|
AMP Comment - Oct. 26, 2004
Post-AMT qualified endorsement strategy
By Abdus Sattar Ghazali
As more details are coming out of the 7-hour marathon meeting of the American Muslim Task Force (AMT) on Oct. 19, 2004 in Washington, it is becoming clear that a deeper rift prevailed among the AMT components and the meeting ended in limbo with an implied decision of no-endorsement. It looks that there were only three main players in the AMT, namely the American Muslim Alliance (AMA), the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC). The other seven members of the coalition were either marginal groups or inactive in the political arena in comparison to the three major groups.
It can be conjectured from the anti and pro-AMT decision articles, published during the last one week, that the CAIR was in favor of endorsement for Senator Kerry, the MPAC for no endorsement while the AMA apparently wanted to support Nader-Camejo ticket, at least in those states which are not considered as swing states and where the election results are a forgone conclusion. (The AMA’s close ties with Peter Camejo give credence to this assessment.)
However, on Oct. 20, at the insistence of CAIR, the AMT implied decision was changed to endorse Senator Kerry. The question is why CAIR was impatient to support Kerry. It released a new opinion poll on Oct. 22, one day after the AMT’s qualified endorsement of Kerry. Obviously, this poll was in hand when CAIR put pressure on AMT to endorse Kerry. AMA yielded to this demand with a twist that called for the endorsement as a protest vote and appreciating “the outstanding role of Ralph Nader in highlighting the denial of civil liberties to religious and ethnic minorities.” (Keep in mind Nader-Camejo ticket and AMA-Camejo ties.)
Obviously, the third main component of the 10-member coalition, the MPAC got upset at the overnight change in Oct. 19 decision and opted to leave the loose coalition. On Oct. 20, the MPAC issued a long statement about its decision of not endorsing any presidential candidate saying: “An endorsement is far too important to give away without delivering solid promises to the community that their interests will be of paramount importance to the next President. Leaders of other religious and ethnic communities throughout our country do not endorse unless they receive such promises. We should not be any different.”
On Oct. 13, many people in the Muslim community were astonished to receive an AMT press release saying that the AMT has not yet endorsed any presidential candidate. If this press release is interpreted in the light of the MPAC announcement, it appears that there was a rift in AMT’s ranks for a long time.
The AMT press release showed the following organizations as its members: American Muslim Alliance (AMA), Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Muslim Alliance of North America (MANA), Muslim American Society (MAS), Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), Muslim Student Association – National (MSA-N), and Project Islamic Hope (PIH). Despite MPAC’s departure, the AMT still maintains 10 members as a marginal group, Muslim Ummah of North America (MUNA), was quietly inducted to fill the MAPC slot.
Now the question is why MPAC decided to issue a separate statement one day before the AMT decision. Apparently the AMT refused the MPAC to share their press conference and elaborate their position of non-endorsement.
Many people in the community are wondering about the impact of AMT’s qualified endorsement on the Muslim voters. Obviously, the credit of any massive Muslim vote to Kerry will not go to the American Muslim organizations or leaders but to the anti-Muslim and anti-Arab policies of the Bush administration and the grassroots work by local community leaders and small local groups. Mention of the AMT’s decision by mainstream media may attract the attention of some Democratic Party leaders but it is unlikely to impress the Muslim voters who were not looking for any “divine” guidance to vote for Kerry.
The episode of AMT’s qualified support to Senator Kerry leads us to another important question: What is the lesson for the Muslim organizations and their leaders? Unity is possible with diversity since unity does not mean uniformity. There are hundreds of small and big organizations which are working with a single broader objective that is the uplift of the Muslim community. It may not be possible to bring these organizations under one umbrella but it will always be possible to get endorsement of many organizations on many specific issues. This method is being adopted by several organizations to mobilize public opinion for their causes. The politics of coalition building (with dozens of names appearing as a footnote) may prove a futile exercise if most of the energy is wasted on keeping the coalition together rather than concentration on the professed objectives.
In the final analysis, as only one week is left in the election, the Muslim organizations have a daunting task to translate the massive support of Kerry into reality rather talking about preparations for election 2006 and 2008.
|
