A Short Middle Eastern Political Primer by Peter David Orr

Middle East.

The Pan-Islamists:

Think Sayyid Qutb, Hasan al-Banna, Ayman Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden. Pan-Islamists desire worldwide Muslim unity and the restoration of the Caliphate. Pan-Islamism is based on the notion that there should be a worldwide brotherhood of Muslims and a common, proactive struggle against the occupation by imperialist rulers—foreign, of course, but internal as well (i.e. “the corrupt Monarchies of the Middle East). Pan-Islamists seeks a global community of Muslims united in resistance against European colonialism and American economic and cultural imperialism.



Divorcing the Pan-Islamist movement from its political implications is impossible. It is a thoroughly political movement--a political movement that seeks to conform the state to the dictates of a strict and literalist interpretation of the Quran. Those who are called Islamists argue that Islam is inherently a political religion, and that the rules and laws laid out in Quran and Hadiths mandate Islamic government.

Muhammad Qutb's most prominent student was Ayman Zawahiri, who later became the mentor of Osama bin Laden.

Qutb's advocated an Islamic theocracy as the “only legitimate state.” He also preached “jihad” as a pro-active rather than simply reactive struggle against non-Islamic governments. Jihad to Qutb, Zawahiri and Bin Ladin has an essentially offensive character in this age, rather than only defensive. All three, of course, are known for their uncompromising opposition to Western culture and values. Those values are seen as degenerative and out of harmony with the expressed will of Allah as outlined in the Quran.

One of the founding movements that helped to create Pan-Islamism was “The Muslim Brotherhood.” The Muslim Brotherhood was founded by Hasan al-Banna. He was a proponent to a return to the imposition of strict Islamic-based law and political systems based on that law. Since only divine guidance could lead humans to peace, justice, and prosperity, it followed that Muslims should despise man-made systems of governance and live according to divinely inspired Quranic law as found in the examle of past Caliphates. "The Qur'an is our constitution" was the slogan of the movement and it continues to be at the heart of Pan-Islamism today.

Not surprisingly, The Muslim Brotherhood advocated Jihad against the European colonial powers, particularly the British and the French, and their allies. So as the US took up the frayed edges of European failure in the region in an attempt to keep the USSR from making inroads, this animosity naturally switched its primary focus to the United States, whose economic domination and cultural corruption of the Muslim world was obvious to them.

Members of Al-Qaeda are deeply anti-democratic Islamists. Why? They believe that there is no place for law made by men. That’s it.


The Secular Pan-Arabists/Pan-Arab Nationalists:

The best two examples are Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt and Saddam Hussein and his Ba'ath Party. Both espoused secular pan-Arabism, economic modernization, and Arab socialism. Pan-Arab Nationalism goes hand in glove with single party rule with socialist leanings--Socialist in the sense of subservience of the individual to the greater, national good. Both saw themselves as social revolutionaries and modernizers.

To the consternation of Islamists, Secular Pan-Arabist governments often institute reforms that smack of the intrusion of Western values. For example, both Nasser and Hussein gave women added freedoms and opened the door to more economic freedom for women. Saddam also created a Western-style legal system, making Iraq the only country in the Persian Gulf region not ruled according to traditional Islamic law.

Saddam Hussein promoted Iraqi nationalism by highlighting its unique role in the history of the Arab world—making frequent references to the Abbasid period, when Baghdad was the political capital of the Arab-Muslim world.

The Secular Nationalist often play whatever side of the foreign political fence that best suits their national aspirations at the moment. For example, as Saddam sought to have Iraq play a leading role in the Middle East he signed an aid pact with the Soviet Union in 1972, and arms were sent along with several thousand advisers from the USSR. A few years later, Saddam executed a group of Iraqi Communists who he felt were conspiring to bring Iraq under Soviet control, followed by a shift in trade toward France and US. This “Western Orientation” continued until the events precipitating the Gulf War in 1991.

Syria is politically in many ways similar to Iraq because the two nations share a common Ba'athist Party path. The Ba’athist takeover in Syria directly followed a Ba'ath coup in Iraq. In fact, the new Syrian Government seriously considered the possibility of federation with Egypt and Ba'ath–controlled Iraq.

In contrast to pan-Islamism, Pan-Arabism is secular and nationalistic first. Religion is secondary as a unifying force. Pan-Arab nationalists generally reject religion as a main element in political identity, and promoted the unity of Arabs regardless of sectarian identity. However, the fact that most Arabs are Muslims is used to foster a new Arab national identity.

The common colors of the movement are black, white, red and green. Notice that many Arab nations have adopted very similar variants of the same color scheme for their flags.


The Islamic Nationalists:

Think Ayyatola Ruhollah Khomeini. In one important sense the Islamic Nationalists are like the Islamic version of Stalin. With Stalin came the notion of “Socialism in One State.” The idea was that a model soviet state should be created that would serve as a paradigm for the next, international, step. Khomeini was certainly no communist or socialist, but if you simply substitute the word “Islam” for “Socialism” you’ll get the idea: “Islam in One State” first to serve as a model for an international, Islamic movement and model of government.

Khomeini sought restoration of Quran-based law and limited the influence of “Westernizing Muslims” who he considered agents of Western Christian or “Godless” or “Satanic” interests intent on "plundering" Muslim lands.

Unlike the Pan-Islamist of Bin Ladin’s sort, Khomeini had no interest in restoring the Caliphate. Instead, he wanted the leading role in government to be taken by the clergy. His concept of the “Guardianship of the Jurist," held that the leading Shia Muslim cleric in society should serve as “Head of State” to protect or "guard" the nation from Western “innovation" and "anti-Islamic laws.”

