RSSSemua Entries dalam "Aljazair" Kategori

The Besok Arab

DAVID B. OTTAWAY

Oktober 6, 1981, dimaksudkan untuk menjadi hari perayaan di Mesir. Ini menandai peringatan momen kemenangan terbesar Mesir dalam tiga konflik Arab-Israel, ketika tentara yang diunggulkan negara itu melintasi Terusan Suez pada hari-hari pembukaan 1973 Perang Yom Kippur dan mengirim pasukan Israel mundur. keren, pagi tak berawan, stadion Kairo penuh sesak dengan keluarga Mesir yang datang untuk melihat militer menopang perangkat kerasnya. Di stan peninjauan, Presiden Anwar el-Sadat,arsitek perang, menyaksikan dengan puas saat pria dan mesin berparade di hadapannya. Saya berada di dekatnya, koresponden asing yang baru tiba. Tiba-tiba, salah satu truk tentara berhenti tepat di depan tribun peninjauan tepat ketika enam jet Mirage menderu di atas dalam pertunjukan akrobatik, melukis langit dengan jejak merah panjang, kuning, ungu,dan asap hijau. Sadat berdiri, tampaknya bersiap untuk saling memberi hormat dengan satu lagi kontingen pasukan Mesir. Dia menjadikan dirinya target sempurna bagi empat pembunuh Islam yang melompat dari truk, menyerbu podium, dan membanjiri tubuhnya dengan peluru. Saat para pembunuh melanjutkan untuk apa yang tampak selamanya untuk menyemprot stand dengan api mematikan mereka, Saya mempertimbangkan sejenak apakah akan jatuh ke tanah dan berisiko diinjak-injak sampai mati oleh penonton yang panik atau tetap berjalan dan berisiko terkena peluru nyasar.. Naluri menyuruhku untuk tetap berdiri, dan rasa kewajiban jurnalistik saya mendorong saya untuk mencari tahu apakah Sadat masih hidup atau sudah mati.

Islam, Politik Islam dan Amerika

Arab Insight

Apakah "Persaudaraan" dengan Amerika Mungkin??

khalil al-anani

"Tidak ada kesempatan untuk berkomunikasi dengan AS. administrasi selama Amerika Serikat mempertahankan pandangannya lama Islam sebagai bahaya nyata, pandangan yang menempatkan Amerika Serikat di kapal yang sama dengan musuh Zionis. Kami tidak memiliki gagasan yang terbentuk sebelumnya tentang orang-orang Amerika atau AS. masyarakat dan organisasi sipil serta lembaga pemikirnya. Kami tidak memiliki masalah berkomunikasi dengan orang-orang Amerika tetapi tidak ada upaya yang memadai untuk mendekatkan kami,” kata Dr. Issam al-Iryan, kepala departemen politik Ikhwanul Muslimin dalam sebuah wawancara telepon.
Kata-kata Al-Iryan merangkum pandangan Ikhwanul Muslimin tentang rakyat Amerika dan AS. pemerintah. Anggota Ikhwanul Muslimin lainnya akan setuju, seperti mendiang Hassan al-Banna, yang mendirikan grup di 1928. Al- Banna memandang Barat sebagian besar sebagai simbol kerusakan moral. Salafi lain – sebuah aliran pemikiran Islam yang mengandalkan nenek moyang sebagai model teladan – telah mengambil pandangan yang sama tentang Amerika Serikat., tetapi tidak memiliki fleksibilitas ideologis yang dianut oleh Ikhwanul Muslimin. Sementara Ikhwanul Muslimin percaya untuk melibatkan Amerika dalam dialog sipil, kelompok ekstremis lain tidak melihat gunanya dialog dan mempertahankan bahwa kekuatan adalah satu-satunya cara untuk berurusan dengan Amerika Serikat.

Demokrasi Liberal dan Islam Politik: Search for Common Ground.

