Is Bush's Call For Democracy Helping Islamist Recruiters?

by Jalal Ghazi

(PNS) -- Many predicted that the war in Iraq would so inflame Arabs and Muslims that Al Qaeda and other extremist groups would enjoy a rise in influence. Now, many Arab observers are saying it is not George Bush's military approach to the Middle East that is making fundamentalist influence grow -- it is his call for the democratization of Arab regimes.

Islamic movements, including those on the U.S. list of terrorist groups, such as Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah and even Al Qaeda are gaining momentum throughout the Arab world, but not necessarily through heightened violence.

Egyptian analyst Kamal Habib argues on the Al Jazeera Web site that many of these groups are no longer calling for intensifying armed attacks, rather they are exhorting their supporters to join the struggle for democracy within their own societies.

Sami Hadad, host of one of Al Jazeera's popular talk shows, "More Than One Opinion," wonders if the Islamist groups are the ones reaping the benefits of the democratization process called for by Bush's "greater Middle East project."

One of Hadad's guests, the Egyptian writer Muhammad Diab, like many Arab commentators, doesn't believe Bush's call for democracy is sincere. He thinks the White House is only asking its Arab allies, like the Egyptian, Jordanian and Saudi regimes, to undertake cosmetic reforms.

Still, Diab notes that the growing popular demand for democratization has empowered the opponents of Arab regimes, which include pro-U.S. governments.

The most powerful opposition parties tend to be Islamist. If free elections were held today, they would come out on top in most Arab countries.

Iraq is the clearest example, with the Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani replacing the secular dictator Saddam Hussein as the most powerful figure in the country, though he still acts behind the scenes. Lebanon could become the next example.

True, Syria has promised withdrawal from Lebanon before the elections, as the United States has demanded. But now, how will the Christian minority be protected and kept in power? The Shiites are clearly the new Lebanese majority. The Christian minority must, at the very least, share political power with them.

Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nassrallah declared on Al Alam television that following the Western definition of democracy, Hezbollah supporters must be given a voice.

"Aren't these masses also Lebanese?" he asked.

Not that Nassrallah has himself become entirely democratic. Despite his support for the Palestinian cause, he has demanded that Palestinian refugees not be given Lebanese citizenship, even though many of them are Lebanese-born and have lived there for decades. The unspoken reason -- the Palestinians are mostly Sunnis.

Shiite groups aren't the only ones gaining ground. Hamas and the Islamic Jihad have recently agreed to join the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), the umbrella of most Palestinian factions and backbone of the Palestinian Authority, on condition that the PLO reform its charter and adopt a more democratic voting process.

In a Cairo summit between the Palestinian factions, Hamas agreed to halt armed attacks against Israeli civilians as a condition for their entry into the PLO.

In Egypt, "all political forces have benefited from American pressure on the Egyptian government, says Muhammad Habib, a spokesman of the Muslim Brotherhood, "because it decreases the possibility that it would use oppressive measures to counter the opposition.

Arab media continues to report large demonstrations demanding that Mubarak not nominate himself or hand over the presidency to his son. However, Habib told Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper that the Muslim Brotherhood could support Mubarak or his son for the presidency if Mubarak "initiates political and constitutional reforms, ends the emergency laws, abolishes the special courts, lifts restriction on free speech and releases all political prisoners."

Egyptian analyst Kamal Habib, in an article on Al Jazeera's Web site, contends that even Al Qaeda is capitalizing on the fervor for democratization. He points to the latest speech of Bin Laden henchman Ayman Al-Zawahiri, which aired on Al Jazeera last Feb. 20. Al-Zawahiri actually talks about "freedom, reforms and democracy in the Arab world," instead of the usual threats of violence against Americans and Arab regimes.

Habib explains that such Western democratic concepts are foreign to the extremist Salafi Islamic School, which is the foundation of Al Qaeda. He concludes that many Muslim groups sympathetic to Al Qaeda are responding to these calls by "joining peaceful means to reform their regimes."

Some Arab media have noted that the Bush administration has reconciled itself to the growth of the Islamist groups and has been more willing to talk with some of them.

On March 24, Al-Quds Al Arabi newspaper reported that a former British intelligence official mediated a March 21-22 meeting in Beirut between U.S. emissaries and officials from Hamas, Hezbollah, Lebanese Al Jamiah Al Islamiyah and the Pakistani Al Jamiah Al Islamiyah.

The U.S. delegation included Republican and Democratic members of Congress, a former undersecretary of state and a former director of the CIA office in Kabul.

The United States bans any contact with Hamas, but apparently that did not stop one of the American participants from saying, "Many former terrorists ended up visiting the White House." According to the article, the Americans want to establish communication and eventually hold more meetings in the United States.

Preparations are already under way to hold the second meeting in an Asian country. The United States has apparently come to realize it has no choice but to work with these Islamist groups because they are the forces that control things on the ground. How far participation in politics will soften these groups' views remains to be seen.