Another complication in Iran’s version of Islamic Nationalism is the racial issue. Persians play the leading role in Iranian politics and Persians do not consider themselves Arabs, so they do not traditionally fall into the trappings of Pan-Arab schemes.


Theocratic Democracy:

Properly seen as a branch of Islamic Nationalism, most Theocratic Democrats lay claim having democratic institutions. For instance, the legislature of Iran is called the “Islamic Consultative Assembly.” It is made up of 290 members elected to four-year terms. The Assembly drafts legislation, ratifies international treaties, and approves the national budget. All of the legislation that these representatives produce must be approved by the Council of Guardians. The Council of Guardians is a theocratic group of Iran’s leading clerics.

A theocratic democracy theoretically endeavors to institute Sharia (traditional Islamic law) while maintaining the power of the people. No separation of “Mosque and State,” if you will.

The concept of Theocratic/Islamic Democracy is viewed by many as an oxymoron because of the notion that theocracy and democracy are incompatible.

Pakistan could very well be considered an example of a real theocratic democracy, for the following reasons. Firstly, in the President of Pakistan is the head of state while the Prime Minister is head of government. Secondly, there is no restriction of political parties. In fact Pakistan has a full-blown multi-party system. Thirdly, executive power is exercised by the elected government, not by national-level clerics. Fourthly, Legislative power is vested in the Parliament, with a few exceptions in the case of extreme national security issues.

What makes Pakistan a “Theocratic” form of democracy then? The Chief Executives are Constitutionally bound to be Muslims.

The West, especially the USA, is also seen as a supporter of Israel, and so having institutions that are too much like Western democracies are seen by many Muslims as suspect.

Secular Nationalist Democracy:

Turkey is a democratic state with a majority Muslim population, which was founded by Ataturk on the basis of the separation of Islam and that state. What should be remembered is that Turks do not consider themselves Arabs and vice versa, so they do not traditionally fall into the trappings of Pan-Arab schemes.

In 1951, an Iranian pro-democratic nationalist, Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh was elected its first Prime Minister. As Prime Minister, Mossadegh alarmed the British Governmetn by nationalizing the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (The original name of BP). Britain immediately put an embargo on Iran. Members of the British Intelligence Service approached President Eisenhower and he agreed to join the British in Operation Ajax--a coup to depose Mossadegh. Althoug the scheme failed, Mossadegh was ultimately replaced with the infamous “Shah of Iran” (Mohammad Reza Pahlavi). So, ironically, the US helped to secure the downfall of the Middle East’s first attempt at democracy.

Islamic Monarchies:

The term absolute monarchy applies. The associated term “Sultan” came to be used as the title of certain Muslim rulers who claimed full sovereignty without claiming the overall Caliphate. In other words, dynastic, localized, monarchies that lay no claim to the entire “Realm of Islam.”

There are no recognized national political parties. The king's powers are theoretically limited within the bounds of Quranic Law and other Saudi traditions. He also must retain a consensus of the Saudi royal family, religious leaders and other important elements in Saudi society. The state's ideology is the Wahhabism. The leading members of the royal family choose the king from among themselves with the subsequent approval of the religious leaders.

For example, Saudi Arabia has no legislature. It has a "Consultative Council" comprised of 90 appointed members. No political parties are allowed in Saudi Arabia. Religious freedom does not exist in Saudi Arabia or any of the other Islamic Monarchies. Pubic bans on any visible forms of non-Muslim worship are enforced by police who have the power to enforce religious law and secular law.

Constitutional Monarchies exist in some Middle Eastern countries. These countries are generally considered more democratic than Saudi Arabia and the other smaller nations of the southern portion of the Arabian Peninsula. Morocco, Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain are examples of Constitutional Monarchies, whereas Yemen, Oman, UAE and Qatar fit the Saudi Arabian mold.

Why do the Pan-Islamists despise the monarchies? Because Osama and his ilk believe that the monarchies are corrupted by their economic association with the West. They also see the monarchy as impotent in the sense that they seem to be powerless to inspire any Pan-Islamic movement.



Islamic Dictatorships and Covert Dictatorships:

Libya’s political system is theoretically based on the political philosophy in Qadhafi's Green Book, which combines socialist and Islamic theories and rejects parliamentary democracy and political parties. In reality, Qadhafi exercises near total control over the government.

It certainly could be argued that Saddam Hussein was a dictator. For that matter it could be argued that single party rule, anywhere, is just another form of dictatorship. By that definition most Middle Eastern nations practice what could be termed “covert dictatorships.”

Egypt is yet another possible example, although after extensive reading on the last fifty years of Egyptian governance, I honestly cannot place the current government neatly in this category or any other without being quite conflicted. There is much in Egypt as in Libya and Pakistan that smacks of covert dictatorships. Single party elections and single candidate elections for Chief Executive are elements of current political practice in Egypt. Egyptian politics have much in common with the Pan-Arab category. In fact many of the most profound theorists of the Pan-Islamist and Pan-Arab movements have been Egyptian nationals.

Why are the Pan-Islamists and Secular Pan-Arab Nationalists often lumped together and called Islamo-Fascists?

The founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Banna, copied fascist methods, since his movement developed during a time when the only counterweights to French and British hegemony in the Middle East were Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. He founded organizations directly based on the Brownshirts and Blackshirts to try and seize power. It is natural that nationalists in the region wishing to rid themselves of Bristish and French colonial domination would find the enemy of their enemies as potential friends or inspirations. The anti-Israel sentiment in common on all sides of this equation is the factor that continues to drive the Pan-Islamists and Pan-Arab Nationalists ever closer.

Last, but not least, consider the mixture of virulent nationalism with socialism in Iraq and Syria in particular. For this reason alone some naturally equate the Ba’ath Party with fascism.