Political Islam and International Relations

Elizabeth Shakman Hurd Assistant Professor Department of Political Science Northwestern University !" University Place Evanston# $% !&!' eshurd(northwestern)edu '*+)* +),*"&

Please do not cite or distribute without permission)

Presented at the Annual -eetin. of the American Political Science Association Au.ust /"# &!! Philadelphia# Pennsylvania

$l s0a.it bien d0aborder la 1uestion de fond2 l0islam est3il compatible avec la la4cit56 -ais alors# de 1uelle la4cit5 parlons3nous6" 37livier 8oy# Vers un Islam europen, "")

9he attempt to understand -uslim traditions by insistin. that in them reli.ion and politics :two essences modern society tries to keep conceptually and practically apart; are coupled must# in my view# lead to failure)

39alal Asad# Genealogies of Religion# &'3&<

$n Rule of Experts# 9imothy -itchell writes that# =the possibility of social science is based upon takin. certain historical e>periences of the ?est as the template for a universal knowled.e)@& 9his observation applies to the knowled.e about Apolitical $slam0 .enerated by secularist epistemolo.y) 9he conceptions of secularism underlyin. social in1uiry determine the kinds of 1uestions that are Aaskable0 and worth askin. about secularism# reli.ion and politicized reli.ion)/ As Hirschkind su..ests# =.reater reco.nition must be .iven to the way ?estern concepts :reli.ion# political# secular# temporal; reflect specific historical developments# and cannot be applied as a set of universal cate.ories or natural domains)@* 9his paper has two obBectives) Cirst# $ analyze the terms throu.h which Apolitical $slam0 is understood in contemporary $nternational 8elations) European and American understandin.s of Apolitical $slam0 rely upon commonly held secular definitions and assumptions about reli.ion and politics) As a result# they do not consider the fundamental 1uestion that motivates the conceptual work of this essay2 in what ways do
=?e need to ask the fundamental 1uestion2 is $slam compatible with laicism6 Dut then# of which laicism are we speakin.6@ :author0s translation;)
"

-itchell &!!&# p) +) Asad "<< # p) "") * Hirschkind "<<+# p) "*)

& /

3"3

assumptions about what Areli.ion0 is and how it relates to Apolitics0 determine the kind of 1uestions worth askin. about Apolitical $slam0 and the kinds of answers one e>pects to find6 $ ar.ue that secularist habits# dispositions and interpretive traditions are part of the cultural and normative foundation of contemporary $nternational 8elations) 9hey are an implicit part of the ontolo.y of this research tradition), As a result# $nternational 8elations re1uires and assumes a particular kind of Areli.ious0 subBect that is produced throu.h a series of practices that are at the core of modern secularist authority) Second# this paper e>plores the effects of these secularist understandin.s upon contemporary European and American forei.n policy toward A$slamic0 political actors and movements) $ ar.ue that one variation of these secularist dispositions contributes to a tendency in European forei.n policy to seek to en.a.e and transform Apolitical $slamists0 both politically and economically) A second variation contributes to a tendency in American forei.n policy to try to eliminate A$slamist0 actors and movements by starvin. them both diplomatically and economically) 9his Aen.a.e0 versus Astran.le0 policy dichotomy has led to si.nificant transatlantic tensions# as Eower su..ests2 9he commonality of views that bound the United States and Europe to.ether is fadin.) Since September ""# &!!"# after a brief flurry of to.etherness# they have been unmistakably driftin. apart) 9he sense of a terrorist threat has initiated a profound transformation in U)S) forei.n policy# but one that Europeans do not share and do not be.in to understand) 9his misunderstandin. is mutual) $t affects all aspects of international relations# from mediation :of the lack of it; in the -iddle East to cooperation :of the lack of it; in defense and from disruptions of trans3Atlantic trade to policy on weapons of mass destruction)+ 9his paper e>plains these policy diver.ences and opens possibilities for new ways of think about and relatin. to Apolitical $slam)0 Secularist epistemolo.y provides the terms throu.h which crucial distinctions are made between public and private# reli.ious and
,

?hite &!!!# p) /) -ahmood &!!,# p) //)

Eowers &!!&# p) //)

3&3

political and sacred and secular) 9hese modes of apprehendin. Apolitical $slam0 have si.nificant political conse1uences in international relations)

Political Islam: Background to the concept

9he term Apolitical $slam0 was coined in the "<+!s to refer to what Denoeu> has described as the =rise of movements and ideolo.ies drawin. on $slamic referentsFterms# symbols and events taken from the $slamic traditionFin order to articulate a distinctly political a.enda)@' Cor Ayubi Apolitical $slam0 refers to =the doctrine andGor movement which contends that $slam possesses a theory of politics and the State)@< Hefner describes a =resur.ence of piety and public reli.ious activity unprecedented in modern history@ in the -uslim world durin. the "<+!s and "<'!s# emphasizin. the diversity of commitments within this movement and distin.uishin. between public e>pressions of -uslim piety and identity and Apolitical0 $slam)"! Salvatore approaches Apolitical $slam0 as a =conceptual and symbolic construct# and never as an unproblematic description of a clear phenomenon)@"" As he ar.ues# =the attribution to $slam of an inherently political dimension states the de.ree of the diver.ence of this reli.ion from the assumed normality# and the de.ree of the diver.ence of the =$slamic@ polity from a normal concept and practice of politics)@"&

Denoeu> &!!&# p) ") Ayubi "<<&# p) i>) Hubaida divides the $slamist movement into Aconservative $slam0 :Saudi establishment;I Aradical $slam0 :more violent appropriations of $slam associated with Sayyid Jutb and his followers;I and Apolitical $slam0 :affiliated with nationalist and leftist proBects advocatin. =ideas and pro.rammes of socio3political transformation based on $slam@;) Hubaida &!!!) "! Hefner &!!,# p) "') "" Salvatore "<<<# note "# p) >>vi) "& $bid)# p) >>)
' <

3/3

Hefner and Salvatore are onto somethin. important when they identify the diversity of commitments within these movements and e>tent to which Apolitical $slam0 is often presumed to diver.e from Anormal0 politics) APolitical $slam0 is interpreted monolithically by secular analysts as epiphenomenal# as a diver.ence andGor infrin.ement upon neutral secular public space# as a throwback to pre3modern forms of -uslim political order# or as a combination of all of the above) ?idely held interpretive and evaluative frameworks about $slam and politics form the cultural and reli.ious backdrop out of which Europeans and Americans understand and en.a.e with Apolitical $slam)0 9wo sets of secularist assumptions are operative in this cultural backdrop) $n the first# which $ describe below as laicism# Apolitical $slam0 appears a superficial e>pression of more fundamental economic and political interests and an infrin.ement of irrational forms of reli.ion upon would3be secular public life in -uslim3maBority societies) $t threatens democratic public order and marks a step toward theocracy) $n the second# described below as AKudeo3Lhristian secularism#0 Apolitical $slam0 appears as an undemocratic commin.lin. of $slam and politics that stands in sharp distinction to the modern :Lhristian or Kudeo3Lhristian; separation of church and state)"/ Distinctions between reli.ious and political authority are not only historically absent from -uslim3 maBority societies but are unthinkable due to fi>ed characteristics of the $slamic reli.ion) $n both of these interpretive traditions# each of which is discussed at len.th below# Apolitical $slam0 appears as a refusal to acknowled.e the privile.ed status of the private sphere and a trans.ression of secularist cate.ories of public and private)"* 9he problem with this understandin. of Apolitical $slam0 is# as Lonnolly ar.ues# that it adopts as =neutral terms of analysis several concepts and themes that became
"/
"*

Hurd &!!*) Cor a related ar.ument re.ardin. the alle.ed refusal of the $ranian hosta.e takers of "<+< to acknowled.e the sanctity of the ?estern private sphere see -cAlister &!!"# p) &&!)
3*3

authoritative only throu.h the he.emony of Mparticular forms ofN ?estern secularism)@", Euro3American secularist epistemolo.ies have produced particular understandin.s of Apolitical $slam#0 at the same time that# to paraphrase Euben# they =conceal their Amechanisms of production0 within claims of obBectivity resultin. in ima.es which say less about what MApolitical $slam0N Areally is0 than about the ways in which MsecularistN assumptions derived from ?estern history and e>periencesOproduce our understandin.s of MitN)@" $n other words# secularist epistemolo.y relies upon and produces a particular kind of Areli.ious0 subBect and a particular understandin. of Anormal politics0 that lends a particular colorin. to theopolitical practices in -uslim3maBority societies) 9he effect of this production of reli.ious subBectivity is to e1uate the appearance of A$slamic0 reli.ion in Apolitical0 practice with fundamentalism and intolerance) 9hese Aframin. effects0 have not .one unnoticed) 8aymond Daker for e>ample alludes to a ?estern tendency to frame Apolitical $slam0 in ne.ative terms in his account of the New $slamist movement in E.ypt)"+ As Daker ar.ues# =there are no sound scholarly reasons for the critical .ap in the ?estern understandin. of $slamOlan.ua.e barriers and cultural differences have meant that these important aspects of mainstream $slam that flow from New $slamist interpretations have been lar.ely i.nored in the ?est)@"' Cawaz Eer.es has remarked that# =the underlyin. cultural values of Americans play a maBor role in shapin. most policy makers0 perceptions of $slamists)@"< -y ar.ument is that European and American forms of secularism are important contributors to these Acultural differences0 and Acultural values0 identified but not e>plained by Daker
Lonnolly "<<<# p) &&) Euben "<<<, p) >iv) "+ Daker &!!/# p) *) See Daker &!!,) "' Daker &!!/# p) *) "< Eer.es "<<<, p) ) Cor a trenchant criti1ue of ?estern approaches to Apolitical $slam0 see Durke &!! )
", "

