American University in Cairo School of Humanities And
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
American University in Cairo School of Humanities and Social Sciences Competing Models of the Modern Islamic State: Wahhabi vs. Muslim Brotherhood Ideologies A Thesis Submitted to Political Science Department In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree of Master of Arts By Mohammad Abdul-Monaem Abdul-Hamid Affan Under the supervision of Dr. Heba Raouf Ezzat December/2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FIRST AND FOREMOST I THANK ALLAH THE MOST MERCIFUL I AM DEEPLY GRATEFUL TO MY ADVISOR PROF. HEBA RAOUF EZZAT FOR HER CONTINUOUS ACADEMIC SUPPORT AND EXPERT ADVICES AND INSTRUCTIONS. I OWE HER TOO MUCH I WISH TO EXTEND MY CORDIAL THANKS AND GRATITUDE TO MY ACADEMIC READERS: PROF. ASHRAF AL SHERIF AND PROF. AMAL HAMADA FOR THEIR METICULOUS AND INFORMATIVE INSIGHTS AND COMMENTS I AM DEEPLY INDEBTED TO PROF. RABAB EL MAHDY, THE RESPONSIBLE OF ENGAGED SCHOLARS FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM FOR HER GREAT EFFORTS AND HELP I AM ALSO THANKFUL TO ALL MY PROFESSORS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANTS IN POLITICAL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT IN AMERICAN UNIVERSITY IN CAIRO I CANNOT FIND ENOUGH WORDS TO EXPRESS MY DEEP LOVE AND APPRECIATION TO MY PARENTS AND WIFE FOR THEIR ENCOURAGEMENT AND SUPPORT FINALLY, I DEDICATE THIS WORK TO THE SOULS OF EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION MARTYRS NEVER FORGET … NEVER FORGIVE TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgement Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures Transliteration CHAPTER ONE: A BACKGROUND ………………………………………………………... 1 I. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 1 II. Research question, hypothesis, and objectives.…………………………………………….. 3 III. Theoretical Framework……………………………………………………………………... 6 a. Political legitimacy: a search for definition ................................................................ 6 b. Different approaches to the political legitimacy …………………………………….. 8 c. Max Weber’s theory of political legitimacy and its critics ………………………… 10 IV. Methodology …………………………………………….………………...……………….. 14 CHAPTER TWO: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ……………………………………… 16 I. The Islamic state: its rationale and definition …………………………………………….. 16 A. The Ummah …………………………………………………………………………….. 17 B. The Islamic shari‘ah …………………………………………………………………… 20 C. The Caliphate “al-khilāfah” …………………………………………………………… 24 II. Problematics associated with the Islamic state definition …………………………………. 26 A. Applying Western terminologies and concepts …………….…………………………. 26 B. The dilemma of the classical political Islamic thought ……………………………….. 27 C. The underdevelopment of the political classical Islamic thought …………………….. 31 D. The inevitable overlap between the sacred Divine shari‘ah and the human thought …. 33 III. The modern state: its historical origin, evolution, and characteristics …………………….. 35 IV. Emergence of the modern state in the Islamic experience ….……………………………… 41 CHAPTER THREE: BIRTH OF ISLAMISM ……………………………………………... 46 I. Islamism: what, why, and who?……………………………………………………………. 46 II. Tale of two ideologies: Wahhabism and Muslim Brotherhood ………….………………... 58 A. The historical and societal context ……………………………………………………... 59 B. The founding ideologues ………………………………………………………………. 64 C. The main religio-political doctrines ……………………………………………………. 70 CHAPTER FOUR: MAKING A MODERN STATE ISLAMIC ………………………….. 84 I. Foundation of the Saudi state ……………………………………………………………… 86 II. The Saudi state of exception ……………………….……………………………………… 91 i. The constitutional order ……………………………………………………………. 92 ii. The mode of legitimacy ……………………………………………………………. 93 iii. The power structure and distribution ………………………………………………. 99 iv. The pattern of citizenship ……………………………………………………...….. 102 III. Competing models of the modern Islamic state …………………………………………... 103 CHAPTER FIVE: ISLAMIST OPPOSITION IN AN ISLAMIC STATE………………. 117 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………………. 126 BIBLIOGRAPHY …………………………………………………………………………… 131 List of Tables: Table (1): Institutional features of the different Weberian forms of domination……………... 12 Table (2): Ideological differences between main versions of Islamism..………………………. 57 Table (3): The main differences between Wahhabism and Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology..... 83 Table (4): The main differences between Wahhabi and Muslim Brotherhood’s models of the Islamic state………………………………………………………………………………….....115 List of Figures: Fig.1: Categorization of Islamism according to the historical evolution……………………….. 57 Fig.2: Different theories of the modern Islamic state…………………………………………... 