by Parvez Ahmed and Mark Schlakman*

Brace yourselves.

You may know that protests erupted outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and that mobs subsequently attacked the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi this past Tuesday on the 11th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001.

Apparently this was at least in part in reaction to an anti-Islam film produced in the United States that objectifies the Muslim Prophet Mohammed, depicting him as a child molester, womanizer and ruthless killer.

You also may know the attack in Benghazi resulted in the tragic death of U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three other Americans as well as several Libyans who attempted to repel the attackers.

You also may be aware that some experts initially believed that a pro-al Qaida group targeted the U.S. Consulate. You may be wondering if the attack may have been an attempt to sabotage Libya’s improving relationship with the West under the guise of spontaneous outrage over the film.

For perspective, the Libyan people chose moderation over extremism in their recent elections.

You may be aware that protests erupted outside other U.S. embassies in Muslim countries. Although the situation remains volatile, you may have noted that the size of the protests dwindled.

Producer’s identity
You even may be aware of the initial questions surrounding the true identity of the producer of the film, first reported to be funded by a self-identified Israeli Jew, later reported to be a Coptic Christian.

You also may have heard that Terry Jones, the infamous pastor of Dove World Outreach Center, a small fundamentalist church in Gainesville whose orchestrated Quran burnings in early 2011 incited violence in Afghanistan, had been promoting this anti-Islam film.

You may be aware that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff called Jones to ask that he withdraw his support for the video because of concern that violence incited by the film would pose risks to U.S. service members around the world.

You may know that President Barack Obama immediately condemned the attack and declared, “Make no mistake. We will work with the Libyan government to bring justice to killers who attack our people,” and that he deployed two warships and other military capability to the area and increased security at other diplomatic posts.

You even may know that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney departed from longstanding protocols when confronting a foreign threat by immediately and sharply criticizing Obama’s response to the events that unfolded in Libya and Egypt based upon an unvetted preliminary statement released by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and that Romney was subsequently rebuked by Democrats and some Republicans for injecting politics into the crisis.

Complex issues
But there is much that we still don’t know.

The underlying issues are exceedingly complex. Why does anti-Americanism seem to persist across the Muslim world even as the threat from al-Qaida seems to be diminishing and more countries are transitioning toward democracy?

Why do more Americans harbor anti-Islam views today than in the immediate aftermath of 9-11? Such issues test the limits of free speech against the backdrop of compelling national security imperatives. An array of competing agendas only exacerbates the challenge.

If there is one guiding principle to embrace, it’s to resist the simple narrative. The corollary would be to exercise restraint until certain key facts are known and can be placed in context.

Parvez Ahmed, is a Fulbright Scholar and associate professor at the University of North Florida in Jacksonville.

Mark Schlakman is a lawyer, former foreign affairs officer and serves as senior program director at The Florida State University Center for Advancement of Human Rights in Tallahassee.

Also, CLICK HERE to view Parvez Ahmed speaking to Shannon Ogden on First Coast News’ On Point (Sunday, September 16, 2012).

Also on Patheos, July 5, 2012.

Nearly 4 in 10 Americans hold an unfavorable view of Islam and Muslims. That number has remained steady since 9-11. Several factors contribute to this negative perception, certainly none greater than Muslims, albeit a few, committing terrorism in the name of Islam. The media exasperates this negativity, as aptly noted in Edward Said’s 1981 classic Covering Islam. However, some media outlets are more egregious than others. A 2011 survey by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) found that the majority of Fox News viewers perceive that Muslims want to establish Shari’a law in America and express the distressing view that Muslims are NOT an important part of America’s religious fabric. Nearly 7 in 10 viewers of Fox News believe that the values of Islam are at odds with American values. In contrast fewer than 4 in 10 viewers of Public Television hold such negative perceptions.

The difference between Fox News viewers and those who watch Public Television is palpable. Spurring the gulf of difference is the content of programming. Fox News did not find anything morally objectionable with airing the virulently Islamophobic movie “Obsession: The Threat of Radical Islam.” While cognizant of the threat from those who kill in the name of Islam, public television and radio has better grasped the importance of providing viewers and listeners with the opportunity to develop a more holistic view of Islam. The fact that 4 in 10 Americans have never socially interacted with a Muslim, necessitates such holism.