Mostapha Benhenda

Makalah ini berusaha membangun dialog antara teori politik demokrasi dan Islam.1 Interaksi di antara keduanya membingungkan: misalnya, untuk menjelaskan hubungan yang ada antara demokrasi dan konsepsi mereka tentang politik Islam yang ideal
rezim, the Pakistani scholar Abu ‘Ala Maududi coined the neologism “theodemocracy” whereas the French scholar Louis Massignon suggested the oxymoron “secular theocracy”. These expressions suggest that some aspects of democracy are evaluated positively and others are judged negatively. Misalnya, Muslim scholars and activists often endorse the principle of accountability of rulers, which is a defining feature of democracy. On the contrary, they often reject the principle of separation between religion and the state, which is often considered to be part of democracy (at least, of democracy as known in the United States today). Given this mixed assessment of democratic principles, it seems interesting to determine the conception of democracy underlying Islamic political models. Dengan kata lain, kita harus mencoba mencari tahu apa itu demokrasi dalam “theodemocracy”. Untuk itu, di antara keragaman dan pluralitas tradisi Islam pemikiran politik normatif yang mengesankan, kami pada dasarnya fokus pada arus pemikiran yang luas kembali ke Abu 'Ala Maududi dan intelektual Mesir Sayyid Qutb.8 Tren pemikiran khusus ini menarik karena di dunia Muslim, itu terletak di dasar beberapa oposisi yang paling menantang terhadap difusi nilai-nilai yang berasal dari Barat. Berdasarkan nilai-nilai agama, tren ini menguraikan alternatif model politik untuk demokrasi liberal. Pada umumnya, Konsepsi demokrasi yang termasuk dalam model politik Islam ini bersifat prosedural. Dengan beberapa perbedaan, konsepsi ini diilhami oleh teori-teori demokrasi yang diadvokasi oleh beberapa konstitusionalis dan ilmuwan politik.10 Tipis dan minimalis, sampai titik tertentu. Misalnya, itu tidak bergantung pada gagasan tentang kedaulatan rakyat dan tidak memerlukan pemisahan apa pun antara agama dan politik. Tujuan pertama dari makalah ini adalah untuk menguraikan konsepsi minimalis ini. Kami membuat pernyataan ulang yang terperinci untuk mengisolasi konsepsi ini dari moralnya (liberal) yayasan, yang kontroversial dari sudut pandang Islam tertentu yang dipertimbangkan di sini. Memang, proses demokrasi biasanya berasal dari prinsip otonomi pribadi, yang tidak didukung oleh teori-teori Islam ini.11 Di sini, kami menunjukkan bahwa prinsip seperti itu tidak diperlukan untuk membenarkan proses demokrasi.

ISLAM, DEMOKRASI & THE USA:

