Dr. Khalid Al-Shafi
Narrow-mindedness and dogmatism are quickly taking the place of tolerance in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen, decades after this tolerance was the main feature of life in these countries.
A rising crescendo of conflict now shrouds relations among political parties and groups, religious, and cultural figures wherever one goes: on the street, at home, at schools, and universities, on mosque and church pulpits, inside legislative and executive institutions, and on TV.
The images of liberation squares accommodating Muslims and Christians, Muslim Brotherhood and socialist activists, liberals, nationalists and leftists and influential speeches being delivered on these squares have disappeared all of a sudden. These images have now given way to accusations of infidelity, treason, bigotry, narrow-mindedness, and fundamentalism.
Ahmed Menessi, an expert from Al Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, says liberals shudder at the prospect of Islamist forces Islamising the state in radical ways that trim personal and public freedoms. He cites examples of countries where this had just happened, but refers to examples of other countries, including the case of the Justice and Development Party in Turkey, where Islamist forces had managed to introduce a great model civilized Islam.
Islamist forces, on the other hand, shudder at the prospect of liberals applying a model of democracy that brushes Egypt’s Islamic identity aside.
Instead of finding common ground, the aforementioned forces prove incapable of overcoming their differences with the aim of reaching consensus on the concepts of democracy, plurality, and political succession to unite political rivals.
The struggle between Islamist and liberal forces in Arab countries over democracy-related slogans is illusory, a mere Don Quixotic battle against the windmills.
The state of the economy is what matters at the end of the day. The economy was what forced Tunisian fruit seller Mohamed Al Bouazizi to set himself on fire and spark a series of popular uprisings in other Arab countries bursting at the seams with poverty, unemployment, and dictatorship.
The economy was Bill Clinton’s most important message as he threw down the gauntlet to his Republican rival in the fight for the White House after the Gulf War crisis that brought recession to the world’s greatest military power. It is the economy that matters while Arab economies deteriorate; local currencies lose ground against foreign currencies; local companies go bankrupt; national capital is smuggled outside Arab countries, and markets suffer instability.
International reports underline the fact that the seeds of democracy cannot grow among individuals whose annual income is less than US$10,000.
These reports add that with US$1,000 of annual individual income, more than 70 percent of Arabs are among the world’s poorest.
Narrow-mindedness and dogmatism are quickly taking the place of tolerance in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen, decades after this tolerance was the main feature of life in these countries.
A rising crescendo of conflict now shrouds relations among political parties and groups, religious, and cultural figures wherever one goes: on the street, at home, at schools, and universities, on mosque and church pulpits, inside legislative and executive institutions, and on TV.
The images of liberation squares accommodating Muslims and Christians, Muslim Brotherhood and socialist activists, liberals, nationalists and leftists and influential speeches being delivered on these squares have disappeared all of a sudden. These images have now given way to accusations of infidelity, treason, bigotry, narrow-mindedness, and fundamentalism.
Ahmed Menessi, an expert from Al Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, says liberals shudder at the prospect of Islamist forces Islamising the state in radical ways that trim personal and public freedoms. He cites examples of countries where this had just happened, but refers to examples of other countries, including the case of the Justice and Development Party in Turkey, where Islamist forces had managed to introduce a great model civilized Islam.
Islamist forces, on the other hand, shudder at the prospect of liberals applying a model of democracy that brushes Egypt’s Islamic identity aside.
Instead of finding common ground, the aforementioned forces prove incapable of overcoming their differences with the aim of reaching consensus on the concepts of democracy, plurality, and political succession to unite political rivals.
The struggle between Islamist and liberal forces in Arab countries over democracy-related slogans is illusory, a mere Don Quixotic battle against the windmills.
The state of the economy is what matters at the end of the day. The economy was what forced Tunisian fruit seller Mohamed Al Bouazizi to set himself on fire and spark a series of popular uprisings in other Arab countries bursting at the seams with poverty, unemployment, and dictatorship.
The economy was Bill Clinton’s most important message as he threw down the gauntlet to his Republican rival in the fight for the White House after the Gulf War crisis that brought recession to the world’s greatest military power. It is the economy that matters while Arab economies deteriorate; local currencies lose ground against foreign currencies; local companies go bankrupt; national capital is smuggled outside Arab countries, and markets suffer instability.
International reports underline the fact that the seeds of democracy cannot grow among individuals whose annual income is less than US$10,000.
These reports add that with US$1,000 of annual individual income, more than 70 percent of Arabs are among the world’s poorest.
