Review: After Jihad, by Noah Feldman

Historically only Turkey has had a track record of democracy. Under Ataturk in the 1920s and 30s Turkey moved toward secularism and subsequently parliamentary government. Even so, whenever Islamic forces became too prevalent or corruption reared its head, the military took over the government for at least a time. But the moderate military always eventually handed the reins of government back to parliamentary control.

Recent elections in Turkey have put a fundamentalist government in power. Thus far this government has been generally respectful of the rights of its citizens. Noah Feldman harkens back to the Algerian crisis of 1989 when Islamists won a majority of the country's elections and the military simply ignored the electoral results. This was done with the narry a peep from the free world including France and the United States. The Islamic groups then resorted to civil war.

Mr. Feldman sees democracy and Islam as revolutionary movements that spread across national boundaries. He asks the question: Are both movements mutually excusive? He believes that they are currently at loggerheads, not because of anything inherent in the movements themselves, but because of the way that they are being carried at present.

He sites many Islamic thinkers who advocate democratic reform, and points out that the rigorous Ayatolla dominated government of Iran is even a quasi-democracy in that some of the government is, indeed, elected, though the mullah's have the final say. On the whole, the current manifestation of Islamism as exhibited by Al-Qaeda or even the regime in Saudi Arabia is very intollerant of other religions and dissenting opinion.

On the other side of the coin, Mr. Feldman points out that the world's leading democracies have actually worked to prop up the totalitarian regimes within the Islamic world, especially in those places where Islamic parties are trying to gain more say in the government, Egypt and Algeria are prime examples. The contention is that because Islamic Democracy is not even given a chance and brutal dictatorships are supported by the prime exponents of democracy that the Islamic movements feel their only option is to resort to armed rebellion and even terror. This has a tendency to make the Islamic movements even more fanatical than they might otherwise be.

Thus, Mr. Feldman argues that the leading democracies of the world have a moral obligation to help foster democratic movements throughout the Muslim world even though this will likely put Muslim Fundamentalist in charge of many of the governments in this region. He submits that Islam is not anethema to technological change generally and in the past has allowed for individual freedom. In Medieval times Islamic countries were far ahead of Christian countries in both culture and technology. They maintained their empires with the assistance of all the various ethnic and religious groups within the area they dominated. There is no reason that they could not exhibit the same tolerant qualities in the future.

How to bring about this state of affairs is another question. Feldman proposes that it be done by all means available. His idea is that we shed the cold-war mentality that requires that we prop up any regime that pledges allegiance to the U.S. even though it represses its own peoples. He advocates using both our financial and even our military power to influence totalitarian regimes to move toward free elections and constitutions supporting the rule of law.

"After Jihad", logically illustrates that Democracy and Islam are not mutually exclusive. Noah Feldman makes both idealistic and practical arguments outlining how Democracy might work in the Islamic world. This is a thought-provoking study which will undoubtedly be read by policy-makers and the thinking public. It is an interesting and timely volume, influencing decisions made in Iraq and the Middle East for the foreseeable future.

This book is available at Amazon.com.