Yayasan Cordoba

Abdullah Faliq

pengantar ,


Terlepas dari itu menjadi perdebatan abadi dan kompleks, Arches Quarterly memeriksa kembali dari dasar teologis dan praktis, perdebatan penting tentang hubungan dan kompatibilitas antara Islam dan Demokrasi, seperti yang digemakan dalam agenda harapan dan perubahan Barack Obama. Sementara banyak yang merayakan naiknya Obama ke Oval Office sebagai katarsis nasional untuk AS, yang lain tetap kurang optimis terhadap perubahan ideologi dan pendekatan di arena internasional. Sementara sebagian besar ketegangan dan ketidakpercayaan antara dunia Muslim dan AS dapat dikaitkan dengan pendekatan mempromosikan demokrasi, biasanya mendukung kediktatoran dan rezim boneka yang memberikan lip service pada nilai-nilai demokrasi dan hak asasi manusia, gempa susulan 9/11 telah benar-benar memperkuat keraguan lebih jauh melalui posisi Amerika tentang Islam politik. Itu telah menciptakan dinding negatif seperti yang ditemukan oleh worldpublicopinion.org, yg mana 67% orang Mesir percaya bahwa secara global Amerika memainkan peran "terutama negatif".
Tanggapan Amerika dengan demikian telah tepat. Dengan memilih Obama, banyak di seluruh dunia menggantungkan harapan mereka untuk mengembangkan perang yang tidak terlalu agresif, tetapi kebijakan luar negeri yang lebih adil terhadap dunia Muslim. Ujian bagi Obama, saat kita berdiskusi, adalah bagaimana Amerika dan sekutunya mempromosikan demokrasi. Apakah itu memfasilitasi atau memaksakan?
Lagi pula, dapatkah itu menjadi broker yang jujur ​​di zona konflik yang berkepanjangan?? Mendaftar keahlian dan wawasan produktif
c ulama, akademisi, jurnalis dan politisi kawakan, Arches Quarterly mengungkap hubungan antara Islam dan Demokrasi dan peran Amerika – serta perubahan yang dibawa oleh Obama, dalam mencari kesamaan. Anas Altikriti, CEO Yayasan Th e Cordoba memberikan langkah awal untuk diskusi ini, di mana dia merefleksikan harapan dan tantangan yang ada di jalan Obama. Mengikuti Altikriti, mantan penasihat Presiden Nixon, Dr Robert Crane menawarkan analisis menyeluruh tentang prinsip Islam tentang hak atas kebebasan. Anwar Ibrahim, mantan Wakil Perdana Menteri Malaysia, memperkaya diskusi dengan realitas praktis penerapan demokrasi di masyarakat yang mayoritas Muslim, yaitu, di Indonesia dan Malaysia.
Kami juga memiliki Dr Shireen Hunter, dari Universitas Georgetown, AS, yang mengeksplorasi negara-negara Muslim yang tertinggal dalam demokratisasi dan modernisasi. Hal ini dilengkapi oleh penulis terorisme, Penjelasan Dr Nafeez Ahmed tentang krisis postmodernitas dan
matinya demokrasi. dr. daud abdullah (Direktur Pemantau Media Timur Tengah), Alan Hart (mantan koresponden ITN dan BBC Panorama; penulis Zionisme: Musuh Sejati Orang Yahudi) dan Asem Sondos (Editor mingguan Sawt Al Omma Mesir) berkonsentrasi pada Obama dan perannya dalam mempromosikan demokrasi di dunia Muslim, serta hubungan AS dengan Israel dan Ikhwanul Muslimin.
Menteri Luar Negeri, Maladewa, Ahmed Shaheed berspekulasi tentang masa depan Islam dan Demokrasi; Cllr. Gerry Maclochlainn
– seorang anggota Sinn Féin yang menjalani empat tahun penjara karena kegiatan Republik Irlandia dan juru kampanye untuk Guildford 4 dan Birmingham 6, merefleksikan perjalanannya baru-baru ini ke Gaza di mana dia menyaksikan dampak kebrutalan dan ketidakadilan yang dijatuhkan terhadap warga Palestina; Dr Marie Breen-Smyth, Direktur Pusat Kajian Radikalisasi dan Kekerasan Politik Kontemporer membahas tantangan mengkaji secara kritis teror politik; Dr Khalid al-Mubarak, penulis dan dramawan, membahas prospek perdamaian di Darfur; dan akhirnya jurnalis dan aktivis hak asasi manusia Ashur Shamis melihat secara kritis demokratisasi dan politisasi umat Islam saat ini.
Kami berharap semua ini menjadi bacaan yang komprehensif dan sumber refleksi tentang isu-isu yang mempengaruhi kita semua dalam fajar harapan baru..
Terima kasih

ISLAM DAN ATURAN HUKUM

Birgit Krawietz
Helmut Reifeld

In our modern Western society, state-organised legal sys-tems normally draw a distinctive line that separates religion and the law. Conversely, there are a number of Islamic re-gional societies where religion and the laws are as closely interlinked and intertwined today as they were before the onset of the modern age. Pada waktu bersamaan, the proportion in which religious law (shariah in Arabic) and public law (qanun) are blended varies from one country to the next. What is more, the status of Islam and consequently that of Islamic law differs as well. According to information provided by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), there are currently 57 Islamic states worldwide, defined as countries in which Islam is the religion of (1) the state, (2) the majority of the population, atau (3) a large minority. All this affects the development and the form of Islamic law.

