Islam and the Arab Spring a Panel Discussion

8/13/2019 Islam and the Arab Spring a Panel Discussion

1/13

Islam and the Arab Spring

Samina Yasmeen is Professor of Political Science and International Relations at the University of WesternAustralia

Larbi Sadiki is a Senior Lecturer in Middle East Politics at the University of Exeter in the UK

Ahmad Shboul is honorary associate professor in the Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies at TheUniversity of Sydney

Lily Rahim is ssociate rofessor in Government and International Relations at The University of Sydney

Omid Tofighian is a tutor in philosophy at the University of Sydney, and a tutor in humanities and languages atthe University of Western Sydney

Transcript

Gary Bryson : Hello, and welcome to Encounter, and a program this week which tackles somebig questions about Islam, democracy, and the Arab Spring. I'm Gary Bryson.

Samina Yasmeen : There have been theological debates that have constantly looked at the ideaof an Islamic State in terms of whether human will is paramount, or a divine will is paramount.And in its very extreme form, those who believe in the divine will being paramount, they arguethat what it means to be part of a political system or of a societal structure has been preordainedand does not change.

Larbi Sadiki : There are lots of issues which remain unsettled in Islam, the question ofdemocracy, the question of gender equality, can a woman for instance be President in a Muslimcountry? And I guess really, within the context of the Arab revolts, that's really what people aretrying to determine.

Omid Tofigian : I think that in its very nature what they're doing is democratic, because you'reallowing all of these different worldviews, all of these different symbols and elements to coexisttogether and participate and communicate with each other.

Gary Bryson : Over the past few months we've watched, fascinated, as one oppressive regimeafter another in North Africa and the Middle East has been challenged by its people in the so-called Arab Spring. Egypt and Tunisia have both ousted their authoritarian leaders, Libya is inthe middle of a bitter civil war and violent unrest continues in Yemen, Syria and Bahrain.


2/13

But as old regimes are torn down and new ones established, some timely questions can be askedabout how these majority Muslim countries will take up the challenges of liberal democracy.While the Arab Spring is primarily a political movement, how will its leaders negotiate thesometimes difficult spaces between Islam, democracy and secularism? Progressive Muslimshave been wrestling with these issues for some time, and there's certainly no shortage of ideas

about redefining the relationship between Islam and the state.

Last April, Sydney University's Department of Government at International Relations, alongwith the Sydney Democracy Initiative, held a symposium in which some of these ideas wereaired. The symposium was called 'Spirited Voices from the Muslim World'. It dealt with a rangeof ideas about Islam, Democracy and gender rights, part of which touched on the events of theArab Spring. We'll hear from some of the symposium's speakers in this program.

Let's begin with Samina Yasmeen, Professor of Political Science and International Relations atthe University of Western Australia. Is there in fact an Islamic way of looking at the events ofthe Arab Spring?

Samina Yasmeen : As someone of Muslim background who works in political issues, I can't butlook at it in the same way as maybe a lot of my colleagues would be looking at it. So I'm keen topoint out that there isn't something like an Islamic way of looking at it. There's different viewson why it's happening, and what creates it and how would it be sustained and what are itsimplications. And I think around the Muslim world, the dominant understanding is that in theMiddle East, in the Arab world, authoritarianism had created conditions where a lot of peoplefelt that there was knowledge deficit, there was democracy deficit, and there was an inability ofthe people to rise up against that. Now these ideas had been coming up in the Arab HumanDevelopment Report from the beginning of this last decade, but because they were combinedwith a population increase and a younger population, it was bound to have an effect on how the

system would relate to this youth. I think in a way what happened was that under the growingpressure of disillusionment, alienation, lack of making their needs, one person rose up, met areaction and then everyone really followed it through. And of course everybody talks about therole of social media in it. But I think there's more to it. It's not just social media, it's also I wouldsay, the cumulative disillusionment of the slightly older generation that had been looking at theissues and saying, 'We have to react to them', and probably they're feeling very good that theyounger generation has come in to take the baton and go forward.

