Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, April 2000, pages 61, 78

Islam in America

One Muslim’s Choices in Picking a President

By M.A. Muqtedar Khan

The race to win party nominations for presidential elections 2000 has now reached a very interesting stage. In a manner of speaking the tables have been turned in both the Republican as well as Democratic primaries. Anointed heirs have now become underdogs and underdogs are now front- runners. Only a few weeks ago Governor George W. Bush seemed invincible. But after the upsets in New Hampshire and Michigan, Senator John McCain’s chances are growing by leaps and bounds. Bradley earlier on seemed to have discovered a way to beat Al Gore, but after Iowa and New Hampshire, it can be safely assumed that Gore will win the Democratic nomination.

For the first time, more than a million and half Muslims will be voting in the presidential elections of 2000. They should not be daunted by the U.S. political spectrum, which ranges from liberal democrats to conservative Republicans, and which poses many conundrums for Muslims who do not fit easily into American political pigeonholes.

Republican emphasis on family values, individual responsibility, personal virtue and God-consciousness resonates with many Muslims. But the affinity that some Republicans show for individuals and organizations which are often rabidly Islamophobic, racist and anti-immigrant scares us. While some Muslims worry that Republicans are more inclined to wage wars against Muslims overseas, like President Bush in Iraq, others argue that Republicans are more pragmatic than Democrats when it comes to foreign policy, and these Muslims prefer pragmatists to liberal crusaders.

Democrats and their concern for diversity and appreciation of immigrants make Muslims feel safer in America. However, the complete disregard for personal ethics so egregiously demonstrated by President Clinton and his sexual escapades; the extreme liberals’ support for alternate lifestyles which threaten the traditional family, and their anti-religion bigotry repel Muslims. Ideally, Muslims would like to see Democrats hold a majority in the Congress but have a Republican in the White House. That would give them the best of both parties. Muslims would get tolerance for their values at home and have a more pragmatic foreign policy.

But probably most Muslims would rather evaluate the merits and demerits of each candidate than just vote along party lines. That is my own approach, and in the following discussion I propose to offer my personal criteria for measuring the four leading presidential candidates. Since American Muslim interests cover both domestic as well as foreign policy, and also include both public and personal ethics, the matrix by which I make my decisions looks like this:

Ethics

Public

Personal

Policy

Foreign

Domestic

The criteria of public ethics may include items ranging from personal credibility to attitudes toward Islam, abortion and family values. Public ethics is essentially an indicator of individual integrity. Qualities such as individual honesty, reliability and promise-keeping will count on this scale. I must, however, warn readers that there is no way of measuring these qualities with total accuracy. One has to go by ”perceptions” developed over time. While it may be unfair at times, the reality is that perceptions play a powerful role in politics.

Muslims will tend to judge the candidate’s foreign policy on the basis of his positions on Kashmir, Palestine, Kosovo, Chechnya, Pakistan and Iraq as primary indicators. On domestic issues, Muslim interests have not really crystallized. The only issue that seems to have galvanized Muslim political institutions is repeal of the “secret evidence” provision of the anti-terrorism act, and that is more of a foreign policy than a domestic issue.

My inability to indicate confidently domestic issues which genuinely concern Muslims is a sad commentary on the self-imposed alienation of Muslims from mainstream American concerns. But it is still safe to suggest that many American Muslims do have strong domestic concerns that may range from family values and abortion to taxes and respect for diversity.

Based on the above criteria I have personally ranked the four major contenders on each category, using 3 for first place, 2 for second place, 1 for third place and 0 for last place. My rankings are offered with due humility, not as a definitive guide to how American Muslims will or should vote, but based solely on what my personal application of Muslim concerns to what I know about the candidates has led me to conclude.

Public Ethics

George W. Bush (3)

John McCain (1.5)

Bill Bradley (1.5)

Al Gore (0)

Personal Ethics

John McCain (2)

George W. Bush (2)

Bill Bradley (2)

Al Gore (0)

Foreign Policy

George W. Bush (3)

John McCain (2)

Bill Bradley (1)

Al Gore (0)

Domestic Policy

Bill Bradley (3)

Al Gore (2)

John McCain (1)

George W. Bush (0)

On personal ethics very little decisive information is available on Bush, Bradley and McCain. Yes, there are rumors that Bush is intellectually challenged and that McCain has a temper, while Bradley is unimpressive. But these are not ethical issues per se. Therefore I decided to divide all the points between the candidates except Gore. Gore has lied in this campaign about his position on abortion. It suggests to me that, like his boss, he prefers to lie rather than explain when confronted with difficult issues. In the last eight years Gore has had many opportunities to come out and make some positive gestures toward Islam and Muslims, but he has steadily avoided that.

On public ethics, Gore’s exposure does provide enough evidence to suggest that he is willing to cut corners for political gains. Perhaps all of them are willing to do so to some degree, but we know that Gore has for sure. The entire issue of soft money and the way he misrepresented what was happening with the Chinese money makes me too suspicious to trust him.

While it may mean nothing to many, Bush’s willingness to acknowledge publicly that his political values are influenced by Jesus suggests that he is not afraid to say what he believes. To say you believe in God and are influenced by this belief in the American political arena is like Galileo telling the pope of his time that the earth revolves around the sun.

McCain’s ambiguity on abortion and his obvious attempts to sit on the fence on this issue suggests that there is more to him than he is willing to reveal. He may be a closet Democrat. Bush can therefore be preferred to McCain, if for no other reason than to avoid future surprises from the senator.

On foreign policy one can safely assume that the Democratic Party has been completely captured by the Israel lobby, and Muslims in general can hope for little good to come from a Democrat on foreign policy. The only exception so far has been Clinton’s intervention in Kosovo, but his willingness to see Chechens being massacred by Russians has reduced the goodwill earned in Kosovo.

McCain, too, has tried to pander to the Israel lobby threatening more serious actions against Iraq and Iran. What more does he want in Iraq? U.S. nuclear attacks on Iraqi women and children to kill those who have survived the sanctions? Bush has at least said the right things on Chechnya and Kosovo, even though he may not be able to find them on a map.

On domestic policy, as I pointed out earlier, Democrats are easily a better option for Muslims than Republicans. In my mind Bradley has more integrity than Gore, and I am happy to note than even Michael Jordan agrees. I rate Bradley above Gore. And because on domestic issues McCain exhibits more of the traits of a moderate Democrat than Bush, despite Bush’s compassionate conservatism, I rate McCain above Bush.

My final ranking, based upon the ratings in each of the preceding sections, is as follows.

Final Ranking

1. George Bush (8)

2. Bill Bradley (7.5)

3. John McCain (6.5)

4. Al Gore (2)

Muslim readers, however, should feel free to develop their own criteria and allocate their own ratings before they vote, as long as they do vote. As citizens of the United States, that is the only effective way for us to influence the U.S. government to follow, in both foreign and domestic affairs, the paths of personal and public morality in which we all believe.

M.A. Muqtedar Khan is a member of the faculty of international politics at Washington College, MD, and a doctoral fellow in international relations at Georgetown University. He is locally known as the “Mufti on the Internet” and is a director of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy.