Are Arab countries ready for democracy?
By María Asensio
The initial hope instigated by the riots in the Arab countries demanding democratic reforms has been enormously diminished when observing the results, which can only be labelled as democratic in the case of Tunisia. This reopens the debate on whether there is compatibility between Islam and democracy. In my opinion, Arab countries can indeed become democracies, but they need political, social and economic reforms. Thus, they are still not ready, but the riots already show that the Arab world is not averse to democracy and that political obstacles to reform that exist in traditional culture are neither permanent nor insurmountable (Schwedler, 1995). According to Bayat, resolving this debate is not about making a comparative judgment on the immutable essence of Islam on the one hand, and of democracy on the other, in order to conclude whether its defining features are compatible or not; but about trying to determine "under what specific conditions Muslims can make compatible democracy" (Bayat, 2007).
The first issue that must be analysed to determine if the Arab countries are ready for democracy is the subject of religion. For those who think that most Muslim countries are less democratic, the rapid conclusion reached is that Islam is incompatible with democracy. However, "the Islam, as many pre-modern religions, is undemocratic in spirit, but has the potential to evolve into a democratic direction"». (Boersner, 2010)
As Samuel Huntington (1994) studied, Christian countries have greater acceptance of democratic precepts, since the Islamic countries confuse the claims of religion and politics. Historically, Islam has failed to establish the ways to manage religion separately as caliphs and mullahs hold political and religious authority, and religious law still prevents a proper development of politics (Boersner, 2010).
Islamic countries have been associated with societies with fewer political rights, and it is true when assessing the levels of freedom of speech and participation, the rule of law and equality of opportunities. Attributing this only to religion is to deny that the problem caused by authoritarianism could be due to the inability of the regimes to promote democracy in fear of the domestic consequences that this might provoke, including the fall of the governments.
One of the problems that must be solved is the interpretation of many of the sacred texts, such as the Sharia (Boersner, 2010). Any Koranic interpretation is a human creation and, therefore, the democratic or authoritarian nature derived therefrom should not be treated as an undeniable consequence drawn from the sacred texts, but as the result of the decisions of specific political actors who see these texts as useful tools for political and social management. Thus, democratization will, at any time, result from the action of individuals and specific groups, whose tendency toward creating a democratic order will be facilitated if adequate democratic interpretations of the sacred texts which are assumed as own are developed (Cepedello, 2011).
The Muslim should not abandon or renounce their faith, but to practice "in their own metaphysical dimension of spirituality, that is, a practice with no intention to govern human consciences." Thus, religion would be a personal matter between the believer and God and its manipulation by governments would, therefore, cease (Belaskri, 2012).
Secondly, in order to build a democratic regime social reforms are needed because, as Lipset stated, democracy is not possible in societies that do not have certain “socio-economic preconditions” (Ramírez, 2011). The viability of democracy is clearly related to the structure and social trends. A social structure in which wealth and learning is concentrated in a few hands is not favourable to democracy (Crozier et al., 1975). The strengthening of civil society as a whole, which eventually becomes relevant as a force for change, is required. The direct relationship of civil society with the functioning of a democracy is clear, with the function of limiting the power exposing the abuses and lack of legitimacy of a particular government. In addition to civil society, some pluralism is needed as the basis of the democratization process, which later would give way to rights as equality and freedom of speech (Broesner, 2010).
The role of political parties is significant too. There should be a multiparty system and parties must be heterogeneous. We may question ourselves whether Islamist parties, as the Muslim Brotherhood, are compatible with democracy. In Europe, there are both secular parties and others with religious overtones. The Muslim Brotherhood are more fundamentalists and vindictive of the presence of Islam than the Turkish Justice and Development Party (AKP). The Muslim Brotherhood have a reactionary policy in the fields of values, family and religion, and, according to the election results, they are the main beneficiaries of a transition through institutional means. What is clear is that these parties should move towards modernization and they have the democratisation example of Turkey having an Islamic government, the AKP, which has achieved a parliamentary democracy (Cobos, 2012).
Returning to the society issue, currently it remains widespread the conviction of the existence of an “Islamic exception” by which the Arab countries would be refractory to democracy and prone to authoritarianism (Álvarez-Ossorio, 2011), as the submissive and unsupportive nature of Muslims incapacitates them, intrinsically and unbeatably, to develop the emergence and subsequent consolidation of a real secular civil society and would be condemned to live under autocratic regimes, where decision-making power is reserved to restricted elites who exercise this power almost without limit (Cepedello, 2011).
From this point of view, Arab societies are saturated with patriarchal values, religious dogmas, ideological extremism and economic interests (Sarsar, 2006) offering very pessimistic patterns of inbreeding, patriarchy and patrimonialism (Norton, 1995). The State asserts itself as solely responsible for meeting the aspirations of the people (Various authors, 2006), basing the relationship of domination between the state and society on the submission of the latter to the state order. However, these explanations ignore that the Arab scene recently has gone through a radical transformation with the emergence of a vibrant civil society that acts as a counterweight to state power and demands greater freedoms (Alvarez-Ossorio, 2011). That is why a large part of the "world public opinion" finds it difficult to assimilate how, within societies formed by individuals supposedly identified with the submission, conformity and lack of solidarity, attitudes of rebellion, dissent and solidarity of such magnitude are arising (Cepedello, 2011).