Now what does it mean in terms of Islamic understanding? I mean you could give it a veryIslamic colour and say that Islam enjoins upon its followers to stand up against authoritarianismand really create a system in which the will of everyone is recognised and realised, so you couldtry and give it a Muslim colour but I think I would be more determined to look at it as asociological phenomenon which finally led to what we are saying now.

Larbi Sadiki : I think Islam is weaved into the cultural, political quilt.

Gary Bryson : Larbi Sadiki is a senior lecturer in Middle East Politics at the University of Exeterin the UK, and the author of Rethinking Arab Democratisation: Elections without Democracy . Ispoke to him on a rainy morning in Sydney where he's currently on sabbatical.


3/13

Larbi Sadiki : There is always the temptation to invoke Islam in anything that happens in theArab world and specifically in relation to the revolts of Tunisia and Egypt. And I'm pretty sure ifone is called upon to invoke Islam, you can find an Islamic narrative of how people for instanceare mobilised, I know that lots of scholars have rushed into this discourse of post-Islamism,which means discarding political Islam from the foment that's been unfolding in the Arab world,

and I think that is hasting into making assumptions about the inability of political Islam toengage with this moment of resistance because if you look at the history, especially, when I sayhistory, like the long duree , the long historical stand, you will find that Islam has always beenpart and parcel of any attempt, whether it is an attempt for state-making, state-unmaking, callsfor social justice, resistance of tyranny, resistance against invasion etc. etc. Specifically ofcourse, we cannot really say that there is a monopoly by political Islam as far as mobilisation andorganisation of resistance against tyranny in Tunisia and Egypt has been happening, butdefinitely, definitely, there is I think a core of the mobilisable public opinion in the Arab worldin relation to these revolts which invoke messages taken directly from Islam.

Samina Yasmeen : Now those meanings are really questioned by other people who say that

human beings, because they are the chosen by God, even over and above angels, they have sucha special place that human will has a right and a responsibility to be present in determining howthe structures are made. So the will of people, their understanding of what it means to be aMuslim and how a system would be organised, is very important for these people.

Now these debates at one level are theological debates. What is a State? What is a society? Whatare the component parts of it? Who is in and who is out? Those who are in what are theirresponsibilities and rights and what are their relationships to those who are out? But I think atanother level it's a very lived-in debate, because it's not just simply about what do I think aboutprimacy of human will or divine will, it is about what does it mean for me in my real life. Foreveryone it's a question of if I believe in the primacy of human will, does that mean that I have tolive in a certain way, and what does that mean for me as an individual, in my family, in mysociety, as an economic being, as a social being, as an intellectual being, all those debates, allthose questions. And they're really answered by people on all sides. Even what does it mean forsomeone to be a man and have responsibilities, or a woman to have responsibilities, children,elderly, the lot. Once you start looking at it like that, this whole question of democracy andexpression of democracy in Muslim States, we have to accept the fact that at one leveltheological debates would make an important impression on how people look at theirrelationship to the system. So it can shape what they need to do and how they need to run thesystem.

Gary Bryson : Samina Yasmeen and Larbi Sadiki. Ahmad Shboul is honorary associateprofessor in the Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies at Sydney University.

Ahmad Shboul : All these countries have majority Muslim populations, but it doesn't mean thatpeople always think about politics in religious terms. There are people who do, but the majoritydon't. I think what triggered the movements has to do with problems in economy, especially inpolitical corruption. I think there is a perception that the leaders of these countries for the pastfew decades, in some cases four decades like Libya for example, don't have real politicallegitimacy. And they haven't actually provided what their people need. So that was the trigger,


4/13


5/13

basically he says, 'We need a new epistemology' and here there is a very interesting referenceback to a significant school of thought from ninth century Iraq, especially in their distinction ofthe two natures of the Qur'an. The Qur'an is on the one hand a divine book which is infinite, infact there's a verse in the Qur'an that says 'The words of God are so infinite that if you've got allthe oceans [as ink] and you've got all the forest as pens, you would never run out of the words of

God'. And that is a subtle description of the preserved book, up there. And the other side of it isthe volume, the Qur'an which we read, and which is actually expressed in the human language.

