Omid Safi, a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, is the author of “Memories of Muhammad: Why the Prophet Matters” and the editor of “Progressive Muslims: On Justice, Gender, and Pluralism.”
The New York Times
October 5, 2012

Modern nation states utilize political models that were unanticipated in any of our premodern scriptures. It is anachronistic to ask whether “Islam” endorses constitutionalism or democracy. Islam as such does not proscribe any one particular system of government. (Of course “Islam” doesn’t do anything, Muslims do. We human beings are the agents of our religious traditions.)

Rather, there are general ethical principles that have to be guaranteed under any system of government that Muslims adopt, like social justice; protection of life, property, and honor of humanity; accountability of rulers to law; distribution of wealth; and protection of minorities. All systems of government are imperfect, and it is not only good but also healthy to be perpetually vigilant against abuses of any form of government. However, it may also be the case that a genuine and robust democracy is the least imperfect of all imperfect political models today, as others before us have said. Read the rest of this entry »

Richard W. Bulliet, a professor of history at Columbia University, is the author of “The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilization”
The New York Times
October 4, 2012

If democracy is to be born in the Muslim world, religious political parties will be the midwives.

Elections do not necessarily mean democracy, of course. Most majority-Muslim countries, including monarchies like Kuwait, Jordan and Morocco, hold elections. Usually nationalist regimes instituted them, and nationalist leaders transformed them into instruments of dictatorship, partly by banning religious parties.

Muslim political parties have been the strongest and most consistent force urging genuinely free elections in majority-Muslim nations.

The question is whether a Muslim party, once elected, would inevitably make a mockery of that process by creating a religious dictatorship.The question in both the Western and the Muslim world, however, is whether a Muslim party, once elected, would inevitably make a mockery of that process by creating a religious dictatorship. Read the rest of this entry »

by Reza Aslan, an associate professor at the University of California is the author of “No God but God” and “How to Win a Cosmic War”
The New York Times
October 5, 2012

The question of whether Islam is compatible with democracy is nonsensical at its core, first because it ignores basic empirical evidence (the five most populous Muslim countries in the world are all democracies) and second because it presumes that Islam is somehow different, unique or special — that unlike every other religion in the history of the world, Islam alone is unaffected by history, culture or context.

Anyone who would answer “no, Islam is not compatible with democracy” does not even deserve a response; this is merely recycling the same old tired and disproven stereotypes about Islam that are frankly starting to get boring.

The truth is no religion either encourages or discourages democracy. Indeed, because religions are in their nature absolutist, all religions reject the principles of liberalism and popular sovereignty that are at the heart of the democratic ideal. Read the rest of this entry »

— A. Lin Neumann
The Malaysian Insider
Sep 23, 2012

SEPT 23 — The “Innocence of Muslims” film controversy, which resulted in riots in the Middle East and the death of the US ambassador to Libya, seemingly exposed the many fault lines between the West and Islam. But that story line has quickly unravelled.

In Indonesia, fortunately, the reaction has been pretty calm. Apart from about a thousand people throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails at the US Embassy in Jakarta and small mobs elsewhere looking to attack McDonald’s and KFC franchises — where no doubt the customers were fellow Muslims — the nation has absorbed “Innocence of Muslims” and wisely decided to let it go. In another week or so it should be forgotten.

In Libya, where Ambassador Chris Stevens died during a riot, a video surfaced showing Libyans entering the smouldering consulate building and trying to rescue Stevens, who was then barely alive. US security people had apparently evacuated the facility and lost track of their own ambassador. So much for us against them and the idea that all of Libya was on a rampage.

In the United States, one of the actresses who appeared in the film is suing the filmmaker for fraud, saying she signed up for something called “Desert Warrior” that had nothing to do with Islam, did not mention the Prophet Muhammad and was later redubbed into “Innocence of Muslims” by the producer, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a native Egyptian and Coptic Christian. There goes the vast conspiracy theory. Read the rest of this entry »

By Musa Mohd Nordin | 2:14PM Sep 21, 2012
Malaysiakini

The violent consequences of past artistic, literary and cultural aggressions against the sanctity of Islam and the prophet seem not to have taught us any lesson.

The abomination against theism continues unabated. Claiming to be works of literature or the arts, the perpetrators have guised behind the cloak of freedom of speech.

The notoriety against Islam has been littered with the likes of Salman Rushdie’s despicable Satanic Verses, through to the ugly Danish cartoons and the latest “film”, which has maliciously maligned Prophet Muhammad.

Caricatures of the prophet have today headlined the French press. The pristine beliefs of Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism have similarly not been spared this irreligious onslaught.

These vulgar and blasphemous provocations are intent on mocking the believers’ reverence of their religious texts, tenets and their prophets.

Specific individuals and interest groups are unashamedly abusing our noble values of freedom of speech and expression to tarnish the image of authentic religions, demonising them and demeaning their prophets with trails of untruths and unfounded claims.
Read the rest of this entry »

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL)
September 21, 2012

Backlash against the anti-Islam film the “Innocence of Muslims” has sparked demonstrations in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya, and several other countries with majority-Muslim populations.

Though significantly smaller than the protests of 2011 that toppled governments in Tunisia, Egypt, and elsewhere, some of the demonstrations have turned violent and have been marked by attacks on Western diplomatic outposts. The most high-profile attack came on September 11 — the day the protests began — in Benghazi, Libya, where an armed group stormed the U.S. consulate, killing U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.

For more on who is protesting and why, RFE/RL spoke to academic Olivier Roy, historian and writer Tariq Ali, and author Charles Kurzman.

