All Entries Tagged Með: "pólitíska Íslam"
The Arab Tomorrow
DAVID B. ÚTTAKA
október 6, 1981, átti að vera hátíðardagur í Egyptalandi. Það markaði afmæli stórkostlegustu sigurstundar Egyptalands í þremur átökum araba og Ísraela., þegar fátækur her landsins lagðist yfir Súez-skurðinn á opnunardögum landsins 1973 Yom Kippur-stríðið og sendi ísraelska hermenn að hörfa. Á svala, skýlaus morgun, Kaíró leikvangurinn var troðfullur af egypskum fjölskyldum sem höfðu komið til að sjá herinn stinga vélbúnaði sínum., Anwar el-Sadat forseti,arkitekt stríðsins, horfði með ánægju þegar menn og vélar gengu fram fyrir hann. Ég var nálægt, nýkominn erlendur fréttaritari.Skyndilega, einn af herflutningabílunum stöðvaði beint fyrir framan yfirlitssýninguna rétt þegar sex Mirage þotur öskruðu yfir höfuð í loftfimleikum, að mála himininn með löngum rauðum slóðum, gulur, fjólublár,og grænan reyk. Sadat stóð upp, að því er virðist að búa sig undir að skiptast á kveðjum við enn einn lið egypskra hermanna. Hann gerði sig að fullkomnu skotmarki fyrir fjóra íslamista morðingja sem stukku úr vörubílnum, ruddist inn á pallinn, og þeytti líkama hans með byssukúlum. Þegar morðingjarnir héldu áfram í það sem virtist heila eilífð að úða stallinum með banvænum eldi sínum, Ég velti því fyrir mér í augnabliki hvort ég ætti að lenda í jörðu og eiga á hættu að verða troðinn til bana af skelfingu lostnum áhorfendum eða halda áfram og eiga á hættu að taka villandi byssukúlu. Eðlishvöt sagði mér að halda mér á fætur, og blaðamannaskylda mín varð til þess að ég fór að komast að því hvort Sadat væri á lífi eða dáinn.
| september 26, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Skýringar á fastur ferðafasi Legacy og íslamska Political Thought: Dæmið um menntun
JAMES Muir
Óheppilegt einkenni mannkynssögunnar er tilhneiging trúarlegrar ágreinings og mismununar til að næra sig með eitruðu bruggi fáfræði og fordóma.. Þó margt sé stundum hægt að gera til að draga úr fordómum, mér sýnist að fræðimenn og kennarar ættu fyrst og fremst að hafa áhyggjur af því grundvallarmarkmiði og varanlegra markmiði að draga úr fáfræði. Árangur manns í að draga úr fáfræði - þar með talið eigin - mun ráðast af hvötum manns.
Námið í íslamskri uppeldisheimspeki gæti verið knúið áfram af hagnýtum áhyggjum í dag: löngun breskra múslima til að hafa íslamska skóla, hvort sem þau eru fjármögnuð af einkaaðilum eða af ríkinu, er eitt málefnalegt dæmi. Frá sjónarhóli uppeldisheimspeki, þó, slík hvatning er afar þröng, afmarkast af hugtökum og flokkum staðbundinna pólitískra deilna líðandi stundar. Fyrir þá sem eru hvattir af þrá eftir þekkingu og skilningi á hefð utan þeirra eigin, það er mjög vafasamt að nokkur rannsókn á íslamskri heimspeki sem takmarkast af núverandi hagnýtum áhyggjum geti verið afkastamikill. Það er engin einföld samsvörun á milli þekkingar og „mikilvægis“.
Þar verður, þó, vera einhver tenging á milli tveggja hefða hugsunar og framkvæmda ef útgangspunktur á að vera, og innkomustaður, sem gerir fræðimanninum kleift að stíga úr einni hefð í aðra. Arfleifð Ísókratesar getur verið einn slíkur útgangspunktur, sem mun hjálpa okkur að skilja samband tveggja hefða, hið klassíska gríska og það íslamska. Yfirburðir hinnar ísókratísku arfleifðar í vestrænni menntun eru vel þekkt og víða þekkt meðal sagnfræðinga, klassíkistar
og stjórnmálaheimspekinga, þó vitund um það sé aðeins byrjuð að birtast meðal menntafræðinga.2 Sömuleiðis, hinn ísókratíska arfleifð til menntunar (og hina ríku hefð arabísks platónisma í heimspeki) hefur haft áhrif á íslamska hugsun, þó á þann hátt sem er
enn ekki vel skilið. Ætlun þessarar greinar er að benda á að breytt form ísókratískrar menntunarhefðar sé grundvallarþáttur íslamskrar stjórnmálahugsunar., nefnilega, Íslamsk fræðsluhugsun. Þetta almenna orðalag á ætlun þessa rits með tilliti til íslamskrar stjórnmálahugsunar gæti valdið misskilningi. Íslam, auðvitað, er litið á af fylgjendum sínum sem sameinað og algilt kerfi trúar og hegðunar.
| september 09, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Íslam og hið nýja pólitíska landslag
Til baka, Michael Keith, Azra Khan,
Kalbir Shukra og John Solomos
Í kjölfar árásarinnar á World Trade Center þann 11 September 2001, og sprengjuárásirnar í Madrid og London 2004 og 2005, bókmenntir sem fjalla um form og aðferðir trúartjáningar - einkum íslamskrar trúartjáningar - hefur blómstrað í hálfgerðum svæðum sem tengja almenn félagsvísindi við hönnun félagsmálastefnu., hugveitur og blaðamennsku. Mikið af verkinu hefur reynt að skilgreina viðhorf eða tilhneigingu múslima á tilteknum spennusvæði eins og London eða Bretlandi. (Barnes, 2006; Ethnos ráðgjöf, 2005; GFK, 2006; GLA, 2006; Populus, 2006), eða gagnrýnt ákveðnar tegundir af íhlutun í félagsmálastefnu (Björt, 2006a; Mirza o.fl., 2007). Rannsóknir á íslamisma og jihadisma hafa skapað sérstaka áherslu á samhliða og flókin tengsl milli íslamskrar trúartrúar og form félagslegrar hreyfingar og pólitískrar virkjunar. (Husain, 2007; Kepel, 2004, 2006; McRoy, 2006; Neville-Jones o.fl., 2006, 2007; Phillips, 2006; Roy, 2004, 2006). Hefðbundið, greiningaráherslan hefur varpa ljósi á menningu íslams, trúarkerfi hinna trúuðu, og sögulegar og landfræðilegar ferill múslimabúa um allan heim almennt og á „vesturlöndum“ sérstaklega (Abbas, 2005; Ansari, 2002; Eade og Garbin, 2002; Hussein, 2006; Stillingar, 2005; Ramadan, 1999, 2005). Í þessari grein er áherslan önnur. Við höldum því fram að rannsóknir á íslamskri stjórnmálaþátttöku þurfi að vera vandlega samhengi án þess að grípa til stórra alhæfinga um menningu og trú. Þetta er vegna þess að bæði menning og trú eru byggð upp af menningu og aftur uppbygging, stofnana- og íhugunarlandslag sem þau eru sett fram í gegnum. Í tilviki reynslu Breta, falin ummerki kristninnar við myndun velferðarkerfisins á síðustu öld, ört breytileg kortagerð af rýmum stjórnmálanna og hlutverk „trúarsamtaka“ í endurskipulagningu velferðarmála mynda hið efnislega félagslega samhengi sem ákvarðar tækifærin og útlínur nýrra stjórnmálaþátttöku..
| september 08, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Íslam á Vesturlöndum
Jocelyne Cesari
The immigration of Muslims to Europe, North America, and Australia and the complex socioreligious dynamics that have subsequently developed have made Islam in the West a compelling new ªeld of research. The Salman Rushdie affair, hijab controversies, the attacks on the World Trade Center, and the furor over the Danish cartoons are all examples of international crises that have brought to light the connections between Muslims in the West and the global Muslim world. These new situations entail theoretical and methodological challenges for the study of contemporary Islam, and it has become crucial that we avoid essentializing either Islam or Muslims and resist the rhetorical structures of discourses that are preoccupied with security and terrorism.
