Empereur

US Foreign Policy and Political Islam

Background

The debate over US policy toward the global resurgence of Islam World has multiple layers

Normative, philosophical, civilizational, politico-economic, and geopolitical
Due to the sensitivity, no consensus over a consistent US policy has been made

There are, however, two policy perspectives competing for political influence over policy making of the White House

The academic and ideological, which are advocated by academics, policy experts and policy entrepreneurs

There are three major forces of influence seeking to shape US foreign policy

Interests, ideas and ideology, this is known as foreign policy triangle

This triangle is represented by three distinguishable groups

Policy practitioners (government officials). Looking for a policy based upon interests
Academics. Prefer a ideas based policy
Policy entrepreneurs. Advancing a policy according to their ideological commitments, which may not, however, represents US national interests

Practitioners

Members of government apparatus: NSC, State Department, CIA, DoD

The traditional approach of US policy toward the Middle East, and the US interests rest, according the former assistant secretary for Near East Affairs, Robert Pelletreau are:

The peace process, security and well being of Israel, energy resources, non proliferation of WMD, promotion of democracy and human rights, the end of terrorist activities, and the development of regional economy

However, he neglected to mention about the need for the US to develop a healthy and friendly relationship with the Muslim and Arab spheres

Robert Pelletreau believes that the term Islamic Fundamentalism is not clearly defined. It is misleading and has been overly used. This is a problem

Political Islam shall be use to refer to Islamic groups and movements with specific goals
For the US government has no quarrel with Islam, the idea of a renaissance of Islam is a threat to the West should be rejected
Though certain Islamic elements are anti-West, but a generalization should not be made

This position is criticized by both the academics and the policy entrepreneurs

The academics criticize the administration for not standing up for the principles and values such as support for democracy and human rights

The policy entrepreneurs criticize the administration not being tougher on the Islamists, and too soft on countries such as Iran or Sudan (both former clients of the US).

The policy entrepreneurs advocate for ‘pre-emptive assassinations’ against potential terrorists such as Osama Bin Laden

The Academics

This is a group composed by scholars of Islam and the Middle East
They believe there is a gap between policy principals and actual implementations
A wrong approach. The media, the policy entrepreneurs and the government in the West in general portrait the Islam as a new Soviet Union

The academics created an alternative school of thought

Claiming that the term ‘Islamic fundamentalism’ has been used indiscriminately
Overlooking the diversity of contemporary Islamic movements, which is a force that provides social services and enhancing political awareness (These groups include Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Jamaat in Pakistan, Refah in Turkey and FIS in Algeria, which ‘genuinely contributed to the development of civil society and have sparked a democratic impulse in contemporary Muslim societies)
Violence and terrorism is only a reaction toward state repression and Israeli occupation
When participation of Islamists in politics is allowed, such as in Jordan, Pakistan, Turkey and Malaysia, satisfactory result have been produced
Islam and democracy are not incompatible. Should an Islamist government arise through democratic means, the West should not give up their democratic values
Condemn ‘Secular Fundamentalism’- repressive and authoritarian secular Arab state
The US should not object implementation of Islamic laws, or participation of Islamists in a government

These recommendations are based on long time research and understanding of contemporary Muslim societies by the by scholars of Islam and the Middle East. However, the academics’ style of thinking is often long term oriented, but the key is to suit the short term oriented political needs of elected officials’, thus making policy entrepreneurs sometimes more useful to the president than academics

The Policy Entrepreneurs

The policy entrepreneurs, as a distinct and diverse group, is composed of academic experts, journalists, lobbyists, think tankers, and former government officials
This is a community that embraces political goals that are attached to specific objectives and interests
The group is influential due to its diversity and its leverage in the spheres of academia, media, and public institution
When members of the policy entrepreneurs group become government officials, administration’s policy trend to shift

The Jihad of policy entrepreneurs

· They believe that there is a centralized international infrastructure of Muslim fundamentalists, which is dedicated to the destruction of the West, Israel and US

· Such objective is based on a growing anti-American, and anti-Israeli sentiments among the Muslims

· The group recommends that the US must refuse to engage or negotiate with the so-called the fundamentalists at any circumstance, and support anyone who is in fighting with the latter

· Peace, civil society and then election. The group believes civil society should be promoted first and democracy subsequently, when by all means, the Islamic groups are out of the scene

· Islam and Democracy is incompatible

· Exclusion of Islamists from governments

Policy entrepreneurs and academics disagree with administration’s policy, both agree, however, that terrorism must be treated with firm manner. Yet solution advanced by both groups differ fundamentally

The policy entrepreneurs want the US to consider acts of ‘Islamic Terrorism’ not as crimes, but an act of war against the American nation
The academics believe the US administration should fight the ‘Extremists,’ not the Islamic movement, and fear that America will launch itself into another Cold War against the Muslim world. The US should play the role as ‘honest broker’ and to put more pressure on the Israelis

It is imperative for the US government to understand

The nature of threat and anti-American sentiment from the Muslim world
The cause for such movement
An effective counter strategy is required

Conclusion

The existence of policy entrepreneurs and academics create a prefect balance of influence over the administration’s policy toward the Mild East
It is evident that, for a long term solution vis-à-vis of problems in the Muslim world, the policymakers are relying increasingly on the academics
However, the academics are marginalized when an ‘in your face crisis’ occurs, and short term political solutions are required
Though the proposed policy may not necessarily represents the long term interests of the United States, the policy entrepreneurs, with their more drastic view and policy proposal, gain favor from the administration leadership
The US should avoid a short term oriented policy, but a policy based on Human Rights and democratic values. This kind of policy will sever truly the interests of the US and the West in general