Budaya Politik Islam, Demokrasi, dan Hak Asasi Manusia

Daniel E. Harga

Telah berpendapat bahwa Islam memfasilitasi otoriterisme, bertentangan dengan nilai-nilai masyarakat Barat, dan signifikan mempengaruhi hasil politik penting di negara-negara Muslim. Karenanya, sarjana, komentator, dan pejabat pemerintah sering menunjuk ke''''fundamentalisme Islam sebagai ancaman ideologis di samping demokrasi liberal. This view, Namun, is based primarily on the analysis of texts, Islamic political theory, and ad hoc studies of individual countries, which do not consider other factors. It is my contention that the texts and traditions of Islam, like those of other religions, can be used to support a variety of political systems and policies. Country specific and descriptive studies do not help us to find patterns that will help us explain the varying relationships between Islam and politics across the countries of the Muslim world. Karenanya, a new approach to the study of the
connection between Islam and politics is called for.
I suggest, through rigorous evaluation of the relationship between Islam, demokrasi, and human rights at the cross-national level, that too much emphasis is being placed on the power of Islam as a political force. I first use comparative case studies, which focus on factors relating to the interplay between Islamic groups and regimes, economic influences, ethnic cleavages, and societal development, to explain the variance in the influence of Islam on politics across eight nations. I argue that much of the power
attributed to Islam as the driving force behind policies and political systems in Muslim nations can be better explained by the previously mentioned factors. I also find, contrary to common belief, that the increasing strength of Islamic political groups has often been associated with modest pluralization of political systems.
I have constructed an index of Islamic political culture, based on the extent to which Islamic law is utilized and whether and, jika begitu, how,Western ideas, institutions, and technologies are implemented, to test the nature of the relationship between Islam and democracy and Islam and human rights. This indicator is used in statistical analysis, which includes a sample of twenty-three predominantly Muslim countries and a control group of twenty-three non-Muslim developing nations. In addition to comparing
Islamic nations to non-Islamic developing nations, statistical analysis allows me to control for the influence of other variables that have been found to affect levels of democracy and the protection of individual rights. The result should be a more realistic and accurate picture of the influence of Islam on politics and policies.

PRECISION DI GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR:

Sherifa Zuhur

Tujuh tahun setelah September 11, 2001 (9/11) serangan, banyak ahli percaya bahwa al-Qa'ida telah mendapatkan kembali kekuatannya dan bahwa para peniru atau afiliasinya lebih mematikan daripada sebelumnya. Perkiraan Intelijen Nasional dari 2007 menegaskan bahwa al-Qa'ida sekarang lebih berbahaya daripada sebelumnya 9/11.1 Emulator Al-Qaeda terus mengancam Barat, Timur Tengah, dan negara-negara Eropa, seperti dalam plot yang digagalkan pada bulan September 2007 di Jerman. Bruce Riedel menyatakan: Sebagian besar berkat keinginan Washington untuk pergi ke Irak daripada memburu para pemimpin al Qaeda, organisasi sekarang memiliki basis operasi yang kuat di tanah tandus Pakistan dan waralaba yang efektif di Irak barat. Jangkauannya telah menyebar ke seluruh dunia Muslim dan di Eropa . . . Osama bin Laden telah melakukan kampanye propaganda yang sukses. . . . Idenya sekarang menarik lebih banyak pengikut dari sebelumnya.
Memang benar bahwa berbagai organisasi salafi-jihadis masih bermunculan di seluruh dunia Islam. Mengapa tanggapan dengan sumber daya yang besar terhadap terorisme Islam yang kami sebut jihad global tidak terbukti sangat efektif??
Pindah ke alat "kekuatan lunak",” bagaimana dengan keberhasilan upaya Barat untuk mendukung umat Islam dalam Perang Global Melawan Teror? (GWOT)? Mengapa Amerika Serikat memenangkan begitu sedikit "hati dan pikiran" di dunia Islam yang lebih luas?? Mengapa pesan strategis Amerika tentang masalah ini bermain sangat buruk di kawasan?? Mengapa, terlepas dari ketidaksetujuan Muslim yang luas terhadap ekstremisme seperti yang ditunjukkan dalam survei dan pernyataan resmi oleh para pemimpin Muslim utama, memiliki dukungan untuk bin Ladin sebenarnya meningkat di Yordania dan di Pakistan?
Monograf ini tidak akan meninjau kembali asal-usul kekerasan Islamis. Alih-alih, ini berkaitan dengan jenis kegagalan konseptual yang secara keliru membangun GWOT dan yang membuat umat Islam enggan mendukungnya. Mereka tidak dapat mengidentifikasi dengan tindakan penanggulangan transformatif yang diusulkan karena mereka melihat beberapa keyakinan dan institusi inti mereka sebagai target dalam
usaha ini.
Beberapa tren yang sangat bermasalah mengacaukan konseptualisasi Amerika tentang GWOT dan pesan strategis yang dibuat untuk melawan Perang itu. Ini berevolusi dari (1) pendekatan politik pasca-kolonial terhadap Muslim dan negara-negara mayoritas Muslim yang sangat bervariasi dan karenanya menghasilkan kesan dan efek yang saling bertentangan dan membingungkan; dan (2) sisa ketidaktahuan umum dan prasangka terhadap Islam dan budaya subregional. Tambahkan ke kemarahan Amerika ini, takut, dan kecemasan tentang peristiwa mematikan 9/11, dan elemen tertentu yang, terlepas dari desakan kepala yang lebih dingin, meminta pertanggungjawaban umat Islam dan agama mereka atas perbuatan buruk para pemeluk agama mereka, atau yang merasa berguna untuk melakukannya karena alasan politik.

