A new edition of Who needs an Islamic State [1], by the Sudanese-born thinker Abdelwahab el-Affendi, has just been published.

The new edition provides a fascinating stock-take on the last two decades of political Islam. The goal of every Islamist group - known as “Islamic movements” in Muslim circles - is to create an “Islamic state”. Affendi’s book, first published in 1991, explored Islamic movements and their authoritarian ideas of how an Islamic state should function; essentially being built around “scholars of knowledge” who would be above the law and hence little more than dictators in reality.

While the ideas in the book were considered by some heretical when first published, the performance of Islamic movements since then appears to have confirmed the book’s basic thesis. Affendi looks at states where Islamic movements had come to power, such as Iran and Sudan, and how far removed from the Islamic ideals of justice and mercy they were. His disillusionment for Islamist rule crystallised after he witnessed firsthand the disastrous and bloody consequences of Islamists coming to power in Sudan, having been close to Hassan al-Turabi, who became Sudan’s leader after the 1989 coup.

The irony of an Islamic state becomes apparent in view of an edict issued in 1988 by Ayatollah Khomeini, then supreme leader of Iran, to the effect that the leader can unilaterally suspend any aspect of Islam, even its basic pillars, if the interest of the “Islamic government” is best met by pursuing (secular) policies in contradiction to Islamic law. It more-than-slightly questions the whole point of all the effort and spilt blood of creating an “Islamic state” if the caliph can end up “suspending” Islam on his own judgment. Though the ayatollah was Shia, the same principle would exist in Sunni Islamist thinking too.

“Why is it that Muslims can only be ’good Muslims’ under a dictatorship?” Affendi asked me when we spoke earlier this week. “Surely submission to Islam must be voluntary and come from the heart, not [be] imposed by political force.”

In his book, he also looks at Islamic movements where they are currently in opposition, such as Egypt, and how their failure to prioritise democracy allowed countless despots to present themselves as bulwarks against anti-democratic Islamists and hence slowed down the democratisation of societies.

The only notable exception is Turkey, where 2001 saw a move by Islamists away from their colleagues, to create a moderate pro-democracy party, the AK party, which subsequently swept to power the following year. The ruling AK party is committed to joining the EU; Turkey remains a member of Nato and maintains strong relations with Israel - hardly the typical characteristics of an Islamist government!

Muslim countries and peoples, Affendi feels, have become more materialistic and consumerist in the last two decades than any western industrial country, only without contributing much to the production of what they consume. While Muslims should always strive to be better people, he says:

“We [Muslims] sound a lot sillier today when we claim that the Muslims should be a light unto mankind, and show exemplary conduct and moral leadership. Now it would be more realistic to just say we wish that Muslims would stop blowing themselves up and get innocent people killed in the process”.

Initially it was felt that to manage the Muslim dream of a caliphate it would be best to model it on an EU-style confederation of democratic Muslim states but, after two decades of failure on the part of Islamic movements, Affendi has suggested downgrading even this ambition:

“I believe it may be necessary to work towards a more modest objective: the creation of a leading Muslim state. The function of such a state would be to play a role similar to that being played by the United States as a leader of the west. This is much less ambitious than a caliphate and falls well short of the building an EU-type union of Muslim states, but could lead to it eventually.”

The Islamic movements dominated Muslim political discourse in the 20^th century. Political models coming from the west, such as representative democracy and accountable governments, were at best seen as tools to achieve an Islamic theocracy or at worst dismissed as unIslamic. Meanwhile monarchies, dictatorships and tyranny were able to thrive in the name of Islam. Much of the last 100 years has been spent politicising Islam rather than working for a just polity: the rule of law, equal citizenship and democratically accountable governments. The 21^st century will see Islamist ideas dismantled by Muslims and western political models incorporated. Parallel to this, however, will be the Muslim challenge to present ideas emanating from the west as not un-Islamic but rather universal - a job in the past made difficult by colonialism and now by the west’s “war on terror”.

Asim Siddiqui