Semua Penyertaan dalam "Jemaah Islamiyah" kategori
Orang Arab Esok
DAVID B. OTTAWAY
Oktober 6, 1981, dimaksudkan untuk menjadi hari perayaan di Mesir. Ia menandakan ulang tahun detik kemenangan terbesar Mesir dalam tiga konflik Arab-Israel, apabila tentera underdog negara itu melintasi Terusan Suez pada hari-hari pembukaan 1973 Perang Yom Kippur dan menyebabkan tentera Israel terkial-kial berundur. Dalam keadaan sejuk, pagi tanpa awan, stadium Kaherah penuh sesak dengan keluarga Mesir yang datang untuk melihat tentera memperkasakan perkakasannya. Di tempat peninjauan, Presiden Anwar el-Sadat,arkitek perang, memerhati dengan penuh kepuasan ketika lelaki dan mesin berarak di hadapannya. Saya berada berdekatan, seorang wartawan asing yang baru tiba.Tiba-tiba, salah satu trak tentera berhenti betul-betul di hadapan tempat peninjauan ketika enam jet Mirage menderu di atas kepala dalam persembahan akrobatik, melukis langit dengan denai merah yang panjang, kuning, ungu,dan asap hijau. Sadat berdiri, nampaknya sedang bersedia untuk bertukar tabik hormat dengan satu lagi kontinjen tentera Mesir. Dia menjadikan dirinya sasaran sempurna untuk empat pembunuh Islam yang melompat dari trak, menyerbu podium, dan memenuhi tubuhnya dengan peluru. Ketika pembunuh terus melakukan apa yang kelihatannya selama-lamanya untuk menyemburkan tembakan mematikan mereka, Saya mempertimbangkan untuk seketika sama ada untuk memukul tanah dan berisiko mati dipijak oleh penonton yang panik atau terus berjalan dan berisiko terkena peluru sesat. Naluri memberitahu saya untuk terus berdiri, dan rasa tugas kewartawanan saya mendorong saya untuk mengetahui sama ada Sadat masih hidup atau sudah mati.
Islam, Islam politik dan Amerika
Wawasan Arab
Adakah "Persaudaraan" dengan Amerika Mungkin?
khalil al-anani
Parti Pembangkang Islam dan Potensi Penglibatan EU
Toby Archer
Heidi Huuhtanen
Sayyid Qutb: The Karl Marx of the Islamic Revolution
Leslie Evans
kenapa tidak ada demokrasi arab ?
Larry Diamond
Menuntut Pusat: Islam Politik dalam Peralihan
John L. Esposito
Pada tahun 1990-an politik Islam, apa yang dipanggil oleh sesetengah orang “fundamentalisme Islam,” kekal sebagai kehadiran utama dalam kerajaan dan dalam politik pembangkang dari Afrika Utara hingga Asia Tenggara. Politik Islam yang berkuasa dan dalam politik telah menimbulkan banyak isu dan persoalan: “Adakah Islam bertentangan dengan pemodenan?,” “Adakah Islam dan demokrasi tidak serasi?,” “Apakah implikasi kerajaan Islam terhadap pluralisme, minoriti dan hak wanita,” “Betapa perwakilan Islamis,” “Adakah terdapat golongan sederhana Islam?,” “Sekiranya Barat takut dengan ancaman Islam transnasional atau pertembungan tamadun?” Kebangkitan Islam Kontemporari Landskap dunia Islam hari ini mendedahkan kemunculan republik Islam baharu (Iran, Sudan, Afghanistan), percambahan gerakan Islam yang berfungsi sebagai aktor politik dan sosial utama dalam sistem sedia ada, and the confrontational politics of radical violent extremists._ In contrast to the 1980s when political Islam was simply equated with revolutionary Iran or clandestine groups with names like Islamic jihad or the Army of God, the Muslim world in the 1990s is one in which Islamists have participated in the electoral process and are visible as prime ministers, cabinet officers, speakers of national assemblies, parliamentarians, and mayors in countries as diverse as Egypt, Sudan, Turki, Iran, Lubnan, Kuwait, Yaman, Jordan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Israel/Palestine. At the dawn of the twenty-first century, political Islam continues to be a major force for order and disorder in global politics, one that participates in the political process but also in acts of terrorism, a challenge to the Muslim world and to the West. Understanding the nature of political Islam today, and in particular the issues and questions that have emerged from the experience of the recent past, remains critical for governments, policymakers, and students of international politics alike.
MUSLIM INSTITUTIONS AND POLITICAL MOBILIZATION
SARA SILVESTRI
In Europe, and most of the Western world, Muslim presence in the publicsphere is a recent phenomenon that characterised the last decade of the 20thcentury and has deeply marked the beginning of the 21st. This visiblepresence, which amounts to something between 15 dan 20 millionindividuals, can best be analysed if dissected into a number of components.The first part of this chapter illustrates where, when and why organisedMuslim voices and institutions have emerged in Europe, dan pelakon mana yang terlibat. Bahagian kedua adalah lebih skematik dan analitikal, bahawa ia berusaha untuk mengenal pasti daripada dinamik ini proses di mana orang Islam menjadi pelakon politik dan bagaimana mereka berhubung dengan orang lain., selalunya kuasa dan keutamaan politik yang tidak bersaing. Ia melakukannya dengan memerhatikan objektif dan kepelbagaian strategi yang telah diguna pakai oleh umat Islam untuk menyatakan kebimbangan mereka terhadap konteks dan lawan bicara yang berbeza. Kesimpulannya menawarkan penilaian awal tentang kesan dan akibat daripada mobilisasi dan pembentukan institusi Muslim bagi Eropah. masyarakat dan penggubalan dasar.
Gerakan Islam: Kebebasan Berpolitik & Demokrasi
Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi
Ia adalah kewajipan (Islamik) Pergerakan dalam fasa yang akan datang untuk berdiri teguh menentang pemerintahan totalitarian dan diktator, despotisme politik dan perampasan hak rakyat. Pergerakan harus sentiasa berpegang kepada kebebasan politik, seperti yang diwakili oleh benar,bukan palsu, demokrasi. Ia harus mengisytiharkan secara terang-terangan ia menolak kezaliman dan menjauhi semua diktator, walaupun ada yang zalim nampaknya berniat baik ke arahnya untuk keuntungan tertentu dan untuk masa yang biasanya singkat, sebagaimana yang telah ditunjukkan oleh pengalaman.Nabi (SAWS) berkata, “Apabila kamu melihat umatku menjadi mangsa ketakutan dan tidak berkata kepada orang yang zalim, "Awak salah", maka anda mungkin kehilangan harapan kepada mereka.” Jadi bagaimana dengan rejim yang memaksa orang untuk berkata kepada orang yang melakukan kesalahan yang sombong, “Macam mana, betapa hebatnya awak. Wahai pahlawan kami, penyelamat dan pembebas kita!”Al-Quran mencela orang yang zalim seperti Numrudh, Firaun, Haman dan lain-lain, but it also dispraises those who follow tyrants andobey their orders. This is why Allah dispraises the people of Noahby saying, “ But they follow (m en) whose wealth and childrengive them no increase but only loss.” [Surat Nuh; 21]Allah also says of Ad, people of Hud, “ And followed thecommand of every powerful, obstinate transgressor”. [Surat Hud:59]See also what the Quran says about the people of Pharaoh, “ Butthey followed the command of Pharaoh, and the command ofPharaoh was not rightly guided.[Surat Hud: 97] “Thus he made fools of his people, and they obeyed him: truly they were a people rebellious (against Allah).” [Surat Az-Zukhruf: 54]A closer look at the history of the Muslim Nation and the IslamicMovement in modern times should show clearly that the Islamicidea, Gerakan Islam dan Kebangkitan Islam tidak pernah berkembang atau membuahkan hasil melainkan dalam suasana demokrasi dan kebebasan., dan telah layu dan menjadi mandul hanya pada masa-masa penindasan dan kezaliman yang menginjak-injak kehendak orang-orang yang berpegang kepada Islam.. Rejim yang menindas seperti itu menimbulkan sekularisme mereka, sosialisme atau komunisme ke atas rakyat mereka dengan kekerasan dan paksaan, menggunakan penyeksaan terselindung dan hukuman mati, dan menggunakan alat-alat syaitan yang mengoyakkan daging,menumpahkan darah, hancur tulang dan hancur jiwa.Kami melihat amalan ini di banyak negara Islam, termasuk Turki, Mesir, Syria, Iraq, (yang dahulu) Yaman Selatan, Somalia dan Negara Afrika utara untuk tempoh masa yang berbeza-beza, bergantung kepada umur atau pemerintahan diktator di setiap negara.Sebaliknya, we saw the Islamic Movement and the Islamic Awakening bear fruit and flourish at the times of freedom and democracy, and in the wake of the collapse of imperial regimes that ruled peoples with fear and oppression.Therefore, I would not imagine that the Islamic Movement could support anything other than political freedom and democracy.The tyrants allowed every voice to be raised, except the voice ofIslam, and let every trend express itself in the form of a politicalparty or body of some sort, except the Islamic current which is theonly trend that actually speaks for this Nation and expresses it screed, values, essence and very existence.
Living with Democracy in Egypt
Daniel Consolatore
Hosni Mubarek was almost elected president of Egypt in September 2005. Not that the seventy-seven-year-old secular autocrat who has ruled that nationfor the past twenty-four years lost the election; by the official count, he took nearly 85 percent of the vote.His nearest competitor, Ayman Nour, the upstart headof the fledgling opposition party al-Ghad (“Tomorrow”),managed less than 8 percent. The only other candidate to take any significant tally was the aged NomanGamaa of the venerable al-Wafd (“Delegation”)party, who managed less than 3 percent. The Ikhwanal-Muslimeen (“Muslim Brotherhood”), feared by somany Westerners for its purist Islamic social and politicalagenda, didn’t even field a candidate.Mubarek’s decisive victory would seem to be reassuringto most people—particularly secular Americans—worried for the future of the few Westernfriendly,moderate Arab regimes, threatened as theyare by the Islamicization of politics in the region. The Bush administration would also seem to have reasonto be pleased, given its recent change of heart aboutArab democracy. The missing chemical weapons in Iraq and subsequent justification of the war thereas precedent for democratization have inspired theWhite House to push for as many elections as possible in the region. Sebenarnya, when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice spoke at the American University inCairo in June, she announced to some surprise that“for sixty years” the United States had been mistakenin “pursu[ing] stability at the expense of democracy”in the Middle East. For generations, A.S.. pundits weresure that the “Arab street” couldn’t be trusted with the vote, as they might hand over power to communistsor fundamentalist Islamists. Realpolitik dictated that autocrats and dictators, like Mubarek and Saddam Hussein, had to be coddled in order to maintain “stability”in the region. If they would then stage election sor dispense with them altogether, deny free speech,and let loose secret police to terrorize the population,the White House would likely turn a blind eye. But ifMubarek could now claim a true democratic mandate,that would be the best of all worlds.
Political Transitions in the Arab World
Dina Shehata
The year 2007 marked the end of a brief interval of political liberalization in the Arab world which began shortly after the occupation of Iraq and which resulted primarily from external pressures on Arab regimes to reform and democratize. External pressures during the 2003-2006 period created a political opening which activists across the region used to press for longstanding demands for political and constitutional reform.Faced with a combination of growing external and internal pressures to reform, Arab regimes were forced to make some concessions to their challengers.In Egypt, upon the request of the President, Parliament passed a constitutional amendment to allowfor direct competitive presidential elections. In September2005, Egypt witnessed its first competitive presidential election ever and as expected Mubarak was elected for a fifth term with 87%of the vote. Lebih-lebih lagi,during the November 2005 parliamentary elections,which were freer than previous elections, the Muslim Brotherhood, the largest opposition movement in Egypt, won 88 seats. This was the largest number of seats won by an opposition group in Egypt since the 1952 revolution.Similarly, in the January 2006 Palestinian parliamentary elections, Hamas won a majority of the seats.Hamas was thereby able to establish control over the Palestinian Legislative Council which had been dominated by Fatah since the establishment of the Palestinian Authority in 1996. In Lebanon, in the wake of the assassination of Rafiq Hariri on 14th February2005, a coalition of pro-Hariri political forces was ablet hrough broad-based mass mobilization and external support to force Syrian troops to pull out from Lebanon and the pro-Syrian Government to resign. Elections were held, and the 14th February coalition was able to win a plurality of the votes and to form a new government.In Morocco, King Mohamed VI oversaw the establishment of a truth and reconciliation committee which sought to address the grievances of those who had been abused under the reign of his father.The Gulf Cooperation Council countries (GCC) also under took some important reforms during the 2003-2006 period. Dalam 2003 Qatar promulgated a written constitution for the first time in its history. In 2005,Saudi Arabia convened municipal elections for the firsttime in five decades. And in 2006, Bahrain mengadakan pilihan raya parlimen di mana masyarakat Syiah AlWefaqwon 40% daripada kerusi. Seterusnya, timbalan perdana menteri Syiah yang pertama di Bahrain dilantik.Peristiwa-peristiwa ini, yang kemudiannya dikenali sebagai 'Arab Spring,' menyebabkan beberapa orang optimis untuk mempercayai bahawa dunia Arab berada di ambang transformasi demokratik yang serupa dengan yang dialami di Amerika Latin dan Eropah Timur dan Tengah pada tahun 1980-an dan 1990-an. Walau bagaimanapun, dalam 2007, kerana liberalisasi politik memberi laluan kepada polarisasi yang lebih tinggi dan penindasan semula,harapan ini terhapus. Kegagalan bukaan 2003-2006 tempoh untuk mewujudkan momentum yang berterusan ke arah pendemokrasian boleh dikalahkan disebabkan oleh beberapa faktor. The deteriorating security situation in Iraq and the failure of the United States to create a stable and democratic regime dampened support for democracy promotion efforts within the American administration and reinforced the views ofthose who held that security and stability must come before democracy. Lebih-lebih lagi, the electoral successes of Islamists in Egypt and in Palestine further dampened Western support for democracy promotion efforts in the region since the principals of thesemovements were perceived to be at odds with the interestsof theWest.
Radical Islam In Egypt A Comparison Of Two Groups
By David Zeidan
The author compares two key Egyptian radical Islamic groups, the Society of Muslims(Takfir wal-Hijra) and the Society of Struggle (Jama’at al-Jihad) and analyzes their differencesin doctrine and strategy. This study is presented in the context of a broader examination of thehistory of militant Islamic groups in Egypt. The author argues that the two societies furnishexamples of basic types of radical Islamic movements. Sebagai tambahan, Jama’at al-Jihad remainsimportant in contemporary Egyptian politics and in that country’s internal struggle.The Egyptian radical groups understudy here, the Society of Muslims (Takfirwal-Hijra) and the Society of Struggle(Jama’at al-Jihad), espoused drasticallydifferent ideologies and strategies forgaining power. The Society of Muslims(Takfir) had a passive separatist andmessianic ideology, delaying activeconfrontation with the state to an indefinitepoint in the future when it could reach acertain degree of strength. In comparison,the Society of Struggle (al-Jihad) diikuti aktivis, ideologi militan yang komited untuk tindakan segera dan ganas terhadap rejim. KEBANGKITAN ISLAMSejarah mendedahkan corak kitaran kebangkitan Islam pada masa krisis. Pemimpin karismatik bangkit cuba memperbaharui semangat dan identiti umat Islam,menyucikan akidah daripada pertambahan dan amalan agama yang rosak, dan mengembalikan Islam murni pada zaman Nabi Muhammad. Pemimpin kebangkitan cenderung muncul sama ada sebagai pembaharu iman yang dijanjikan pada permulaan setiap abad (mujaddids), atau sebagai penyelamat yang diutus oleh Tuhan di akhir zaman untuk menegakkan kerajaan keadilan dan kedamaian yang terakhir (mahdi).
W&M Progresif
Menerima Tanggungjawab Pilihan Pilihan Raya
Pembangunan institusi demokrasi datang dengan eksternaliti negatif. Sebagai progresif politik, I believe that the big picture – establishing a solid democratic foundation – outweighs the possible emergence of political parties that may advocate religious or gender intolerance. I am a firm believer in the workings of the democratic process. While I have been studying in Egypt for the semester, I am reminded that despite the imperfections of the United States democratic system, it is still many times better than living under any authoritarian regime that outlaws political parties and posts military police at a variety of locations in an effort to exert control and maintain power.
In Egypt, the electoral process is not democratic. The National Political Party – the party of President Mubarak – exerts tremendous influence in the country. Its main opposition is the Muslim Brotherhood, which was created in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna. The Muslim Brotherhood is based on very strict interpretations of the Koran and the idea that secular governments are a direct violation of the teaching of the Koran. The party has a very violent past; it has been directly responsible for several assassination attempts and the assassination of the Egyptian leader Anwar-as-Sadat in 1981.
The Muslim Brotherhood is an illegal political party. Because the political party is religious, it is not allowed to participate in the public sphere under Egyptian law. Despite this technicality, the party has members in the Egyptian Parliament. Walau bagaimanapun, the parliamentarians cannot officially declare their affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood but instead identify as Independents. Though the party remains illegal, it remains the most powerful opposition to the ruling National Democratic Party.
Civil society and Democratization in the Arab World
yang 500 most influential muslims
John Esposito
Ibrahim Kalin
The publication you have in your hands is the first of what we hope will be anannual series that provides a window into the movers and shakers of the Muslimworld. We have strived to highlight people who are influential as Muslims, thatis, people whose influence is derived from their practice of Islam or from the factthat they are Muslim. We think that this gives valuable insight into the differentways that Muslims impact the world, and also shows the diversity of how peopleare living as Muslims today.Influence is a tricky concept. Its meaning derives from the Latin word influensmeaning to flow-in, pointing to an old astrological idea that unseen forces (like themoon) affect humanity. The figures on this list have the ability to affect humanitytoo. In a variety of different ways each person on this list has influence over thelives of a large number of people on the earth. The 50 most influential figuresare profiled. Their influence comes from a variety of sources; however they areunified by the fact that they each affect huge swathes of humanity.We have then broken up the 500 leaders into 15 categories—Scholarly, Political,Administrative, Lineage, Preachers, Wanita, Youth, Philanthropy, Development,Science and Technology, Arts and Culture, Media, Radicals, International IslamicNetworks, and Issues of the Day—to help you understand the different kinds ofways Islam and Muslims impact the world today.Two composite lists show how influence works in different ways: InternationalIslamic Networks shows people who are at the head of important transnationalnetworks of Muslims, and Issues of the Day highlights individuals whoseimportance is due to current issues affecting humanity.
Reform in the Muslim World: The Role of Islamists and Outside Powers
Shibley Telhami
The Bush Administration’s focus on spreading democracyin the Middle East has been much discussed over the past several years, not only in the United Statesand Arab and Muslim countries but also around theworld. In truth, neither the regional discourse about theneed for political and economic reform nor the Americantalk of spreading democracy is new. Over the pasttwo decades, particularly beginning with the end of theCold War, intellectuals and governments in the MiddleEast have spoken about reform. The American policyprior to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990 also aimedto spread democracy in the Arab world. But in that case,the first Gulf War and the need to forge alliances withautocratic regimes were one reason talk of democracydeclined. The other reason was the discovery that politicalreform provided openings to Islamist political groupsthat seemed very much at odd with American objectives.The fear that Islamist groups supported democracy onlybased on the principle of “one man, one vote, one time,”as former Assistant Secretary of State Edward Djerejianonce put it, led the United States to backtrack. Evenearly in the Clinton Administration, Secretary of StateWarren Christopher initially focused on democracy inhis Middle East policy but quickly sidelined the issueas the administration moved to broker Palestinian-Israelinegotiation in the shadow of militant Islamist groups,especially Hamas.
The future of Islam after 9/11
Mansoor Moaddel
There is no consensus among historians and Islamicists about the nature of theIslamic belief system and the experience of historical Islam, on which one couldbase a definitive judgment concerning Islam’s compatibility with modernity. Nonetheless,the availability of both historical and value survey data allow us to analyzethe future of Islam in light of the horrific event of 9/11. The key factor that woulddetermine the level of societal visibility necessary for predicting the future developmentof a culture is the nature and clarity of the ideological targets in relation towhich new cultural discourses are produced. Based on this premise, I shall try toilluminate the nature of such targets that are confronted by Muslim activists inIran, Mesir, dan Jordan.