The Arab World's Self-Inflicted Wounds

(Weekly Standard)  Joseph Loconte is a senior fellow at The King's College in New York City and a frequent contributor to The Weekly Standard.

---

A few years ago at a meeting in Amman, Jordan, a Bush administration official suggested the time might be ripe for an Arab "democratic spring"--a flowering of democratic institutions in the Middle East. Amr Moussa, secretary-general of the Arab League, delivered the predictably gloomy forecast: "There will be no spring or autumn or winter or summer without solving the Palestinian problem. We want our friends in the United States to know that this is the consensus in the region."

The consensus is holding. The result is that the 22 member states that make up the Arab League retain their status as some of the most economically backward, politically corrupt, and socially repressive countries on the planet. That's the implicit message of the most recent Arab Human Development Report, "Challenges to Human Security in the Arab Countries," released last week by a group of leading Arab intellectuals. It is more or less the same conclusion reached by the editors at The Economist, who devoted a special edition of the London-based magazine to examine what ails the Arab world.

There's a good deal of candor to these reports, including a willingness to admit that authoritarian rulers--aided by "flawed constitutions" and "unjust laws"--are a major reason for social instability and economic decline. Yet both reports suggest a baffling ignorance of the political principles essential to healthy, democratic societies. To wit: Neither the seven-part critique by The Economist nor the 200-page study by Arab intellectuals breathes a word about democratic ideals such as freedom of religion and the separation of church and state.

The latest Arab Human Development Report (AHDR)--the fifth in a series sponsored by the United Nations--identifies numerous threats to "human security" in Arab states. They include everything from climate change to poverty to "outside intervention" from hostile forces (read Israel and the United States). One is left with a sense of skewed priorities and confusion about the deepest obstacles to human flourishing.

To be fair, there's a measure of self-criticism, including the fact that flawed economic policies have saddled Arab countries with the world's highest unemployment rate, about 14.4 percent, or more than twice that for the world at large. The report does not blink in describing the plight of "abused and subordinated" Arab women. It cites the problem of legalized discrimination, "honor crimes," and state-sanctioned sexual violence, including rape. "One of the most violent, intrusive and traumatic threats to women's personal safety continues while society averts its eyes," the report says. And there's at least a confession that many Arab states ignore the human rights provisions of international charters to which they are signatories. The AHDR also delivers probably the toughest criticism of the Sudanese government uttered by Arab leaders, agreeing with U.N. reports that the regime is guilty of summary executions, torture, and other crimes against humanity. Better late than never.

Missing from the analysis, though, is any exploration of how Islamic religious values might be causing, or exacerbating, the problems. Nowhere in its treatment of Darfur, for example, does the AHDR mention the principal culprit in the humanitarian catastrophe: the radical Islamist ideology of the Sudanese government. Nowhere do we learn that the violent repression of Arab women is upheld by Muslim clerics making appeals to the Koran. Similar omissions by The Economist taint its overall critique. One might read both reports and not realize that political Islam represents the greatest threat to freedom and security in the Arab world.

This sanitizing approach to intensely religious societies is not only bizarre, but misleading: By failing to see the fundamental political and theological defects in Arab culture, it cannot chart a convincing way forward.

Consider the AHDR's view of the source of stability in the multi-cultural West. "In western political history," the authors say, "the normative concept that has contributed most to the management of ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversity is that of citizenship." There is even mention of the need for a renewed "social contract" in Arab societies. These might be useful concepts if the authors understood them in their fullest historical contexts--but they don't. Neither, sadly to say, do the reporters at The Economist.

