Houchang Chehabi is Professor of International Relations and History. (Licence, Universite de Caen; Diplôme, Institut d’Etudes Politiques de Paris; MA, PhD, Yale University). He is Specialized in Middle Eastern Politics and Cultural History, Shiism, International Law. Chehabi has written numerous articles, book reviews, and translations.

Houchang Chehabi to Gulan: Many people in the Middle East have confused democracy and majoritarianism


Gulan: The Islamic political parties which came to power through Arab spring have failed, in addition to Egypt, in Tunisia and Libya their situation is the same. In your opinion, after 80 years trying to get into power, why have the Islamic political parties been failing in their first session?

Chehabi: Without being an expert I can give you a general access to it. First of all, it is not at all clear that these are committed to democracy. It is one thing to claim that you are committed to democracy when you are in the opposition and it is another thing to claim democracy when you have power. Even assuming that they are genuine in committing to democracy, it is mostly realized that anti- democratic forces in society are still very strong and so not everybody is going to accept the election results, whoever it is, because there are many forces who do not believe in democracy in society. The third reason, I would say, is that these parties have no experience in governing; they are staffed by men who have always been in the opposition only and who have no direct experience in administering the country, in the running the country, and staffing institutions. So it is obvious that they will make mistakes.

Gulan: Arab spring disclosed that it is not Islam which cannot get along with democracy, but it is the Islamic parties which consider democracy as a reason just for getting into power, if Islamic political parties do not adapt to democracy, what will the future of Arabic countries be?

Chehabi: I think different people mean different things when they say democracy. Many people in the Middle East when they say democracy, they mean government in the interest of the majority of the people, they mean a type of government that will defend the interest of the masses as opposed to a corrupt government that represent the interest of only a small elite. Now, this is a step forward but it is not to seem as democracy because democracy means elected government but also means human rights, individual rights, and respect for minority. I think many people in the Middle East forget about the last three and retain only government by the majority.

Gulan: The examples that the Islamic parties have presented are Hammas in Palestine, Lebanon Hizbullah, and Muslim-Brotherhood in Egypt, experts used to think that these parties should be tested practically in terms of ruling. In your view, don’t you think that it is the time for international community to support and help people in these countries to step toward democracy development?

Chehabi: yes of course but ultimately the most important dynamics of every society are domestic. For example, now everybody in Egypt is blaming America, the Muslim Brotherhood blames America for having supported the military and the people who supported the military coup blame America for having supported the Muslim Brotherhood. So whatever happens in these countries, America is blamed and I think ultimately this shows that America is really quite powerless to do anything one way or another.

It takes a lot of education, tolerance, and trust to create a democratic society. It is not easy. I think the Arab Spring has been the first step that will be a further step forward and I think there will be a transitional period of perhaps twenty or thirty years in which certain aspects of democracy will begin to appear but the entire system will not be democratic and I think the country that is doing this most successfully gradually moving forward in the democratic direction without upheaval, and civil war is Morocco. In Morocco you have a lot of freedom of press, you have party competition but obviously the king is still so powerful that cannot be called a real democracy, but constitutional government as a cause to democracy is appearing in Morocco and I would not be surprised that Morocco becomes the first country to be fully democratic in years.

Gulan: Some experts think that the non-Arabic Islamic countries like Malaysia and Turkey have presented a nice model of democracy, although Justice and Development party is currently in power within Turkey, Turkey’s constitution is a kind of secular one. In your opinion, why cannot political parties of Arabic countries participate in political life just like parties in Malaysia and Turkey?

Chehabi: because the structures of the states do not allow this. I mean, what does it mean to protect elections in Syria, Saudi Arabia? Both have no elections. So when the regime does not make the elections possible, political parties cannot assist it--that is obvious. So the big hope is for no group to have total control of the society. For instance, in Tunisia nobody has a total control over the state and this means that the different parties have to talk to each other, they have to come up with compromises, and they have to hammer out institutions that are acceptable to everybody. So that is why I am more optimistic for Tunisia than for Egypt which has a strong army which means that it does not allow free elections.

Gulan: Another aspect which the Islamic political parties pursue is violence and ignoring mediating and tolerance. But as we have seen in Egypt, the brotherhood was not just against this path, but since Al-Azhar university was playing a mediating role, they also stood against the university, and also they rejected Egyptian history, they were about to break the pyramids and they prohibited ballet art. In your view, why Muslim-Brotherhood pursued such a violent policy by reaching the authority?

Chehabi: These policies are unacceptable to people who have been hegemonic so far. The people who voted for Muslim Brotherhood have never been to the ballet or opera. So, for them these are very secondary unimportant matters. So I am not surprised that the Muslim Brotherhood is against opera, ballet, and pyramid. What surprises me is that they make such big issues unimportant because they should know that by going against these things, against cultural manifestation, they make lots of enemies and when a group is weak and has just attained power, it should not make enemies that not already has. That is a big question for me and since I am not an expert on Egypt I have not answered this question.

Gulan: If we imagine that all Arabic countries to be ruled by Islamic parties, as we see now most of the Arabic countries have been dominated by Islamic parties. So, to what extent will Islamic rule create a ground for clash of civilization?

Chehabi: I think many people in the Middle East have confused democracy and majoritarianism. Majoritarianism and democracy is not the same thing. And I think in the Middle East especially Islamic parties, when they say democracy, they mean majoritarianism.

Political Islam still has to sell oil to the west. So it has to deal with the west. I mean even if the Muslim Brotherhood returns to power in Egypt, they still need the income generated by the tourist resorts on the red sea. So I think by coming to power they will have to make compromises.