Home Opinions Do we need a Libyan Ghannouchi?

Do we need a Libyan Ghannouchi?


By: Abdul-Razzag Dahish*

The old Rashed Ghannoushi wasn’t 180-degree different from the

Abdul-Razzag Dahish
Abdul-Razzag Dahish

new one. Maybe 90 degrees or less. The man who didn’t wear an Islamic headband is the same person who didn’t wear a tie or speak about the governorship of the people, moving away from terms of Abulala Al-Mawdody. He tried in every time to join a generation that sees no place for retroactive thinking and presented his project for modernity reconciled Islam with all Shura principles; from the peaceful handover of power to the right to make mistakes and the acceptance of the different other.  The man remained less controversial than Hasan Al-Toraby and avoided a lot of sub-issues like the torture of the grave, sex and other subjects that may shed blood and discussions.

The portrait of Ghannoushi, which was presented him, tried to show his ability to turn on himself. But these are volatilities of the man whose political pragmatism tops his ideological rigidity; he was the one who refused to pray for mercy for the former president of Tunisia, Al-Habib Abu-Rgeba but turned to another on himself. A man from the “Muslim Brotherhood” camp but without a Quran book and sword on the doctrine as the founder of Muslim Brotherhood, Hasan Al-Banna, believes. He didn’t present the 21st century Islam in a developed repeat of Sayed Qotb but introduced new road signs and words that no one can say he is the speaker of God.

After the nine eleven events, the “Brotherhood” a new autopsy of the Jihadi phenomenon, they portrayed it as a natural result of the military oppression, they also represented themselves as the best to tame the extremist powers.

Ghannoushi believed that secularism doesn’t only mean that religious men don’t intervene in politics but also politicians don’t intervene in religion. After the Tunisian revolution, Al-Nahda movement won it all through ballot boxes in an investment of the silent majority. Though the exaggerations of the movement, the man didn’t hang Tunisia on the movement’s neck; he preferred to distribute any failure amongst all political groups.

It is true that Al-Nahda was carried away with the opportunity to take over, its dictionary started to present terms of victory, enabling, and political isolation and protecting the revolution, but Ghannoushi with his pragmatic instinct knows that staying onboard of the political “Titanic” is political suicide.

Al-Nahda emerged as if it is a movement that refuses any excluding legislations and uses derivatives of the “new liberalism” including the freedom of consciousness and diversions from the Islamic Ummamism to the Tunisian nationalism and from the state of the “Morshed” to the patriotism nation started. So do we need a Libyan Ghannoushi, don’t we need only a Libyan in this Libyan time?

*A Libyan Writer and Journalist