Their treatment of the Bush administration's democracy agenda, particularly in Iraq, highlights the deficiencies. The Economist claims that Iraqis participated in the 2005 national elections "at America's behest"--as if U.S. Marines mobilized at gunpoint the 11 million Iraqis with ink-stained fingers who turned out to vote. We hear, approvingly, from an Egyptian academic who calls American forces in Iraq "the Mongols of the 21st century." There is virtually nothing in The Economist's report about the attraction of democratic ideals. No mention of the importance of government by consent or a vibrant civil society, the guarantees of any social contract worth signing. Instead, The Economist treats contemptuously the suggestion that the "lack of democracy and pluralism" in the Arab world has anything to do with the rise of religious radicalism. The Arab Human Development Report takes much the same line. Every unhappy indicator of violence and social unrest in Iraq is blamed on the U.S. invasion--while three decades of authoritarian rule and state-sponsored genocide under Saddam Hussein are ignored. There's talk about the need for an independent judiciary, but not much about what actually makes for a just society.

Arab and European intellectuals seem to suffer from the same intellectual vertigo: They don't grasp the central religious rationale that has guided and legitimized successful democracies, namely, the idea of a loving God who has endowed every individual with natural rights and binding obligations.
Chief among these rights is the freedom to seek spiritual truth without fear of penalty or coercion. This is what we mean in the West by religious liberty--including the liberty to change one's religion. It is a central duty of the state to protect this right, without discrimination, for all its citizens. This is what we mean by equal justice under the law. "Neither pagan, nor Mahometan, nor Jew, ought to be excluded from the civil rights of the commonwealth, because of his religion," wrote John Locke in A Letter Concerning Toleration. "The Gospel commands no such thing . . . And the commonwealth, which embraces indifferently all men that are honest, peaceable, and industrious, requires it not."

The genius of the American Founders--who drew heavily on Locke--was their ability to find within the prevailing religious tradition, Protestant Christianity, the moral and spiritual resources to anchor democratic government. Their argument about "inalienable rights" drew its strength from a belief in the transcendent source of human rights. Neither Madison nor Jefferson could conceive of a just society without protections for the rights of conscience, the crown jewel of democratic freedoms.

Yet the leading "enlightened" thinkers in the Arab world--and more than a few in European capitals--can easily imagine it. They are untroubled by the appalling lack of religious freedom in Arab countries. They don't dare to defend the rights of religious minorities. They fail to understand why religious pluralism, under a political system of equal justice, is the best hope for more stable, humane, and prosperous societies in the Middle East.

Such a benighted view of religion and democracy cannot bode well for the future of the Arab world or, for that matter, the democratic West.


By Joseph Loconte
Reprinted with permission from The Weekly Standard

[berniemk]

There is no question that Islam is the central and major problem in the Muslim world, not just the Arab world, even though they were the imperialists/colonialists who conquered much of the world and forced conversion to Islam or death.

Mr. Joseph Loconte understands what Westerners miss, that our freedom of speech and religion is not possible in Muslim countries.

Mr. Joseph Loconte understands what Westerners miss, that our polite, tolerant stance towards all religions, is inapropriate when dealing with Muslim countries. They don't play by the same rules. They are totally intolerant of other faiths. They are totally intolerant of questioning ideas and beliefs. They threaten any Muslim who does so as an apostate, who risks their life in speaking out.

To be raised in a country in which the Koran is the word of God, no questions may be asked of it. If persistent in questioning the inaccuracies, the contradictions, the sloppy transcriptions...Off with your head.

There can be no democracy or republic in countries where all the children are raised to avoid reason, to not question, to accept the Koran on blind absolute faith, at face value. 5 year olds who don't even speak Arabic are taught huge portions of the Koran, without ever understanding it. It is not mystery that Muslim countries are so primitive, they are not taught critical thinking. They are punished for it by their religion.

If one reads the Koran, it is filled with hate, total disrespect for woman, for slaves, for non-Muslims, for non-virgin brides. It requires total submission of women to their husbands, only half the inheritance a woman's brothers get.

Many apostates, who open themselves up to murder for questioning, much less criticizing the Koran, almost universally say that they had their awakening when they actually read the Koran, especially if they understood Arabic, and discovered what a prejudiced, hateful, bullying attitude is expressed over and over again.

Mr. Loconte spelled it out, and yet way more than half the comments here ignore the basic tenet of his report. The core problem is Islam and the literal acceptance of the Koran.