On Friday, July 6 at 9 pm EST, PBS will nationally broadcast a documentary titled, “Islamic Art: Mirror of the Invisible World” narrated by Susan Sarandon. The documentary is a timely reminder about the many contributions made by Muslims to art and culture. As an educator, I am looking forward to this documentary as it adds to a growing collection of well-made documentaries that provide a semblance of balance to the general propensity in the media to stereotype Muslims.

Recently I was conducting a Sunday school class for a group of Muslim teenagers at my mosque. To my great disappointment, but not surprise, I found that the Muslims are almost as ill-informed as my non-Muslim elderly students who attend my continuing education class on Islam that I teach at my university. Both groups did not have an appreciation for the many innovations that the Muslim world has given us, which we take for granted in our daily lives. The word coffee has its genesis in the Arabic qahwa, which became the Turkish kahve then the Italian caffé. The game of chess originated in India but it was introduced to Europe by the Moors in Spain during their tenth century rule. The word rook comes from the Persian rukh, which means a chariot. A millennium before the Wright brothers, Abbas ibn Firnas made several attempts to build a flying machine. He had constructed a device that allowed him to stay in flight for over 10 minutes. He crash landed and correctly concluded that he had forgotten to give his invention the tail it needed to stabilize while landing. Shampoo was introduced to England by a Muslim who was appointed Shampooing Surgeon to King George IV. Many of the modern-day surgical instruments are nearly the same design as devised by a Muslim physician named al-Zahrawi in the 10^th century. Almost half a century before Louis Pasteur, children in Turkey were being vaccinated to inoculate against small pox.

The British non-profit and non-religious organization the Foundation for Science, Technology and Civilization through their 1001 Inventions exhibits and research is helping to reintroduce these facts to not only the Western world but also to Muslims. They have held exhibitions and film shows from New York to Istanbul.

Criticism of Muslims, when warranted, is a legitimate exercise in public discourse. But our national interests are ill-served if we only criticize and never appreciate. We are still paying the price of our many adventures in the Muslim world often initiated on a foundation of misguided views about the beliefs, history and culture of Muslims. Recently TIME magazine ran a cover story asking the rhetorical question “Is America Islamophobic?” I do not believe so. PBS airing yet another documentary about Islam suggests that a small but critical mass of Americans remain open minded about better understanding other cultures and religions. Critics of public radio and television, I am sure, will accuse PBS of a pro-Islam bias. And many Muslims may hastily conclude that the negative attitude of Fox News viewers is representative of the general unawareness of Islam in America. PBS’s Friday night national broadcast provides both critics countervailing facts to reconsider their stereotyping.

Convergence of interests and values
by Parvez Ahmed*

It happens once in a blue moon — the convergence of Western military action with Arab and Muslim public opinion. The last time we witnessed such convergence was during the US-led interventions in the Balkans, which stopped an ethnic cleansing and eventually brought peace to a troubled region of the world. Contrary to assertions from some, Libya 2011 is not Iraq of 2003.

Whereas the war in Iraq lacked any international legitimacy, the military intervention in Libya has legal authority in the form of UN Security Council Resolution 1973. In addition, enforcement of the no-fly zone in Libya also has the support of the Arab League, symbolic as that support may be. But most importantly, unlike 2003, there are no mass demonstrations either in Arab or Western capitals opposing another Western military adventure in yet another Muslim majority country.

The lack of opposition should not be mistaken for a lack of concern. The history of Western military interventions in the region has been largely perceived as neocolonial imperialism. The fact that Iraq remains a bloody mess and Afghanistan a quagmire adds to the anxiety. And yet the hope that has sprung from the peaceful revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt gives us reason to believe that military intervention in Libya, as abhorrent as the idea may be, was the right thing to do in order to thwart the brutality of yet another Arab dictator. Something has fundamentally changed in the Arab and Muslim world. The rest of the world is now being forced, albeit reluctantly, to contend with that reality.

Speaking to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, US Sen. John Kerry gave voice to the optimism being felt by many, despite lingering concerns. “If liberation can be translated into lasting democracy, then the new Arab awakening will carry a vital message: simply, that ordinary people everywhere have the ability to determine for themselves how they are governed. The developments in Egypt and Tunisia also represent a dramatic blow against the extremism that we have been struggling with this past decade or more — a blow against extremism that we could not have dealt ourselves.”

Sen. Kerry went on to say, “But just as the Berlin Wall could not be rebuilt, so we know that the old order of the Middle East cannot be restored.” To stop the restoration of the old order, military intervention in Libya became necessary. If the Muammar Gaddafi regime had overrun Benghazi, as they were poised to do, the Arab spring could have prematurely ended amidst deep suspicion that the West could have stopped the massacre but chose not to. This would have further emboldened the brutal repressions already under way from Yemen to Bahrain. In Yemen the defection of a senior military leader provides hope that if Western powers abandon their realpolitik and finally align their interests with their values, not only the people but also the extant power establishment may reject their brutal overlords.

Michael Gerson, speechwriter to former US President George W. Bush, in a recent op-ed to The Washington Post wrote: “When a government engages in genocide, ethnic cleansing or crimes against humanity — effectively waging war against its own citizens — other nations have the right and duty to intervene. In Libya, this abstract norm became a basis for action. The Obama administration deserves credit for its part in establishing this precedent.” The Arab spring has offered a Sputnik moment for US foreign policy. It appears that President Obama is slowly warming up to the idea that transformative change not only requires moral leadership of words but unfortunately necessitates the use of force when force becomes the only way to stop crimes against humanity. Rwanda still haunts us.

The reticence of emerging democratic powers such as Turkey, Brazil and India to join hands in this effort remains a source of concern. Although negotiations remain the preferred way to end this standoff, Gaddafi’s intransigence coupled with his threat to go door to door to clean out “rebels” offers scant hope for a peaceful resolution.
The extraordinary convergence of Western policy and Arab/Muslim public opinion needs further cementing. Sen. Kerry wants to introduce legislation to financially support “new and fledgling democracies in the region.” Sen. Kerry asserts, “We ought to be helping governments reform their security sectors, building transparency into the fabric of government ministries, strengthening the rule of law and helping leaders to incorporate the views of their public in the day-to-day work that they’re engaged in.”

Turkey, with its long history of democracy and its experience as part of its European Union accession process as well as with enacting changes that brings laws and policies to the standards expressed by Sen. Kerry, must play a pivotal role going forward. Only then can Turkey’s aspiration of zero problems with its neighbors become a sustainable policy.

Abuse of Women is Sadly Endemic
Parvez Ahmed

Amidst all the euphoria about Egypt’s peaceful revolution, the news of CBS news reporter Lara Logan being sexually assaulted hits like a ton of bricks. The people of Egypt, especially its youth, have been such an inspiration that any hint of deviant behavior understandably elicits gasps and should provoke soul searching. Sadly the incident is not as isolated.

A 2008 survey by the Egyptian Center for Women’s Rights shows 98 percent of foreign women and 83 percent of Egyptian women reporting being sexually harassed. Six in 10 men admitted to such behavior. How is it that Muslim society’s, which often pontificate about conservative values and uses such mantra to advocate segregation, that women are denied the most basic of dignity?

The Islamic scripture is unequivocal that the proper treatment of women is a cornerstone in developing personal piety and societal harmony. In chapter 9 verse 71, the Quranic paradigm is clear, “The believers, men and women, are protectors, one of another: they enjoin what is just and forbid what is evil: they observe regular prayers, practice regular charity, and obey God and His Messenger. On them will God pour His Mercy: for God is Exalted in power, Wise.”

Expounding on the subject of gender relations, noted Islamic scholar Jamal Badawi writes, “Under no circumstances does the Quran encourage, allow or condone violence (against women). In extreme cases … it allows for a husband to administer a gentle pat to his wife that causes no physical harm to the body nor leaves any sort of mark. …. In the event that dispute cannot be resolved equitably between husband and wife, the Quran prescribes mediation between the parties through family intervention on behalf of both spouses.” Badawi is attempting to contextualize the Quranic verse 4:34. And yet many Muslim religious leaders do not place this verse into its proper context, making it ripe for abuse both at the hands of Muslim men and by those who blame Islam for all that ails the Muslim world.

Contradictions between the teaching in sacred texts and the reality on the ground are not limited to Egypt or the segregated and repressive Gulf States. In Turkey, 4 out of 10 women are physically abused by their husbands, according to a recent study titled “Domestic Violence against Women in Turkey.”

