Believe what they do

While Eric Trager over at the Washington Institute continues to warn that Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood seeks a monopoly on power, Carnegie Endowment yesterday hosted Islamist politicians–including an Egyptian adherent of the Muslim Brotherhood–swearing fealty to pluralism.  The day-long event–of which I attended only the first session on “Building New Regimes After the Uprising”–started off with Islamists from Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt and Jordan.

Tunisia

Sahbi Atig, a Tunisian National Constituent Assembly member representing Ennahda, said that Tunisians want is a “civil state” and protection of individual rights.  The Tunisian revolution has been fortunate to have broken cleanly with the autocratic regime without much violence.  The army stepped aside willingly and is now out of politics–soldiers cannot even vote.  Tunisia has now conducted free and fair elections to a pluralist constituent assembly operating under a temporary constitution.

The constituent assembly seeks a broad consensus based on Islamic and Arab identity but also guaranteeing individual liberties through institutions like a constitutional court and independent electoral and media commissions.  Women’s and minority rights will be respected.  Sharia will be a basis for freedom and justice.

The current government is seized with economic issues:  unemployment, foreign investment, the need for more development in the interior.  Accountability and transitional justice will be important issues, but settled only by dialogue and consensus. Questioned about his 16 years in prison, Atig made it clear they had taught him to oppose torture and advocate for freedom.

Morocco

Mustafa Elkhalfi, now Minister of Communications, claimed that Morocco’s “third path” is working:  meeting the demand for reform without instability.   The King reacted promptly to the “February 20” movement, promising good governance, transparency, rule of law.  There is now a new constitution, real elections have been held, there is an Islamist prime minister and a governing coalition that includes Amazighs (aka Berbers).  The monarchy has provided unity, modern religious leadership, and preservation of pluralism.   There is a dynamic and active civil society with more than 50,000 private organizations and a culture of integration that includes Amazighs as well as leftists, in addition to Islamists and other political forces.

There are four main challenges:  implementation of the new constitution (especially its provisions for freedom press and expression, women’s equality and an independent judiciary); real decentralization of governance (including the Western Sahara); answers to economic and social challenges like poverty, electricity, health and education; and revived regional cooperation with Morocco’s neighbors.

Egypt

Abdul Maegoud Rageh Dardery of Egypt’s Freedom and Justice Party (a Muslim Brotherhood outfit), suggested that Egypt had made mistakes in the past by either slavishly following European practices or trying to depart entirely from them.  He would like to see Egypt respect its own traditions but learn from the Europeans.

Egyptians yearn to live free under the rule of law.  They want a civil state with reference to Islamic principles (not rulings in the FJP view) as the main source of law.  The new constitution will be written by committee chosen half from outside parliament, which includes 20 parties.  The FJP refused to claim the chair of all the parliamentary committees, preferring to distribute responsibilities more widely.  The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces is trying to hold on to its privileges but the FJP wants to avoid a military-industrial complex.

Dardery was at pains to underline that sharia simply means rule of law and jihad means exerting an effort.  The FJP will take a pragmatic approach to alliances, making common cause with whoever supports its program.

Jordan

The tone got darker with Nabil Alkofahi, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Jordan, which has undergone very limited reform.  Elections in 2007 were fraudulent, he said, leading the Brotherhood to boycott them in 2010.  The King is still stalling on reform, preferring to keep in place a constitution that gives him, his government and the military too much power.  He uses the Israel/Palestine conflict, and the division between West Bankers and Jordanians, to distract attention and delay reform.

The King should be part of the solution, not part of the problem.  The MB wants a constitutional, pluralist and civil state to conduct free and fair elections.  There is no history of religious oppression in Jordan.  But there is a need to eliminate military tribunals and the excessive role of the intelligence services. The MB itself is internally democratic, he claimed.  Women participate.

Alkofahi was blunter than the others about Israel.  While at pains to say that individual Jews and Christians should be treated correctly in Muslim countries, he underlined that Israel is occupying Palestine.  Israel, he said, needs to end its aggression and respect Palestinian rights, including the right of return.  But he promised a clear MB policy on the issues only when they gain power.

The bottom line:  It was good to hear these rising political figures deal forthrightly with the issues Americans have on their minds, well-posed by Carnegie’s Marwan Muasher.  But ultimately we’ll need to assess what they do, not just what they say.  Trager’s warnings should not be ignored.