Monday, December 5, 2011 - 2:22 PM

The first elected Islamist party to take over the reins of government in the Arab world arrived in the unlikely location of Morocco. The Party of Justice and Development (PJD) finished first in the November 25 elections, gaining 107 of 395 seats in parliament. Their leader, Abdullah Benkirane, will now ascend to what was once considered an unthinkable position for an Islamist: he will be the country's next prime minister.
The Moroccan case challenges conventional wisdom about contemporary Islamists and contextualizes qualms about what they might do next. The PJD originated as an offshoot of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood. But while the Brotherhood only formed an official political party in 2011, their Moroccan brothers have been contesting elections and navigating party politics since 1998. Far from being revolutionary or even incendiary, Islamists of the PJD rose to the top not by challenging the status quo, but rather by skillfully and pragmatically abiding by it, even at times bolstering it. Their rule will likely be no different.
The first time I visited the headquarters of Morocco's main Islamist party was in 2006, a year away from its second full run in parliamentary elections. I was greeted by the unexpected sounds of laughter, as three young activists sat in the corner of the courtyard poking fun at a more senior member. "If you could have any ministerial position in government," one asked him, "which one would you choose?" Before he could answer, a voice from the distance shouted, "Why not Minister of Tourism!" And then the chuckles began. It was funny for them because back then it seemed so farfetched -- farfetched that the king would ever deign to ask them to serve as the public face of the country, especially overseas. They would, another joked, more likely scare away visitors then beckon them.
The Moroccan monarchy's gamble on limited political reforms is what made these daydreams a reality. When authoritarian leaders across the region this past year were folding or doubling down, the king of Morocco opted for watered down reform. Beginning in March, in an effort to co-opt local protests, government officials in Morocco told anyone who would listen that the king was going to great lengths to share his immense power. They then heralded his constitutional reforms that would, for example, ensure that the king would actually appoint the next prime minister based solely on election results (rather than deciding himself, as has been known to happen).
But, in fact, the actual constitutional changes approved in a popular referendum in July left the core elements of monarchical supremacy intact. Every Moroccan -- regardless of his or her political views -- will readily admit that the king still runs the show. Anything resembling a budding democracy, or even a constitutional monarchy on the model of Spain or England, is still a long way away for this North African kingdom.
Perhaps because the political reforms proved so limited, the elections that followed exhibited neither the enthusiasm nor the dynamism of its neighbors in the region. Many activists opted to boycott. Turnout was low at 45 percent. The percentage of spoiled ballots, on the other hand, was high (some estimates suggest up to one third). And both of these figures were not drastically off from where they were in 2007.
Such a managed, limited democratic façade did not bother the PJD. Throughout
the last decade, these Islamists readily went along with what can only be
thought of as a puppeted political process. Authorities allowed them to
participate in elections, but very clearly set specific limitations on their
behavior. The palace, for instance, permitted the PJD to campaign, but state
media regularly lobbied against its efforts. The party could field candidates,
but it was often told how many seats it could contest, especially in 2003,
following bombings in Casablanca.
Also, the Moroccan government devised
an electoral system so complex and multilayered that it became close to
impossible for any single party to garner an outright majority. Nevertheless,
the PJD ignored nay saying from other Islamists in the country; they chose to
embrace elections instead of reject them.
The PJD were just as submissive when it came to the supposedly revered role of religion.
When the palace intensified pressure against "religious parties," the PJD
eschewed the label "Islamist." They opted, instead, to call themselves a party
of "Islamic reference." They also agreed not to campaign in mosques. In
fact, before the interior ministry permitted them to take part in elections in
the late nineties, the party had to agree to certain ground rules. Most
significantly, the king at the time, Hassan II, made clear that they would have
to avoid "heresy"
-- by which he meant, in language obvious to all citizens, there would be no religious
challenges to the regime.
The PJD, in sum, seldom bit the hand that fed them. In fact, labeling such
Islamist parties as "opposition" movements might even be somewhat misleading. For
they saved their harshest verbal attacks, their sharpest criticism, not for
those in charge, but for those they competed against: Leftists and outlawed Islamists.
They sold themselves mainly as alternatives within the system -- as substitutes
to the enervated and corrupt parties of yesteryear. Once in parliament, the PJD
tried
to shame these lackluster parties by taking attendance during open sessions.
