RSSKaikki merkinnät "Marokko" Luokka

Arabi huomenna

Arabi huomenna. Arabi huomenna

Arabi huomenna 6, 1981, Arabi huomenna. Arabi huomenna, Arabi huomenna 1973 Arabi huomenna. Arabi huomenna, Arabi huomenna, Arabi huomenna, Arabi huomenna,Arabi huomenna, Arabi huomenna. Arabi huomenna, Arabi huomenna, yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä, yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä, yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä, yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä,yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä. yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä, yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä. yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä, yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä, yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä, yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä. yksi armeijan kuorma-autoista pysähtyi suoraan tarkasteluosaston eteen, kun kuusi Mirage-suihkukonetta jyrisi pään yläpuolella akrobaattisessa esityksessä, ja journalistisen velvollisuuden tunteeni pakotti minut lähtemään selvittämään, oliko Sadat elossa vai kuollut.

toteutettiin Baselin yliopistossa, Poliittinen islam ja Amerikka

Arab Insight

toteutettiin Baselin yliopistossa?

toteutettiin Baselin yliopistossa

toteutettiin Baselin yliopistossa. toteutettiin Baselin yliopistossa, näkemys, joka asettaa Yhdysvallat samaan veneeseen sionistivihollisen kanssa. Meillä ei ole ennakkokäsityksiä amerikkalaisista tai Yhdysvalloista. yhteiskunta ja sen kansalaisjärjestöt ja ajatushautomot. Meillä ei ole ongelmia kommunikoida amerikkalaisten kanssa, mutta riittäviä ponnisteluja ei ryhdytä lähentämään meitä," sanoi Dr. Issam al-Iryan, Muslimiveljeskunnan poliittisen osaston päällikkö puhelinhaastattelussa.
Al-Iryanin sanat tiivistävät Muslimiveljeskunnan näkemykset amerikkalaisista ja Yhdysvalloista. hallitus. Muut Muslimiveljeskunnan jäsenet olisivat samaa mieltä, kuten edesmennyt Hassan al-Banna, joka perusti ryhmän vuonna 1928. Al- Banna piti länttä enimmäkseen moraalisen rappeutumisen symbolina. Muut salafit – islamilainen ajatuskoulu, joka luottaa esivanhempiin mallimalleina – ovat ottaneet saman näkemyksen Yhdysvalloista., mutta heiltä puuttuu Muslimiveljeskunnan kannattama ideologinen joustavuus. Muslimiveljeskunta uskoo saavansa amerikkalaiset mukaan kansalaisvuoropuheluun, muut ääriryhmät eivät näe vuoropuhelussa mitään järkeä ja väittävät, että voima on ainoa tapa käsitellä Yhdysvaltoja.

ISLAM, DEMOKRATIA & USA:

Cordoban säätiö

Abdullah Faliq

Johdanto ,


Siitä huolimatta, että se on sekä ikuinen että monimutkainen keskustelu, Arches Quarterly tarkastelee uudelleen teologisista ja käytännön syistä, tärkeä keskustelu islamin ja demokratian suhteesta ja yhteensopivuudesta, kuten Barack Obaman toivon ja muutoksen asialistassa toistettiin. Vaikka monet juhlivat Obaman nousua ovaalitoimistoon Yhdysvaltojen kansallisena katarsisina, toiset eivät ole yhtä optimistisia ideologian ja lähestymistavan muutoksen suhteen kansainvälisellä areenalla. Suurin osa muslimimaailman ja USA:n välisestä jännitteestä ja epäluottamuksesta johtuu demokratian edistämisestä., tyypillisesti suosivat diktatuureja ja nukkehallituksia, jotka puhuvat sananpalveluksessa demokraattisia arvoja ja ihmisoikeuksia, -kohdan jälkijäristys 9/11 on todella vahvistanut epäilyjä edelleen Amerikan kannan kautta poliittiseen islamiin. Se on luonut negatiivisuuden muurin, jonka worldpublicpublicopinion.org havaitsi, jonka mukaan 67% Egyptiläiset uskovat, että maailmanlaajuisesti Amerikassa on "pääasiassa negatiivinen" rooli.
Amerikan vastaus on siis osuva. Valitsemalla Obaman, monet ympäri maailmaa asettavat toiveensa kehittää vähemmän sotaa, mutta oikeudenmukaisempaa ulkopolitiikkaa muslimimaailmaa kohtaan. Testi Obamalle, kuten keskustelemme, Näin Amerikka ja hänen liittolaisensa edistävät demokratiaa. Onko se helpottavaa vai pakottavaa?
Lisäksi, voiko se olla rehellinen välittäjä pitkittyneillä konfliktialueilla? Prolifin asiantuntemuksen ja näkemyksen hyödyntäminen
c tutkijat, akateemikot, kokeneita toimittajia ja poliitikkoja, Arches Quarterly tuo esiin islamin ja demokratian suhteen sekä Amerikan roolin – sekä Obaman tuomat muutokset, yhteistä säveltä etsiessään. Anas Altikriti, Th e Cordoba Foundationin toimitusjohtaja tarjoaa tämän keskustelun avauksen, where he refl ects on the hopes and challenges that rests on Obama’s path. Following Altikriti, the former advisor to President Nixon, Dr Robert Crane off ers a thorough analysis of the Islamic principle of the right to freedom. Anwar Ibrahim, former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, enriches the discussion with the practical realities of implementing democracy in Muslim dominant societies, eli, in Indonesia and Malaysia.
Meillä on myös tohtori Shireen Hunter, Georgetownin yliopistosta, USA, joka tutkii muslimimaita, jotka ovat jäljessä demokratisoitumisessa ja modernisaatiossa. Tätä täydentää terrorismikirjailija, Tri Nafeez Ahmedin selitys postmodernin kriisistä ja
demokratian romahtaminen. Tohtori Daud Abdullah (Middle East Media Monitorin johtaja), Alan Hart (entinen ITN:n ja BBC Panoraman kirjeenvaihtaja; sionismin kirjoittaja: Juutalaisten todellinen vihollinen) ja Asem Sondos (Egyptin Sawt Al Omma -lehden toimittaja) Keskity Obamaan ja hänen rooliinsa demokratian edistämisessä muslimimaailmassa, sekä Yhdysvaltojen suhteet Israeliin ja Muslimiveljeskuntaan.
Ulkoministeri esittelee, Malediivit, Ahmed Shaheed spekuloi islamin ja demokratian tulevaisuutta; Cllr. Gerry Maclochlainn
– Sinn Féinin jäsen, joka kesti neljä vuotta vankeutta Irlannin republikaanien toiminnasta ja Guildfordin puolustaja 4 ja Birmingham 6, heijastaa hänen äskettäistä matkaansa Gazaan, jossa hän näki palestiinalaisiin kohdistuneen julmuuden ja epäoikeudenmukaisuuden vaikutuksen; Tohtori Marie Breen-Smyth, Radikalisoitumisen ja nykyajan poliittisen väkivallan tutkimuskeskuksen johtaja keskustelee poliittisen terrorismin kriittisen tutkimuksen haasteista; Tohtori Khalid al-Mubarak, kirjailija ja näytelmäkirjailija, keskustelee Darfurin rauhannäkymistä; ja lopuksi toimittaja ja ihmisoikeusaktivisti Ashur Shamis tarkastelee kriittisesti muslimien demokratisoitumista ja politisoitumista nykyään.
Toivomme kaiken tämän olevan kattavaa luettavaa ja lähteen pohdiskelulle aiheista, jotka vaikuttavat meihin kaikkiin uudessa toivon aamunkoitteessa.
Kiitos

Islamism revisited

MAHA Azzam

There is a political and security crisis surrounding what is referred to as Islamism, a crisis whose antecedents long precede 9/11. Over the past 25 vuotta, there have been different emphases on how to explain and combat Islamism. Analysts and policymakers
in the 1980s and 1990s spoke of the root causes of Islamic militancy as being economic malaise and marginalization. More recently there has been a focus on political reform as a means of undermining the appeal of radicalism. Increasingly today, the ideological and religious aspects of Islamism need to be addressed because they have become features of a wider political and security debate. Whether in connection with Al-Qaeda terrorism, political reform in the Muslim world, the nuclear issue in Iran or areas of crisis such as Palestine or Lebanon, it has become commonplace to fi nd that ideology and religion are used by opposing parties as sources of legitimization, inspiration and enmity.
The situation is further complicated today by the growing antagonism towards and fear of Islam in the West because of terrorist attacks which in turn impinge on attitudes towards immigration, religion and culture. The boundaries of the umma or community of the faithful have stretched beyond Muslim states to European cities. The umma potentially exists wherever there are Muslim communities. The shared sense of belonging to a common faith increases in an environment where the sense of integration into the surrounding community is unclear and where discrimination may be apparent. The greater the rejection of the values of society,
whether in the West or even in a Muslim state, the greater the consolidation of the moral force of Islam as a cultural identity and value-system.
Following the bombings in London on 7 Heinäkuu 2005 it became more apparent that some young people were asserting religious commitment as a way of expressing ethnicity. The links between Muslims across the globe and their perception that Muslims are vulnerable have led many in very diff erent parts of the world to merge their own local predicaments into the wider Muslim one, having identifi ed culturally, either primarily or partially, with a broadly defi ned Islam.