In this article, I argue that Islam as a religious tradition is a terra incognita. A preliminary reason for this situation is that there is no consensus on religion as an object of research. Religion, as an academic discipline, has become torn between historical, sociological, and hermeneutical methodologies. With Islam, the situation is even more intricate. In the West, the study of Islam began as a branch of Orientalist studies and therefore followed a separate and distinctive path from the study of religions. Even though the critique of Orientalism has been central to the emergence of the study of Islam in the ªeld of social sciences, tensions remain strong between Islamicists and both anthropologists and sociologists. The topic of Islam and Muslims in the West is embedded in this struggle. One implication of this methodological tension is that students of Islam who began their academic career studying Islam in France, Germany, or America ªnd it challenging to establish credibility as scholars of Islam, particularly in the North American academic
context.
| september 07, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
ÍSLAM, LÝÐRÆÐI & BANDARÍKIN:
Cordoba Foundation
Abdullah Faliq
Intro ,
In spite of it being both a perennial and a complex debate, Arches Quarterly reexamines from theological and practical grounds, the important debate about the relationship and compatibility between Islam and Democracy, as echoed in Barack Obama’s agenda of hope and change. Whilst many celebrate Obama’s ascendancy to the Oval Office as a national catharsis for the US, others remain less optimistic of a shift in ideology and approach in the international arena. While much of the tension and distrust between the Muslim world and the USA can be attributed to the approach of promoting democracy, typically favoring dictatorships and puppet regimes that pay lip-service to democratic values and human rights, the aftershock of 9/11 has truly cemented the misgivings further through America’s position on political Islam. It has created a wall of negativity as found by worldpublicopinion.org, according to which 67% of Egyptians believe that globally America is playing a “mainly negative” role.
America’s response has thus been apt. By electing Obama, many around the world are pinning their hopes for developing a less belligerent, but fairer foreign policy towards the Muslim world. Th e test for Obama, as we discuss, is how America and her allies promote democracy. Will it be facilitating or imposing?
Ennfremur, can it importantly be an honest broker in prolonged zones of confl icts? Enlisting the expertise and insight of prolifi
c scholars, academics, seasoned journalists and politicians, Arches Quarterly brings to light the relationship between Islam and Democracy and the role of America – as well as the changes brought about by Obama, in seeking the common ground. Anas Altikriti, the CEO of Th e Cordoba Foundation provides the opening gambit to this discussion, 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, nefnilega, in Indonesia and Malaysia.
We also have Dr Shireen Hunter, of Georgetown University, US, who explores Muslim countries lagging in democratisation and modernisation. Th is is complemented by terrorism writer, Dr Nafeez Ahmed’s explanation of the crisis of post-modernity and the
demise of democracy. Dr Daud Abdullah (Director of Middle East Media Monitor), Alan Hart (former ITN and BBC Panorama correspondent; author of Zionism: Th e Real Enemy of the Jews) and Asem Sondos (Editor of Egypt’s Sawt Al Omma weekly) concentrate on Obama and his role vis-à-vis democracy-promotion in the Muslim world, as well as US relations with Israel and the Muslim Brotherhood.
Minister of Foreign Aff airs, Maldives, Ahmed Shaheed speculates on the future of Islam and Democracy; Cllr. Gerry Maclochlainn
– a Sinn Féin member who endured four years in prison for Irish Republican activities and a campaigner for the Guildford 4 and Birmingham 6, refl ects on his recent trip to Gaza where he witnessed the impact of the brutality and injustice meted out against Palestinians; Dr Marie Breen-Smyth, Director of the Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Contemporary Political Violence discusses the challenges of critically researching political terror; Dr Khalid al-Mubarak, writer and playwright, discusses prospects of peace in Darfur; and fi nally journalist and human rights activist Ashur Shamis looks critically at the democratisation and politicisation of Muslims today.
We hope all this makes for a comprehensive reading and a source for refl ection on issues that aff ect us all in a new dawn of hope.