86 Fig.3: Islamist traditions shaping al-ṣaḥwa al-islāmiyyah’s ideology………………………… 120 Transliteration: ḍ ض ʾ أ ṭ ط ā ا ẓ ظ b ب ʿ ع t ت gh غ ṯ ث f ف j ج q ق ḥ ح k ك kh خ l ل d د m م ḏ ذ n ن r ر h هـ z ز w و s س i ي sh ش ṣ ص CHAPTER ONE: A BACKGROUND I. INTRODUCTION: The birth of the modern state in the Muslim world was associated with a relatively new phenomenon in the Islamic experience, which is the emergence of multiple contradicting doctrines and ideologies for the Islamic state. In contrary to the case in other polities preceding the modern state in the political history of Islam (i.e., empire state, sultanates, kingdoms, city- states, or the more primary forms as tribes), contemporary Sunni Muslims – and even Islamists – do not agree upon one model or theory for the Islamic state. Despite the fact that all are claiming Islamic reference, there are diverse theories, which include: the authoritarian traditional theory of Wahhabism, the democratic theory claimed by Islamic democrats as Rashid al-Ghannoushi, the theocratic democracy of Abu al-A„la al-Mawdudi, the idealistic theory of al-ḥākimiah (the governance) of Sayyid Quṭb, and the semi-theocratic theory, the rule of religious scholars „ulamā‟ , as in case of Afghani Taliban and Somali legal courts systems, which represent a Sunni counterpart of the Shiite Velayat-e-Faqih theory1. The emergence of the modern state carried many challenges to the traditional model of the Islamic governance. The modern state is characterized by specific patterns of legitimacy, constitutionality, citizenship, and sovereignty, which are different from those of the traditional Islamic state. Therefore, many scholars point to inherent incompatibility between both states. Bertrand Badie, for instance, states that the political modernity contradicts the cultural patterns and the societal organizations of the Muslim World.2 In accordance to him, Heba Raouf argues 1 Abdelilah Belkeziz, The state in contemporary Islamic thought: a historical survey of the major Muslim political thinkers of the modern era (London: I. B. Tauris, 2009). 2 Bertrand Badie (trans. by nakhlah friefer), al-dawlatan: al-dawlah wa al-mojtama„ fi al-gharb wa fi dar al-islam (Beirut ; al-dār al-baiḍā‘: al-markaz al-ṯaqāphi al-‗arabi, 1996), 289. 1 that the modern state disintegrates and expropriates the Islamic notions of al-jamā„ah ―the Group‖ and al-ummah, resulting in distortion and limitation of the Islamists‘ political imagination about the modern Islamic governance.3 Recently, Wael Hallaq claims that the Islamic modern state is an ―Impossible State‖. He argues that: ―The Islamic state, judged by any standard definition of what the modern state represents, is both impossible and a contradiction in terms.‖4 He mentions many major incompatibilities between both state models, including: positivist rational paradigm of the modern state vs. the metaphysical normative paradigm of the Islamic state, the autonomous sovereignty as one of the form-property in the modern state vs. the affirmation of the God sovereignty in the Islamic state, and the centrality of the morality in the subject production in the Islamic state vs. the technology of the subject production by the modern state, which aims at creation of an efficient productive citizen.5 In the aftermath of the Arab Spring, with the success of the Political Islam movements to seize power in some countries, such as Egypt and Tunisia, the problematic of the Islamic state was raised again and ignited serious conflict between Islamists and seculars. They combated around many issues, as: the identity of the state, codification of the shari'ah, and the constitution, what resulted in severe political polarization in the Arab Spring countries. Nevertheless, another hidden conflict seems to begin simultaneously in the camp of the Islamists itself between the Wahhabism and the Muslim Brotherhood, the two major Sunni Islamic movements. The 3 Heba Raouf Ezzat ―naẓarāt fi al-khiāl al-syāsi lel-islāmyyin: eshkāliāt manhajiah wa syāsiah‖ in islāmyoun wa democratyoun: eshkāliāt benā‟ tayyār Islāmi democrāti, ed. Amr Shoubky (Cairo: markaz al-drāsāt al-syāsiah wa al-estrātijiah, 2006), 44. 4 Wael B. Hallaq, The Impossible State: Islam, Politics, and Modernity's Moral Predicament (New York: Columbia University Press, 2013), ix – xiv. 5 Ibid., 5 – 12 & 155-160. 2 increasingly prominent role of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab Spring challenges Al Sa„ud‟s position within the Sunni Islamic world.6 In addition, the Muslim Brotherhood seems to challenge the Saudi model of the Islamic governance and refutes the historical Saudi claim that their ʿulamā‟-backed political system is the authentic Islamic model of governance. The political gains of the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates across the region were thought to reveal the obsolescence of the Saudi Islamic state model.7 II. RESEARCH QUESTION, HYPOTHESIS AND OBJECTIVES: The Wahhabi and the Muslim Brotherhood movements are considered the major modern Islamic movements in the Sunni Muslim World. Each of them calls for a different model of the Islamic state. The Wahhabi ideology adopts a traditional state model,8