Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Esmeir, “Juridical Humanity”

In recent opinion polls, a majority of Egyptians say they would like Sharia to be the only source of law in their country. Some maintain that calls for a return to Sharia reflect a resentment of the European legal systems forced on Egypt during the imperialist period. Berkeley professor Samera Esmeir’s new book, Juridical Humanity: A Colonial History (Stanford 2012) undoubtedly sheds light on the subject. The publisher’s description follows:

In colonial Egypt, the state introduced legal reforms that claimed to liberate Egyptians from the inhumanity of pre-colonial rule and elevate them to the status of human beings. These legal reforms intersected with a new historical consciousness that distinguished freedom from force and the human from the pre-human, endowing modern law with the power to accomplish but never truly secure this transition.

Samera Esmeir offers a historical and theoretical account of the colonizing operations of modern law in Egypt. Investigating the law, both on the books and in practice, she underscores the centrality of the “human” to Egyptian legal and colonial history and argues that the production of “juridical humanity” was a constitutive force of colonial rule and subjugation. This original contribution queries long-held assumptions about the entanglement of law, humanity, violence, and nature, and thereby develops a new reading of the history of colonialism.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

The NYT on Divisions Among Egyptian Islamists

An interesting piece on the Egyptian elections in the Times. Now that an electoral commission has disqualified the Muslim Brotherhood’s preferred presidential candidate , Khairat al-Shater, as well as the leading Salafi candidate, the two principle Islamist contenders are the MB’s Mohamed Morsi and a rival, Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh. Morsi, the more conservative of the two, embraces a kind of back-to-basics program that, among other things, calls for limiting the presidency to Muslims and establishing a council of Muslim scholars to advise Parliament on Islamic law — the MB’s “old ‘Islam is the solution’ platform,” he declares. (The Times explains for its readers that the MB is known for “its moderate Islamist politics;” I guess Mori did not get the memo). Aboul Fotouh, whom the MB expelled two years ago for advocating political pluralism, offers a competing, more liberal Islamist vision. For example, he rejects  restrictions on political office for non-Muslims and the idea of the scholars’ council.

In opinion surveys, majorities of Egyptians consistently say that Sharia should be the only source of law in their country. Which version of Sharia prevails  will depend largely on the result of this conflict within the Islamist movement. Mori’s strategy is to appeal to more conservative elements, including the very conservative Salafis, while Aboul Fotouh seems to be staking his political future on more progressive Muslims, as well as the relatively small number of Egyptian secular liberals and Christians. MB and Salafi candidates received a combined two-thirds of the vote in a recent election for a new national assembly in Egypt, and one has to assume that Mori’s electoral strategy is the correct one. Time will tell.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Egyptian Election Commission Bans Muslim Brotherhood’s Candidate for President

Egypt’s Presidential Election Commission today disqualified  the Muslim Brotherhood’s candidate, Khairat al-Shater, from running for President in an election scheduled for next month. Nine other candidates, including Hosni Mubarak’s intelligence chief, Omar Suleiman, were also disqualified. The commission did not give reasons for the disqualification, but al-Shater, whose campaign immediately announced that he will appeal the commission’s decision, does have a previous criminal conviction. Earlier this week, CLR Forum discussed al-Shater’s stated desire to restore Sharia in Egypt.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Sharia Is My Main Priority: Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood Candidate

According to the Reuters FaithWorld blog, the Muslim Brotherhood’s candidate for the Egyptian presidency, Khairat al-Shater, declared last week that restoring Sharia would have the highest priority in his administration. “Sharia was and always will be my first and final project and objective,” he told a group called the “Religious Association for Rights and Reform.”

One shouldn’t be surprised. Since its founding, the MB has made restoring Sharia in Muslim societies its main goal. Moreover, the idea that law should be based on Sharia is quite popular in Egypt.  Indeed, in a recent, widely-reported survey, a majority of Egyptians said that Sharia should be the only source  of law in their country.

Do comments like al-Shater’s mean that non-Muslim minorities should worry? That’s not as clear, frankly. People who say they favor “Sharia” may mean different things.  Perhaps, as Noah Feldman argues, “Sharia” in  contemporary Muslim politics suggests a more or less democratic, rule of law society informed by religious principles. Non-Muslims would not necessarily have to worry about this version of Sharia. If, however,  “Sharia” means something like classical fiqh, which placed severe restrictions on Christians and other non-Muslims, calls for its restoration are quite worrisome.