Thank you
| september 07, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Hamas-stefna Bandaríkjanna hindrar frið í Miðausturlöndum
Henry Siegman
Failed bilateral talks over these past 16 years have shown that a Middle East peace accord can never be reached by the parties themselves. Israeli governments believe they can defy international condemnation of their illegal colonial project in the West Bank because they can count on the US to oppose international sanctions. Bilateral talks that are not framed by US-formulated parameters (based on Security Council resolutions, the Oslo accords, the Arab Peace Initiative, the “road map” and other previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements) cannot succeed. Israel’s government believes that the US Congress will not permit an American president to issue such parameters and demand their acceptance. What hope there is for the bilateral talks that resume in Washington DC on September 2 depends entirely on President Obama proving that belief to be wrong, and on whether the “bridging proposals” he has promised, should the talks reach an impasse, are a euphemism for the submission of American parameters. Such a US initiative must offer Israel iron-clad assurances for its security within its pre-1967 borders, but at the same time must make it clear these assurances are not available if Israel insists on denying Palestinians a viable and sovereign state in the West Bank and Gaza. This paper focuses on the other major obstacle to a permanent status agreement: the absence of an effective Palestinian interlocutor. Addressing Hamas’ legitimate grievances – and as noted in a recent CENTCOM report, Hamas has legitimate grievances – could lead to its return to a Palestinian coalition government that would provide Israel with a credible peace partner. If that outreach fails because of Hamas’ rejectionism, the organization’s ability to prevent a reasonable accord negotiated by other Palestinian political parties will have been significantly impeded. If the Obama administration will not lead an international initiative to define the parameters of an Israeli-Palestinian agreement and actively promote Palestinian political reconciliation, Europe must do so, and hope America will follow. Því miður, there is no silver bullet that can guarantee the goal of “two states living side by side in peace and security.”
But President Obama’s present course absolutely precludes it.
| september 07, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Íslamismi endurskoðaður
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 ár, 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, það er orðið algengt að finna að hugmyndafræði og trú séu notuð af andstæðum aðilum sem heimild til lögfestingar, innblástur og fjandskap.
Staðan er enn flóknari í dag vegna vaxandi andstöðu og ótta við íslam á Vesturlöndum vegna hryðjuverkaárása sem aftur hafa áhrif á viðhorf til innflytjenda., trú og menningu. Mörk umma eða samfélags hinna trúuðu hafa teygt sig út fyrir múslimska ríki til evrópskra borga. Umma er hugsanlega til alls staðar þar sem múslimsk samfélög eru. Sameiginleg tilfinning um að tilheyra sameiginlegri trú eykst í umhverfi þar sem tilfinningin um aðlögun að nærliggjandi samfélagi er óljós og þar sem mismunun gæti verið augljós. Því meiri höfnun á gildum samfélagsins,
hvort sem er á Vesturlöndum eða jafnvel í múslimaríki, því meiri styrking á siðferðislegu afli íslams sem menningarlegrar sjálfsmyndar og gildiskerfis.
Í kjölfar sprenginganna í London á 7 Júlí 2005 það varð meira áberandi að sumt ungt fólk var að fullyrða trúarlega skuldbindingu sem leið til að tjá þjóðerni. Tengsl múslima um allan heim og skynjun þeirra á að múslimar séu viðkvæmir hafa leitt til þess að margir í mjög mismunandi heimshlutum hafa sameinað eigin staðbundnar vandræði í hinum víðtækari múslima., hafa auðkennt sér menningarlega, annað hvort fyrst og fremst eða að hluta, með vítt skilgreint íslam.
| september 06, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
PRECISION IN THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR:
Sherifa Zuhur
Seven years after the September 11, 2001 (9/11) árásir, many experts believe al-Qa’ida has regained strength and that its copycats or affiliates are more lethal than before. The National Intelligence Estimate of 2007 asserted that al-Qa’ida is more dangerous now than before 9/11.1 Al-Qa’ida’s emulators continue to threaten Western, Middle Eastern, and European nations, as in the plot foiled in September 2007 in Germany. Bruce Riedel states: Thanks largely to Washington’s eagerness to go into Iraq rather than hunting down al Qaeda’s leaders, the organization now has a solid base of operations in the badlands of Pakistan and an effective franchise in western Iraq. Its reach has spread throughout the Muslim world and in Europe . . . Osama bin Laden has mounted a successful propaganda campaign. . . . His ideas now attract more followers than ever.
It is true that various salafi-jihadist organizations are still emerging throughout the Islamic world. Why have heavily resourced responses to the Islamist terrorism that we are calling global jihad not proven extremely effective?
Moving to the tools of “soft power,” what about the efficacy of Western efforts to bolster Muslims in the Global War on Terror (GWOT)? Why has the United States won so few “hearts and minds” in the broader Islamic world? Why do American strategic messages on this issue play so badly in the region? Why, despite broad Muslim disapproval of extremism as shown in surveys and official utterances by key Muslim leaders, has support for bin Ladin actually increased in Jordan and in Pakistan?
This monograph will not revisit the origins of Islamist violence. It is instead concerned with a type of conceptual failure that wrongly constructs the GWOT and which discourages Muslims from supporting it. They are unable to identify with the proposed transformative countermeasures because they discern some of their core beliefs and institutions as targets in
this endeavor.
Several deeply problematic trends confound the American conceptualizations of the GWOT and the strategic messages crafted to fight that War. These evolve from (1) post-colonial political approaches to Muslims and Muslim majority nations that vary greatly and therefore produce conflicting and confusing impressions and effects; og (2) residual generalized ignorance of and prejudice toward Islam and subregional cultures. Add to this American anger, fear, and anxiety about the deadly events of 9/11, and certain elements that, despite the urgings of cooler heads, hold Muslims and their religion accountable for the misdeeds of their coreligionists, or who find it useful to do so for political reasons.
| september 06, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Lýðræði, Elections and the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood
Israel Elad-Altman
The American-led Middle East reform and democratization campaign of the last two years has helped shape a new political reality in Egypt. Opportunities have opened up for dissent. With U.S. and European support, local opposition groups have been able to take initiative, advance their causes and extract concessions from the state. The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood movement (MB), which has been officially outlawed as a political organization, is now among the groups facing both new opportunities
and new risks.
Western governments, including the government of the United States, are considering the MB and other “moderate Islamist” groups as potential partners in helping to advance democracy in their countries, and perhaps also in eradicating Islamist terrorism. Could the Egyptian MB fill that role? Could it follow the track of the Turkish Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Indonesian Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), two Islamist parties that, according to some analysts, are successfully adapting to the rules of liberal democracy and leading their countries toward greater integration with, respectively, Europe and a “pagan” Asia?
This article examines how the MB has responded to the new reality, how it has handled the ideological and practical challenges and dilemmas that have arisen during the past two years. To what extent has the movement accommodated its outlook to new circumstances? What are its objectives and its vision of the political order? How has it reacted to U.S. overtures and to the reform and democratization campaign?
How has it navigated its relations with the Egyptian regime on one hand, and other opposition forces on the other, as the country headed toward two dramatic elections in autumn 2005? To what extent can the MB be considered a force that might lead Egypt
toward liberal democracy?
| september 05, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Múslima Brothers EGYPT'S: Árekstra eða samþætta?
Research
The Society of Muslim Brothers’ success in the November-December 2005 elections for the People’s Assembly sent shockwaves through Egypt’s political system. In response, the regime cracked down on the movement, harassed other potential rivals and reversed its fledging reform process. This is dangerously short-sighted. There is reason to be concerned about the Muslim Brothers’ political program, and they owe the people genuine clarifications about several of its aspects. But the ruling National Democratic
Party’s (NDP) refusal to loosen its grip risks exacerbating tensions at a time of both political uncertainty surrounding the presidential succession and serious socio-economic unrest. Though this likely will be a prolonged, gradual process, the regime should take preliminary steps to normalise the Muslim Brothers’ participation in political life. The Muslim Brothers, whose social activities have long been tolerated but whose role in formal politics is strictly limited, won an unprecedented 20 per cent of parliamentary seats in the 2005 kosningar. They did so despite competing for only a third of available seats and notwithstanding considerable obstacles, including police repression and electoral fraud. This success confirmed their position as an extremely wellorganised and deeply rooted political force. Á sama tíma, it underscored the weaknesses of both the legal opposition and ruling party. The regime might well have wagered that a modest increase in the Muslim Brothers’ parliamentary representation could be used to stoke fears of an Islamist takeover and thereby serve as a reason to stall reform. If so, the strategy is at heavy risk of backfiring.