It even supported punishing those members of parliament who were absent.
Most significantly, unlike their Egyptian counterparts, the PJD has not
displayed any ability or even desire to challenge or confront state authority
this year. Indeed, in the midst of the Arab Spring, in the midst of the most
historic protests in the modern history of Morocco (and, of course, the
region), the PJD stood by the monarchy -- even when the other
major Islamist group in the country, the banned Justice and Spirituality
Organization, led marches to oppose it.
It therefore should come as no surprise that when the future Islamist prime
minister of Morocco,
Abdullah Benkirane, initially
ascended to the position of party head in 2008, one of the first people to
congratulate him was none other than the king himself. The monarch's praise was
a reminder of the Islamist leader's track record of working with, not against,
the regime. Benkirane had long exhibited, the king pointed out, a "desire to
put the supreme interests of the nation and just causes above all other
considerations."
After the PJD's first place finish this time around, Benkirane returned the
favor. He reminded
citizens that the real head of state in the country is the king. He said
this, of course, in an effort to allay fears of an Islamist takeover. But he
also, in the process, managed to admit the shortfalls of recent reforms. How
democratic can a country be when the head of the winning party readily admits
that his powers are limited?
Yet, both the king and the Islamist leader gained a great deal from these results. Benkirane, of course, earned the highest elected office in the country. But, by begrudgingly appointing him, the king showed that he was holding firm to his new constitution. Together, they now have an opening to put forward a new partnership of Islamist governance: one in which a monarch imposes a considerable check on the prospect of unbridled Islamist power.
This was not a difficult sell to many young Islamists. There has been good
reason, after all, for the PJD to stand by the regime all this time. Party
activists wanted to continue to reap the spoils of electoral inclusion: the jobs,
the generous state electoral funding, the fancy party conventions, even the
respect that comes with wearing suits and campaigning for office. During my two
years of field research among young Islamists in Morocco, PJD activists would often
tell me: "We are here because we have a future in the party." In a country
of mass unemployment, where young people's futures are far from certain, this
was a powerful inducement.
They also, of course, wanted to continue to hold the government positions they
already had. And they carried out these jobs in much the same manner in which
they had procured them in the first place: with disciplined pragmatism. The
party's outbursts of hysterics tend to get the lion's share of media attention,
such as when its affiliated newspaper blamed the Asian
Tsunami on sinning Asians or when Benkirane himself lashed
out at a camerawoman in parliament for her immodest attire. But, for the
most part, the party's stabs at governance have been noteworthy largely for
their lack of excitement.
The PJD candidates who held local office made fighting corruption and
reorganizing city finances to eliminate waste their overarching themes. When a
PJD candidate was elected the mayor of Kenitra, a city north of Rabat, one of his first major acts
in office, for example, was to digitize municipal records. His rise was
particularly telling: while serving as head of the PJD's youth wing (the
biggest of any party in the country) he also held a desk job doing tech support
for the prime minister's office -- back when the prime minister was a Socialist.
He then went
on to serve as an advisor on outsourcing to the economic affairs minister.
This yearning to get to work -- more to the point, to do the work of governing -- has long characterized the party, and there is little reason to believe that this will abate. At the headquarters following their second place finish in 2007, as party elites debated whether to join the government as a junior partner or remain outside it, young Islamists were heard making the surprising (and ultimately unsuccessful) case for the former. The rank and file, they said, could not go another five years without government jobs and related patronage. Now they won't have to wait any longer.
Avi Spiegel is an assistant professor of political science at the University of San Diego and is completing a book on the rise of young Arab Islamists.
BDELHAK SENNA/AFP/Getty Images
EXPLORE:MIDDLE EAST, MIDDLE EAST POSTER 4, ARAB WORLD, MIDDLE EAST, NORTH AFRICA, DEMOCRACY, ELECTIONS, POLITICS
This is what Prime minster do?
The government's Commons defeat over the Gurkhas shows Gordon Brown is "rapidly running out of political authority", David Cameron has said.
The Conservative leader said Mr Brown had "misjudged the public mood" over how many Gurkhas may settle in the UK.
Labour lost a vote on the issue after 27 of its MPs rebelled.
Mr Cameron said the defeat capped a damaging few weeks for Mr Brown but the PM said he would not be "diverted" from the vital challenges facing the UK.
