by Patrick Lang (bio below)
Akef, whose group won 88 of the Egyptian parliament’s 454 seats in elections in November and December, made his comment in an attack on the United States’ assertion that it is promoting democracy in the Middle East.
He said the U.S. campaign was a cover for promoting its own interests and those of the Zionist movement in the region.
`American democracy … steers the world into the American orbit delineated by the sons of Zion, so that everyone must wear the Stars and Stripes hat and keep away from the Zionist foster child,” he wrote in his weekly statement.” NY Times
Someone among my correspondents wrote recently to say, that I should relax, that “all such” extremist movements in the Middle East become political parties embedded in the body politic of their country over time and are rendered harmless, by being involved with “real” concerns.
I suppose that the Egyptian Muslim Brothers (MB) would be a good example. Stimulated by the bloviations of academics who generally believe that the evil deeds of Western countries and the “oppression” of autocratic government are responsible for Islamic extremism, the US Government has been inspired to foster the political empowerment of the MB in Egypt. As a result the MB in Egypt grew its caucus in the Cairo parliament from 11 seats to 88 in the recent election. Feeling its “oats” it now speaks up in defense of a belief held by many in the Islamic World, namely that the Holocaust is an invention of Western propaganda designed as “cover” for yet more evil deeds by the USA under the guidance of “Zionism.” Zionism is here used in quotes because it is not the Zionism of the Zionists to which they refer, but rather the “Zionism” of the “Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion” in which many of the same people fervently believe. For those who may not have heard of this interesting work of political fantasy, it is a document written in central Europe in the 19Th Century purporting to be the records of the planning conference at which the Jews laid out their plan to take over the world. Someone should ask Mr. Akef if he believes in that as well.
I will say again, Islamist movements have two agenda items in common:
- They intend to create Sharia law states in preparation for merger of these states into the Umma. Within those states they will tolerate nothing that is at odds with their view of Islam.
- Antipathy to the West and particularly to the US as leader of the West is a “treasured” belief since they see all of mankind as locked in a struggle between the Muslims and “the other.”
Among Islamists such beliefs are so strong that any and all actions by “the other” are interpreted on the basis of learning what evil purpose “the other” had in them.
Pat Lang
Col. Patrick W. Lang (Ret.), a highly decorated retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces, served as “Defense Intelligence Officer for the Middle East, South Asia and Terrorism” for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and was later the first Director of the Defense Humint Service. Col. Lang was the first Professor of the Arabic Language at the United States Military Academy at West Point. For his service in the DIA, he was awarded the “Presidential Rank of Distinguished Executive.” He is a frequent commentator on television and radio, including MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann (interview), CNN and Wolf Blitzer’s Situation Room (interview), PBS’s Newshour, NPR’s “All Things Considered,” (interview), and more .
Personal Blog: Sic Semper Tyrannis 2005 || Bio || CV
Recommended Books || More BooTrib Posts
Novel: The Butcher’s Cleaver (download free by chapter, PDF format)
“Drinking the Kool-Aid,” Middle East Policy Council Journal, Vol. XI, Summer 2004, No. 2
I still agree with your correspondent.
First on blaming the West:
this is obviously overblown a great deal. But we did carve up the Ottoman Empire and create a bunch of illogical nation-states that are hard to rule whether by democratic means or not. And we have made it our strategic objective to provide stability in a region where stability is not a natural occurence. So, we wind up backing thugs like Mubarak, the Sauds, the Shah, Saddam, and our support creates a hostility that makes democracy dangerous to our interests.
The Iranian Revolution hurt our interests precisely because we were seen as the power behind the Shah. And, of course, we were the power behind the Shah.
There is a sense in which I agree with Wolfowitz’s rhetoric (but not his true intentions). If the Arab world could elect their representatives it would correct most of these problems over time.
The question is whether the rest of the world can afford to let loose that level of uncertainty.
It’s a quagmire, because the status quo does exacerbate anti-western terrorism as well as violate the principles of democracy and self-determination for which we are supposed to stand.
We need to be cautious, and we cannot keep going down the neo-con road, but we should accept that the first wave of democracy in the region is not going to be very friendly to our interests.
It’s a shame that our some members of our agencies and those of other countries have exploited the issue so completely with deception that we ordinary folk have no idea who to believe.
There have been several very good diaries recently highlighting trends and conditions in the US which will shortly give Americans an opportunity to reflect on stability.
I don’t know if stability is a natural occurrence anywhere, possibly in the few places on earth where “modernity” has not yet arrived. Generally, the wider the gap between the rich and poor, stability becomes a greater challenge.
In the case of “government” by dictatorship and cartel, such as one finds in the US and its client states, stability is of necessity somewhat fragile.
Religious-based “movements” can be a great help in this, either providing a “venting outlet,” or an aid in popularizing policies and government actions which might otherwise not be helpful to stability.
It is also important to note that stability is seldom the most profitable environment for certain business interests, and greed occurs quite naturally everywhere.
I’ve given you a couple of 4s here.
I found Akif to be spelled differently and that one seems to have a level-headed approach to the concerns. From what he said, he feels that it’s up to each person whether or not to obey the laws of the faith and not a matter of law. In that article he expressed the concern for having been misrepresented.
I don’t have the original diary post/reference as I write this but another interestinng mention was the cetrist Wasat party. Evidently it was a split from the MB back in 96 and is due a ruling or license in Feb 2006. The interesting principle asked about was the seperation of religion and politics due to that ban in Egypt. He explained a modern understanding of Sharia is accepting of Shura principle that doesn’t require a choice between bicameral and unicameral legislature or even if the government should be parliamentary rather than presidential. It does call for people to participate in the process, however is best decided by the interests of the people. He summed it up as this…
Islamic civilization is like any other, and shares the idea of peaceful settlement with other cultures, movements, and ideologies without foolish hostility and aggression.
I don’t know. Maybe this is the guy that lost.
What I know about this group, one can place on the head of a pin. I do know or have heard that the brotherhood is what the ones in Syria and those who want to stay in the good graces of the west…are against. I would love to know more about them before I do any judgment calls. I have heard that they are the bad boys of the movement.
in the middle east and not see these kind of groups rising to preeminance we have to become an honest broker in the Israeli – Palestinian process. That is step one. It would also help if we stopped attacking middle eastern countries for no reason. It may also do some good if we didnt go on about democracy and yet support hideously autocratic regmes that we like. Then of course we get to our oil companies.
It is easy to rail against the rise of “extremist” movements in the midle east, but we have no ability to affect them. In fact every movement we amk agianst them makes them more popular. We do however, have the ability to look at ourselves and our actions critically, and make changes if we truly want good relations in the middle east. However, I have little hope that we will overcome our arrogance and addres long overdue reforms in our middle eastern policy.