Cairo/Brussels, 2 March 2005: The West's failure to understand the very diverse nature of Islamic activism risks sidelining non-violent and modernist tendencies, and strengthening militant jihadis.
Understanding Islamism,* the latest report from the International Crisis Group, describes that diversity -- the differences between minority Shiite and majority Sunni streams, and particularly within Sunni Islamism -- and explains its implications for U.S. and European policy choices.
"Since 9/11, Western observers and policy-makers have tended to lump all forms of Islamism together, branding most as 'radical' and treating them as hostile to Western interests. That approach is fundamentally misconceived", says Robert Malley, Crisis Group's Middle East and North Africa Program Director. "Islamism has a number of very different forms, only a few of them violent and only a small minority justifying a confrontational response".
Sunni Islamism -- on which most Western emphasis is placed today, and about which most fears are held -- is no longer at all monolithic. It now has three main distinctive types, each attempting to reconcile tradition and modernity in its own way:
Political: These movements seek political power by constitutional means, invoke democratic norms and accept the framework of the nation-state.
Missionary: The Islamic missions of conversion do not seek political power. Their overriding purpose is the preservation of Muslim identity and moral order.
Jihadi: The Islamic armed struggle has three sub-types: internal (against Muslim regimes); irredentist (fighting to redeem land ruled by non-Muslims); and global (against the West).
Shiite Islamism is different again: remaining unified to a remarkable degree because it so often sees itself as defending the interests of a minority Shiite community in relation to other populations, and not usually taking a violent form except under sectarian attack.
Which of the three main trends of Sunni Islamism will prevail is of great importance to the Muslim world and -- although none of them can be considered tamely "pro-Western" by any means -- to the U.S. and Europe. By adopting a sledge-hammer approach that does not differentiate jihadi Islamism from its political and missionary brands, or between fundamentalist and modernist streams of activism, Western policy-makers risk provoking one of two undesirable outcomes: either inducing the different strands to band together in reaction, or causing the non-violent, modernist trends to be eclipsed by the jihadis.
"Continuing to look for 'moderates' isn't likely to get anywhere as long as 'moderate' means 'co-optable'", says Hugh Roberts, North Africa Project Director. "Groups that fail to articulate the frustrations and expectations of the mass of Muslims have little chance of political success in Muslim countries, let alone promoting significant reform there".
Understanding Islamism,* the latest report from the International Crisis Group, describes that diversity -- the differences between minority Shiite and majority Sunni streams, and particularly within Sunni Islamism -- and explains its implications for U.S. and European policy choices.
"Since 9/11, Western observers and policy-makers have tended to lump all forms of Islamism together, branding most as 'radical' and treating them as hostile to Western interests. That approach is fundamentally misconceived", says Robert Malley, Crisis Group's Middle East and North Africa Program Director. "Islamism has a number of very different forms, only a few of them violent and only a small minority justifying a confrontational response".
Sunni Islamism -- on which most Western emphasis is placed today, and about which most fears are held -- is no longer at all monolithic. It now has three main distinctive types, each attempting to reconcile tradition and modernity in its own way:
Political: These movements seek political power by constitutional means, invoke democratic norms and accept the framework of the nation-state.
Missionary: The Islamic missions of conversion do not seek political power. Their overriding purpose is the preservation of Muslim identity and moral order.
Jihadi: The Islamic armed struggle has three sub-types: internal (against Muslim regimes); irredentist (fighting to redeem land ruled by non-Muslims); and global (against the West).
Shiite Islamism is different again: remaining unified to a remarkable degree because it so often sees itself as defending the interests of a minority Shiite community in relation to other populations, and not usually taking a violent form except under sectarian attack.
Which of the three main trends of Sunni Islamism will prevail is of great importance to the Muslim world and -- although none of them can be considered tamely "pro-Western" by any means -- to the U.S. and Europe. By adopting a sledge-hammer approach that does not differentiate jihadi Islamism from its political and missionary brands, or between fundamentalist and modernist streams of activism, Western policy-makers risk provoking one of two undesirable outcomes: either inducing the different strands to band together in reaction, or causing the non-violent, modernist trends to be eclipsed by the jihadis.
"Continuing to look for 'moderates' isn't likely to get anywhere as long as 'moderate' means 'co-optable'", says Hugh Roberts, North Africa Project Director. "Groups that fail to articulate the frustrations and expectations of the mass of Muslims have little chance of political success in Muslim countries, let alone promoting significant reform there".
Comment