Washington's 'Dialog with Islam': Is it going in the right direction?

Farish A. Noor, Berlin

These days it has become terribly fashionable for Western politicians to talk about the "need for dialogue" with the Muslim world. No more so that in the White House, whose occupants are largely responsible for the global crisis we see around us today and which has become the main reason why such dialogue is now so important.

After a succession of blunders from Afghanistan to Iraq, the Bush administration and its Neo-Con coterie now seek the help of "moderate Muslim" leaders to help them fix the thing they broke in the first place. It is safe to say that the reputation and image of the United States of America is at an all-time low worldwide, and in the Muslim world in particular.

Washington's clumsy military adventures further afield and its perceived support for the Zionist regime in Israel have forfeited what little goodwill and understanding America had among ordinary Muslims, and has dangerously compromised America's ability to communicate its message and intentions to the outside world.

Now that reality has sunk in, the powers-that-be in Washington have embarked on their own "rediscovery" of Islam. First came the revelation that Paul Wolfowitz and his ilk were studiously reading the Koran. Then came speeches by President Bush, Collin Powell, et al about how Islam had been "misinterpreted" and "sullied" by a handful of fanatics who have brought shame to a great faith with a long history. Now the same bunch of Neo-Cons are on the look-out for "moderate Muslim" leaders they can negotiate and discuss with, with the hope of winning back some of the credibility and goodwill they have lost over the past three years.

The Muslim world in turn is not short of honest, dedicated and sincere Muslim leaders, intellectuals and spokesmen who can rise to the challenge. Sadly, the Muslim world happens to be short of another vital element: Cash. Faced with chronic economic, structural and institutional problems back home, the leaders of the Muslim world are now standing in line to be invited to the White House to engage in the grand "dialogue" between civilizations that -- we are told -- will rid the world of the problem of "terror" and help ameliorate relations between the West and the Muslim world.

Thus far we have seen several contenders for the job of "moderate Muslim spokesman". The contest seems to have been hijacked by the dictates of fashion as well, for it looks more and more like the final round of the hit TV show American idol.

From Afghanistan we have the suave and debonair Hamid Karzai, who comes across as the face of exotic Islam dressed in suitable Oriental garb and yet speaks the language of realpolitik. (Of course the man's links to key oil and gas companies in the past has been conveniently overlooked.) From Pakistan there is Pervez Musharraf, the "model" Muslim general-turned-civilian democrat who is meant to be a model for other gun-totting Muslim generals out there. From Indonesia we have Megawati Soekarnoputri, the "model" Muslim woman-turned-President (though her party's links to big business and the Indonesian army has likewise been airbrushed out of the picture). And from Malaysia we have Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, another "model" Muslim leader -- though the fact that opponents in his country are still harassed by laws such as the Internal Security Act -- is likewise omitted.

Added to this glittering galaxy of Muslim stars is a new contender: The former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, Anwar Ibrahim, who was recently released from prison and is now undergoing surgery in Europe after his brutal abuse at the hands of Malaysian police. Anwar too is seen as a potential contender for the "model Muslim leader" awards, and has expressed his desire to play such a role in the mediation of cross-cultural conflict. It was not a coincidence that shortly after his arrival in Germany he was called by none other than Paul Wolfowitz, who raised the matter of dialogue and negotiation with him.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with dialogue per se. Indeed Islam positively extols and encourages dialogue continuously, as that too is seen as part of dakwah and an important feature of normative Islam. But here lies the crux of the matter: Dialogue for what, for which ends and for whose interests?

That the leaders of the Muslim world wish to engage in a dialogue with the West is laudable and timely. But such dialogue -- if it is to achieve something more concrete and lasting than a hefty dinner bill -- has to address some important issues that are inescapable. These include:

The glaring economic and power differentials between the developed and developing world, which is one of the root causes of global terrorism and instability that everyone is talking about. Can Muslim leaders like Karzai, Musharraf, Megawati, Badawi or even Anwar raise such matters in a concrete, even explicit manner? And having done so, will they also be willing to address the mechanics and mechanisms of the globalization process that are further aggravating these problems and widening the power and wealth differentials between the North and the developing South?

Then there is the historical role of the West -- notably America itself and its allies like Britain and Australia -- that have further contributed to the breakdown of state institutions and the norms of governance in the Muslim world. Washington may be abuzz today with spurious talk of "holy terror in the name of Islam", but their argumentation is as holey as it is shallow. For was it not the U.S. that funded groups like the Taliban in the first place, and supported repressive, militaristic and anti- democratic regimes all over the Muslim world, from Indonesia to Saudi Arabia? Are these moderate Muslim leaders prepared to raise such issues as they chit-chat over tea and biscuits in the White House?

These are some of the crucial questions that need to be addressed openly, honestly and transparently as the leaders of the West and the Muslim world engage in the dialogues they are raving about. Unless and until questions of political structure and institutions are discussed critically and objectively, such flaccid attempts at dialogue will bring us no closer to mutual understanding, much less accommodation and meaningful co- existence. And if the leaders of the Muslim world are not prepared to raise such concerns, they might as well write off their bookings for the next flight to the U.S. If all they want is another photo-shoot with them shaking hands with the President of the United States, that can be done easily with Photoshop. Its amazing what computers can do these days!

Dr Farish A Noor is a Malaysian Political Scientist and Human Rights Activist and can be reached at farishactivist@yahoo.co.uk