The Middle East has been a region that has been in a state of crisis for over a century now. Since the redefining of its political boundaries post World War I, the prolonged conflict between Israel and Palestine to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the region has been the site of conflicts based on a wide range of justifications. Dictatorships, religion, land disputes, possession of weapons of mass destruction, the subjugation of populace, and, arguably, oil have been some of the common war points. However, just how true these justifications of war are depends greatly on the perception of the Middle East, its politics and culture, in the eyes of the rest of the world.
The Middle East, in its core make up, is more or less like many Asian and African countries. However, while Africa and the rest of Asia have had far more frequent political interactions with the west, the Middle East had been a fairly subdued part of the world until its discovery of vast reserves of crude oil and natural gas. As such, Middle Eastern culture has been hidden from common view and the extent of the regions development and current political set up needs to be studied in order to see just how similar the region is to some of the most prominent economies of the world. Doing so will encourage the breaking of several ‘myths’ that are often used to paint the region in a negative or skewed light.
THE MYTHS OF THE MIDDLE EAST
The Middle East has been stereotyped as desert regions with people travelling on camel backs, women covered from head to toe in black cloth, belly dancers and ruthless tyrannical governments. In other words, the Middle East is often mistaken to be an all Arab, all Muslim region, which is not a fact. There are several such myths associated with the region that is often associated more with the 1001 Arabian Nights than human rights. One such myth, highlighted by Fred Halliday in his book ‘100 Myths about the Middle East’ is discussed and analyzed at length below.
ISLAM DOES NOT ALLOW FOR A SEPERATION OF RELIGION AND POLITICS, AND HENCE OF WHAT MODERN EUROPEAN THOUGHT IS TERMED ‘SECULARISM’.
Halliday points out how this myth holds true only till about a 100 years into Islamic history. There was always a clear distinction between the ruler or caliph and the religious authority or the ulema. I agree with Halliday here. Islamic Law, known as the Sharia, is often confused to be a predecessor of Islamic ethics. On the contrary, the Sharia law is derived from the ethical teachings of the Koran, the word of God. The legal profession in the first two centuries of Islam tried to make the law of Sharia cover every ethical situation and to make the study of this law the culminating study in Islamic Education. Thus, since the Islamic education was the most formative element in Islamic civilization, the important role of ethics in this civilization becomes obvious . Hence, while the Sharia is the law or the judiciary, it is not the rule or the government.
Islam prescribes a strict code of ethics on all its followers. This code, mainly listed in the Holy Koran, covers all spheres of life. Furthermore, the Sharia laws have been formed to make sure the ethics are followed and those breaking the tenets of Islam face the prescribed retribution. A lot of people view Islamic laws to be very severe and inhumane. However, if the laws of a country were to be lax, the incident of crime in that country would expectedly be high as perpetrators would have no fear of retribution. The punishment for crime has to either match or surpass the loss caused by the crime being committed. Only then will the law be good enough to discourage people from committing criminal acts.
The politics affecting Middle Eastern countries has a direct impact on world economies and politics. Yet, the political system of Muslim countries greatly differs from modern Western concepts, leading to misconceptions about the morality of such a system and doubts about its feasibility in the modern democratic world of politics. In this paper, I will be firstly be discussing how religion and politics in Islam cannot be separated. I will further discuss the rationality behind Islamic politics existing in the modern democratic scenario.
Unlike Christianity, Islam does not consider its clergy and its political rule to be different and to act independently of each other. More precisely expressed, the religious and political authority is traditionally mixed in one person, the caliph . At the same time, the religious leaders in Islam do not have the authority to change the law of Islam, the Sharia. In other words, a Muslim ruler is not a religious authority but is required to govern his subjects based on the Sharia and treat them as equals in religion.
Here, it is vital to highlight the importance of the Sharia in Islam and the effect it has on the politics in Islamic states. As mentioned earlier, Sharia is the Islamic law which has been handed down to Muslims through the Holy Koran as well as the Hadith. While the Koran is the bible of Islam, the Hadith are the teaching of Prophet Mohammed as documented by his immediate followers. While Muslims expect their ruler to follow and implement the laws of the Sharia, these laws say little to nothing about the running of the state. It is a judiciary system, not a political one. Hence, the ruler is free to run the country as per his own political ideas so long as he adheres to the tenets of Islam and the Shariah Law.
