Engaging with Islamists: A new agenda for the policy community

How Western governments should engage Islamists who have been democratically elected, or represent the social fabric of the societies from which they come, is a question that has been discussed in different policy fora for years - particularly since Hamas’ sweeping victory in the Palestinian elections of 2006.Two contemporary developments have brought this question to the forefront again. First, the Arab Spring that has forced four dictators from power simultaneously brought Islamists to power in both Egypt and Tunisia. Second, the past couple of years have seen a shift in US policy towards the question of engaging with the Afghan Taliban, presumably based on the recognition that there might be no way around a future scenario where the Taliban become part of a coalition government in Afghanistan. For Western governments and the international donor community engaging with Islamist power holders demands a deeper insight into the existing variety of Islamisms, and breaking with some of the stereotypes that sometimes dominate public debates on Islamism. It is not self-evident what is meant by ‘they want sharia’ or ‘they want to reinstall Islamic authenticity,’ though it might trigger the sound of doomsday trumpets in public debates around the world.

In a brief prepared for the Norwegian Atlantic Committee, Mona Kanwal Sheikh, illuminates some of the main differences and characteristics of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Afghan Taliban in order to highlight some important insights when engaging with Islamists. The two cases help to illustrate that there can be great variation in the practical political consequences that the different Islamist movements draw from the core idea that Islam is a holistic ideology, a total way of life, and particularly relevant for public and political life.