Introduction

The trend of many Muslim-majority countries embracing a more Islamic governance model is a topic of significant discussion, particularly in the context of what some perceive as the limitation and failure of secularism to address the needs of Muslim societies. This article delves into the reasons behind this shift and the challenges faced by Muslims in non-Islamic states, highlighting the historical and current issues with secularism from an Islamic perspective.

Perceptions and Reality of Life in Muslim Countries

Much of the negative sentiment towards living in Muslim countries arises from the disenfranchising treatment of women and the perceived futility of religious observance in the face of proven inaction from divine figures. Women in many Muslim countries often face significant restrictions on their rights and freedoms compared to their counterparts in secular states. This has led to a widespread sentiment that women are being treated as second-class citizens and that their contributions and dignity are not valued adequately. Furthermore, the daily ritual of praying five times a day is seen as meaningless when religious figures like Allah do not show any observable signs of intervention or concern for their subjects.

Many Muslims yearn for a life that offers more personal freedom and security, which often seems to be in stark contrast to the environments within Muslim-majority countries. The promise of secular governance promised such freedom, combined with the perceived benefits of more advanced societies, has led many to question why their own countries fail to deliver these benefits.

Secularism and Islamic Governance: A Failed Experiment?

The hypothesis that secularism has been a boon for Muslim countries is increasingly met with skepticism. While secular governance may have seemed like an attractive alternative to many, the reality is often far more complex and problematic. The application of secularism in Muslim-majority regions has often intertwined with external geopolitical interests, leading to significant social and political upheaval.

One of the most compelling examples is the comparison between the Islamic Caliphate and contemporary European and American models. The Caliphate, particularly under the Ottoman Empire, offered a system of governance that was inclusive and cosmopolitan, promoting religious and cultural pluralism without hindrance. This system allowed for the free movement of people throughout the region, a privilege that in modern times, due to the fragmentation of territory and the imposition of borders, is largely a thing of the past.

Take, for instance, the case of the European Union (EU) and the concept of visa-free travel within the Schengen zone. This represents a modern achievement, enabling citizens to travel freely across multiple states. However, this freedom was historically enjoyed by Muslims under the Islamic Caliphate without the need for special visas. The dissolution of the Caliphate led to the creation of numerous smaller states governed by autocratic rulers, often in alignment with Western interests and against the interests of local Muslims. The West’s support for these rulers, despite their authoritarian nature, is a prime example of how secular governance can be co-opted by external powers.

The case of Iran before and after the 1979 revolution is another illustration of how secularism can be contorted to serve foreign interests. When Iran was a secular country under the Pahlavi dynasty, the United States played a significant role in facilitating the 1953 coup that ousted Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh and installed the Shah, a longtime US ally, as a dictator. The resulting theocratic regime, while far from ideal, ensured Iran’s safety from foreign interference, something that a purely secular government might not have been able to guarantee.

The Unveiling of Western Secularism: Hypocrisy and Double Standards

The critique of Western secularism does not end with governance and borders. Organizations like the United Nations (UN) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) are often cited as exemplars of global order and justice. However, the reality is far more nuanced. The UN and its laws are often applied with double standards, where Western nations are rarely subject to the same scrutiny as their counterparts. The ICC, for instance, has yet to bring war criminals from Western nations to justice, highlighting the hypocrisy in the promotion of international law. The Palestinian plight further reinforces this argument, as their situation has remained unresolved despite decades of international discussions and decisions.

These examples underscore the inconsistency and inequity in the application of secular rules and principles by Western powers. The lack of true freedom and security for Muslims in many regions suggests that the secular model often serves to maintain the status quo rather than to truly benefit and protect the people it purports to represent.

Conclusion and Future Outlook

The current trends towards Islamic governance in many Muslim-majority countries are a reaction to the perceived failings of secularism. While the path towards a complete Islamic state is complex and fraught with challenges, it is clear that the quest for a more inclusive and just society is a primary motivator for many. The Islamic resurgence can be seen as a natural progression towards a system of governance that is more aligned with the cultural and religious values of the people.

As the world continues to navigate the complexities of international relations and governance, it is imperative that the West acknowledges the nuances and historical context of its engagement with Muslim-majority countries. The shift towards Islamic governance is not merely a rejection of Western influence but a reflection of a deeper societal desire for justice, freedom, and the protection of cultural and religious identity.