To be fair, abuse of women is not exclusively a Muslim problem. The same day that the Lara Logan story broke, news media also reported that female members of the U.S. Navy were alleging cover up of widespread rape. A U.S. Justice Department study shows that 1 in 6 American women are raped during their lifetimes. Nearly half of all murders of women in the U.S. are committed by a romantic partner. Abuse of women is just as problematic in conservative Muslim societies as they are in the liberal West. This underscores the need for less finger-pointing and ought to provide the impetus to collectively address the issue.

The abuse women in Muslim societies are particularly jolting because of its stark contrast with the normative teachings of Islam. I often have the privilege of speaking to people of other faiths about Islam and Muslims. Such contradictions are what most troubles my audience and why they continue to harbor negative opinions about Islam and Muslims. Islamophobia cannot be overcome by merely preaching Islam. It will require Muslims to live Islam and their societies to reflect Islam’s values and ethics. While Muslim preachers rail against those who prevent women from wearing headscarves or hijab they are largely silent on the endemic abuse of women. While Muslim countries, particularly in the Middle East, are quick to defend segregation as a way to “protect” women they have taken few measures to stem the pervasive mistreatment of women in their own backyards.

In the general gloom and doom of the Middle East, once again it is the educated and enlightened Muslim youth that is providing a ray of hope. Visit the Facebook page titled, “Lara Logan: An apology from Egypt.” The messages of apology seem heartfelt. Many Egyptians are rightfully ashamed of this ignominy. My fervent hope is that they turn this moment of shame into motivation for positive change that eradicates this ‘social cancer.’ Can Arabs and Muslims once again turn their hopeful eyes towards Egypt leading the path to civilization? CNN producer and camerawoman Mary Rogers gives voice to the hope of many, “Perhaps it will be people power, the same people power that brought down a regime, that will successfully combat sexual harassment. But the only real protection women can have is when the attitudes of men change.”

[Professor Parvez Ahmed is a Fulbright Scholar and Associate Professor of Finance at the University of North Florida.]

We are all Egyptians now

I am mesmerized by the peaceful popular uprisings calling for the end of three decades of dictatorial rule in Egypt. Often the news from the Muslim world is depressing. Not today. The impact of this is still unknown.

But one thing is unmistakably clear: We are all Egyptians now. The young voices from Egypt fill me with hope and optimism about the future of the Middle East and the Muslim world. In the unlikeliest of places and in the most trying of circumstances, the Egyptians are not just demanding their freedoms but, unbeknownst to them, are helping to shatter several myths along the way.

The unforgettable images from Tahrir Square are helping to erase the myth of Muslims and Arabs being apathetic to democracy and docile to authoritarian rule. It is also erasing the lore of the archetypal Muslim male — conservative and angry — and the stereotypical Muslim woman — compliant and veiled. Like any other society, Muslim communities boast a range of voices. Many practicing Muslims favor separation between mosque and state, viewing this as a position closer to normative Islam, while others desire that national laws reflect their religious values, fervent in their belief that such an action is pleasing to God.

Along with the Jasmine Revolution of Tunisia, the popular uprising in Egypt is a deathblow to the urban legend that change in Muslim societies can only be brought about by force. For over a decade al-Qaeda and its affiliates have successfully exploited the lack of freedoms and dignity in parts of the Muslim world to foment terrorism, euphemistically calling them martyrdom operations. Overwhelming majorities in Tunisia and Egypt by their actions emphatically rejected the nihilism of al-Qaeda. They instead chose the Gandhian approach of non-violence and peaceful assembly to redress their grievances. This sign of hope must not be extinguished by the intransigence of Hosni Mubarak to step down. Orderly transition cannot be a pretext to extending his iron-fisted rule.

Equally impressive is the shattering of yet another myth, often the bedrock assumption behind America’s unquestioned support for the Mubaraks and the Abdullahs of the world. For long the Mubaraks and the Abdullahs have sold the notion, and America bought the idea, that choices in the Muslim world are bipolar — the ruthless dictator or the parochial religious fundamentalist. To most Muslims these are false choices. Like their counterparts in other parts of the world, most Muslims care less about the ideology of their government and more about the services which that government can deliver. Palestinians in Gaza did not choose Hamas for their ideological bent, but rather they voted Fatah out for failing to deliver basic services to the people. Many Turks may not agree with the socio-religious views of their conservative prime minister, but time and again they back his party at the polls because they deliver on their promises of good governance.