Olivier Roy: “It’s not true that there is a general ban on pictures of Muhammad. It’s a Salafist view and now the Salafist view is dominant. But if you look at miniatures in the Middle Ages, you had a lot of representations of the Prophet. The story that there is no representation of the Prophet in Islam just doesn’t exist; it’s a modern invention. You can find a huge iconography of Muslim representations of the Prophet, including in Pakistan, by the way. Until the 1960s, you could buy a picture of Muhammad in the shops in Pakistan. It’s only a recent kind of Salafist interpretation.” [READ THE ENTIRE INTERVIEW]

Tariq Ali: “Without a doubt [local grievances against the West play a big part in these protests]. The religion has been politicized. The reason for that, of course, is that during the Cold War the United States was backing most of these [extremist Islamist] groups to fight communism all over the world, especially in the Muslim world. Wahhabi preachers were sent with American approval by Saudi Arabia to create what we now know as political Islam.” [READ THE ENTIRE INTERVIEW]

Charles Kurzman: “I call this a clash of hatreds. Most people do not hate one another and yet these small groups who do hate seem to be able to grab the headlines and get everybody’s attention. Let’s keep in mind that protesting an insult is perfectly legal in most countries, including the United States, and if people want to hold signs or even burn flags, they’re allowed to do that. That is called free speech, and so I do not mind when groups organize to protest a movie. I think that is a sign of political participation.” [READ THE ENTIRE INTERVIEW] Read the rest of this entry »

The past week of unrest and protests across the Muslim world was largely the work of more puritanical Salafists, many of whom harbor as much ire for their own governments as they do the West.

By Vivienne Walt / Tunis | September 21, 2012 | TIME

In a park hidden from the road and strewn with trash, two young Salafist men dressed in the traditional garb of gray tunics and sandals laid out their plan for revenge against the anti-Islam YouTube video out of California, as well as cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in a French satirical magazine this week. In the meeting place they had picked for an interview with TIME on Thursday, the men said they were prepared to wait—years, if necessary—for the right moment to avenge the insults from both the U.S. and France. “We never know when the reaction will be, but sooner or later this revenge is going to be seen by the West, just as we saw with the Danish cartoons,” said Mahmoud, 25, a slender man with black hair, referring to drawings of the Muslim prophet which appeared in a Danish newspaper in 2006—two whole years before al-Qaeda detonated a car bomb outside the Danish embassy in Islamabad in apparent revenge, killing five people. With hardline Islamic youth under tight surveillance since the disastrous attack on Tunis’s U.S. Embassy last Friday, Mahmoud says that devout youth like him will simply wait until the heat is off, before taking action, including possible “jihad.” “We can do anything,” Mahmoud said, “but at the right time and place, under the right circumstances.” Read the rest of this entry »

— Islamic Renaissance Front
The Malaysian Insider
Sep 22, 2012

SEPT 22 — The Islamic Renaissance Front views the recent murders and uproar over the film “Innocence of Muslims” with much sadness and bafflement.

All available facts suggest that “Innocence of Muslims” is not even a film. What is currently known about it was available in the widely circulated YouTube clip which ran for a total of some 13-odd minutes. What is worse, most critics are in agreement on the film’s utterly poor quality — cheap sets, mediocre actors, bad voice-overs and incomprehensible narrative — all of which explains why no one had even heard of the so-called film until Muslims decided to make a fuss about it.

Indeed, the added tragedy is not so much that the film is Islamophobic, which it clearly is, but that the unnecessary attention given to it by angry Muslims, eventually gave the film far more publicity than it deserves. Read the rest of this entry »

By Mohamed Imran Mohamed Taib | September 20, 2012
The Malaysian Insider

SEPT 20 — Just days ago, I was asked over a dinner conversation with several interfaith practitioners: “Why are Muslims such an angry people?” The riots over the film “Innocence of Muslims” was certainly on their minds. It took me a while to respond.

First, there is an unstated presumption that most, if not all, Muslims are prone to anger.

Second, a string of incidents from recent decades seems to suggest that any form of provocation to the Muslim faith is sure to lead to riots and vengeful killings across the Muslim world.

Who could forget the death fatwa issued on British novelist Salman Rushdie for “The Satanic Verses”, which denigrates the founder of Islam, Mohammed; and a similar response to the Danish Jyllands-Posten’s cartoon in 2005?

It seems as if provocations directed at Muslims have heightened in the last few years. In 2008, Dutch film-maker Geert Wilders released his movie “Fitna”, which depicted the Quran as evil and promoting hatred and violence.
Read the rest of this entry »

Tariq Ramadan | 18 Septembre 2012 / Tariq Ramadan
www.tariqramadan.com

One controversy subsides ; another worse one begins. After the Danish cartoons, the Dutch video “Fitna” and several low-grade irritants, a short, crudely executed—and scrupulously insulting—film has inflamed deep-seated resentments. Several hundred furious demonstrators gathered in front of the American Embassy in Cairo and the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. In the confusion and violence, a U.S. Ambassador and three diplomats were killed ; elsewhere embassies came under violent attack, with many wounded and serious material damage. Literalist Salafis succeeded in mobilizing a relatively small number of demonstrators ; over-excited young people and ordinary citizens who, firm in their intention to protect the Prophet’s reputation, joined in to express their rejection of the American government and its policies. The demonstrations were the work of a tiny minority, but media coverage and the rapid spread of the protest movement has destabilized the region, and may well have substantial consequences for the future of the Middle East, and for the process of democratization and normalization. The violence must be condemned unconditionally. To attack innocents, diplomats and to kill indiscriminately is anti-Islamic by its very nature ; Muslims cannot respond to insults to their religion in this way. On this principle there can be no compromise.
Read the rest of this entry »