The possible democratization to be carried out today in the Arab States not only fails as a result of the tribal or religious social organization that characterizes them, but also for the imported character of its application in societies that are segmented and unstructured (Broesner, 2010). The big problem that has existed with the introduction of democratic elements in Arab countries is that, in most cases, these have been imposed. Therefore, even though in many Arab countries some Western structures were assumed, this does not mean that the bases of a democratic state were easily interiorised. Reforms and democratization of traditional societies cannot happen by imposition but by removing dictatorial roots from their own culture. There is no democracy if the democratic culture is not prioritized. A political culture that includes a strong civil society, capable of generating alternatives and controlling the government; and participation of political parties, along with a voter education and confidence that the elections will be maintained in the future are necessary (Broesner, 2010).
Considering the issue of elections, it should be noted that the holding of elections does not presuppose the existence of a democratic system. Democracies must contemplate legal guarantees and social policies to ensure strong institutions. The holding of free elections does not guarantee that the winners will feel committed to extend the reforms required by a democracy. Elections are just the formula to reach or legitimize power (Broesner, 2010). In fact, the elections held after the riots have given the majority to the Muslim Brotherhood in its various versions, which does not guarantee the existence of a real democracy (Cobos, 2012).
As we have seen, a change in the political culture of society, which must take place through an educational reform is needed. The radical nationalist movements have attempted to legitimize institutions and concepts of democracy such as Parliament, Constitution and general elections, without educating the public on the rights and duties that a democracy provides and involves (Broesner, 2010). This has led to the fact that "the Arabs rather than fear of democracy, what they suffer is a cultural amputation: the denied access to the most important achievements of the past centuries and, particularly, to tolerance, i.e. the secular humanism that allowed the expansion of civil society in the West "(Mernissi, 2007).
The creation of a universal educational system is an essential requisite for Islamic societies to achieve the necessary level of democratic awareness that will allow individuals and groups to set up a political horizon in which democracy can be regarded as an organizational system in accordance with their vital interests and expectations. It seems clear that only through a radical transformation of the meaning and direction of educational models, involving the renounce to procedures and neo-colonial techniques, may allow schools to stop being instances of domination and control of the population and become spaces of promotion of individual empowerment, active social participation, civil society and democracy (Cepedello, 2011).
In conclusion, democracy is compatible with Islam as long as the Arab countries develop a series of changes in their societies, political parties, level of secularisation and education systems. These reforms should not be imposed, but democracy must be the result of a building process carried out by Muslims themselves, as specific social actors are the ones who make up a political system as democratic or authoritarian (Cepedello, 2011). What is clear is that with the Arab Spring, the countries have entered what is known as post-Islamism, which is characterized by an effort to unify Islam with freedom, democracy and modernity (Alvarez-Ossorio, 2011). The future of the Arab region still remains uncertain and it will take years until we see or not the democratic dimension of the governments.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Álvarez-Ossorio, I. (2011). El mito de la conflictividad del mundo árabe. De la época colonial a las revueltas populares. Investigaciones Geográficas, 55, pp. 55-70.
Bayat, A. (2007). Islam and Democracy: What is the Real Question? Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press
Belaskri, Y. (2012). Primavera árabe, hacia una nueva esperanza. Pasajes: Revista de pensamiento contemporáneo, 39, pp. 47-51
Boersner Herrera, A. (2010). ¿Liberalización política o democratización política en el mundo árabe?: Argumentos de incompatibilidad entre la democracia y el islam. Cuadernos del Cendes, 74, pp. 81-105.
Cepedello Boiso, J. (2011). Cultivando la “primavera árabe”: educación, democracia y sociedad civil en los estados de raíz islámica. Fragmentos de filosofía, 9, pp. 53-72.
Cobos, M. (2012). La islamización de la primavera árabe. Crítica, 978, pp. 8-11
Crozier, M.K., Huntington, S.P., Watanuki J. (1975) The Crisis of Democracy. Reporto n the Governability of democracies to the Trilateral Commission. New York: New York University Press.
Huntington, S. (1994). La tercera ola. La democratización a finales del siglo XX. Barcelona: Paldós.
Mernissi, F. (2007). El miedo a la modernidad islam y democracia. España: Ediciones del Oriente y del Mediterráneo.
Norton, A.R. (1995). Civil Society in the Middle East, pp. 6. Leiden: Brill
Ramírez, M. (2011). Crisis en el mundo árabe: Análisis desde el “paradigma de la transición”. Revista enfoques, vol. IX, nº 14, pp. 89-116.
Sarsar, S. (2006). Quantifying Arab Democracy, Democracy in the Middle East. Middle East Quarterly, vol. 13, nº 3, pp. 24.
Schwedler, J. (1995). Toward Civil Society in the Middle East. A Primer. London: Lynner Rienner Publishers, pp. 24.
VV.AA. (2006). Visiones del islam. Diez años de la Biblioteca del Islam Contemporáneo. Barcelona: Edicions Bellaterra, Biblioteca del Islam Contemporáneo.
[Photograph retrieved from: http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/09/18/238810.html (Reuters)]