| september 05, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Íslam og lýðræði
ITAC
Ef maður les blöðin eða hlustar á fréttaskýrendur um alþjóðamál, það er oft sagt – og jafnvel oftar gefið í skyn en ekki sagt – að íslam samrýmist ekki lýðræði. Á tíunda áratugnum, Samuel Huntington kom af stað vitsmunalegum eldstormi þegar hann gaf út The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, þar sem hann setur fram spár sínar fyrir heiminn - skrifað stórt. Á pólitíska sviðinu, hann bendir á að á meðan Tyrkland og Pakistan gætu haft smá tilkall til „lýðræðislegs lögmæti“, voru öll önnur „... múslimalönd að mestu ólýðræðisleg: konungsveldi, eins flokks kerfi, herstjórnir, persónuleg einræði eða einhver samsetning af þessu, hvílir venjulega á takmarkaðri fjölskyldu, ættin, eða ættbálka“. Forsendan sem röksemdafærsla hans byggir á er að þeir séu ekki aðeins „ekki eins og við“, þeir eru í raun andvígir grundvallar lýðræðislegum gildum okkar. Hann trúir, eins og aðrir, að á meðan verið sé að mótmæla hugmyndinni um vestræna lýðræðisvæðingu annars staðar í heiminum, átökin eru mest áberandi á þeim svæðum þar sem íslam er ríkjandi trú.
Rökin hafa líka komið fram frá hinni hliðinni líka. Íranskur trúarfræðingur, að velta fyrir sér stjórnarkreppu snemma á tuttugustu öld í landi sínu, lýst því yfir að íslam og lýðræði séu ekki samrýmanleg vegna þess að fólk sé ekki jafnt og löggjafarstofnun sé óþörf vegna þess hve íslömsk trúarlög eru innifalin.. Svipaða afstöðu tók nýlega af Ali Belhadj, alsírskur menntaskólakennari, prédikari og (í þessu samhengi) leiðtogi FIS, þegar hann lýsti því yfir að „lýðræði væri ekki íslamskt hugtak“. Kannski var dramatískasta yfirlýsingin um þetta efni frá Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leiðtogi súnní-uppreisnarmanna í Írak sem, þegar horfur eru á kosningar, fordæmdi lýðræði sem „illt meginregla“.
En samkvæmt sumum múslimskum fræðimönnum, Lýðræði er enn mikilvæg hugsjón í íslam, með þeim fyrirvara að það lúti alltaf trúarlegum lögum. Áherslan á aðalsæti sharía er þáttur í næstum öllum íslömskum athugasemdum um stjórnarhætti, hófsamur eða öfgakenndur. Aðeins ef valdhafinn, sem tekur við vald sitt frá Guði, takmarkar gjörðir sínar við „eftirlit með stjórnun sharía“ á að hlýða honum. Ef hann gerir annað en þetta, hann er trúlaus og staðráðnir múslimar eiga að gera uppreisn gegn honum. Hér liggur réttlætingin fyrir miklu af ofbeldinu sem hefur hrjáð múslimska heiminn í baráttu eins og ríkjandi var í Alsír á tíunda áratugnum
| september 04, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
In Search of Islamic Constitutionalism
Nadirsyah Buxur
While constitutionalism in the West is mostly identified with secular thought, Islamic constitutionalism, which incorporates some religious elements, has attracted growing interest in recent years. Til dæmis, the Bush administration’s response to the events of 9/11 radically transformed the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan, and both countries are now rewriting their constitutions. As
Ann Elizabeth Mayer points out, Islamic constitutionalism is constitutionalism that is, in some form, based on Islamic principles, as opposed to the constitutionalism developed in countries that happen to be Muslim but which has not been informed by distinctively Islamic principles. Several Muslim scholars, among them Muhammad Asad3 and Abul A`la al-Maududi, have written on such aspects of constitutional issues as human rights and the separation of powers. Hins vegar, in general their works fall into apologetics, as Chibli Mallat points out:
Whether for the classical age or for the contemporary Muslim world, scholarly research on public law must respect a set of axiomatic requirements.
