Crescent Magazine

By Fahad Ansari in London

No single Islamic movement has generated as much controversy in the times we live in than the Taliban in Afghanistan. From their rise to power in 1996 through their toppling in 2001 and to their recent re-emergence and increasing authority, voices within the Muslim world have differed as to their importance and the level of support which should be afforded to them. A large part of this confusion is due to the near total ignorance that many have as to who the Taliban are and what they actually stand for. The stereotypical narrative of the movement as propagated by the US government and its allies is that the movement consists of a group of uneducated backward war-mongering mullahs who wish to gain power to impose oppressive rule on the Afghan people. With the war in Afghanistan having no end in sight and the number of body-bags returning to Washington and London increasing daily, policy makers and political analysts have recently had to revisit such superficial prejudiced views and instead try and understand the true nature and aims of the Taliban.

By Seyfeddin Kara

The Justice and Development Party — Adalet va Kalkinma Partisi (AKP) in Turkish — is perhaps one of the most interesting and perplexing political movements operating in the Muslim world today. Its official program and ideology are not dissimilar to many political party platforms in the West. The AKP adheres to “democratization” and civil society, rule of law, fundamental rights of freedom, and liberal economic policy. The official party program has no reference to Islam or Muslims and none of the policies have had any Islamic discourse. Even the leader of the party, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who is known for his Islamic background, has so far not made any statement indicating an Islamic agenda. Yet it has been branded by Western analysts to be an “Islamist” party.

By Maksud Djavadov

At first glance there appears nothing unusual about the ruling party’s “landslide victory” in the March 1 parliamentary elections in Tajikistan. All authoritarian regimes, in Central Asia as elsewhere, use “elections” as an administrative tool to formalize their grip on power. On closer examination, it becomes clear that no matter how authoritarian and power hungry the regime in Tajikistan may be, it still had to accept the popularity of the Islamic Revival Party of Tajikistan (IRPT). Even though the regime allocated only 7.7% of the vote to the IRPT in the “new” parliament which was formed as a result of electoral fraud, as attested to by many international observers, the fact that IRPT is still legally present on the Tajik political scene is a great achievement based on Central Asian standards.

By Seyfeddin Kara

When Israel’s then President Ezer Weizman, a former air force chief, visited Turkey in 1997 he violated diplomatic protocol by making statements about the host country’s internal affairs. Commenting on the Welfare Party’s victory in the elections he said “the Turkish army will not stay idle following [Necmettin] Erbakan’s inauguration as Prime Minister.”  Contrary to what would have been expected from any sovereign country faced with such gross interference in its internal affairs, Weizman received a very mild reaction. The Turkish Foreign Ministry played down the Israeli President’s remarks, calling them Weizman’s personal opinion.