Debating DEMOKRASI DI DUNIA ARAB

Ibtisam Ibrahim

What is Democracy?
sarjana Barat mendefinisikan metode demokrasi untuk melindungi hak-hak individu sipil dan politik. Ini memberikan kebebasan berbicara, tekan, iman, pendapat, kepemilikan, dan perakitan, serta hak untuk memilih, mencalonkan dan mencari jabatan publik. Huntington (1984) argues that a political system is democratic to the extent that its most powerful collective decision makers are selected through
periodic elections in which candidates freely compete for votes and in which virtually all adults are eligible to vote. Rothstein (1995) states that democracy is a form of government and a process of governance that changes and adapts in response to circumstances. He also adds that the Western definition of democracyin addition to accountability, competition, some degree of participationcontains a guarantee of important civil and political rights. Anderson (1995) argues that the term democracy means a system in which the most powerful collective decision makers are selected through periodic elections in which candidates freely compete for votes and in which virtually all the adult population is eligible to vote. Saad Eddin Ibrahim (1995), an Egyptian scholar, sees democracy that might apply to the Arab world as a set of rules and institutions designed to enable governance through the peaceful
management of competing groups and/or conflicting interests. Namun, Samir Amin (1991) based his definition of democracy on the social Marxist perspective. He divides democracy into two categories: bourgeois democracy which is based on individual rights and freedom for the individual, but without having social equality; and political democracy which entitles all people in society the right to vote and to elect their government and institutional representatives which will help to obtain their equal social rights.
To conclude this section, I would say that there is no one single definition of democracy that indicates precisely what it is or what is not. Namun, as we noticed, most of the definitions mentioned above have essential similar elementsaccountability, competition, and some degree of participationwhich have become dominant in the Western world and internationally.

Islam dan Demokrasi

ITAC

Jika seseorang membaca pers atau mendengarkan komentator pada hubungan internasional, sering dikatakan - dan bahkan lebih sering tersirat tapi tidak mengatakan - bahwa Islam tidak kompatibel dengan demokrasi. Di tahun sembilan puluhan, Samuel Huntington memicu badai api intelektual ketika dia menerbitkan The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, di mana dia menyajikan ramalannya untuk dunia – ditulis besar-besaran. Di ranah politik, dia mencatat bahwa sementara Turki dan Pakistan mungkin memiliki beberapa klaim kecil untuk “legitimasi demokratis” semua negara lain “… negara-negara Muslim sangat non-demokratis.: monarki, sistem satu partai, rezim militer, kediktatoran pribadi atau beberapa kombinasi dari ini, biasanya bertumpu pada keluarga terbatas, klan, atau basis suku”. Premis yang mendasari argumennya adalah bahwa mereka tidak hanya 'tidak seperti kita', mereka sebenarnya bertentangan dengan nilai-nilai demokrasi esensial kita. Dia percaya, seperti yang dilakukan orang lain, bahwa sementara gagasan demokratisasi Barat sedang ditentang di bagian lain dunia, konfrontasi paling menonjol di daerah-daerah di mana Islam adalah agama yang dominan.
Argumen juga telah dibuat dari sisi lain. Seorang sarjana agama Iran, merenungkan krisis konstitusional awal abad kedua puluh di negaranya, menyatakan bahwa Islam dan demokrasi tidak kompatibel karena orang tidak setara dan badan legislatif tidak diperlukan karena sifat inklusif hukum agama Islam. Posisi serupa diambil baru-baru ini oleh Ali Belhadj, seorang guru sekolah menengah Aljazair, pengkhotbah dan (pada konteks ini) ketua FIS, ketika dia menyatakan "demokrasi bukan konsep Islam". Mungkin pernyataan paling dramatis tentang hal ini adalah pernyataan Abu Musab al-Zarqawi ., pemimpin pemberontak Sunni di Irak yang, ketika dihadapkan dengan prospek pemilihan, mencela demokrasi sebagai "prinsip jahat".
Namun menurut beberapa cendekiawan Muslim, demokrasi tetap menjadi cita-cita penting dalam Islam, dengan peringatan bahwa itu selalu tunduk pada hukum agama. Penekanan pada tempat terpenting syariah adalah elemen dari hampir setiap komentar Islam tentang pemerintahan, moderat atau ekstremis. Hanya jika penguasa, yang menerima otoritasnya dari Tuhan, membatasi tindakannya pada “pengawasan administrasi syariah” apakah dia harus dipatuhi. Jika dia melakukan selain ini, dia adalah seorang non-Muslim dan Muslim berkomitmen untuk memberontak melawan dia. Di sinilah letak pembenaran untuk sebagian besar kekerasan yang telah melanda dunia Muslim dalam perjuangan seperti yang terjadi di Aljazair selama tahun 90-an.

