|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Internationally, these movements advocate an openness towards the world. Islam has always been open and has interacted with the Greek culture and with the Roman tradition. Modern Islamists are themselves mostly elites who have been educated in the West, and they are very open to the interaction of world cultures and the dialogue between different civilizations. They are perhaps the only mediators of this spirit.
They are politically very open to the international community. They are not virulently nationalist or chauvinist. That is perhaps because Islam de-emphasizes the frontier between nationalities and between countries and considers that the whole area where Muslims live is one open space where people should traffic freely and should exchange information and commerce. It's also a belief in Islam that even the Ummah itself does not constitute-the whole community of Muslims doesn't constitute a barrier, a sectarian barrier, to relating positively with other religions, and it presupposes that societies are always multi-religious and not exclusive. The Islamists are vis-a-vis the West-initially look to the West as a challenge to respond to and also as a model to emulate. They think there are many positive values of Islam which have been developed in the West-the value of participatory, free, consultative government, the value of dignity to the individual, the value of free enterprise. And in these respects, they do share with the West many things. It's true that initially, because the West has been seen as the imperial force that has disestablished the Shari'a, it was a focus for mobilizing the Islamic spirit. But as they develop the substance of their religious aspirations, they now look to their models and they are preoccupied by trying to promote Islam and develop their societies towards their ideal. It's only in those cases where a particular Western policy identifies with a repressive regime, where the West sometime oscillates between supporting democracy, even if it yields Islam as a general will in a particular country and between this liberal attitude to democracy in Muslim societies and another attitude which seeks to exclude perhaps Islamic movements from the democratic process altogether and to deny them freedom of expression and self-determination. The Islamic movements support Islamic causes worldwide. They were highly impressed by the Islamic revolution in Iran as a popular, unarmed challenge to a repressive, reactionary regime in Iran. They are not highly impressed by subsequent developments in Iran because after this first phase as a revolution, it was difficult perhaps for Islamic revivalist movement in Iran to focus on constructive and positive models of Islamization. And after all, in Africa in particular, Iran does not enjoy the same presence as Arabia, for example, enjoys. But Arabia has been supportive of traditional institutions, like mosques and schools, and in no manner has it supported or financed contemporary Islamic movements. Islamic movements have been infused by the developments in Afghanistan and by the developments in central Asia. They considered the Soviet Union to be equally imperialist and they were very concerned about the eclipse of all those Muslim communities in central Asia. And Islamic movements have also been concerned about the Palestinian problem, considering that Jerusalem in particular is equally a focus of devotion and interest for Muslims in general. We are now witnessing the development of an Islamic dimension within the Palestinian society due perhaps to the failure of the nationalist movement in Palestine and in the Arab world generally in doing anything about the settlement of the Palestinian problem. So the Islamists are perhaps internationally more conscious than the average man in public life in Muslim societies. As of present, there are very few cases where Islamic revival has taken the shape of an Islamic state. Iran is one example, but yet not fully developed. The Sudan in Africa is another example, and Sudan is now trying to develop a program for Islamization of institutions of democracy not as a transplant, a superficial transplant which time and again has collapsed and has failed even to be true to its own representative and responsible nature. But based on the values of the people, and to entrench economic, and to mobilize religion for the development of a highly underdeveloped country and to bring social values in close reference to religious values, Islamic and otherwise. The Sudan is also trying to strike an example in peaceful coexistence between Muslims and non-Muslims. The issue of the south has plagued the Sudan, but it has no association with Islam altogether. It has started very early due to the discrepancy in economic development between the two parts of the country and due to the fact that the south was a closed district for very, very long. Peace talks are now under way and there is an agenda for federalization and for decentralization of cultural policy and of law, so that the country again could become stable and develop its immense potential. Because of its Islamic spirit the Sudan relates very positively with its African neighbors on the Horn of Africa, in West Africa, and in Central Africa. Because it's a highly developed Islamic model it does radiate worldwide and has called the attention of Islamists all over the Muslim world. This, Mr. Chairman, is a general framework of the evolution of Islamic revival, renaissance, renewal, or Islamic fundametalism, if someone wants to use that particular word. Thank you very much. 
|
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
