The Rise of Pan-Islamism

The Bush Administration believes that the spread of democracy in the Middle East will curtail violence as well as modernize the region. In fact recent multi-party elections in Egypt and Palestine has had made observers believe otherwise.

Through the recent parliamentary elections in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood has been able to gain 20% of the seats (88 in total) despite numerous violations of the electoral process and several arrests of members. Similarly, Hamas considered by the United States and many European nations as a terrorist organization beat Yasser Arafat’s Fatah party and rose to power.

What does this mean for the security of the region? Did the United States’ genuine desire to spread democracy and peace in the region completely backfire? These are two critical questions.

Hamas’ rise to power is problematic. Historically, the organization has operated under a schizophrenic framework – while organizations and countries around the world can commend them on their philanthropy work in Palestine (i.e. setting up schools in Gaza), those same organizations and countries can condemn them for promoting acts of terror in order to gain concessions. However, since Hamas’ nascent rise to power last month, Moussa Abu Marzouk, deputy head of the organization’s political bureau has emphasized Hamas’ goal of achieving peace in the hope of having the United States remove the organization’s label as harboring terrorism.

Hamas has quickly learned that diplomacy is a method of effective negotiation. Moreover, it took them a very short time to realize that their international acknowledgment will only come through a change of their image.

Unfortunately, diplomacy and promises of peace are only euphemisms since actions speak louder than words. Given the violence provoked by their Islamic militant arm, it is difficult for Western governments to believe that their political agenda has changed.

The United States and other Western nations are skeptical of Hamas’ intentions at this point. On the other hand, the ramifications of the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt are less obvious.

From a domestic standpoint, it is still uncertain what the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood will bring to Egyptian society since they have not defined a clear agenda. The party advocates the use of the Islamic Sharia law which (as in the case of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia) has been viewed as strict and oppressive. Nevertheless, issues such as the role of women in society or whether Israel should be granted sovereignty (regardless of Sadat’s peace efforts in the 1970s) are at this point esoteric. This is quite worrying for Egyptians and neighboring Arab countries.

More interestingly is the United States’ gains of having the Muslim Brotherhood rise to power. The US views the Brotherhood as a ‘moderate’ practitioner of Islam vis-à-vis an organization such as al-Qaeda. Officially, the Brotherhood has clearly renounced violence as a means to achieve concessions. Given current US-Egyptian relationships, the United States may wish to use the Brotherhood as a buffer against al-Qaeda – as a way of reducing the organization’s activities in the region and within Egypt.

This is certainly speculative and given the issue of using euphemistic language in diplomacy, politics are never fully transparent.

Regardless, the situation is tense and uncertain. The Muslim Brotherhood recently provided funds for Hamas after it had been denied international aid from organizations and other nations. Hamas only had to turn to their neighbors Egypt for support. To their luck, it received support from a 200,000 member strong organization which have proven their influence, power and perseverance in Egypt despite oppression from previous Egyptian presidents (such as Gamal Abdel Nasser).

Pan-Islamism is on the rise. The Shiia are gaining power in Iraq and theocratic regimes already exist in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Is Pan-Islamism proliferating in the region? Has the spread of democracy empowered the Islamists?