The young voices in Tahrir Square showed that in a few days of freedom they have earned a lifetime of wisdom. Even when angry at Israel’s treatment of Palestinians they did not want their new government to walk away from Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel. While remaining skeptical about the motives of the Muslim Brotherhood, they welcomed diverse voices in the new Egypt. Their disappointments over American foreign policy did not make them break out into anti-American chants. When the state apparatus failed to protect innocent civilians from looters and thugs, youths acted in an impromptu fashion to protect the dignity of their families and their communities. Egyptians and Tunisians have best exemplified the slogan “Yes, we can.”

Standing at the edge of a new dawn, one cannot help but be hopeful. But this euphoria of hope should not detract attention from a basic fact — democracy is a process, not an outcome. The process requires engagement and vigilance. Removing a dictatorial regime is not enough, for democracy is not merely the rule of the majority but also necessitates the protection of minority rights and voices.

In my visits to Egypt I have always been impressed by the sense of civilizational pride that ordinary citizens expressed, from college campuses to coffee shops. Egyptians now have a chance to put their pride in their long legacy of monumental civilizational achievements to good use. Watching from afar, we may not be able to help much, but at the very least we can pray that the extraordinary sacrifices of the most ordinary amongst us is not wasted. Rather, it serves as a powerful motivator to truly usher in a new era of peace and healing to one of the most troubled regions of the world.

Additional Reading: Egypt’s Revolution: How Democracy Can Work in the Middle East
By Fareed Zakaria

Listen to a radio interview on WJCT’s First Coast Connect. Listen to the Dec 6, 2010 show.

A group called the ACT! For America, which by most accounts is a hate group, organized a smear campaign to oust me from the Jacksonville Human Rights Commission, to which I was confirmed just a few months ago. You may remember the contrived controversy my nomination generated at that time. If you need a refresher, visit my blog. Most of April 2010 entries on my blog are about that controversy.

Unfortunately, once again the media played into ACT’s ploy and gave legs to the unfounded allegations made by ACT. The local NPR station, on their show First Coast Connect analyzed the situation. Click on Fri show of First Coast Connect.

On Sunday Dec 5, 2101 the Florida Times Union today, published a summarized version of my speech stating, “We are running excerpts from the speech on this page so readers can judge for themselves. The entire speech can be read on our Opinion Page Blog: jacksonville.com/opinion.”

Guest column: Is Islam compatible with American democratic values?
Source URL: http://jacksonville.com/opinion/letters-readers/2010-12-05/story/guest-column-islam-compatible-american-democratic-values

In 2005, a Danish newspaper printed a cartoon depicting Muhammad, who Muslims believe to be the last Messenger and Prophet of God, with a bomb in his turban. This set off an international row as protests erupted from Europe to Asia.
In some Muslim countries, newspapers that reprinted the cartoon were closed. European countries evacuated staffs of embassies and Muslim countries withdrew ambassadors. The fallout also had economic repercussions. According to the Gulf News, Danish exports began to fall as consumers in Muslim countries shunned Danish products in protest.

This provoked the question: Is Islam incompatible with Western values? Are Islam and the West destined to have a clash of civilization?

Those who answer yes point to events like 9/11 or the cartoon controversy as proof positive of the inherent incompatibility of Islam and with the West.

Others who are more knowledgeable about Islam and Muslim societies say that neither 9/11, nor the cartoon controversy, are indicative of any inherent clash of values. The antecedents of such events are socio-political. Religion may at best be a contributing factor.

While people debate the place of Islam in American society, another reality is taking shape right before our very eyes.

According to The New York Times, a record number of Muslim workers are complaining of workplace discrimination ranging from being called “terrorist” to being barred from wearing headscarves or taking prayer breaks.

According to federal data, discrimination complaints by Muslims are up 20 percent from last year and up 60 percent since 2005. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has found enough credibility in these complaints that they have filed several lawsuits on behalf of Muslim workers.

This summer we have seen tensions boil over as a pastor attempted to burn the Quran and many opposed to building of an Islamic community center in New York descended to embarrassing levels of incivility.

