Opinion: ISO Islamic democracy

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

The United States has reportedly spent perhaps $10 billion in open and covert aid to Pakistan’s President Prevez Musharraf since 9/11, so one would think Americans would have gotten at least some positive bounce for its warbucks. Wrong. A fascinating new survey by WorldPublicOpinion.org and the U.S. Institute of Peace provides both an indictment of how poorly U.S. policies are viewed by the Pakistani people, and some pointers for how to improve matters, if the next U.S. president cares to do so. The survey should be of particular interest to those Republican candidates who’ve supported Musharraf, as well as to Sen. Barack Obama, who has expressed support for possible unilateral U.S. military action in Pakistan.

The bad news is not new but very bad indeed: By huge majorities, the Pakistani people now perceive the presence of U.S. troops in South Asia as a security threat to Pakistan -- more people even than think India poses a critical security threat. Given Pakistan’s bloody history with India and its current strategic importance to the so-called war on terror, this isn’t just a public diplomacy problem for the United States. It’s a catastrophe. The survey found 72% thought the U.S. military presence in Asia posed a ‘critical threat’ while another 12% thought it was ‘important but not critical.’ In contrast, only 53% thought tensions between India and Pakistan and closer relations between India and the U.S. were a ‘critical threat,’ about half cited violence between different religious and ethnic groups in Pakistan and 41% cited Al Qaeda as a critical threat. Only 16% thought Iran developing a nuclear weapon posed such a threat and only 10% thought China’s rise as a world power was very worrisome. The survey was conducted among 907 urban adults polled in 19 cities and had a margin of error of 3.3%.

Only 18% thought the Pakistan-U.S. security cooperation of the past five years had benefited Pakistan or was of equal benefit to Pakistan and the U.S., while 29% though it had hurt the U.S. and 55% thought it had mostly benefited the U.S. or benefited neither country.

The number of those who beleive the U.S. goal is to weaken and divide the Islamic world has risen from 73% of Pakistanis in February, 2007, to 86% when the same question was asked again in September, 2007. And overall, only 23% trust the U.S. to act responsibly ‘somewhat’ or ‘a great deal,’ while 49% said they trust the United States ‘not at all’ and another 15% said they have ‘not very much’ trust in the U.S. ability to act responsibly.

The good news is that much as most Pakistanis dislike U.S. actions, they are also disenchanted with Islamic extremists and by large majorities, reject violence against civilians. But they are universally, emphatically and by huge margins in favor of democratic government, and want to live in a country that is governed according to Islamic principles. Given that Pakistan was founded as a Muslim homeland, on one level this isn’t surprising. But as University of Marlyand pollster Steven Kull points out, whenever there is conflict in a Muslim country, the United States tends to believe that it must be because Western-oriented, secular U.S. allies are clashing with Muslim extremists in league with Al Qaeda. ‘This narrative does not apply to Pakistan,’ Kull noted. In fact, the polls show that there are almost no pro-U.S. forces and secularism is a dirty word, but there are very few Al Qaeda supporters, either. There is very little suipport for the ‘Talibanization of daily life in Pakistan,’ but real support for madrassah reform, which means Pakistanis want their schools to teach their children to be good Muslims, but they want better math and science education as well.

Most important, Pakistanis see no contradiction between democracy, a government that follows Islamic principles and a larger role for sharia law in their societies. In fact, Pakistanis want all three. If the U.S. wants to get on the right side of history, not to mention the coming elections, it had better get intimately acquainted with Islamic democracy, however it is defined in any given Muslim nation.

The interesting news for Obama is that a plurality of Pakistanis are opposed to their own military going into the federally administered tribal areas to pursue and capture Al Qaeda or Taliban fighters. But 80% said their government should not allow U.S. or other foreign troops into Pakistan to do the job. Respondents were also asked the Obama question: Suppose the Pakistani government learned that Osama bin Laden was in the tribal areas and found his exact location. Even under that scenario, 39% thought their government should not try to capture bin Laden and only 24% thought it should.

How are the presidential candidates going to reconcile support for democracy in Pakistan with the goal of capturing Osama bin Laden? Last we heard, U.S. intelligence thinks he’s probably in the tribal areas, though only 2% of Pakistanis surveyed thought he was there. Some 18% thought Osama was in Afghanistan and 8% volunteered to the pollsters that he was probably hiding in the United States. Cultural disconnect, anyone?