The part of the Tunisian revolution I want to focus on is the support for Islamic political parties: what it means for both Tunisia’s future and the future of US relations with Tunisia. Before coming here, I thought most of the Arab revolutions were both socially and politically radical-- they wanted to overthrow the current political order and make society in general more free. After spending time here though, I’ve realized thats not entirely true. While Ben Ali was an incredible thief and a political tyrant, he didn’t limit most social freedoms (unless of course you wanted to say something against the regime. But thats what I mean by political tyrant). Interestingly one of the main social freedoms Ben Ali did take away was the freedom to wear the hijab.
Now that Ben Ali is gone, there has been a resurgence of Islamic groups. The most well-known one (and the only one with official licence) is An-Nahda, a group that was totally crushed during Ben Ali’s rule. Mark Lynch wrote a fantastic article a few weeks ago about the situation of An-Nahda right now, and it jives completely with what people have been telling me. An-Nahda clearly has the most support of any of the ninety or so political parties that were created following the revolution. That said, people seem very suspicious of it and its positions. While An-Nahda says that it is for a moderate interpretation of Islam and is modeling itself off the Turkish AKP, many of the Tunisians I have talked to are worried that this is a front and when An-Nahda is in power it will push a very conservative agenda.
The other prominent Islamic group in Tunisia right now are the Salafists. While An-Nahda might be promoting a moderate agenda, the Salafists certainly are not. If you are interested, the wikipedia entry gives a good background on Salafist beliefs. If not, suffice to say Salafists believe in a very conservative version of Islam that only looks to the first three generations of Muslims*. Although I am fairly certain the Salafists represent only a tiny minority of Tunisians, they have certainly made their presence known. A group of Salafists actually attacked a film showing in Tunis a few weeks ago. The Salafist vision for Tunisia is a very conservative one, and if they were able to take power I think many of the liberties Tunisians enjoy now would disappear.
All of that said, based on the discussions I’ve been having I think the majority of Tunisians are quite moderate. However they are not as moderate as I thought before I came here. As I wrote above, my impression of the “Arab Spring” is that it was led by youth who wanted social and political freedom. While the desire for political freedom is obvious, I’m no longer so sure that Tunisia is going to be as socially free as it was before. Almost everyone I have talked to says that Tunisia is an Islamic state. Many people think that Ben Ali (and his really despised wife Lela) went too far in banning the hijab and promoting more Western behavior. They believe Tunisia needs to return to its Arab/Muslim roots.
Now that I’ve witnessed this first-hand, I’ve also realized that I’ve been reading very similar things about other countries going through their own revolts. This article about Syria, the last two paragraphs in this article about Libya, a lot of what has been said about the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt-- in all of these situations there seems to be a fairly strong Islamic sentiment.
So what does this all mean? I can’t really comment on the other states, but I can say I don’t think Tunisia is going to end up with a highly conservative, Islamic government. Even if An-Nahda ends up with a significant percentage of the parliament (the most generous estimates give them 30% of the population, no where near a majority) , there is no way they are going to be able to single handily enforce some sort of radical Islamic agenda. While the country might grow slightly more conservative, its not going to become Saudi Arabia or Iran. More importantly, the stronger call here is for democracy. I have witness first-hand how excited Tunisians are to choose their own government. The only thing anyone wants to talk about is the revolution and the upcoming elections. They are making history and they know it. No government is going to be able to shut down political debate, no matter what its agenda is.
The United States is notorious for its reluctance to support Islamic governments. But if An-Nahda ends up with some sort of majority in Tunisia, I think it would be an incredibly foolish move for the United States to intervene in any way. And seriously, if I read anything about the US funding other parties in Tunisia, I will probably cry. If we haven’t learned our lesson yet about intervening into the politics of other nations, then we never will. I am currently reading a book about the Iranian hostage crisis, and its pretty clear that the CIA sponsored assassination of an Iranian prime minister and continued support for the Shah played a large part in creating support for the Islamists there. If the US intervenes into politics here ( or anywhere in the Middle East for that matter) I think a similar reaction is quite likely.
Finally, I direct you to a phenomenal blog post about the Muslim Brotherhood and democracy. Although Jonathan Wright (A journalist who has been based in the Middle East reporting for Reuters for the past 30 years and is an all around bad ass) should probably write with a few more paragraphs, its worth powering through till the end. As he states:
For decades, social liberals have hidden behind the authoritarian state to do the dirty work of keeping the Islamists out of politics. If there is be lasting change, the liberals have to take on the Muslim Brotherhood's ideology in the free marketplace of ideas, instead of fretting and running for cover. That's what democracy is about. That's why the best democracies allows communists and fascists to run for office, in the confidence that a well-educated and well-informed public will not vote for them in large numbers. Sometimes people do vote for them, but that's because the liberals and secularists have not done their work properly.
I could not agree more. As long as these new democracies remain democratic, its not any business of the US to try to influence politics. The citizens of these new countries have a right to debate and choose the government they want. The United States loves to give lectures about the value of democracy and freedom of speech-- maybe its about time we actually let them happen in the Near East.
*Please, please, please understand that conservative and violent are not the same. If you read the word Salafist and thought terrorist, please read the wikipedia page
ps- Sorry about the editing level on the post last week. Probz not my finest hour. I've tried to be better this week.
No comments:
Post a Comment