Menantang Otoritarianisme, Kolonialisme, dan Perpecahan: Gerakan Reformasi Politik Islam al-Afghani dan Ridha

Ahmed Ali Salem

The decline of the Muslim world preceded European colonization of most

Muslim lands in the last quarter of the nineteenth century and the first
quarter of the twentieth century. Khususnya, the Ottoman Empire’s
power and world status had been deteriorating since the seventeenth century.
But, more important for Muslim scholars, it had ceased to meet

some basic requirements of its position as the caliphate, the supreme and
sovereign political entity to which all Muslims should be loyal.
Oleh karena itu, some of the empire’s Muslim scholars and intellectuals called
for political reform even before the European encroachment upon
Muslim lands. The reforms that they envisaged were not only Islamic, tapi
also Ottomanic – from within the Ottoman framework.

These reformers perceived the decline of the Muslim world in general,

and of the Ottoman Empire in particular, to be the result of an increasing

disregard for implementing the Shari`ah (Hukum Islam). Namun, since the

late eighteenth century, an increasing number of reformers, sometimes supported

by the Ottoman sultans, began to call for reforming the empire along

modern European lines. The empire’s failure to defend its lands and to

respond successfully to the West’s challenges only further fueled this call

for “modernizing” reform, which reached its peak in the Tanzimat movement

in the second half of the nineteenth century.

Other Muslim reformers called for a middle course. Di satu sisi,

they admitted that the caliphate should be modeled according to the Islamic

sources of guidance, especially the Qur’an and Prophet Muhammad’s

teachings (Sunnah), and that the ummah’s (the world Muslim community)

unity is one of Islam’s political pillars. Di sisi lain, they realized the

need to rejuvenate the empire or replace it with a more viable one. Memang,

their creative ideas on future models included, but were not limited to, yang

following: replacing the Turkish-led Ottoman Empire with an Arab-led

caliphate, building a federal or confederate Muslim caliphate, establishing

a commonwealth of Muslim or oriental nations, and strengthening solidarity

and cooperation among independent Muslim countries without creating

a fixed structure. These and similar ideas were later referred to as the

Muslim league model, which was an umbrella thesis for the various proposals

related to the future caliphate.

Two advocates of such reform were Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and

Muhammad `Abduh, both of whom played key roles in the modern

Islamic political reform movement.1 Their response to the dual challenge

facing the Muslim world in the late nineteenth century – European colonization

and Muslim decline – was balanced. Their ultimate goal was to

revive the ummah by observing the Islamic revelation and benefiting

from Europe’s achievements. Namun, they disagreed on certain aspects

dan metode, as well as the immediate goals and strategies, of reform.

While al-Afghani called and struggled mainly for political reform,

`Abduh, once one of his close disciples, developed his own ideas, yang

emphasized education and undermined politics.




Mesir di Tipping Point ?

David B. Ottaway
Pada awal 1980-an, I lived in Cairo as bureau chief of The Washington Post covering such historic events as the withdrawal of the last
Israeli forces from Egyptian territory occupied during the 1973 Arab-Israeli war and the assassination of President
Anwar Sadat by Islamic fanatics in October 1981.
The latter national drama, which I witnessed personally, had proven to be a wrenching milestone. It forced Sadat’s successor, Hosni Mubarak, to turn inwards to deal with an Islamist challenge of unknown proportions and effectively ended Egypt’s leadership role in the Arab world.
Mubarak immediately showed himself to be a highly cautious, unimaginative leader, maddeningly reactive rather than pro-active in dealing with the social and economic problems overwhelming his nation like its explosive population growth (1.2 million more Egyptians a year) and economic decline.
In a four-part Washington Post series written as I was departing in early 1985, I noted the new Egyptian leader was still pretty much
a total enigma to his own people, offering no vision and commanding what seemed a rudderless ship of state. The socialist economy
inherited from the era of President Gamal Abdel Nasser (1952 untuk 1970) was a mess. The country’s currency, the pound, was operating
on eight different exchange rates; its state-run factories were unproductive, uncompetitive and deep in debt; and the government was heading for bankruptcy partly because subsidies for food, electricity and gasoline were consuming one-third ($7 billion) of its budget. Cairo had sunk into a hopeless morass of gridlocked traffic and teeming humanity—12 million people squeezed into a narrow band of land bordering the Nile River, most living cheek by jowl in ramshackle tenements in the city’s ever-expanding slums.