Then he goes on to say that there's no need to sanctify the Arabic language. The Arab language islike any other human language, it just happens to be the language of the Qur'an and there's noneed to sanctify it or sanctify the heritage or culture that is written in it in Arabic. Part of thisalso is how this question of avoiding reason and avoiding secularism plays in the hands of someIslamist preachers and advocates, especially when they present certain slogans which are actuallysocial or political slogans, but expressed in religious terms, and therefore make it impossible foryou to debate them. And he makes a long list of these, such as you know we're talking about thetrue religion, 'this is God's book', 'this is the Prophet's sunnah ', 'we are one Islamic ummah ,' 'there

is God's absolute formal justice'. Or the worst one from my point of view is 'God is the ruler ofthe world', in almost Sultanic terms. And you know, from that then comes things like, 'why don'twe apply the sharia ' without defining it, or 'Islam is the solution and Islam is the answer,'without telling us how and so on. So this is one of the problems where obfuscation createsproblems for people who want to have debates about religion in society.

Ahmad Shboul : The relationship between religion and politics in Egypt, and for that matter inother Arab countries, is very complex. I think there was a kind of current of secular thinking inEgypt which goes back at least to the nineteenth century, not just among political leaders whowere pragmatic but almost among Muslim intellectuals. People like Mohammad Abdul and soon, I would say they're quite rational and secular. They would go as far as saying, 'Look, theleader of a Muslim country, even the judge in a Muslim society is not necessarily a religiousfigure. His position is civic.' So there is that kind of understanding. But even if you go back tothe pre-modern period, not in Egypt, but also say in Islamic thought, there's always been a verystrong rational current, even in Islamic theology.

Of course you have the fundamentalist people who are stuck to the text in a narrowinterpretation, but in general because of the influence of Greek philosophy and logic and so on,like in mediaeval Christianity and early Reform churches, you have that kind of rationalisation.So that is there, but also in terms of political practice, people have been thinking in secular terms,but even people like Nasser who was clearly secular, he couldn't ignore the religious sentimentof the population, this is true even now in the United States and other places. You know, I likethat expression of one modern historian who said 'You cannot actually fillet out religion fromsociety'. But that is different from saying, let's express everything in religious terms.

Samina Yasmeen : I can understand the argument for secularism because you do need, especiallyin multicultural, multi-religious societies, a space which is free of any one group's vices, and so ithas to be level playing field for everyone. And if that means a set of rules that everybody agreesupon, irrespective of their religious backgrounds, I think that's a very good space to be in. Butdoes that mean that when Muslims are operating in the secular space, they deny the Islamic


6/13

identity? I don't think so. And it's not just simply a Muslim experience. I think any one of us whohas any idea about any kind of spirituality, will bring that with us. We don't keep it outside thedoor when you're walking into a space, you bring it with you. And I think secular spaces need tobe the spaces where we come with those ideas, but we come with the responsibility that theydon't give us the right to silence other ideas. And in that sense I think secularism can exist and it

should exist very comfortably with people who believe in things provided they have this sense ofresponsibility.

Gary Bryson : Can you tell me something about how important secularism is or might be tothese emerging democracies now in North Africa and the Middle East?

Larbi Sadiki : I think the mobilisation happening in Egypt and Tunisia - and this is really anemancipatory moment, really in the full sense of the word, religiously, politically, culturally, etc.etc., What they have to revisit is the political template of people like Mubarak, Ben Ali, becausereally what they were able to do was actually to institute a system of de facto secularism in theArab world, which means what, subverting the Ottoman paradigm. In the Ottoman state, the

Caliphate was a monopoly of religion over politics. Now, post-independence, Arab statessubverted that paradigm so politics became in charge of religion, so that when you talk about theazha [for example], whether it's the theological side of it, the administrative side of it, theritualistic side of it, the juridical side of it - all of that was founded by the state. So states wereable to recruit religion for the purpose of the ruler, whatever that purpose is, whether it's secularnationalism whether it's Arab socialism, pan-Arabism, making war, making peace etc. etc.