Although this statement might make it seem as though the political rule and the religion are two separate entities, the importance of religious tenets being followed goes a long way in dictating the policies of the state. For instance, the Koran states that ‘Let there be no compulsion in religion’ (Koran 2: 256). It also speaks against demolishing places of worship of other religions. Islam also forbids using violence to force people to convert to the religion. Basically, the morals of Islam encourage Muslims to preach Islam but strictly prohibit them from insulting another religion or to force anyone to accept Islam.
These are the tenets on which modern ‘secular’ Islam states are based. Countries like the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Bahrain, have a moderate approach towards other religions and go to the extent of constructing places of worship such as churches and temples within their city. However, certain Islamic countries like Iran and Afghanistan take a more hard line approach towards the following of other religions within their countries. Iran, a country with a majority Shi’a population, has developed a clergy separate from the Sunni Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia. The clergy of Iran has claimed power to change or ‘update’ the laws of the Sharia to match changing demands of a modernized society.
Although the Koran touches the subject of secularism, there is no mention of democracy in it. The main focus of the Prophet Mohammed during his life was the preaching of Islam which is why no system of succession was formed or recorded. The fact that Islam had emerged in a ‘stateless tribal society’ led Prophet Mohammed to establish a politico-religious community which was based on faith as the main criterion for membership . The Prophet named Abu Baker Siddique as his successor citing the goodness of his nature and his ability to lead a people in the uncertain times after the Prophet’s death. However, this nomination was the basic cause of Islam being split in to sects - Sunni and Shi’a - as believers argued that Abu Baker was not a member of the Prophet’s family and hence should not rule. Abu Baker did rule however and the success of caliphs remained based on faith and ability and not lineage.
As Islam does not define any form of government as advisable to be followed, Islamic states are free to choose one of their own liking so long as the government adheres to Islamic tenets. Muslims over several centuries have, willingly or not, accepted life under various dynasties, tyrants, holy men and warlords, as long as they enforced Sharia . Western countries have been exposed to the concept of democracy much longer than Arabian countries. The people of the Arab world, even if they are aware of the boons of a democratic state, do not wish for their current form of government to be changed as they often believe that democracy will lead to slacking in the implementation of the Sharia. It can be noted that the people of such states prefer autocratic rule as was demonstrated in the election of the Taliban by the people of Afghanistan to lead their nation.
It should be noted that not all Islamic countries have a history of violence and exploitation. There are several Islamic countries that follow the tenets of Islam which require the government to function based on justice, equality, peace and tolerance. Nations such as the United Arab Emirates have shown great progress over the last 2 decades and are considered developed nations. They have a well etched system of justice and government that deals with Muslims based on the Sharia law and with non-Muslims based on a Westernized judiciary system. Its people enjoy high standards of living, crime and violence rates in its cities are very low and the country has highly cooperative relations with neighboring countries as well as western nations. Hence, it is safe to say that all Islamic governments cannot be painted with the same brush and each needs to be studied individually to understand its place in the modern world.
Conclusion
I agree with Halliday’s refutation of the myth that Islam does not allow for a separation of religion and politics, and hence of what in modern European thought is termed ‘secularism’. However, the reasoning that he provides seems to be insufficient to fully explain the inter-relation between the law and tenets in Islam. Islam, as a religion, preaches tolerance, equality and strictly prohibits exploitation. Yet, the fact that it does not prescribe any particular form of government to its followers gives far too much scope for rulers to exploit the populace. The tenets of Islam are based on good faith and purity of character. However, power is known to corrupt. Although the Islamic Sharia law calls for the ouster of a ruler not following its tenets, the implementation of the law often fails when it is dealing with the people in power. As such, it becomes difficult to control levels of corruption, human rights violations and aggression towards neighboring countries, when the hard line government leads the people to believe it is following the preaching of Islam. The western world is right to be cautious about Islamic countries. However, great effort needs to be made on their part to understand and identify Islamic nations that are not democratic but still adhere to Islamic tenets and rule the country in fairness.
Works cited
Halliday, Fred. 100 Myths About The Middle East. Berkley, LA: University of California Press, 2005.
Hourani, George F. Reason and Tradition in Islamic Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985
Ayubi, Nazih. Political Islam. London: Routledge, 1991.
Lane, Jan-Erik and Hamadi Redissi. Relion & Politics - Islam and Muslim Civilization. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2009.
The Holy Koran
