No Islam is not to blame for the state of affairs in the Middle East! What may be to blame, are those individuals who have destroyed the original concept, that was super-tolerant peace-loving Islam, and replaced it with the Brotherhood of totally intolerant hate.
And or, replaced it with dictatorial theocracies and or so-called strong men?
When we look around the world, we see places like Islamic Turkey, Malaysia, and Indonesia, which are all functioning secular democracies. While they are not perfect, neither is any other so-called democracy?
So no, Islam is not to blame, just those who have abused it and dramatically altered it, so that it no longer represents the original teachings, except say, in the Sofie tradition, which as the least altered over the centuries, remains true to Islamic core principles and original esoteric teachings, which by the way include meditation, as did esoteric Christianity.
Rhrosty.

There's one important omission from the article -- the fact that in Muslim nations half the population are subjected to various forms of constraint and oppression, ranging from dress codes to sexual regulations to legal statutes that reduce them to the level of goods and chattels. THERE'S your 'democratic deficit'; and Islam's blood-soaked hands are red to the elbows with the responsibility for it.

Thank you Riaz, I enjoyed your article. I found it informative, balanced and thought provoking.

I have never been comfortable with the western tendency to blame Islam for the problems Islamic nations’ experience. This is because these problems are not unique to Islamic nations. Their problems are however, a common feature of all totalitarian regimes.

Dictatorships come in a variety of flavors, military, religious, political ideologies and benign dictatorships or royal families. I think Islam is more vulnerable to totalitarian control because their religion “binds” together their social, political, religious and economic fabric. It is just a very small step to shift to dictatorships.

Once in power it is almost impossible for their poverty stricken and disenfranchised populations to gain social equity or justice. In fact many Muslims express their desire to not have these, mostly because they have been lead to believe that these things as bad.

One of the great tragedies of modern times and one of the greatest evils perpetrated upon the peoples of the underdeveloped nations, is the notion that their pain, suffering and poverty is a direct result of the policies, oppression, domination and power of the developed world, when in fact, it is a direct result of the policies, oppression, domination and power of their own leadership that is the primary cause.

Israel has shown what can be done since 1948. They have turned desert land into prosperity and achieved more than Islamic nations have done in centuries.No doubt that is part of the reason the left and others hate them so much.

The article makes an interesting point about the failure of Islamic business values and procedure and the consequence for accumulation of capital as a bar to prosperity relative to Western nations.

Unfortunately this is gibberish. What has happened in Islam is the centralistion of all economic wealth within the Islamic hierarchy. There has been no trickle down effect to the masses, who in any event have been constrained by the oppressive social and personal nature of Islam. Saudi Arabia is text book for this, as is Iran, previously Iraq and Libya, certainly Syria and Pakistan.

And this is the key point because economic prosperity can only be achieved in free countries with individual rights. The failure of Communisn demonstrated that.

What has happened in the West is that the previously oppressive influence of Christianity has been vitiated through the Church's own reformation and the developement of individual rights beginning with the Magna Carta.

There is no equivalent process taking place in Islam or capacity for such.

I am astounded by the author's listing of Islamic countries such as Turkey, Albania, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia, which are likely to have happy endings.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Turkey is only still a success because of its powerful secular tradition enforced by the military. This is now being severely encroached by the current Islamist government.

As for the rest, they all have elements of state failure.

It is not the Arabian heritage which is at fault; it is Islam.

Another propaganda piece for Islam motivated by either ignorance or deceit. There is no "debate". Never was.

Robert Spencer: " ... all of the schools that are considered orthodox teach, as part of the obligation of the Muslim community, warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers."
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/11/pure-islam-and-michael-van-der-galien.html

For example ...

"Hanafi school: A Hanafi manual of Islamic law repeats the same injunctions. It insists that people must be called to embrace Islam before being fought, “because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith.” It emphasizes that jihad must not be waged for economic gain, but solely for religious reasons: from the call to Islam “the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war.”

However, “if the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax [jizya], it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do.” (Al-Hidayah, II.140)"

Ditto for all the other schools of Islamic theology.