Gary Bryson : Larbi Sadiki. Any discussion of Arab politics has to take into account the centralimportance of history, whether it's the Ottoman empire or the more fraught legacy of Westerncolonialism. This history produces what seems to Western eyes to be a fear of modernity. AhmadShboul.

Ahmad Shboul : The main problem is the connection between modernity and colonial powersthat have dominated the Arab world during the nineteenth century and most of the first half ofthe twentieth, and they still in a sense, impinge on the Arab world, politically, economically andculturally. So there is that kind of tension, you know, you can't give me modernity; at the sametime you are giving me oppression or humiliation or depredation, exploitation, all these things.That's one thing.

I think the other complexity has to do with the confusion between change and progress. I thinkone of the interesting things that some Arab political leaders, especially in the old monarchies,would say, 'Look we would love to have Western technology, we would love to have airports,aeroplanes, even universities and so on, but we don't want to change our ways.' So there's thatkind of conservativism which sometimes translates into the next point which is fear of modernitybecause it means change. In other words, there's a strong current of conservatism in some Arabsocieties and certainly in certain political elites. I'm thinking mainly in the Arabian peninsula.And also in some other countries. So this is this kind of problem, and some intellectuals talkabout fear of modernity in that sense. It's not like everybody's afraid of modernity. It's what itimplies for perceived values for society and what also it implies for instability for the rulingelites.


7/13

Samina Yasmeen : I think of it as lessons learned, unlearned, and then re-learned. So Muslimhistory initially was a democratic history, so it was a lesson learned because of Islam. Then itwas unlearned because of rise of powers, even within the Muslim communities who were ruling.They did have very strong examples of being very authoritarian as well. And then colonisation.So that lesson was unlearned, and now it's being re-learned. But it doesn't mean that it's not in the

Muslim books, it just means we have to come back to it. And again, learning takes time. So Ithink we need to be - not gentle with Muslim communities - but just understand that it is ahuman process, and by expecting too much, too soon, what we're really getting into is anassumption that somehow the West has to set the pace at which everyone else must move. That Ithink is a dangerous precedent because that's not democratic, it doesn't give you the right tomove along the path that you want to move along.

Gary Bryson : Samina Yasmeen and Ahmad Shboul. And you're with Encounter on ABC RadioNational, this week discussing Islam, democracy and the Arab Spring.

Lily Rahim is an Associate Professor in Government and International Relations at Sydney

University. She also contributed to the university's forum on 'Spirited Arab Voices'. And shereminded us that there is an important middle ground between an Islamic state and a secular one.

Lily Rahim : What I'm focused on is to look at that middle ground, the Islamic states at one endof the spectrum and then we have the secular states, the other end of the spectrum. Places likeTurkey and other places in North Africa. But what I'm interested is to look closely at the states.Most Muslim states are actually in the middle, quasi-secular. There's a lot of research been doneto highlight this. Many of us that are not too aware of the Muslim world, we often imagine thatthey would be closer towards the Islamic state model. And that is not so. And I think this point isalso being highlighted quite well in the recent developments in the Middle East, sweeping rightthroughout the Middle East, the political crises, where we find that if we watch clearly, the

conversations, the views put forward by civil society, actors, even representatives of the MuslimBrotherhood, they're not asking for an Islamic state, neither are they are asking for a secularstate, and this middle ground is interesting, in that there is a strong theological basis to supportthis middle ground. Concepts such as shura , wasatiyyah , which is moderation, middle-path,

justice, and so on and so forth. So there is that theological basis in the text and so on.

