By P.A. Mohamed Ameen,
The following is my general observation; I can not say how much of it applies to Iran. It is open to debate. I am neither a scholar nor an Alim, I try to approach issue from a layman’s point of view.
Generational clash in Muslim world
The attitude of the Muslim public regarding the way the rulers govern and run the affairs of a nation. The youngsters want greater liberalism, more freedom, more mixing of the gender, more socialising, lesser controls, co-educational institutions, greater permissibility, diluting the regimentation that Islamists try to enforce.
But the Islamic scholars who are more worried about clash of civilizations feel that if the youngsters have their way ( after all they do constitute a significant share of the vote bank in a democracy: Iranian or Malaysian, it makes little difference and so they do influence the outcome on who hold political office), then Islam may be defeated as a total and comprehensive way of life by the Western Culture which considers Islam is archaic and based on an impractical and uncompromising 7th century edict.
Muslim rulers and Islamic Shari’a
So the problem is how to compromise and how much to compromise or remain uncompromising? Should the rulers ( Example: The Guardian Council of Iran) put their feet down and dictate their terms based on their interpretation of Islamic Shari’a regardless of the consequences or try to please the not-so-Taqwa based for the sake of political expediency. This is I think is the big hurdle.
Political expediency
Political expediency, foreign intervention and appeasing the liberal Western World and trying to cushion the adverse criticism of non-Muslims cannot be accepted as the reasons for compromising. That does not mean that fresh interpretations to the laws of Islam are out of the question.
After all, only about 10% of the Shari’a laws are clear cut, straight forward and easily understood without disputes and the rest are subject to reinterpretation based on the circumstances and the changing social, geo-political and economic situations.
Representation of religious scholars in Guardian Council
Many like me are in favour of the idea of a Guardian Council consisting of very eminent and distinguished religious scholars. This guarantees that, in spite of a parliamentary majority, no law can be passed or approved unless and until the Guardian Council states that the law/s do not violate the basic principles framed in the Book of Allah swt. This is the sticking point. Many orientalists like Daniel Pipes feel that this is totally unacceptable and undemocratic. What is Mr. Daniel Pipes motive for trespassing into a painstakingly tended territory of an alien culture? Any secret agenda?
Democracy and Islam
Well a one hundred percent democracy, based on one man one vote to decide every thing and pass every law is definitely anti-Islamic. For instance, in any Muslim country, can a law be passed even if 100% of the Lawmakers agree to allow consensual sex relation between an adult male and female? Or, permitting same sex marriages or legalising homosexual relation for that matter?
Iranian dissidents
If the Iranian dissidents in the West partly/mostly supporting Brother Mousavi( no doubt a great intellectual) together with the dissatisfied local Iranians work towards changing the regime and rock the boat of Islam based stability that Iran has been experiencing, they will be consciously or unconsciously playing into the hands of the adversaries of Iran and Islam and may help strengthen their hands. And non-Iranians, Non-Shiah Muslims like me are worried that these undesirable political rebellion may lead to a Iraq like situation and eventual invitation by the opponents of the present Iranian Political Administration to Western countries to solve the issue. Every one knows what will be the motive of the interventionists and how much will be the sufferings of the millions of innocent Iranians. Do many of us not wish right now( we held opposite views in the 1990s) that after all, Saddam Hussein remained in power, in spite of his shortcomings.
Weak Iman root of problems
In conclusion I will put the blame on our weaknesses and inability to solve most of our problems on our weak Iman, our disunity, ego and pride of our stubborn leaders, our easy-go-lucky life style, our praising and copying the Western culture in dress, in music, in laws, in institutions, our lack of research, lack of intellectual pursuit, lack of economic independence, lack of technological advancement, lack of honesty and hard work, lack of willingness to sacrifice for the collective good of the Ummah, lack of economic co-operation between the Muslim nations and our inability to work out our own financial, monetary, banking, investment and insurance systems.