And finally, there is a naivete in westerners prejudiced by right wing American Republicans that the problems are from extremists, the terrorists, adn that all religions deserve respect. But look at Afghanistan after the Taliban were kicked out. Women are still very restricted socially, educationally, financially, legally. The "normal" Muslims are still undemocratic by Western standards. They are still Muslims, and there is no room for any liberal, reasonable Islamic religion. Its not safe to support it openly. Women are still mistreated as men are told to do in the Koran without restriction.

Everything else is minor.

[joro4]

This article eventually hits on the key issue: it's not democracy, but the rights of the individual. I think we Americans have an overly romantic view of democracy. Democracy without human rights and rule of law is merely mob rule. We are fortunate that our founding fathers had the wisdom to contain the democratic principles they put into our constitution and ensure that the rights of minorities can not be voted away by the majority as has happened in other democracies, e.g. 1930s Germany.

[Mom-O-Truth]

A completely ignorant, arrogant and irrational article written by someone who obviously hates Arabs and Europeans but not himself. A tail of the Cheynee administration is still living in the past 8 years. Locoman writes : ?Yet the leading "enlightened" thinkers in the Arab world--and more than a few in European capitals--can easily imagine it. They are untroubled by the appalling lack of religious freedom in Arab countries. They don't dare to defend the rights of religious minorities.? Locoman IS IGNORANT of the existing religious freedom in Arab countries who respect the rights their of Christian, Jewish citizens and Muslim extremists as well. Clean up your own mess first.

WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM : STOP PUTTING YOUR NOSE INTO OTHER COUNTRIES CUSTOMES AND STOP ENFORCING YOUR WESTERN WAYS OF LIFE ON MIDDLE EASTERN AND OTHER COUNTRIES UNDER the ?protection of freedom? UMBRELLA, Haven?t you learned your lessons in Correa, Nam, Laos, Iraq and currently Afghanistan. Respect the customs and religions of other countries and stay out of their lives.

Look at the corruption and financial cannibalism of this past administration; we are not better than the Arabs with our own self-inflicted wounds. How soon do we forget who reduced the number of oil refineries in this country to suck the American citizen at the gas pump. Is that your dream of freedom or is it reckless abuse of freedom ? We are controlled by the pirates of Wall Street and the oil companies from within. The Wall street INVESTORS exported our jobs to south east Asia then to China and India to fill their pockets with profits of bad products that fail right after the warranty ends. Locoman, you can not call Iraq nor Afghanistan as a successful experience, just like many before which weakened our country?s inner strength and eroded the real value of our ?Once? powerful American Dollar by over 75% over the past 30 years. How is that for self-inflicted disaster that was about to bring another depression ??

[FriendlySaudi]

I think you guys have somehow missed the point about the report. I read the arabic version and I can say the middle eastern countries are facing humanitarian crises, and if nothin is going to change in the next 10-20 years, a lot of people will look for moving out of the region to somewhere where they can find jobs, food, and most important WATER. yes, water is very scarce, and most middle easter countries have "authoritarian" goverment, where many people have to sumbit to the goverment beyond their well. That being said, i think the world should no they are doing no good solving the problem with the goverments, we need to act in civilian level, support the poor, and help the unemployed finding a job. there are lots of oppuronities, but the middle east is laking the intellectuals who are welling to raise their countries out of poverty, yes they have oil, and loads of money, but it is not distributed to the most need benefciaries, instead it's being devoted to military personnal and equipment, possible nuclear arm race, and non humanitarian missions, like going to space, dirlling for oil.. etc. well Im glad i got out of saudi arabia, but i know im goin to return sometime :)

[kikomanson]

MeTooAlso2- Look to your house for the answer, When did it stop being Native American Land and become yours?

In your twisted knowledge 0f world history,bears no semblance to actual events.

[joyo8729]

There are indeed many paths to the Truth. They all go through Jesus Christ the Son of God.

[kikomanson]

MeTooAlso2, is correct all his assumptions are ALL BOGUS, He knows not of what he speaks.I spent 72 years in the U.S. and served in her military before moving to South East Asia.

MeTooAlso the U.S. has many short comings and has been the force behind more CIA revolts against more elected governments that any other nation on the face of the earth.

One must have the capacity to recognize her shortcomings before being able to remedy them!!!

[ubrew12]

We give 2 billion dollars a year to Hosni Mubarak, the dictator who rules 100 million Egyptians. HALF of that money has to be spent by him on U.S. military equipment, i.e. its a corporate giveaway to U.S. defense contractors. We've been doing this for 25 years.

Mubarak is a dictator. He holds sham elections and pays goons to beat up and imprison anyone who campaigns against him. He does that with OUR money. He's been doing it for 25 years with HUGE U.S. support.

Modern Egyptians are pretty smart, they see what is going on. They are being enslaved with OUR money, and OUR military equipment, and they deeply resent it. Radical Islam lights the fire, but WE bring the fuel. And out of this deeply impoverished and enslaved country come crazy jerks like Attah, the guy who led the 911 hijackers. BOTH of the attacks on the World Trade Center were led by Egyptians, and most of the 911 hijackers were Egyptians. Our policies DO have blowback, and 911 is a classic example.

What would WE do, if a foreign government paid a dictator to keep us from having a true democracy? If that government paid a dictator to keep his boot on our necks? How would WE respond? I think ANY freedom loving American knows how he would respond!

Egypt is screwed up. We screwed it up. We are screwing it up. And the unkindest cut of all, is to hear the Weakly Standard say, 'its all THEIR fault'.

[limaurs]

Islam is definitely a problem, Mr. Loconte. The difficulty I have is trying to figure out if the problem is inherent to Islam or is the Muslim religion a handy excuse for Muslims and non-muslims alike to use to promote their self interest . There is always something in any religions that can be used to vilify it, so picking out the things that strike us as odd about Islam is not really meaningful.
How can one reconcile our contemporary negative view of Islam with the tolerant, prosperous and diverse empire that Muslims built and that flourished a thousand years ago.That empire had at its core a love of learning and scientific exploration that led to discoveries without which the Renaissance would not have been possible. If Islam is indeed what the bin Ladens of this world claim it is, then my very birth is a miracle.
I am a Christian Arab who has left his native land , not because of Islamic oppression but because of the hypocrisy that pervades public life in the Arab world. For the same reason, many of my Muslim friends packed their bags and left, aspiring to work for NASA or become successful surgeons .

Funny how things turn out. I grew up with Muslims who strove to live a peaceful, moral life under the guidance of a benevolent and forgiving god and now I only hear of Muslims who seeks to chop off people's heads and force their religion on the world.We certainly live in interesting, if crazy,times.

[mysteriousjz]

A) There are equally corrupt and repressive societies all over the world where the variable "religion" is not the same. Thus, religion seems irrelevant. In Southeast Asia, they sell their 6 year old daughters on the streets for sex with westerners (mainly Americans, and then Europeans). If only, Islamic countries do not have that problem at all.

B) There are corrupt and oppressive regimes all over, Arab world is no exception. Only in Arab world, we see people (called terrorists) rising up to their regimes. Therefore, by that analogy, the religion followers may actually be doing good by fighting off the bad regimes.

C) The oppressive and brutal regimes are being supported by the foreigners/foreign powers. The example of Saddam given in this "opinion" to support the distorted view. Saddam was fully supported by the US-Do you not agree with that. Thus, foreign intervention does matter. And actually, that is the MAIN reason of all these troubles.

D) Invasions and occupations are relevant to the region. To believe that foreign interference is irrelevant to the region is naive. Erecting and supporting puppet regimes, like in IRaq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are relevant. All these regimes are corrupt and barbaric. Add to that are continouus bombing of the people who rise up to raise their voice.

E) Going back to the variable religion-If only, it could be that the religion is actually helping the Arab world to rise up against the oppression and brutality and to fight for "freedom." Now, this is not happening in other oppressive regimes where the variable religion is not the same. Thus, the religion may actually be a part of the solution, not problem.