So the point here is that in my case studies of Indonesia and Malaysia, places I'm most familiarwith, we find that these states, these states that were created and established after the SecondWorld War, these post-colonial states, we find that if we look closely at these constitutions, thiswas the ideal of the post-colonial elites, the founding fathers and mothers of these post-colonialstates. This was their political vision; to establish a quasi-secular state. This is the vision ofMalaysia's Tunku Abdul Rahman, this is the vision of Soekarno, this was you could say, thevision of Nasser and you could say Ali Jinnah and others as well.

So very much middle ground. And this is their nation-building stance or vision; reconcilingIslam, Muslim majority States reconciling Islam within a secular-oriented constitutional andpolitical framework.


8/13

Gary Bryson : Lily Rahim. The politics of the Arab Spring countries also owe much to thehistory of Islam itself. The divide between Shia and Sunni Muslims for example, goes right backto the days of Mohammad. It's a divide which makes a marked difference to the shape ofpolitical Islam in each nation. Larbi Sadiki.

Larbi Sadiki : The two main branches of Islam are Shia-ism and Sunni-ism, and Sunni Muslimsclaim that they're not theocratic in the sense you don't have a hierarchy. You don't havemonopoly over hermeneutical practice or exegesis by a self-appointed class. That does not reallyexist. Now in Shia-ism of course you've got almost like the equivalent of a temple of wisdom,king philosophers, people like Khomeini. When you say Ayatollah , it literally means 'a godlymiracle'. Someone who's committed forty, fifty years of their lifetime in the seminaries of Shia-ism whether in holy cities like Qom or Najaf. They claim that actually they know Islam, theyknow the Qur'an etc. etc., and I guess really that's something that we respect, because in Shia-ismdefinitely the tradition and the institution of itjihad is far more vibrant, it has been far morevibrant than in Sunni Islam. But who is in charge of understanding, distilling the meaning ofIslam is different. In Sunni really you don't have that kind of class elite of exegetes. But you

have that in Shia-ism.

Ahmad Shboul : The prophet Mohammad was essentially a religious leader, but he was also apolitical leader, not because he wanted to be a political leader or religion wanted him to be apolitical leader, but because of the needs, the circumstances of the time. There was no state in thespace he was operating in, unlike Christ within the Roman Empire. And that is why Islamconcerned itself with trying to establish some kind of law and order. But that establishment oflaw and order itself was conducted, if you like, in civic terms, and I think that's created a lot ofconfusion, but if you take the Caliphs, you know, the Muslim leaders who came after him,essentially to me they were political leaders.

Larbi Sadiki : Even the prophet when he knew he was departing this world, he did not leave atestament of who should succeed him at all. So he left the whole question of successfulleadership, open to the people who come after him to decide, and I think that's a pearl of wisdomfor other Muslims interested in liberalising or democratising. Of course within the panoply ofIslam or political Islam, you've got a variety of narratives, and I guess these narratives, tosummarise the debate, which is like a huge debate, you've got two things: You've got like Islamwith capital 'I' which is like the ideal of Islam and then you've got with a small 'i', theinterpretation of Islams.

Gary Bryson : Larbi Sadiki and Ahmad Shboul.

The interpretation of Islams, with their varied and different cultural flavours, can shed some lighton how Islamic scholars today think about ideas such as democracy and secularism.

Speaking at the Sydney University symposium, Samina Yasmeen introduced us to the work ofJaved Ahmad Ghamidi, a Pakistani Muslim theologian.

Samina Yasmeen : The reason why I have chosen Ghamidi, is that that unlike the debate inPakistan which had been couched in terms of the secular about human will and orthodox who


9/13

talk about primacy of divine will - where Ghamidi stands out very clearly is that although heoccupies the end of the spectrum where divine will is paramount, the way he talks about theseideas and the way he presents what it means to be a Muslim, is so open and so flexible that itactually presents the opportunity of integrating ideas that have also emerged on the primacy ofthe human will and of the spectrum. Or another way of saying this is that he occupies the

orthodox space, but is one of the most educated liberal modern thinkers that you could think of inPakistan at the moment.

