UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title The Constitutionalism of Ruhollah Khomeini's Theory of Guardianship Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4rg2c49c Author Hossainzadeh, Nura Alia Publication Date 2016 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California The Constitutionalism of Ruhollah Khomeini’s Theory of Guardianship By Nura Alia Hossainzadeh A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Mark Bevir, Chair Professor Kinch Hoekstra Professor Hamid Algar Professor Shannon C. Stimson Summer 2016 Abstract The Constitutionalism of Ruhollah Khomeini’s Theory of Guardianship by Nura Alia Hossainzadeh Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Mark Bevir, Chair In this dissertation, I study the political thought of a scholar and political actor who has long been viewed as a cultural Other: Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. To understand Khomeini’s thought, or the thought of any other culturally unfamiliar author, I argue that it is essential to engage in a historical study of the traditions of thought that the author interprets and elaborates. Through a study of many of Khomeini’s political writings—written as early as 1943 and as late as 1989—I have determined that Khomeini was influenced by four traditions of thought: the Shi’a jurisprudential tradition of political theory, the Usuli legal tradition, the Islamic constitutionalist tradition, and more marginally, the Islamic mystical-philosophical tradition. As a scholar of the Shi’a jurisprudential tradition of political theory, Khomeini holds that Islamic jurisprudents must be granted a powerful role in government. The secondary literature fails to recognize, however, the way in which Khomeini’s Islamic constitutionalist ideas impact his theorization of the political role of the jurisprudent, and at times, it incorrectly presumes that the guardian is the mystic or philosopher depicted in the Islamic mystical-philosophical tradition. As a constitutionalist, Khomeini argues that consent and popular representation are necessary ingredients of legitimate government and that the shari’a can be supplemented or aspects of it even suspended by law drafted in a parliament. Khomeini’s constitutionalism is based upon tenets of the Usuli legal tradition, which says that Islamic law is underwritten by principles from which can be deduced new law, law that is human and contestable. The influence of the Islamic constitutionalist tradition on Khomeini’s thought is most evident in his 1943 work, The Unveiling of Secrets, as well as in his post-revolutionary writings. Khomeini’s more widely read work, Islamic Government, does not include manifestly constitutionalist themes, but I argue that it has been misinterpreted to espouse ideas that contradict Islamic constitutionalism. Khomeini’s writings, as well as the institutions of government that were inspired by his theory, continue to be subjects of interest for conservative and reformist scholars and actors, and his writings are invoked for support for perspectives across the political spectrum. Beyond helping us to understand contemporary debates in the Islamic Republic, Khomeini’s political writings are a source of concepts and arguments that may be marshalled and elaborated in novel Islamic theories of government and politics. 1 To Grandpa and Nonna, Eugene Barlow Gilbert & Nora Bianchini Gilbert who left as I was writing this but whose memory and love helped to sustain me through the end of it i Acknowledgements I would like to thank my dissertation chair and graduate advisor, Mark Bevir, for reviewing countless pages of writing, meeting with me at a moment’s notice, teaching me—both directly and through example—how to think analytically, and spending years thinking about what sort of advice he could give me that would benefit me intellectually and in my career. I would like to thank my committee members: Kinch Hoekstra, for his close attention to my work and his deep concern for helping me to become a better thinker and scholar; Hamid Algar, for all he has taught me about Iran, Islam, and how to comprehend and contemplate fairly what is unfamiliar; and Shannon Stimson, for moving me to ask the questions I needed to ask and encouragingly speaking to me about how and why my research is so exciting and very much needed. I would also like to thank Diego von Vacano, Nicholas Tampio, and Leigh Jenco, fellow comparative political theorists who have not hesitated to read and reflect on my work and offer me advice on how to pursue a study of non-Western political theory. Thank you, also, to Nina Hagel, colleague and friend, for years of meaningful conversations and for her warmth and kindness. Thank you to Suzan Nunes, who was always there to help me think through options and progress steadily towards this point. A note of thanks is also in order for the Western Political Science Association and the American Political Science Association, at whose annual meetings I have presented my work on multiple occasions and received immensely helpful feedback from audiences, discussants, and fellow panelists. I also received feedback on my work from the anonymous reviewers selected by the Journal of Shi’a Islamic Studies, in which I published parts of Chapter 3 and short selections from Chapter 5 (in an article entitled “Ruhollah Khomeini’s Political Thought: Elements of Guardianship, Consent, and Representative Government,” printed in in 7:2, 2014), as well as reviewers selected by by the Journal of Political Ideologies, in which I published parts of Chapter 4 (in an article entitled “Democratic and Constitutionalist Elements in Khomeini’s Unveiling of Secrets and Islamic Government,” printed in 21:1, 2016). Last but certainly not least, I would like to thank my mom, who cultivated in me a love of learning and has entertained my questions about the universe since I was a little girl; my dad, grandparents, and sisters, whose love and support has been tangible and unwavering; and my husband Reza, who walked into my life only three years ago but who has given me an amount of support, encouragement, and love that could fill centuries. ii Table of Contents Chapter 1: Cross-Cultural Political Theory, Four Genres………………………………………...1 Chapter 2: Intellectual Background to Khomeini’s Political Thought…………………………..25 Chapter 3: Islamic Government (Hokumat-i Islami)…………………………………………….54 Chapter 4: The Unveiling of Secrets (Kashf-i Asrar)…………………………………………….67 Chapter 5: Constitutionalist Themes in Khomeini’s Public Speeches, Statements, and Correspondence: 1979-1989……………………………………………………………………100 Chapter 6: Political Thought in Contemporary Iran: Abdollah Javadi Amoli and Hasan Yousefi Eshkevari………………………………………………………………………………………..124 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………...151 iii Chapter 1: Cross-Cultural Political Theory, Four Genres Western political theorists have, since the mid-1990’si, become increasingly interested in studying works of political theory produced by authors who lived, thought, and wrote in unfamiliar cultural and intellectual contexts, works that are often, but not always, written in languages other than English but are certainly outside of the “canon” of political philosophy commonly taught to students in Western universities. Debates have emerged since this time about how to integrate these works into the discipline. While the traditional canon of political philosophy is dangerously narrow, the world of political philosophy outside of the West is vast and unfamiliar, inspiring debate on how, or whether, political theorists can ever communicate across cultural distances. In this chapter, I argue that the beliefs of authors who write in these unfamiliar contexts can best be understood if we study their ideas historically. This entails examining how individual agents use their reason to differently interpret, modify, or perhaps reject the ideas they inherit from teachers. Traditions of thought are thus the object of study of historians, and traditions are constituted by ideas that evolve through time as pupils learn from teachers—where these teachers need not be formal teachers but instead any person, including friends, public figures, long-deceased philosophers, who transmits an idea—and these pupils become teachers themselves.ii In this chapter, I contrast the historical approach with three other methods of interpreting culturally unfamiliar authors: first, what I call the positivist approach, second, the dialogical approach, and third, the pearl-diving approach. I critique positivists for explaining beliefs by reference to formal social and psychological laws and theorists of dialogue for often holding that cross-cultural understanding and agreement is limited, for often neglecting historical study in their engagement with the other, and for undertheorizing their interpretive methodology. I do not critique but instead distinguish my approach from the pearl-diving approach, which is not incompatible with the historical approach because pearl-divers study culturally unfamiliar texts for an altogether different purpose—rather than seeking primarily to understand culturally unfamiliar texts, they seek to use them instrumentally. However, if a pearl-diver claimed that he could both understand the beliefs of authors, without undertaking