Islamist Parties and Political Normalization in the Muslim World

6. Mapping the Terrain of Reform in Yemen: Islah over Two Decades

Chapter 6 Mapping the Terrain of Reform in Yemen: Islah over Two Decades stacey philbrick yadav In words that captured well the Yemeni Islah party’s trajectory over more than two decades, a member of the party’s consultative council once explained that the typical Islamist in Yemen ‘‘does not come in any one color, but is always open to change.’’1 The notion that Yemeni Islamists affiliated with Islah vary widely in their ideologies and methods has been borne out by twenty-three years of vibrant political practice, against a backdrop of authoritarian regime encroachment and, ultimately, regime transition . This variation was made evident from the outset, in an intra-Islamist debate over whether to participate in Yemen’s post-unification political institutions, in differences over how to relate to the regime once elected, and most recently in deep cleavages related to the formation of a crossideological alliance of opposition parties. Islah also played a role in Yemen’s 2011 ‘‘Change Revolution,’’ and is now a member of the transitional unity government and a dominant figure in the National Dialogue Conference. Whether serving as junior partner in alliance with the ruling party in the 1990s, leading the formal opposition in the 2000s, or contributing to postcon flict conciliation today, Islah’s flexibility has enabled it to remain at the center of Yemeni political life for more than two decades. This flexibility is owed in part to the role of internal cleavages in the Islamist movement, particularly in its most visible institutional expression, the Yemeni Congregation for Reform (Islah, or the Islah party). While internal factionalism makes it difficult to identify unitary Islahi ‘‘party positions ,’’ the lessons derived from Islah’s practice from Yemen’s unification in 1990 to the present sheds light on some core assumptions about the Mapping the Terrain of Reform in Yemen 135 dynamic effects of Islamist parliamentary participation, for Islamists themselves and for the broader political field. In particular, Islah’s experience highlights the dual direction of change brought about through Islamist participation in formal political institutions, and poses a challenge to linear expectations of Islamist ‘‘moderation.’’ Party discourse has had a powerful effect on Yemen’s political vocabulary and has contributed to major shifts in what Yemenis view as politically desirable and pragmatically possible. At the same time, internal balance among factions and external alliances with other partisan and extrapartisan actors and organizations have been transformed along the way. As this chapter will demonstrate, over the last two decades of parliamentary participation, factions in Islah have gained and lost political power, within the party itself and in the broader political field. Indeed, Islah’s experience suggests that the nature of the political interlocutors with whom Islamists compete has mattered considerably for the content of Islamist party activism. Factions have negotiated their internal positions in the party by investing in important extrapartisan institutions and crossideological alliances. This practice became even more pronounced in the mid-2000s, once the triangular balance of power that characterized the party’s internal dynamics throughout the 1990s gave way to a more bipolar distribution of power (and ideology) within the party. This has begun to reverse itself again in the wake of the momentous events of 2011, further illustrating the fluid and nonlinear nature of the party’s ideological composition and the impact of its practical choices, which together make the case of Islamism in Yemen so interesting and potentially elucidatory. While it is difficult to write about Islah, or Yemen more generally, during a period of substantial transition and political restructuring, what can be said today is that the process of participation and competition with ideological others has undeniably shaped the content and practice of the Islah party. Alliance-formation and cross-ideological networks have strengthened factions , but also exacerbated existing tensions between them. Relationships with actors and organizations outside the party have shaped the balance of power within it, leaving a clear mark on its discourse and practice. Thus, to say that ‘‘the party’’ has been responsive to the structural constraints it has confronted in the face of declining pluralism at the national level is undoubtedly true, but also obscures the elemental characteristic of Islah—its internal factionalism—in determining what ‘‘the party’’ stands for or pursues at any given moment. 136 Stacey Philbrick Yadav This chapter will trace the transformation of the Islah party through three distinctive periods in its...