years, Islam has played an increasingly influential role in
politics (and not only in the Islamic world), with political Islam frequently
expressing itself through radicalism and terror. Both Muslims and non-Muslims
have not always agreed on the extent to which such behavior is compatible with
genuine Islam.

How Islam is understood varies widely among devout, moderately religious, and
nonobservant Muslims, as well as among Islamic scholars, political parties and
organizations. Even Western experts and critics of Islam hold different views.
Overall, there are two conflicting images of Islam: one that sees it as a
peaceful religion ready for dialogue and coexistence; and one that sees Islam as
largely fundamentalist, militant and even terrorist.

There is a widespread misperception that Islam's holy texts are written in a way
that can justify both interpretations. But, in my opinion, the reason for
different - and frequently contradictory - interpretations is an incompetent and
incomplete approach that detaches individual texts from their context and
construes them without a thorough understanding of the true spirit of the Koran.

This approach to Islamic texts - coming from both secular and religiously
oriented Muslims, as well as from non-Muslims with an interest in the subject -
calls into question the compatibility of Islam and democracy, and its ability to
embrace peace and moderation. Based on more than a decade of study and debate, I
am convinced of the compatibility between Islam and democracy. Indeed, democracy
is not only permitted by Islam, but can be regarded as a religious rule.

My understanding is drawn from a principle contained by the basic Islamic theory
of legal reasoning, which asserts that when strong religious interests can be
realized only through a specific path of action, that path becomes no longer
merely a matter of choice but a religious rule. Thus, if we can establish that
democracy is the means to achieving the best interests of the Muslim community -
and I believe we can do this - then democracy may be declared a religious duty
in
Islam.

Even if democracy might be viewed primarily as an evil from an Islamic point of
view, there is another principle of interpretation of religious law in Islam
according to which minor evils (even if religiously impermissible or not
recommended at first) become permissible, even mandatory, if they alone can
prevent major evils.

The Muslim interest in democracy is best understood through a clear perception
of
the reality of how Muslims live. A country like Iraq, for example, is home to a
diverse and varied population: It includes Arabs and Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites,
as well as minorities of other religions and ethnic groups. Moreover, not all
Muslims practice Islam, nor do those who practice it do so in the same way.

So religion cannot be imposed; individuals must practice it according to their
own choices. Any enforcement of religious practice only creates hostility toward
religion. Thus, I believe that a political system that best permits free choice
-
including the choice to be a practicing Muslim - is the best system for Islam.

Of course, the problem of Islam's compatibility with democracy may be analyzed
from different points of view. One possible approach is purely practical,
comparing democracy with all other conceivable alternatives. In my opinion,
there
are only five conceivable alternatives in a Muslim country.

The first is secular dictatorship. This is unacceptable for two reasons.

First, dictatorship itself is ugly and deplorable; second, secular dictatorship
excludes Islamic parties from participating normally in the political system. We
have considerable experience of this in the Middle East.

Of course, the second option, an Islamic dictatorship, is also possible.

But this, too, is unacceptable. As with a secular dictatorship, Islamic
dictatorship is ugly and destructive. Such a dictatorship would damage Islam by
associating the religion with unjust rule and would create enemies to the
religion. A third alternative is democracy, but with secular restrictions on
religious parties. In fact, this would be a pseudo-democracy and would infringe
on the rights of religious people to fully participate in politics. Likewise, an
Islamic democracy with restrictions on nonreligious parties would be a mockery
of
democracy and be harmful to Islam. This would also be unrealistic, because in
the
current age of globalization, any false claims to democracy can be easily
exposed
as false.

So, in my view, true democracy is the only alternative, because it is realistic
and promotes peace. Call this ideology-free democracy: a political system that
tolerates restrictions imposed only from within, but never from outside, the
democratic process itself. We must recognize that democracy has proven its worth
around the world. It is the best way of organizing a society based on reality,
not ideals. Why shouldn't Iraqis, who will be voting this Sunday, benefit from
the proven experience of other peoples?


Dia al-Shakarchi is a Shiite theologian living in Baghdad. This commentary is
published in collaboration with Project Syndicate



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.2 - Release Date: 28.01.05