Dari Akar Nasionalisme di Dunia Islam

Shabir Ahmed

Dunia Muslim telah ditandai oleh kegagalan, perpecahan, pertumpahan darah, penindasan dan keterbelakangan. Pada ini, tidak ada negara Muslim di dunia benar dapat mengklaim untuk menjadi pemimpin dalam setiap bidang kegiatan manusia. Memang, the non-Muslims of the East and the West
now dictate the social, economic and political agenda for the Muslim Ummah.
Selanjutnya, the Muslims identify themselves as Turkish, Arab, African and Pakistani. If this is not enough, Muslims are further sub-divided within each country or continent. Misalnya, in Pakistan people are classed as Punjabis, Sindhis, Balauchis and
Pathans. The Muslim Ummah was never faced with such a dilemma in the past during Islamic rule. They never suffered from disunity, widespread oppression, stagnation in science and technology and certainly not from the internal conflicts that we have witnessed this century like the Iran-Iraq war. So what has gone wrong with the Muslims this century? Why are there so many feuds between them and why are they seen to be fighting each other? What has caused their weakness and how will they ever recover from the present stagnation?
There are many factors that contributed to the present state of affairs, but the main ones are the abandoning of the Arabic language as the language of understanding Islam correctly and performing ijtihad, the absorption of foreign cultures such as the philosophies of the Greeks, Persian and the Hindus, the gradual loss of central authority over some of the provinces, and the rise of nationalism since the 19th Century.
This book focuses on the origins of nationalism in the Muslim world. Nationalism did not arise in the Muslim world naturally, nor did it came about in response to any hardships faced by the people, nor due to the frustration they felt when Europe started to dominate the world after the industrial revolution. Agak, nationalism was implanted in the minds of the Muslims through a well thought out scheme by the European powers, after their failure to destroy the Islamic State by force. The book also presents the Islamic verdict on nationalism and practical steps that can be taken to eradicate the disease of nationalism from the Muslim Ummah so as to restore it back to its former glory.

A Kepulauan Muslim

Max L. Kotor

This book has been many years in the making, as the author explains in his Preface, though he wrote most of the actual text during his year as senior Research Fellow with the Center for Strategic Intelligence Research. The author was for many years Dean of the School of Intelligence Studies at the Joint Military Intelligence College. Even though it may appear that the book could have been written by any good historian or Southeast Asia regional specialist, this work is illuminated by the author’s more than three decades of service within the national Intelligence Community. His regional expertise often has been applied to special assessments for the Community. With a knowledge of Islam unparalleled among his peers and an unquenchable thirst for determining how the goals of this religion might play out in areas far from the focus of most policymakers’ current attention, the author has made the most of this opportunity to acquaint the Intelligence Community and a broader readership with a strategic appreciation of a region in the throes of reconciling secular and religious forces.
This publication has been approved for unrestricted distribution by the Office of Security Review, Department of Defense.

Budaya Politik Islam, Demokrasi, dan Hak Asasi Manusia

Daniel E. Harga

Telah berpendapat bahwa Islam memfasilitasi otoriterisme, contradicts the

values of Western societies, and significantly affects important political outcomes
in Muslim nations. Karenanya, sarjana, komentator, and government
officials frequently point to ‘‘Islamic fundamentalism’’ as the next
ideological threat to liberal democracies. This view, Namun, is based primarily
on the analysis of texts, Islamic political theory, and ad hoc studies
of individual countries, which do not consider other factors. It is my contention
that the texts and traditions of Islam, like those of other religions,
can be used to support a variety of political systems and policies. Country
specific and descriptive studies do not help us to find patterns that will help
us explain the varying relationships between Islam and politics across the
countries of the Muslim world. Karenanya, a new approach to the study of the
connection between Islam and politics is called for.
I suggest, through rigorous evaluation of the relationship between Islam,
demokrasi, and human rights at the cross-national level, that too much
emphasis is being placed on the power of Islam as a political force. I first
use comparative case studies, which focus on factors relating to the interplay
between Islamic groups and regimes, economic influences, ethnic cleavages,

and societal development, to explain the variance in the influence of

Islam on politics across eight nations.