Asked if his authority had suffered, the prime minister insisted he was "getting on" with the business of government, focusing on swine flu and the recession among other issues.
"We are dealing with the big issues. We are not going to be diverted," Mr Brown told a press conference after talks with the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
Business Secretary Lord Mandelson has admitted it was "turning into a bit of a week" for Labour but denied the prime minister was losing his authority.
He said Mr Brown was right to be taking the initiative over issues such as reforms of MPs' expenses, on which they will be a series of crunch Commons votes on Thursday.
But former Labour minister Tom Harris said the lost vote was a "humiliation" for the government.
In his blog, Mr Harris wrote that he had backed the government as it deserved "credit" for what it had done for the Gurkhas but conceded Labour had "screwed up".
'Misjudging mood'
At his monthly news conference, Mr Cameron said a sequence of events showed Mr Brown's authority was being undermined.
Last week's Budget showed the government was "running out of money" while the Damian McBride e-mail scandal indicated an administration "running out of moral authority", he said.
The prime minister misjudged the public mood and what was right
David Cameron on the Gurkha vote
Brown faces new Commons battle
Nick Robinson on the PM's troubles
The government had also been forced into a number of policy U-turns over issues such as Titan prisons, he added.
The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats united to inflict a shock defeat on Labour over the Gurkhas as a large number of Labour MPs either voted against the government or abstained.
In response, ministers will reconsider the restrictions on entry for Gurkhas, which critics say are arbitrary and unjust, and bring forward a decision on current applications.
"The prime minister misjudged the public mood and what was right," Mr Cameron said of the vote.
He urged the government to accept Conservative proposals to reform immigration rules to allow all Gurkhas who served in the British army before 1997 to be able to come to the UK.
Mr Brown, who chaired a Cabinet meeting on Thursday, said Labour had done more for the Gurkhas than any previous government and "wanted to do more".
The Liberal Democrats have also calling for all Gurkhas to get equal right of residence.
In addition to the Gurkhas, Mr Cameron said there were other areas where the two main opposition parties could "co-operate" together, such as the environment and civil liberties.
However, he stressed there were still areas of "big disagreement" between the two parties - notably on Europe.
Economic challenge
On the economy, Mr Cameron said it would be the political party which best understood how to cope with the changed economic climate which would deserve to win the next election.
The Conservatives are reviewing all their public spending commitments, with Mr Cameron suggesting a "new era of thrift" in government is needed to restore public finances to health.
But he rejected suggestions that this would leave the Tories having to take "nasty" decisions on spending cuts and tax rises that would effectively derail other proposed reforms.
If people viewed the Conservatives as just "a bunch of accountants" the party would have failed, he said.
The Conservatives had to show their policies for reforming public services to give more power to people were consistent with ensuring the government lived within its means, describing this as an "exciting challenge".
With tourism revenue in Japan falling by a third since the earthquake and tsunami, the government is looking at ways - including free flights - of attracting visitors back.
On 11 March Japan was hit by its most powerful earthquake since records began. The quake and subsequent tsunami led to almost 16,000 deaths. Nearly 5,000 people are still missing.
But with the human tragedy came an economic problem, with tourism dropping sharply.
In April 2011, tourism numbers fell by over 60% compared to the year before. They are yet to recover to pre-tsunami levels, despite a new 12.1tn yen ($157bn; £100bn) budget for the reconstruction.
The disaster even had a significant knock-on effect in other countries, with fewer Japanese tourists travelling abroad.
The tower was hardly damaged at all as a result of the earthquake," says Shigeru Yoshino, one of the architects of the building. "In the aftermath, the tower showed the flag of Japan and was an encouragement."
But even now, some tourism boards are still a little reluctant to recommend Japan as a holiday destination.
Around 1.5bn yen (£12.3m) has been set aside by the government to dispel "harmful rumours" about the current situation and radiation risks.
"We have no problem with transport or food products," says Hiroo Nagasawa, general manager of the five-star Hyatt Regency hotel in Tokyo.
"Basically Tokyo is back to normal but I don't know if the message has got out to foreign countries yet."
Travel advice
The Japan National Tourist Organisation predicts that tourism revenues will be a third lower in 2011 than they were in 2010.
This is what the prime minister should think.
Admin of Duck rubber | dog beds

The Middle East Channel offers unique analysis and insights on this diverse and vital region of more than 400 million.
Read More
(1)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE