146 The Americau Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 18.3 

Second Annual Conference of the Center for the Study of 
Islam & Democracy (CSID) 

The Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) held its second 
annual conference at Georgetown University on April 7, 2001. Students, 
diplomats, liberal professionals, investors, activists and academicians were 
among the guests at the conference cosponsored by Georgetown 
University's Center for Muslim Christian Understanding (CMCU), the 
International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), and the Institute of Global 
Cultural Studies. 

The conference theme, "Islam, Democracy and the Secularist State in the 
Post Modem Era" echoed in the presentations of Muslim scholars in the 
following five panels: Islam and Democracy, The Secular State, Elements 
of Democracy with Respect to Islam, Postmdernity, and Democracy in 
Practice and Islam in Context. A total of twenty presentations were made 
by the panelists in these five sections. 

Since the CSID is a research organization with a membership of 
academics, entrepreneurs, Muslim intellectuals, liberal professionals and 
activists committed to promoting democracy in the Muslim world, its 
annual conferences and monthly publication "The Muslim Democrat" serve 
as a forum through which the relationship between Islam and democracy is 
defined and democratic elements inherent in Islam are identified. As a 
think-tank dedicated to defining the historical and philosophical basis of 
democracy and its compatibility with the elements of Islam, CSID's 
presentations underscored justice, equality and tolerance as democratic 
concepts intrinsic to Islamic principles. 

By outlining the historical development of secularism and its role in 
Muslim societies, the panelists did not only encourage Muslim activists to 
institutionalize democratic practices, but they also addressed Muslim 
scholars and activists from both the western and the Muslim worlds who 
are convinced that Islam is incompatible with democracy. By presenting 
the causes of problems inherent in secular trends in Muslim countries like 
Yemen, Jordan, Indonesia and Malaysia, and identifying the shortcomings 
in their democratization process, CSID's presentations simultaneously 
sought to convince both Islamists and secularists that democratic ideals and 
Islamic principles were compatible. 

Since a distinction must be made between the separation of church and 
state and the separation of religion from politics in order to advance the 



Conference Reports 147 

historical dialogue between Islam and democracy, this annual conference 
can be remembered as playing an important role in advancing the historical 
dialogue between Islam, democracy and secularism. 

In his concluding remarks, Dr. M i  Mazrui outlined four types of states 
- the secular state like the USA; the state with an established religion like 
the Islamic Republic of Iran or England; the atheistic state like the former 
Soviet Union and China; and the ecumenical state like Lebanon. Mazmi 
concluded that since the separation of church from state is institutional, and 
the separation of religion from politics is behavioral, it is usually easier to 
cope with problems based on institutional arrangements than with those 
based on behavioral elements. The distinction, however, between these two 
concepts was implicit in CSID's presentations due to its efforts to study 
these elements and their impact on the relationship between Islam and 
democracy. 

In fact, an examination of this distinction is crucial for understanding the 
four different types of states and developing the historical dialogue between 
Islam and democracy, and pivotal in defining the sociopolitical issues that 
confront Muslim countries operating in secular societies like Turkey and 
India and more ambivalent societies like Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, 
Indonesia and Malaysia. 

The historical dialogue between Islam and democracy was clearly 
defined in Dr. Louay Safi's presentation, "Islam and the Secular State." 
In the following statement, Safi clarified the distinction between these two 
concepts by pointing to the reason behind the separation of church and state 
and identifying the need to analyze the role that religion plays in the 
democratization process operating in secular societies. "While the secular 
state was designed to prevent organized religion from controlling public 
institutions, it did not aim at undermining religiosity per se, ... it was 
perceived as multireligious society's best defense against the imposition 
of the religious values and worldview of one's community on another." 
He stressed, however, that secularization gradually undermines the role 
of morality in public life to the extent that a fresh look at the role of 
morality and religion in guiding public policy is urgently needed. 

Other presentations stimulated further debate and sometimes 
controversy. For example, the presentation in the third panel, "The Search 
for a Third Discourse: Beyond Tradition and Ideology", by M. A. Muqtedar 
Khan, examined the ideas of Abdul Kareem Soroush, Muhammad 
Khatami, Farid Esack and Maulana Waheeduddin in hopes of identifying a 



148 The Amuicaa Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 18.3 

new approach through which Islam would be seen as democracy's partner. 
In the presentation by Fred R. Dallmayr, "Reflections on Abdel Karim 
Soroush," "religious government" or the role of religion in politics emerged 
as the key to democratic government. In the fourth panel, Dr. Mohammad 
Moniruzzaman defined Islam as "The Underlying Principle of a democ- 
racy, because Islam is a system that addresses human concerns more often 
than metaphysical concepts. 

In his Luncheon Keynote Address, Abdolkarim Soroush contended that 
there is "no separation between church and state because religion and 
democracy are two parts of a whole." He further identified the ethical role 
that religion plays in politics, arguing that a "system of Islamic philosophy 
can be independent of religion and Islam, and can_work compatibly with the 
Islamic world at large." 

The most important element missing in the five panels was the 
discussion of domestic issues prevalent in the immediate world closely 
associated with secular America, and not just the wider world, i.e., Muslim 
countries. Since part of democracy is to dialogue on controversial issues, 
addressing divisive, contentious issues in American society is important for 
the development of the historical dialogue between Islam and democracy. 
It is only by identifying Islamic and secular positions on such issues as 
the role of prayer in schools, affirmative action and abortion that the 
relationship between Islam and democracy in America can be fully defined. 

Furthermore, if institutions in democratic Muslim countries are 
developed according to western models, then the western model of 
democracy serves as the scale against which the compatibility of Islam with 
democracy in secular societies is measured. It is important to dialogue on 
controversial issues and not avoid or deny them, if we are to produce an 
accurate picture of how secularism and democracy affect the quality of life 
within the US and in the larger world society. 

Layla Sein 
Assistant Editor, A J I S S  

A M S S  Coordinator