I believe belly-dancing is associated with Turkey and Egypt.

Since these are Muslim countries, I'm puzzled why they would allow
belly-dancing. Doesn't Islam require that women cover up?

I think Islam doesn?t allow belly dancing because it doesn?t allow
music, and silent dancing is no fun. A much better place to ask this
question is (yep, you guessed it) http://www.askimam.com where an
authentic Imam answers questions from faithful from all over the
world. An eye-opener, BTW.

So, according to Imam  Mufti Ebrahim Desai all music is prohibited, as
well as of course dancing. Any mention of belly-dancers is in this
question:

http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=8847

As to prohibition of music of any kind please refer to those answers:
http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=12953
http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=6285
http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=12923
http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=12940
http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=8847

If that doesn?t answer your question feel free to Ask Imam (dot com).

Greetings,
I won't argue with askimam about what it correct according to the
Koran and shariah.  Personally, having travelled in several Muslim
countries, I never heard that music was forbidden, and music is
certainly very common and present in those countries.  There are pop
music stars in Turkey and Egypt as well as traditional music, sung and
instrumental.  The existance of this typical "oriental"-sounding music
indicates that it stems from a very old tradition. This suggests that
regardless of what Islamic religious laws say, music has never been
effectively prohibited.

Belly dancing implies to westerners a lot of skin, and it is also
based on long tradition, but as the askimam site puts it,
traditionally it belongs in the haraam -the women's quarter, performed
before women only.  In the 17th century, Lady Mary Montegu reported
from Turkey the freedom women showed in the hamam (public bath), so
among themselves, I imagine that they danced rather "freely".
In Egypt, the dancers are required  - I believe - to cover themselves
from their ankles up, but the cloth can be pretty diaphanous from the
films of weddings that I have seen.  And this may have been the case
early; Lady Montegu reported that the finest cotten was so thin that
even under several layers one could see a woman's nipple.

Traditionally  -as in the question to askimam- there was belly dancing
at the women's party before the wedding.  I have seen a film from
Egypt of an older woman dancing at such a party, and she certainly
could "move it", better that what I have seen anywhere else, and it
was obviously very suggestive, if you will, instruction for the
wedding night.  Oh, yes, she was guite covered, which did not detract
from the suggestiveness of her dancing.

In Turkey  - and probably elsewhere -  the traditon is still alive,
not just something professionals do.  In a popular restaurant area in
Istanbul, I have seen girls dancing after dinner  - in jeans -  and a
man or two, also clothed, of course.

So, you are correct, Islam requires that women cover up, but it hasn't
done away with old traditions.  I wonder if Salome's dancing  -
arousing Herod's lust - was not quite in the same tradition.

Dear Shira:  Is Belly Dance Intended to Serve Men?
http://www.shira.net/dearshira/servingmen.htm
..."Since the rise of Islam, "belly dancing" among Muslim women has
been mostly a social dance that was done in the company of other
women. Just as we use social dancing as part of our celebration at
wedding receptions and other happy occasions, so did people in the
Middle East. In traditional Muslim households, women celebrated
separately from men. For each special event, men had their party, and
women had a separate one. Men danced with other men, and women danced
with other women, all using the moves that today we think of as "belly
dancing" moves..."

More at the link.

Egypt and Turkey are not god examples since they are secular countries.
It's better to compare situation in Iran and United Arab Emirates.

Greetings,

Islamic law is derived from 2 main sources: the Quran (the word of
God) and the Sunnah (the teachings and practices of Prophet Muhammad).
 Islamic scholars have derived 2 additional tools to help codify
certain matters that by necessity did not exist at the time the of the
prophet, namely the Qiyaas (comparing the situation in question to
situations that have been previously resolved by resorting to Quran
and Sunnah directly) and the Ijmaa (unanimous consensus of the
scholars on a particular issue).
The subject of belly dancing specifically is (to my knowledge) not
covered by either of the the two primary sources, and hence the
rulings of the various muftis and scholars are secondary derivations
based on Qiyaas and Ijmaa.
What is beyond doubt in Islam, is that women should not be sexually
provocative to anyone other than their husband; neither in the way
they are dressed or in the way they move or talk.  Similarly, men are
forbidden to emulate the women, and also have restrictions on their
dress and behaviour in the audience of women other than their wives. 
This provides a solid basis for scholars to use Qiyaas to derive a
ruling that Islam does not allow belly dancing as a public practice.
In response to other comments, I completely disagree with askimam
about the fact that music is not allowed by Islam.  This is beyond
argument simply because the Prophet himself used to encourage his
people to sing and rejoice on special occasions, and the Quran
encourages us to beautify our voices when reciting it.  What may be
subject to question though, is music that is played with the sole
intention of provoking ane evil (e.g. public dancing). This is another
example of contextual rulings that are unnecessarily generalized.
As for the comments about Egypt and Turkey, suffuce to say that there
are no "Islamic countries" that follow the Shariaa (Islamic law) to
the word.  Alcohol and gambling are also permitted according to
Egyptian law, while there is no shadow of doubt that both these
practices are blatant sins under Islamic law.

God knows best.

This must be the comment of the man of God.
It is simple, Islam is not Christianity what means "imam's, or
askimam.com" services may only include their opinion about quran words
or a groups words.
What means, there are no praists or levels of being near god. You and
god, everbody else means nothing including imam's. So that web site
wont work.
You have to read Quran yourself and analyse. Sunnah (the teachings and
practices of Prophet Muhammad, I am not quite sure if "human being"
added something to words of Muhammed, but even a letter is not changed
of Quran. I ve read Quran in Turkish a couple times. Music is not
forbidden, but a tariqat can believe, I ve read my self no there is
not, music is not banned.
You can not say ISLAM, but can be called Quran.
Quran orders to close their parts to protect themselves from "rape"
which is common and "legal" before Muhammed came. God stopped the evil
raping to womens by ordering these to people by Muhammed. To protect
human being from human being. You may give up from the benefits of
having the pill (order of god) but dont forget the pill (order) is for
you also the fact is not having the pill. All is for us.

cynthia-ga,
>>That is a wonderful link.
If I were a Muslim, it occurred to me that to this question I might ask back:
Do Christian religions approve of table dancing?  (And much more that
appears in print and on TV in western countries?)