Now what is Ghamidi's idea of the State or democracy? The starting point for his idea ofdemocracy is that it is a government through consultation. Shura is at the heart of what he thinks.Organisations of Muslims in any country, but definitely in Pakistan, need to start work.Consultation is the one in which every participant is equal, and the consultation is based on theprecondition that those who are consulted are not just simply consulted because you have to tickthe box, but you're consulted because it is an essential part of getting access to the knowledgeand ideas of others.

And other preconditions of consultation is that people who are consulted are extended respectand the recognition, because if you don't extend them that recognition, it impacts on theirwillingness to share their ideas, but it also, if they're not taken into account, then it creates asense of disillusionment and you will miss out in a future contribution of ideas. So theconsultation among the selected few is the basis of the state for Ghamidi.

But then the question really is that when the consultation has to take place, who are the ones whoengage in this process? What are the criteria for choosing as to who the shura would be? His ideais that the process of consultation must represent communities and they must enjoy the respect ofthe people. So the respect and the reliability of those who engage in this process is an essentialcondition for his notion of who rules an Islamic State. The idea that you need to enjoy respect is

not of short-term relevance, in fact what he says is that respect has to be earned over a period oftime and it must be sustainable. So it's only over a period of time, experience, interaction, thatcertain people develop the respect of the community, and in that capacity they acquire the rightto be part of that group that decides what happens in the Muslim community.

Samina Yasmeen : I think Ghamadi is one of those who in our age at least, is very significant interms of how he combines Islamic understanding with ideas that are very modern. He presents itas an Islamic solution, but when you look at it, elements are so similar to what we think of inWestern democracies. His argument is that people who enjoy the trust of their respectivecommunities have the right to represent their interests. And that these rights must be taken intoaccount by the groups that make decisions, and it's through that consultation that they need tocome to a decision. Even the leadership within that smaller group of representatives can't beestablished in an authoritative manner, it has to come through a process of consultation.

Gary Bryson : And he also says that that leadership is not God-given?

Samina Yasmeen : He says that leadership is to grow out of that consultative process, andreligious clergy, by way of being religious clergy and ulema , don't have a pre-ordained right tolead. It's not that he says that you have a religious realm and you've got a political realm, the


10/13

connection's there, but he says that to start off with a demand that only the ulema have a right torun the system is actually missing the point, because the ulema can't deliver in the way that thesystem requires them to deliver. It's very important to understand that he's not saying it's his idea,he's saying it's his interpretation of what the Qur'an has already established, or what Islamictradition has already established. So it's marrying Islam with the idea of democracy, not as being

in a Western space but being very clearly located in Islamic space.

Gary Bryson : Samina Yasmeen. And you're with Encounter on ABC Radio National, wherewe're exploring ideas about Islam, democracy and the Arab Spring.

MUSIC: Arabic hip-hop

Gary Bryson : And so to voices of a different kind. One of the biggest factors in the Arab Springis just how visible these events have been to the eyes of the world. Despite attempts by theMubarak regime in Egypt for example, to shut down the internet, news was spread instantly byTwitter and Facebook. We saw the same thing in Iran when young people there contested the

election results.

As in the west, social media has been embraced by the youth of the Arab world, bringing a newdimension to any discussion of modernity and Islam.

And it's not just social media. According to Sydney University philosopher, Omid Tofighian,digital technology itself, including music, art and film, is changing young people's perspectiveson life in the Islamic world.

Omid Tofighian : As a result of digital technology and new genres of art and new interactionsbeing made with different cultures and different religious views, I think new questions are being

evoked. And I think the fact that these new questions are coming up and these new questions arethemselves being questioned, and the fact that a lot of especially youth, are not necessarilylooking for a definite answer but are more interested in engaging with the questions, I think that'sa pivotal factor in understanding what's happening in North Africa and in the Middle East.

Gary Bryson : Omid Tofighian presented a paper at the Arab Voices symposium called 'Digi-Tafsir: Transforming Middle-Eastern Societies in a Digital Age'.