First, the perusal of the tradition cannot be construed as a mere retrospective reading. By simply projecting present-day concepts backwards, it is all too easy to force the present into the past either in an apologetically contrived or haughtily dismissive manner. The approach is apologetic and contrived when Bills of Rights are read into, say, the Caliphate of `Umar, with the presupposition that the “just” qualities of `Umar included the complex and articulate precepts of constitutional balance one finds in modern texts
| september 03, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Skipulagssamfella í múslimska bræðralagi Egyptalands
Tess Lee Eisenhart
Sem elsta og mest áberandi stjórnarandstöðuhreyfing Egyptalands, Félagið um
múslimska bræður, al-ikhwan al-muslimeen, hefur lengi skapað áskorun fyrir aðra veraldlega
stjórnarfar með því að bjóða upp á yfirgripsmikla sýn á íslamskt ríki og víðtæka félagslega
velferðarþjónustu. Frá stofnun þess í 1928, bræðralagið (Ikhwan) hefur dafnað í a
samhliða trúar- og félagsþjónustu, forðast almennt bein árekstra við
ríkjandi stjórnarfar.1 Nýlega undanfarna tvo áratugi, þó, bræðralagið hefur
dundaði sér við flokksræði á hinu formlega pólitíska sviði. Þessi tilraun náði hámarki
kosning áttatíu og átta bræðra á alþýðuþingið árið 2005 — sá stærsti
stjórnarandstæðinga í nútíma Egyptalandi sögu – og handtökur næstum því í kjölfarið
1,000 Bræður.2 Kosningaframfarir í almennum stjórnmálum veita nægt fóður
fyrir fræðimenn að prófa kenningar og spá fyrir um framtíð Egypta
stjórn: mun það falla undir íslamista andstöðu eða verða áfram leiðarljós veraldarhyggju í landinu
Arabaheimur?
Þessi ritgerð víkur sér undan því að vera með svona víðtækar vangaveltur. Í staðinn, það kannar
að hve miklu leyti Bræðralag múslima hefur aðlagast að stofnun í fortíðinni
Áratugur.
| september 01, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Ræða dr,MUHAMMAD BADIE
Doktor,Muhammad Badie
In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate Praise be to Allah and Blessing on His messenger, companions and followers
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
I greet you with the Islamic greeting; Peace be upon you and God’s mercy and blessings;
It is the will of Allah that I undertake this huge responsibility which Allah has chosen for me and a request from the MB Movement which I respond to with the support of Allah. With the support of my Muslim Brothers I look forward to achieving the great goals, we devoted ourselves to, solely for the sake of Allah.
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
At the outset of my speech I would like to address our teacher, older brother, and distinguished leader Mr. Mohamed Mahdy Akef, the seventh leader of the MB group a strong, dedicated and enthusiastic person who led the group’s journey amid storms and surpassed all its obstacles, thus providing this unique and outstanding model to all leaders and senior officials in the government, associations and other parties by fulfilling his promise and handing over the leadership after only one term, words are not enough to express our feelings to this great leader and guide and we can only say “May Allah reward you all the best”.
We say to our beloved Muslim brothers who are spread around the globe, it is unfortunate for us to have this big event happening while you are not among us for reasons beyond our control, however we feel that your souls are with us sending honest and sincere smiles and vibes.
As for the beloved ones who are behind the bars of tyranny and oppression for no just reason other than reiterating Allah is our God, and for seeking the dignity, pride and development of their country, we sincerely applaud and salute them for their patience, steadfastness and sacrifices which we are sure will not be without gain. We pray that those tyrants and oppressors salvage their conscience and that we see you again in our midst supporting our cause, may Allah bless and protect you all.
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
As you are aware, the main goal of the Muslim Brotherhood Movement (MB) is comprehensive modification, which deals with all kinds of corruption through reform and change. “I only desire (your) betterment to the best of my power; and my success (in my task) can only come from Allah.” (Hud-88) and through cooperation with all powers of the nation and those with high spirits who are sincere to their religion and nation.
