Tuesday, October 02, 2012

What the Salafis Want

Ashraf Khalil
Time


To even approach Mohammed Abdel Rahman, you have to take off your shoes. The son of the man Americans call “the blind sheik”—Omar Abdel Rahman, who is now serving a life sentence for seditious conspiracy in a North Carolina prison–spends part of each day at a make-shift open air sit-in calling for his father’s release just outside the walls of the U.S. embassy in Cairo. A collection of blue straw mats are spread across the concrete ringed by about eight pairs of shoes along the edges. Several times a day, the mats become their prayers rugs, so no shoes allowed.
I came looking for him to talk about the role of Salafis—the controversial and conservative Islamists who are wielding new and often, in the eyes of Westerners and secular Arabs, troubling political influence–in the new Egypt and in the Arab world after more than a year of uprisings. The interview would be part of a major story by Bobby Ghosh in this week’s print version of TIME magazine.
Sitting beneath multiple banners displaying his father’s bearded visage, the 39-year-old Mohammed comes across as genuinely placid and pleasant. He departed for Afghanistan in 1988 at age 16 to join up with the Mujahideen  “Back then, all the world was with us, especially the U.S., because we were hitting the Soviet  Union,” he says. He was captured by U.S.-led forces in 2003 and says he spent a few months being interrogated at Bagram Airbase before being rendered back to Egypt and spending several more years in jail. He was released in the fall of 2010, a few months before the revolution that toppled President Hosni Mubarak.
Abdel Rahman says he personally participated in that uprising, but says that the issue of joining in the protests was a controversial one within Salafist circles. Salafist doctrine before the revolution strictly forbade involvement in opposition politics. The common Arabic phrase is: “la yagouz khurooj ala al hakim” which loosely translates as “Don’t challenge those in power” Says Mohammed Abdel Rahman: “Before the revolution, our sheiks would only talk about politics in an indirect way. Most [Salafists] didn’t get involved in the revolution—and then only near the end. And there were many who said at the time that the revolution was a mistake.”
After the revolution, the Salafist shifted strategies, forming multiple political parties. Their performance in parliamentary elections fall 2011—capturing 20% of the seats—was a genuine shock to most observers.  “Their popularity became evident in the elections,” says Abdel Rahman, who insists he was not surprised. “I was expecting it because of what I know of the Egyptian people. These have always been a religious people”  In addition, he says, the Salafists—unlike the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood–benefitted from their lack of involvement in political and pre-revolutionary focus on purely religious outreach. “We were considered clean.”
I asked why American diplomats and Egyptian security forces have allowed him and his followers to camp out right outside the embassy for 13 months now. He laughs and says his group might actually be enhancing embassy security by blocking one of the roads, leading to the staff entrance of the embassy. “They leave us because we’re not causing trouble,” he says. “The Americans do respect the fact that we’re here non-violently—as opposed to those other protests. Officials from the embassy sometimes stop by and chat with us.”
He declares that he and his group were not behind the recent siege of the U.S. embassy in Cairo, which was apparently triggered by the controversial and until then little known film Innocence of Muslims. On Sept. 11, 2012, he was at the embassy sit-in just as he almost always is. Earlier in the day, he and his supporters had held a press conference outside the embassy under the banner “Who are the real terrorists”—arguing that his father was unjustly imprisoned and had no involvement in the 1993 World Trade Center attacks (indeed, his father was convicted of conspiracy involving other plots.) Then around 5 p.m., a big crowd of protestors descended on the embassy “It wasn’t just one group and it wasn’t just Islamists,” Abdel Rahman recalls. “We asked them to go around the corner. We didn’t want any problems here.”
Abdel Rahman says that he briefly joined the mass protests, but that he didn’t like what he saw from the crowd and didn’t stay long. “I could see it wasn’t very well-organized. There were people who wanted to scale the walls and people who wanted to hold a sit-in. People were yelling at each other and arguing. I and my people left and came back here.” The rest was diplomatic catastrophe for the Morsy government and a debacle for the Obama administration.
Nonetheless, the new Egyptian president has pledged to work for his father’s freedom.  “I wasn’t expecting it at all, but my mother wasn’t surprised,” he says. “There has been an effort in Egypt to erase my father’s name from the history books. So this was a victory for reversing that effort” He says that since then, he has been in contact with the presidential office—not Morsy himself, but Morsy’s representatives have made similar pledges to lobby the Americans for his fathers release.
Morsy’s move may have been political outreach but Abdel Rahman is very certain about the differences between the President and the Muslim Brotherhood, on the one hand, and himself and the Salafists on the other.  “For [the Brotherhood)],” he explains, “it’s optional whether to grow your beard or not. For us there is no other option. For them, it’s optional whether women should wear the niqab. For us, there is no other option.” It’s clear that he regards all these “options” in the Brotherhood camp as signs of their weakness and moral flexibility. It all boils down to what the Salafists want. “It’s very simple,” says Abdel Rahman. “We want shari’a. Sharia in economy, in politics, in judiciary, in our borders and our foreign relations.The internal debate among us is how quickly we want to implement it. Do we do it all at once, or do we do it gradually so as not to shock people too much.”
“Salafis are not monolithic,” says Khalil al-Anani, a professor of Middle Eastern politics at the Durham School of Government and International affairs. “They can be divided into: Political Salafis, who adopt political ideology and seek to implement it regardless other views or factions and the traditional Salafis who are not interested in politics.
Political Salafis, on their side, can be divided into two main strands: first is the extreme or radical and violent Salafis, e.g. Salafiyya Jihadiyya in Sinai, Ansar-AlShari’a in Libya. The second is the pragmatic and more domesticated (politicised) Salafis like Al-Nour party and other Salafi parties.”
Most Salafis, says Anani, “treat democracy as a mere tool to implement the Islamic law [Shari’a]. They tend to acculturate religion and pull the societies towards what they believe the ‘authentic’ Islam.” In that way, all Salafis, he says, “view the Arab Spring as a golden opportunity to impose their ideology and enforce their worldviews upon Arab societies. Moreover, they view themselves a stakeholders of the new political environment which implies that they should have a share in the fruits of the Arab Spring. Hence, they tend not to compromise their religious ideology for the sake of politics” And because of that rigidity, he says, “The relationship between Salafis and the MB is complex and variant. I see them as adversaries more than allies. Both compete over audience, influence, and political interests. They occasionally co-operate, but only to hit secular and liberals.”
The push-and-pull and compromises of politics may not suit the Salafists at all. Abdel Rahman acknowledges that this first parliamentary result may be the high water mark for the Salafists. He says it is very likely that the numbers could drop in new parliamentary elections coming within the next six months. He blames this on bad press from “liberals in the media” who have painted the Salafists as both power-hungry and obsessed with inserting religious minutia into the constitution while ignoring the massive real-world problems facing the country.
But there is also the disunity among the various Salafists—and how closely they will allow themselves to work with Morsy and the Brotherhood. The al-Nour Party—the largest of the Salafist parties—is essentially an umbrella for a loose collection of power centers based around different sheiks with different agendas. “There are some internal tensions” in the Nour party, Abdel Rahman says, refusing to elaborate about an organization that he has ties to. “If there are any problems, different groups could splinter and return to their individual sheiks.” On Wednesday, the Nour Party’s supreme committee voted to oust the party’s leader Emad Abdel Ghaffour, reportedly over a number of internecine issues but including his recent appointment to a government post by President Mohamed Morsy, who belongs to the MB’s ruling Freedom and Justice Party.
Around 5 p.m. on the day I met Abdel Rahman, one of his half-dozen followers gave the call to prayer over a loud-speaker. The group assembled in a line on the mat to perform the prayers with Mohammed Abdel Rahman leading. At the end, he offers off-the-cuff appeals to the almighty for his father’s safety and freedom, and asks God’s protection for “Mujahideen everywhere.”  Tomorrow, he’ll be back to sit and pray again.
Read more: http://world.time.com/2012/09/27/what-the-salafists-want-an-interview-with-the-blind-sheiks-son/#ixzz27gBjRDNR

No comments: