I do understand this, but am also very pessimistic about Islamic leaders taking any significant role in world politics. Any theocracy is at least 500 years out of date. The regimes that exist in place of pure Islamic rule are willing to take the necessary steps to trade with the rest of the world. Islamic rule, it seems, would prefer to have the rest of the world regress 500 years. Neither the current regimes or the Islamic people within those nations see democracy, the rule of law or individual rights as options. Our problem is: what regime do we want to support, one that we can do business with or one that we can't do business with?
These regimes frequently use Islam to legitimize their own political actions, and thus set the stage for another kind of Islam in opposition to them.
It is not an accident that nearly all the hijackers were from countries we consider our allies, but we are busy bombing and attacking a non-allied country which merely made the mistake of allowing them to pass through its territory, and then thumbed its nose at us.
If we were to support regimes which have "liberty and justice for all" as their goal we would not have to try to determine who is a good dictator and who is a bad one.