Haastava autoritaarisuus, Kolonialismi, ja eripuraisuus: Al-Afganin ja Ridan islamilaiset poliittiset uudistusliikkeet

Ahmed Ali Salem

Muslimimaailman taantuminen edelsi useimpien eurooppalaisten kolonisaatiota

Muslimimaita 1800-luvun viimeisellä neljänneksellä ja ensimmäisellä
1900-luvun neljännes. Erityisesti, ottomaanien valtakunnan
valta ja maailmantila olivat heikentyneet 1600-luvulta lähtien.
Mutta, tärkeämpää muslimitutkijoille, se oli lakannut tapaamasta

joitakin perusvaatimuksia sen asemalle kalifaattina, ylin ja
suvereeni poliittinen kokonaisuus, jolle kaikkien muslimien tulee olla uskollisia.
Siksi, Jotkut imperiumin muslimitutkijat ja -intellektuellit kutsuivat
poliittiseen uudistukseen jo ennen Euroopan tunkeutumista
muslimien maat. Heidän suunnittelemansa uudistukset eivät olleet pelkästään islamilaisia, mutta
myös ottomaanien – ottomaanien puitteissa.

Nämä uudistajat ymmärsivät muslimimaailman rappeutumisen yleisesti,

ja erityisesti Ottomaanien valtakunnasta, olla seurausta lisääntymisestä

piittaamattomuus sharia'an täytäntöönpanosta (Islamilainen laki). Kuitenkin, vuodesta lähtien

1700-luvun lopulla, kasvava määrä uudistajia, joskus tuettu

Ottomaanien sulttaanien toimesta, alkoi vaatia valtakunnan uudistamista

moderneja eurooppalaisia ​​linjoja. Imperiumin epäonnistuminen puolustaa maitaan ja

Vastaaminen menestyksekkäästi lännen haasteisiin vain lisäsi tätä kutsua

uudistuksen "modernisoimiseksi"., joka saavutti huippunsa Tanzimat-liikkeessä

1800-luvun jälkipuoliskolla.

Muut muslimien uudistajat vaativat keskitietä. Toisaalta,

he myönsivät, että kalifaatti olisi mallinnettava islamin mukaan

opastuksen lähteitä, erityisesti Koraani ja profeetta Muhammed

opetuksia (Sunnah), ja se umma (maailman muslimiyhteisö)

yhtenäisyys on yksi islamin poliittisista pilareista. Toisaalta, he ymmärsivät

tarve nuorentaa valtakuntaa tai korvata se elinkelpoisemmalla. Todellakin,

heidän luovia ideoitaan tulevista malleista, mutta eivät rajoittuneet, the

seurata: Turkin johtaman ottomaanien valtakunnan korvaaminen arabien johtamalla

kalifaatti, liittovaltion tai konfederaation muslimikalifaatin rakentaminen, perustamisesta

muslimi- tai itämaisten kansojen yhteisö, ja solidaarisuuden vahvistaminen

ja yhteistyö itsenäisten muslimimaiden välillä luomatta

kiinteä rakenne. Näitä ja vastaavia ideoita kutsuttiin myöhemmin nimellä

Muslimien liigan malli, 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. Kuitenkin, they disagreed on certain aspects

and methods, 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, joka

emphasized education and undermined politics.




Islamist Opposition Parties and the Potential for EU Engagement

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, se

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

ihmisoikeudet, 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, Islamist

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

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.