Which version does the MB endorse? The MB has been presenting a moderate face to the world. Its official English-language website contains a slew of articles attempting to reassure Egyptian Christians (and Western liberals) that minority rights would be protected under the MB’s version of a Sharia society. Like “Sharia,” however, “rights” can mean different things, and the MB will also have to assuage more militant Islamists who are not so interested in moderation. Time will tell.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian · 1 Comment

Copts Boycott Committee Drafting New Egyptian Constitution

Calling their participation “futile,” the Coptic Church yesterday withdrew its two representatives from the 100-person committee drafting Egypt’s new constitution. The committee, which is dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis, has also suffered recent defections from liberal and secular members, who argue that the committee fails to represent the totality of Egyptian society. Even Al-Azhar University, the country’s leading seat of Islamic learning, has withdrawn from the process, suggesting a division within the Muslim community about the direction the committee is taking. These defections follow the Muslim Brotherhood’s announcement  Saturday that it will run a candidate in upcoming presidential election, notwithstanding earlier pledges to sit out the contest.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian · 1 Comment

Neocons, Christians, and Syria

Robert Wright has an interesting post in the Atlantic on an emerging split between Neocons and Christians over American intervention in Syria. Although Neocons and conservative Christians joined in supporting a war to oust Saddam Hussein  in 2003, he writes, this time, conservative Christian journals, both Evangelical and Catholic, have been running articles warning of the danger to Syria’s Christians if the Assad regime should fall. Wright wonders whether Christian solidarity — “are we really ready to go to war against two million Christians?” – will stop conservative Christians from supporting American intervention this time. It’s a very interesting point. One should never discount the role that Christianity plays in American foreign relations, including America’s relations in the Middle East. And Syria’s Christians are definitely in danger. I’m not sure how much fellow-feeling there is, though. American Christians do not typically identify with the Christian communities of the Middle East, most of which, like the Copts in Egypt, are Orthodox rather than Catholic or Protestant. And fellow feeling for Iraq’s Christians did not stop conservative Christians from supporting the Iraq war, which has led to a catastrophe for Christians in that country. I’m sure that Christian solidarity plays some role, as Wright argues, but conservative Christian wariness about an incursion in Syria likely has much more to do with alienation from the current American President — with whom they certainly don’t identify.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian · 2 Comments

First Things Lecture Tonight

Just a reminder that I’ll be speaking tonight at the First Things editorial offices in Manhattan on the subject of equality for Christians in the Middle East. Details are here. If you’re in the neighborhood, please stop by and say hello.

Posted on by

Louër, “Shi’ism and Politics in the Middle East”

From Columbia University Press, a new book by Laurence Louër (research fellow at CERI/ SciencesPo in Paris), Shi’ism and Politics in the Middle East (forthcoming May 2012). The publisher’s description follows. 

Laurence Louër’s timely study immediately precedes the recent outbreak of unrest in Bahrain, triggering the escalation of the so-called Arab Spring of 2011. In addition to issues relating to the role of Shiite Islamist movements in regional politics, Louër provides background for the Bahraini conflict and Shiism’s wider implications as a political force in the Arab Middle East.

Louër’s study depicts Bahrain’s troubles as a phenomenon rooted in local perceptions of injustice rather than in the fallout from Shiite Iran’s foreign policies. More generally, her work argues that although Iran’s Islamic Revolution had an electrifying effect on Shiite movements in Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf, in the end local political imperatives are the crucial driver of developments within Shiite movements—though Lebanon’s Hezbollah remains an exception. In addition, the rise of lay activists within Shiite movements across the Middle East and the emergence of Shiite anticlericalism has diminished the overwhelming influence of the Shiite clerical institution. Ultimately, Louër dispells the myth that Iran determines the politics of Iraq, Bahrain, and other Arab states with significant Shiite populations. Her book couldn’t be more necessary as revolution continues to spread across the Middle East.

Posted on by Marc O. DeGirolami

Law, Religion, and Politics in Tunisia

An interesting, though rather inaptly titled, article about, among other things, a trial for blasphemy in Tunisia which has generated enormous controversy.  Tunisia’s future, like that of Egypt, appears very uncertain.  I also found the comments about the worries of the residents of Tunis interesting.  Years ago, I spent several weeks in Tunis working as part of an archeological dig in ancient Carthage.  I enjoyed that time in Tunis very much.  It is a sophisticated and cosmopolitan sea-side resort and it is unsurprising that its residents would be alarmed about Tunisia’s future.  It is the democracy that seems to be what they fear.

Posted on by Marc O. DeGirolami · 1 Comment

“Radical Islamists Win Final Round of Egyptian Elections”

Ilya Somin has the story and comments:

If the Islamists consolidate power and make serious progress towards implementing their agenda, Egypt 2011-12 could easily join Russia 1917, Cuba 1959, and Iran 1979 as a classic historic example of a case where a bad regime was overthrown only to be replaced by one that is much worse.