Omid Tofighian : 'Digi-tafsir', it means a kind of interpretation that is modelled or has beentransformed by digital technology. The more I looked into it I realised that there are new formsof interpretation taking place - of tradition, culture and religion, and politics - and these forms of

interpretation weren't available before, they weren't being practiced before, but I think with theintroduction of digital technology, particularly in these artistic genres, people are able to saythings that they didn't have the opportunity to say before.

MUSIC: Arabic hip-hop

Omid Tofighian : Hip-hop is a very interesting example because it is often the voice of themarginalised, a voice of the oppressed, and also it has a very urban, gritty urban feel to it, people


11/13

can empathise with it in all parts of the world and I think the popularity of hip-hop worldwide isa testament to that. People immediately are attracted to it, the rhymes, the rhythms, the beats, thesynthesizing, the different sound effects, turntable-ism, the art of turntable-ism was extremelyattractive, and also the fact they could involve or include some indigenous factors into hip-hopwithout distorting it or without moving away from what hip-hop stands for.

So basically Iranian hip-hop developed, like Egyptian hip-hop has developed, like Palestinianhip-hop has developed, or even Saudi hip-hop is now developing, and you have some reallyinteresting hip-hop artists in Iran, and this has flowed into or influenced other genres. So nowyou have rock fusion, using the same sorts of techniques that hip-hop artists used forsynthesizing and mixing and it's had a huge impact and it's actually allowed people to expressnew feelings, new emotions, and look to the future, in terms of how they want to see their art andculture in society, and politics, developing.

If we use this to understand what's happening in the Middle East now, young people have anattachment to certain religious sentiments. They have an interest in certain kinds of philosophy

or certain kinds of theology, but also they have an interest in so many other things as well. Theyhave an interest in international film; they have an interest in international sport; also in thepolitical situation in other parts of the world. They enjoy hobbies that we enjoy here in the West,different genres of music, different kinds of fashion, and all of these things make up theiridentities - the same way that Australians or Americans or Canadians amalgamate differentfactors to create their own identities. Now the interesting thing is that with digital technology,people in the Middle East, especially young people, people in North Africa, especially youngpeople, are able to amalgamate or mould all of these things into a new unity that represents theirown unique way of living and way of thinking.

Gary Bryson : Omid Tofighian. So the pressures for change in the Arab world are, as we've seen,

multi-faceted - an amalgam of desires for political and social freedoms which are both Islamicand deeply connected with the global community.

Perhaps a positive sign of this can be seen in the changing nature of the Muslim Brotherhood inEgypt. Long associated with extreme political Islam, the brotherhood too, it seems, is gettingwith the times. Ahmad Shboul.

Ahmad Shboul : The people who are now leading the Muslim Brothers, especially their newpolitical party - which is called Party of Freedom and Justice by the way, it doesn't have anIslamic title - they are mostly more progressive, I would say. Definitely relative to the old guard,and they are talking essentially in terms which can be described as secular, certainly liberal.They are saying you know, 'We don't want to monopolise the political scene; we believe inmulti-party system, we want our brothers, the Copts, the Christians to participate with us. We arenot excluding anybody', and so on. So this is their language. The other thing is they are actuallynow saying, and this is official, that they want the people to be the source of political authority.Until recently their slogan was 'God Is the Source of Political Authority'. So there is a shift.

Larbi Sadiki : Political Islam itself is not monolithic. Political Islam say in Yemen is not thesame as political Islam in Egypt. You've got actually brands of political Islam. You've got like


12/13


13/13

My thanks to the Department of Government and International Relations, the University ofSydney, and to the Sydney Democracy Initiative for their help with this program.

And a link to the Symposium, 'Spirited Voices from the Muslim World' can be found on ourwebsite. You'll also find further information about this program, including a written transcript.

Technical production today by Michelle Goldsworthy. I'm Gary Bryson. Thanks for listening.

Islam and the Arab Spring a Panel Discussion

Documents

Transcript of Islam and the Arab Spring a Panel Discussion