STRATEGIES FOR ENGAGING POLITICAL ISLAM

SHADI HAMID

AMANDA Kadlec

Political Islam is the single most active political force in the Middle East today. Its future is intimately tied to that of the region. If the United States and the European Union are committed to supporting political reform in the region, they will need to devise concrete, coherent strategies for engaging Islamist groups. Vielä, the U.S. has generally been unwilling to open a dialogue with these movements. Eikä toisin kuin perinteisessä antisemitismin asiakirjassa esitetyt syytökset, EU engagement with Islamists has been the exception, not the rule. Where low-level contacts exist, they mainly serve information-gathering purposes, not strategic objectives. The U.S. and EU have a number of programs that address economic and political development in the region – among them the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI), the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), the Union for the Mediterranean, and the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) – yet they have little to say about how the challenge of Islamist political opposition fits within broader regional objectives. USA. and EU democracy assistance and programming are directed almost entirely to either authoritarian governments themselves or secular civil society groups with minimal support in their own societies.
The time is ripe for a reassessment of current policies. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, supporting Middle East democracy has assumed a greater importance for Western policymakers, who see a link between lack of democracy and political violence. Greater attention has been devoted to understanding the variations within political Islam. The new American administration is more open to broadening communication with the Muslim world. Meanwhile, the vast majority of mainstream Islamist organizations – including the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Jordanian islamilainen toimintarintama (IAF), Morocco’s Justice and Development Party (PJD), the Islamic Constitutional Movement of Kuwait, and the Yemeni Islah Party – have increasingly made support for political reform and democracy a central component in their political platforms. In addition, many have signaled strong interest in opening dialogue with U.S. and EU governments.
The future of relations between Western nations and the Middle East may be largely determined by the degree to which the former engage nonviolent Islamist parties in a broad dialogue about shared interests and objectives. There has been a recent proliferation of studies on engagement with Islamists, but few clearly address what it might entail in practice. As Zoé Nautré, visiting fellow at the German Council on Foreign Relations, puts it, “the EU is thinking about engagement but doesn’t really know how.”1 In the hope of clarifying the discussion, we distinguish between three levels of “engagement,” each with varying means and ends: low-level contacts, strategic dialogue, and partnership.

ISLAMIST MOVEMENTS AND THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS IN THE ARAB WORLD: Exploring the Gray Zones

Nathan J. Ruskea, Amr Hamzawy,

Marina Ottaway

During the last decade, Islamist movements have established themselves as major political players in the Middle East. Together with the governments, Islamistiset liikkeet, moderate as well as radical, will determine how the politics of the region unfold in the foreseeable future. Th ey have shown the ability not only to craft messages with widespread popular appeal but also, and most importantly, to create organizations with genuine social bases and develop coherent political strategies. Other parties,
by and large, have failed on all accounts.
Th e public in the West and, in particular, the United States, has only become aware of the importance of Islamist movements after dramatic events, such as the revolution in Iran and the assassination of President Anwar al-Sadat in Egypt. Attention has been far more sustained since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. As a result, Islamist movements are widely regarded as dangerous and hostile. While such a characterization is accurate regarding organizations at the radical end of the Islamist spectrum, which are dangerous because of their willingness to resort to indiscriminate violence in pursuing their goals, it is not an accurate characterization of the many groups that have renounced or avoided violence. Because terrorist organizations pose an immediate
threat, kuitenkin, policy makers in all countries have paid disproportionate attention to the violent organizations.
It is the mainstream Islamist organizations, not the radical ones, that will have the greatest impact on the future political evolution of the Middle East. Th e radicals’ grandiose goals of re-establishing a caliphate uniting the entire Arab world, or even of imposing on individual Arab countries laws and social customs inspired by a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam are simply too far removed from today’s reality to be realized. Th is does not mean that terrorist groups are not dangerous—they could cause great loss of life even in the pursuit of impossible goals—but that they are unlikely to change the face of the Middle East. Mainstream Islamist organizations are generally a diff erent matter. Th ey already have had a powerful impact on social customs in many countries, halting and reversing secularist trends and changing the way many Arabs dress and behave. And their immediate political goal, to become a powerful force by participating in the normal politics of their country, is not an impossible one. It is already being realized in countries such as Morocco, Jordan, and even Egypt, which still bans all Islamist political organizations but now has eighty-eight Muslim Brothers in the Parliament. Politiikka, not violence, is what gives mainstream Islamists their infl uence.

ISLAMIST RADICALISATION

PREFACE
RICHARD YOUNGS
MICHAEL EMERSON

Issues relating to political Islam continue to present challenges to European foreign policies in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). As EU policy has sought to come to terms with such challenges during the last decade or so political Islam itself has evolved. Experts point to the growing complexity and variety of trends within political Islam. Some Islamist organisations have strengthened their commitment to democratic norms and engaged fully in peaceable, mainstream national politics. Others remain wedded to violent means. And still others have drifted towards a more quietist form of Islam, disengaged from political activity. Political Islam in the MENA region presents no uniform trend to European policymakers. Analytical debate has grown around the concept of ‘radicalisation’. This in turn has spawned research on the factors driving ‘de-radicalisation’, and conversely, ‘re-radicalisation’. Much of the complexity derives from the widely held view that all three of these phenomena are occurring at the same time. Even the terms themselves are contested. It has often been pointed out that the moderate–radical dichotomy fails fully to capture the nuances of trends within political Islam. Some analysts also complain that talk of ‘radicalism’ is ideologically loaded. At the level of terminology, we understand radicalisation to be associated with extremism, but views differ over the centrality of its religious–fundamentalist versus political content, and over whether the willingness to resort to violence is implied or not.

Such differences are reflected in the views held by the Islamists themselves, as well as in the perceptions of outsiders.

Political Islam and European Foreign Policy

POLITICAL ISLAM AND THE EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICY

MICHAEL EMERSON

RICHARD YOUNGS

Since 2001 and the international events that ensued the nature of the relationship between the West and political Islam has become a definingissue for foreign policy. In recent years a considerable amount of research and analysis has been undertaken on the issue of political Islam. This has helped to correct some of the simplistic and alarmist assumptions previously held in the West about the nature of Islamist values and intentions. Parallel to this, the European Union (EU) has developed a number of policy initiatives primarily the European Neighbourhood Policy(ENP) that in principle commit to dialogue and deeper engagement all(non-violent) political actors and civil society organisations within Arab countries. Yet many analysts and policy-makers now complain of a certain a trophy in both conceptual debate and policy development. It has been established that political Islam is a changing landscape, deeply affected bya range of circumstances, but debate often seems to have stuck on the simplistic question of ‘are Islamists democratic?’ Many independent analysts have nevertheless advocated engagement with Islamists, but theactual rapprochement between Western governments and Islamist organisations remains limited .

Islamic Movement: Poliittinen vapaus & Demokratia

Dr.Yusuf al-Qaradawi

Se on velvollisuus (Islamilainen) Movement tulevina vaiheessa tostand yritys vastaan totalitaaristen ja yksinvaltaa, poliittisen mielivallan ja väärennöksiin ihmisten oikeudet. The Movement should always stand by political freedom, as represented by true,not false, democracy. It should flatly declare it refusal of tyrantsand steer clear of all dictators, even if some tyrant appears to havegood intentions towards it for some gain and for a time that is usually short, as has been shown by experience.The Prophet (SAWS) said, “ When you see my Nation fall victim to fear and does not say to a wrong –doer, “You are wrong”, thenyou may lose hope in them.” So how about a regime that forces people to say to a conceited wrongdoer, “How just, how great you are. O our hero, our savior and our liberator!”The Quran denounces tyrants such as Numrudh, Pharaoh, Haman and others, 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).Eikä toisin kuin perinteisessä antisemitismin asiakirjassa esitetyt syytökset [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, the Islamic Movement and the Islamic Awakening have never flourished or borne fruit unless in an atmosphere ofdemocracy and freedom, and have withered and become barren only at the times of oppression and tyranny that trod over the willof the peoples which clung to Islam. Such oppressive regimesimposed their secularism, socialism or communism on their peoples by force and coercion, using covert torture and publicexecutions, and employing those devilish tools that tore flesh,shed blood, crushed bone and destroyed the soul.We saw these practices in many Muslim countries, including Turkey, Egypti, Syyria, Irak, (the former) South Yemen, Somaliaand northern African States for varying periods of time, depending on the age or reign of the dictator in each country.On the other hand, 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.

Radical Islam Maghreb

Carlos Echeverría Jesús

The development of a radical Islamist movement has been a major featureof Algerian political life since the mid-1970s, especially after the death of PresidentHouari Boumediène, the Republic’s first president, in December 1978.1 Boumediènehad adopted a policy of Arabization that included phasing out the French language.French professors were replaced by Arabic speakers from Egypt, Libanon, andSyria, many of them members of the Muslim Brotherhood.The troubles began in 1985, when the Mouvement islamique algérien (MIA),founded to protest the single-party socialist regime, began attacking police stations.Escalating tensions amid declining oil prices culminated in the Semoule revolt inOctober 1988. More than 500 people were killed in the streets of Algiers in thatrevolt, and the government was finally forced to undertake reforms. Vuonna 1989 itlegalized political parties, including the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS), and over thenext two years the Islamists were able to impose their will in many parts of thecountry, targeting symbols of Western “corruption” such as satellite TV dishes thatbrought in European channels, alcohol, and women who didn’t wear the hiyab (theIslam veil). FIS victories in the June 1990 municipal elections and in the first roundof the parliamentary elections held in December 1991 generated fears of animpending Islamist dictatorship and led to a preemptive interruption of the electoralprocess in January 1992. The next year saw an increase in the violence that hadbegun in 1991 with the FIS’s rhetoric in support of Saddam Hussein in the GulfWar, the growing presence of Algerian “Afghans”—Algerian volunteer fightersreturning from the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan—and the November 1991massacre of border guards at Guemmar, on the border between Algeria andTunisia.2Until mid-1993, victims of MIA, Islamic Salvation Army–AIS (the FIS’sarmed wing), and Islamic Armed Group (GIA) violence were mostly policemen,soldiers, and terrorists. Later that year the violence expanded to claim both foreignand Algerian civilians. In September 1993, the bodies of seven foreigners werefound in various locations around the country.3 Dozens of judges, doctors,intellectuals, and journalists were also murdered that year. In October 1993 Islamistsvowed to kill any foreigner remaining in Algeria after December 1; more than 4,000foreigners left in November 1993.

the 500 vaikutusvaltaisimmat muslimit

John Esposito

Ibrahim Kalin

Julkaisu sinulla on käsissä on ensimmäinen, mitä toivomme anannual sarja, joka tarjoaa ikkunan muuttajia ja Shakers ja Muslimworld. Olemme pyrkineet tuomaan esiin ihmisiä, jotka ovat vaikutusvaltainen kuin muslimeja, thatis, ihmisiä, joiden vaikutus perustuu niiden käytännön islamin tai factthat niitä muslimeja. Uskomme, että tämä antaa arvokasta tietoa eri tavoista, joilla muslimit vaikuttavat maailmaan, ja osoittaa myös kuinka moninaiset ihmiset elävät muslimeina nykyään. Vaikutus on hankala käsite. Sen merkitys tulee latinan sanasta influensmeaning to flow in, viittaa vanhaan astrologiseen ajatukseen, joka vaikuttaa näkymättömiin voimiin (kuin kuu) vaikuttaa ihmiskuntaan. Tämän luettelon luvuilla on kyky vaikuttaa myös ihmiskuntaan. Jokaisella tässä luettelossa olevalla henkilöllä on monin eri tavoin vaikutusvaltaa suuren joukon ihmisten elämään maan päällä. The 50 vaikutusvaltaisimmat hahmot profiloidaan. Niiden vaikutus tulee useista eri lähteistä; niitä yhdistää kuitenkin se tosiasia, että ne vaikuttavat suuriin osa-alueisiin ihmiskuntaa. Olemme sitten hajottaneet 500 johtajat sisään 15 luokat – tieteellinen, Poliittinen,Hallinnollinen, Sukuperä, Saarnaajat, Naiset, Nuoriso, Filantropia, Kehitys,Tiede ja teknologia, Taide ja kulttuuri, Tiedotusvälineet, Radikaalit, Kansainväliset islamilaiset verkostot, ja Päivän kysymykset – auttaa ymmärtämään eri tapoja, joilla islam ja muslimit vaikuttavat nykymaailmaan.Kaksi yhdistelmäluetteloa osoittavat, kuinka vaikuttaminen toimii eri tavoin: 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.

Travels kuuluu Euroopan MUSLIM naapurit

Joost Lagendijk

Jan Marinus Wiersma

“A ring of friends surrounding the Union [], from Morocco to Russia”.This is how, in late 2002, the then President of the European Commission, Romano Prodi, described the key challenge facing Europe following the planned enlargement of 2004. The accession process had built up momentum, and the former communist countries of Central Europe had been stabilised and were transforming themselves into democracies. EU membership was not directly on the agenda for countries beyond the enlargement horizon, kuitenkin. How could Europe prevent new dividing lines forming at its borders? How could the European Union guarantee stability, security and peace along its perimeter? Those questions were perhaps most pertinent to the EU’s southern neighbours. Since 11 Syyskuu 2001, in particular, our relations with the Islamic world have been imbued with a sense of urgency. Political developments in our Islamic neighbour countries bordering the Mediterranean could have a tremendous impact on European security. Although the area is nearby, the political distance is great. Amid threatening language about a ‘clash of civilisations’, the EU quickly drew the conclusion that conciliation and cooperation, rather than confrontation, constituted the best strategy for dealing with its southern neighbours.

