Going to war was the U.S. president’s decision, for which he alone is responsible.
Daniel C. Kurtzer, Aaron David Miller
{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy"
]
}REQUIRED IMAGE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 21, 2007
- NEWS RELEASE -
The political arm of the Kuwaiti Muslim Brotherhood stands poised to achieve more political influence than almost any of its sister movements in the Middle East, yet must strike a balance between building a broad political coalition and pursuing its goal of Islamization – a vision for the nation challenged by a number of Kuwaiti political actors. How will this need for compromise affect future democratic reforms in the country, as well as the Brotherhood’s long-term goal of a more Islamic society?
In a new Carnegie Paper, Pushing toward Party Politics? Kuwait’s Islamic Constitutional Movement, Nathan Brown, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment, explores how the Islamic Constitutional Movement (ICM), in an effort to gain political legitimacy, has pursued democratic reforms and formed alliances with other opposition forces it regards as unsympathetic to its religious, cultural, and moral values.
Despite critics who question the ICM’s commitment to democratic principles, Brown argues that the ICM “supports liberalizing political reforms fairly faithfully, but it draws the line when liberalization leads in a cultural direction” contrary to its goals of Islamization. The ICM holds strong positions against perceived moral corruption in Kuwaiti society, often using forceful language that it eschews on most other occasions.
Brown believes that the ICM is entering a period of greater tension in its relationship with the government and while the relatively permissive political atmosphere in Kuwait will probably survive, the current tension will force all political actors to develop new strategies to achieve their objectives.
Notes:
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is a private, nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing cooperation between nations and promoting active international engagement by the United States. Founded in 1910, its work is nonpartisan and dedicated to achieving practical results.
###
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
Going to war was the U.S. president’s decision, for which he alone is responsible.
Daniel C. Kurtzer, Aaron David Miller
The cracks between Trump and Netanyahu have become more pronounced, particularly over energy and leadership targets.
Eric Lob
The crisis is not just a story of energy vulnerability. It’s also a complex, high-stakes political challenge.
Darcie Draudt-Véjares
The war in Ukraine is costing Russia its leverage overseas. Across the South Caucasus and Middle East, this presents an opportunity for Europe to pick up the pieces and claim its own sphere of influence.
William Dixon, Maksym Beznosiuk
Amid increased polarization and the influence of disinformation, radical-right parties are once again gaining traction across Europe. With landmark elections on the horizon in several countries, are the EU’s geostrategic vision and fundamental values under existential threat?
Catherine Fieschi, Cas Mudde