Pihak Oposisi Islam dan Potensi Engagement Uni Eropa

Toby Archer

Heidi Huuhtanen

In light of the increasing importance of Islamist movements in the Muslim world and

the way that radicalisation has influenced global events since the turn of the century, dia

is important for the EU to evaluate its policies towards actors within what can be loosely

termed the ‘Islamic world’. It is particularly important to ask whether and how to engage

with the various Islamist groups.

This remains controversial even within the EU. Some feel that the Islamic values that

lie behind Islamist parties are simply incompatible with western ideals of democracy and

hak asasi manusia, while others see engagement as a realistic necessity due to the growing

domestic importance of Islamist parties and their increasing involvement in international

affairs. Another perspective is that democratisation in the Muslim world would increase

European security. The validity of these and other arguments over whether and how the

EU should engage can only be tested by studying the different Islamist movements and

their political circumstances, country by country.

Democratisation is a central theme of the EU’s common foreign policy actions, as laid

out in Article 11 of the Treaty on European Union. Many of the states considered in this

report are not democratic, or not fully democratic. In most of these countries, Islamis

parties and movements constitute a significant opposition to the prevailing regimes, dan

in some they form the largest opposition bloc. European democracies have long had to

deal with governing regimes that are authoritarian, but it is a new phenomenon to press

for democratic reform in states where the most likely beneficiaries might have, from the

EU’s point of view, different and sometimes problematic approaches to democracy and its

related values, such as minority and women’s rights and the rule of law. These charges are

often laid against Islamist movements, so it is important for European policy-makers to

have an accurate picture of the policies and philosophies of potential partners.

Experiences from different countries tends to suggest that the more freedom Islamist

parties are allowed, the more moderate they are in their actions and ideas. In many

cases Islamist parties and groups have long since shifted away from their original aim

of establishing an Islamic state governed by Islamic law, and have come to accept basic

democratic principles of electoral competition for power, the existence of other political

competitors, and political pluralism.

Politik Islam di Timur Tengah

Apakah Knudsen

This report provides an introduction to selected aspects of the phenomenon commonly

referred to as “political Islam”. Laporan ini memberikan penekanan khusus untuk Timur Tengah, di

particular the Levantine countries, and outlines two aspects of the Islamist movement that may

be considered polar opposites: demokrasi dan kekerasan politik. In the third section the report

reviews some of the main theories used to explain the Islamic resurgence in the Middle East

(Figure 1). In brief, the report shows that Islam need not be incompatible with democracy and

that there is a tendency to neglect the fact that many Middle Eastern countries have been

engaged in a brutal suppression of Islamist movements, causing them, some argue, to take up

arms against the state, and more rarely, foreign countries. The use of political violence is

widespread in the Middle East, but is neither illogical nor irrational. In many cases even

Islamist groups known for their use of violence have been transformed into peaceful political

parties successfully contesting municipal and national elections. Namun, the Islamist

revival in the Middle East remains in part unexplained despite a number of theories seeking to

account for its growth and popular appeal. In general, most theories hold that Islamism is a

reaction to relative deprivation, especially social inequality and political oppression. Alternative

theories seek the answer to the Islamist revival within the confines of religion itself and the

powerful, evocative potential of religious symbolism.

The conclusion argues in favour of moving beyond the “gloom and doom” approach that

portrays Islamism as an illegitimate political expression and a potential threat to the West (“Old

Islamism”), and of a more nuanced understanding of the current democratisation of the Islamist

movement that is now taking place throughout the Middle East (“New Islamism”). This

importance of understanding the ideological roots of the “New Islamism” is foregrounded

along with the need for thorough first-hand knowledge of Islamist movements and their

adherents. As social movements, its is argued that more emphasis needs to be placed on

understanding the ways in which they have been capable of harnessing the aspirations not only

of the poorer sections of society but also of the middle class.