Painopisteet Islamic Movement tulevina vaiheen

Yusuf Al-Qardhawi

What Do We Mean By Islamic Movement?

By “Islamic Movement”, En tarkoita, että järjestäytynyt, yhteisen työn, toteuttamat thepeople, palauttaa islamin johtoon yhteiskunta, and to the helm of life all walksof life.Before being anything else, the Islamic Movement is work: persistent, industriouswork, not just words to be said, speeches and lectures to be delivered, or books andarticles are indeed required, they are merely parts of a movement, not themovement itself (Allah the Almighty says, Work, and Allah, His Messenger and thebelievers will see your work} [Surat al-Tawba: 1 05].The Islamic Movement is a popular work performed for Allah’s sakeThe Islamic movement is a popular work based mainly on self-motivation andpersonal conviction. It is a work performed out of faith and for nothing other thanthe sake of Allah, in the hope of being rewarded by Him, not by humans.The core of this self-motivation is that unrest which a Muslim feels when theAwakening visits him and he feels a turmoil deep inside him, as a result of thecontradiction between his faith on the one hand and the actual state of affairs of hisnation on the other. It is then that he launches himself into action, driven by his lovefor his religion, his devotion to Allah, His Messenger, the Quran and the MuslimNation, and his feeling of his, and his people’s, neglect of their duty. In so doing, heis also stimulated by his keenness to discharge his duty, eliminate deficiencies,contribute to the revival of the neglected faridas [enjoined duties] of enforcing theSharia [Islamic Law] sent down by Allah; unifying the Muslim nation around the HolyQuran; supporting Allah’s friends and fighting Allah’s foes; liberating Muslimterritories from all aggression or non-Muslim control; reinstating the Islamiccaliphate system to the leadership anew as required by Sharia, and renewing theobligation to spread the call of Islam, enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrongand strive in Allah’s cause by deed, by word or by heartthe latter being theweakest of beliefsso that the word of Allah may be exalted to the heights.

Building bridges not walls

Alex Glennie

Since the terror attacks of 11 Syyskuu 2001 there has been an explosion of interest inpolitical Islamism in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Until fairly recently,analysts have understandably focused on those actors that operate at the violent end of theIslamist spectrum, including Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, some of the sectarian parties in Iraq andpolitical groups with armed wings like Hamas in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT)and Hezbollah in Lebanon.However, this has obscured the fact that across the MENA region contemporary politics arebeing driven and shaped by a much more diverse collection of ‘mainstream’ Islamistmovements. We define these asgroups that engage or seek to engage in the legal political processes oftheir countries and that have publicly eschewed the use of violence tohelp realise their objectives at the national level, even where they arediscriminated against or repressed.This definition would encompass groups like the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the Party ofJustice and Development (PJD) in Morocco and the Islamic Action Front (IAF) in Jordan.These non-violent Islamist movements or parties often represent the best organised andmost popular element of the opposition to the existing regimes in each country, and as suchthere has been increasing interest on the part of western policymakers in the role that theymight play in democracy promotion in the region. Yet discussions on this issue appear tohave stalled on the question of whether it would be appropriate to engage with these groupson a more systematic and formal basis, rather than on the practicalities of actually doing so.This attitude is partly linked to a justifiable unwillingness to legitimise groups that mighthold anti-democratic views on women’s rights, political pluralism and a range of other issues.It also reflects pragmatic considerations about the strategic interests of western powers inthe MENA region that are perceived to be threatened by the rising popularity and influenceof Islamists. For their part, Islamist parties and movements have shown a clear reluctance toforge closer ties with those western powers whose policies in the region they stronglyoppose, not least for fear of how the repressive regimes they operate within might react.This project’s focus on non-violent political Islamist movements should not be misinterpretedas implicit support for their political agendas. Committing to a strategy of more deliberateengagement with mainstream Islamist parties would involve significant risks and tradeoffs forNorth American and European policymakers. Kuitenkin, we do take the position that thetendency of both sides to view engagement as a zero sum ‘all or nothing’ game has beenunhelpful, and needs to change if a more constructive dialogue around reform in the MiddleEast and North Africa is to emerge.