Unlike you, who are attempting to dialogue and learn, most Americans choose to remain ill-informed. As a result, today more people have a negative view of Islam than in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

Our media outlets, mostly cable news shows and radio talk shows, are major contributors to this trend that bodes ill for the long-term sustainability of our national interests.

A few politicians and religious leaders have only exasperated the situation by trying to ride the coattails of fear of Islam to electoral victories.

The situation has gotten so out of hand, that Time magazine ran a cover story, “Is America Islamophobic?” with the following comment: “In France and Britain, politicians from fringe parties say appalling things about Muslims, but there’s no one in Europe of the stature of a former House speaker who would, as Newt Gingrich did, equate Islam with Nazism.”

So how do we go past this rancor? By doing exactly what you are doing today. Trying to learn and attempting to dialogue.

President John Kennedy summed it best, “Tolerance implies no lack of commitment to one’s own beliefs. Rather it condemns the oppression or persecution of others.”

To the question: Is Islam compatible with American values? The answer is yes.
Why? Because in a normative sense (Excerpted from Michael Wolfe’s The Next American Religion):

Islam is democratic in spirit. The Quran, on which Islamic law is based, enjoins Muslims to govern themselves by discussion and consensus.

Islam is tolerant of other faiths. Like America, Islam has a history of respecting other religions. In Prophet Muhammad’s day, Christians and Jews in Muslim lands retained their own courts and enjoyed considerable autonomy. It was the Muslims who made it possible for Jews to return to and live in Jerusalem after centuries of being outcasts.

Islam encourages the pursuit of religious freedom. The Quran clearly states that there is no compulsion in matters related to faith and religion.

Islam emphasizes individual responsibility. Every person is responsible for the condition of her or his own soul. Everyone stands equal before God. America is wedded to an ethic of individual liberty based on righteous actions. For a Muslim, spiritual salvation depends not just on faith, but also righteous actions.

Islam is egalitarian. The Pledge of Allegiance (one nation, “under God”) and Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address (all people are “created equal”) express themes that are also basic to Islam. If you visit mosques in America, you will find them among the most racially integrated congregations of faith.

Democracy and Islam

I would like to spend a little bit more time on the issue of democracy and Islam with particular emphasis on Sharia.

The former deputy prime minister of Malaysia, Anwar Ibrahim wrote:
“It is true that the founding principles of constitutional democracy, as we know it today, have their antecedents in the political philosophy of John Locke, which entered France through the writings of Voltaire and then deeply influenced the framers of the U.S. constitution.

“But the fact that these principles of political freedom and democracy were first articulated in the West does not preclude them from universal application, nor can it be asserted that they have not been expressed in other contexts.”

A majority of the world’s 1.4 billion Muslims live in democracies, ample proof that there is no inherent discord between Islam and democracy.

But what about those Muslim majority countries, most of them in the Middle East, which are not democracies?

Is Islam the reason for them being held back?

The Council of Foreign Relations concludes that “a mix of historical, cultural, economic and political factors – and not Islam as a religion – explain why democracy has failed to take root in many Muslim countries.”

In fact, surveys by Gallup and Pew show that clear majorities in the Arab world would favor democracy as a form of government. The people most animated about this are the so-called Islamists.

Outside of the Middle East (which accounts for fewer than 20 percent of the global Muslim population), Alfred Stepan in the Journal of Democracy argues that Muslim nations are on par with – or outpace – comparable non-Muslim developing nations in terms of civil liberties and free and fair elections.

The democracy deficiency in the Arab world is more a function of oil than religion.
State ownership of oil has stifled the development of market economies and government transparency. Oil has allowed the monarchies in the Middle East to make a Faustian bargain with their citizens.

That bargain: Governments will not tax its citizens (oil revenues pay for government budgets) and in exchange the citizens will not demand voting or representation.
Let me quote Anwar Ibrahim, the erstwhile deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia: “If democracy is about giving dignity to the human spirit, then freedom is the sine qua non.”

Within Islam, the great Andalusia jurist Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi in the 14th century, articulated a perspective on the Maqasid al-Shari’a (the higher objectives of the shari’a), demonstrating the central role of freedom as a higher objective of the divine law. The very same elements in a constitutional democracy are moral imperatives in Islam – freedom of conscience, freedom to speak out against tyranny, a call for reform and the right to property.”