The MB believes that Allah has placed all the foundations necessary for the development and welfare of nations in the great Islam; therefore, Islam is their reference towards reform, which starts from the disciplining and training of the souls of individuals, followed by regulating families and societies by strengthening them, preceded by bringing justice to it and the continuous jihad to liberate the nation from any foreign dominance or intellectual, spiritual, cultural hegemony and economic, political or military colonialism, as well as leading the nation to development, prosperity and assuming its appropriate place in the world.
| Ág 30, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
MILLI GÆR OG Í DAG
HASAN AL-BANNA
The First Islamic State
On the foundation of this virtuous Qur’anic social order the first Islamic state arose, having unshakeable faith in Íslamskir stjórnarandstöðuflokkar og möguleiki á þátttöku í ESB, meticulously applying it, and spreading it throughout the world, so that the first Khilafah used to say: ‘If I should lose a camel’s lead, I would find it in Allah’s Book.’. He fought those who refused to pay zakah, regarding them as apostates because they had overthrown one of the pillars of this order, saying: ‘By Allah, if they refused me a lead which they would hand over to the Apostle of Allah (PBUH), I would fight them as soon as I have a sword in my hand!’ For unity, in all its meanings and manifestations, pervaded this new forthcoming nation.
Complete social unity arose from making the Qur’anic order and it’s language universal, while complete political unity was under the shadow of the Amir Al-Mumineen and beneath the standard of the Khilafah in the capital.
The fact that the Islamic ideology was one of decentralisation of the armed forces, the state treasuries, og provincial governors proved to be no obstacle to this, since all acted according to a single creed and a unified and comprehensive control. The Qur’anic principles dispelled and laid to rest the superstitious idolatry prevalent in the Arabian Peninsula and Persia. They banished guileful Judaism and confined it to a narrow province, putting an end to its religious and political authority. They struggled with Christianity such that its influence was greatly diminished in the Asian and African continents, confined only to Europe under the guard of the Byzantine Empire in Constantinople. Thus the Islamic state became the centre of spiritual and political dominance within the two largest continents. This state persisted in its attacks against the third continent, assaulting Constantinople from the east and besieging it until the siege grew wearisome. Then it came at it from the west,
plunging into Spain, with its victorious soldiers reaching the heart of France and penetrating as far as northern and southern Italy. It established an imposing state in Western Europe, radiant with science and knowledge.
Afterwards, it ended the conquest of Constantinople itself and the confined Christianity within the restricted area of Central Europe. Islamic fleets ventured into the depths of the Mediterranean and Red seas, both became Islamic lakes. And so the armed forces of the Islamic state assumed supremacy of the seas both in the East and West, enjoying absolute mastery over land and sea. These Islamic nations had already combined and incorporated many things from other civilisations, but they triumphed through the strength of their faith and the solidness of their system over others. They Arabised them, or succeeded in doing so to a degree, and were able to sway them and convert them to the splendour, beauty and vitality of their language and religion. The Muslims were free to adopt anything beneficial from other civilisations, insofar as it did not have adverse effects on their social and political unity.
| Ág 28, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
Múslímskur eyjaklasi
Max L. Gross
Þessi bók hefur verið mörg ár í vinnslu, eins og höfundur útskýrir í formála sínum, þó að hann hafi skrifað megnið af raunverulegum texta á árinu sem hann var háttsettur rannsóknarfélagi við Center for Strategic Intelligence Research. Höfundur var í mörg ár deildarforseti leyniþjónustuskólans við Joint Military Intelligence College.. Jafnvel þó að það kunni að virðast að bókin gæti hafa verið skrifuð af hvaða góðum sagnfræðingi eða svæðissérfræðingi í Suðaustur-Asíu, þetta verk er upplýst af meira en þriggja áratuga þjónustu höfundar innan leyniþjónustusamfélagsins. Svæðisþekking hans hefur oft verið notuð við sérstakar úttektir fyrir bandalagið. Með þekkingu á íslam sem er óviðjafnanleg meðal jafningja hans og óslökkvandi þorsta eftir að ákvarða hvernig markmið þessarar trúar gætu komið fram á sviðum sem eru langt frá áherslum flestra stefnumótenda., Höfundurinn hefur nýtt þetta tækifæri til hins ýtrasta til að kynna leyniþjónustusamfélaginu og breiðari lesendahópi stefnumótandi þakklæti fyrir svæði sem er í erfiðleikum með að sætta veraldleg og trúarleg öfl.
Þetta rit hefur verið samþykkt til ótakmarkaðrar dreifingar af Office of Security Review, Varnarmálaráðuneytið.
| Ág 27, 2010 | Athugasemdir 0
IkhwanScope á Facebook
IkhwanScope Á Scribd
IkhwanScope á Twitter