3,3

and Eer.es) Althou.h the causalities are comple># secularist epistemolo.y contributes in crucial ways to the constitution of these otherwise ine>plicable Acultural0 barriers) 9he second step in my ar.ument is to su..est that these secularist evaluations of Apolitical $slam0 have si.nificant policy conse1uences in international relations) Cirst# in secular analyses forms of politics identified as A$slamist0 appear almost e>clusively in their trans.ressive andGor re.ressive capacity# and tend to be e1uated and conflated with Afundamentalism)0 As van der Peer and %ehmann note# =when reli.ion manifests itself politicallyOit is conceptualized as fundamentalismO$t is almost always interpreted as a ne.ative social force directed a.ainst science# rationality# secularismFin short# a.ainst modernity)@&! Eertrude Himmelfarb for e>ample associates $slamic fundamentalism with =disa.reeable ima.es of female subBu.ation and abuse# reli.ious intolerance and persecution# despotic .overnments and caste systems# child labor and illiteracy# and other unsavory practices that are hardly consonant with the vision of a universal Amoral community)0@&" Secularists like Himmelfarb are 1uick to associate Apolitical $slam0 with the trans.ression of universal norms in part because =from the point of view of secularism# reli.ion has the option either of confinin. itself to private belief and worship or of en.a.in. in public talk that makes no demands on life)@&& Decause the forms of politics identified by secularists as Apolitical $slam0 do not conform to either of these re1uirements# secularist epistemolo.y e1uates them with do.matism and fanaticism)&/ APolitical $slam0 is defined a priori as a threat to the privile.ed status of the private sphere and as a step toward theocracy) 9his presumptive trans.ression is often linked

Pan der Peer and %ehmann "<<<# p) /# citin. %awrence "<'<) Himmelfarb &!!&# p) + ) && 9alal Asad# A8eli.ion# Nation3State# Secularism0# in Pan der Peer and %ehmann "<<<, p) "<") &/ %ynch &!!!# pp) +*"3+,<)
&! &"

3 3

rhetorically to the alle.ed -uslim proclivity for terrorism and totalitarianism# both of which also refuse to honor the privile.ed status of the private sphere)&* A second policy conse1uence of Euro3American secularist epistemolo.y is that the forms and de.rees of separation between public and private# sacred and secular# $slam and politics that do e>ist in contemporary -uslim3maBority societies either do not appear at all# or appear as ill3fittin. imitations of a ?estern secular ideal) 7n the one hand# attempts to ne.otiate Asecular0 modalities of differentiation between reli.ion and politics are depicted as Aderivative discourses0 of a more successful and authentic ?estern secular ideal) APolitical $slam#0 on the other hand# is depicted in oppositional terms vis3Q3vis these derivative secularist discourses and represented as a unitary and unified threat to otherwise viable local variations of ?estern secularism) %e.itimate ne.otiations over the terms in which reli.ion enters into public life in -uslim3maBority conte>ts that take place under the headin. of Apolitical $slam0 are occluded as a result) APolitical $slam0 is neither merely a backlash a.ainst modernization# nor an epiphenomenal e>pression of more fundamental material interests# nor an attempt to revivify anachronistic local tradition# thou.h each of these factors may be operative to some e>tent) APolitical $slam0 is a modern lan.ua.e of politics that challen.es# sometimes works outside of# and :occasionally; overturns fundamental assumptions about Areli.ion0 and Apolitics0 that are embedded in the forms of ?estern secularism that emer.ed out of %atin Lhristendom) 9hese forms of secularism are themselves social and historical constructs)&, 9he secularist settlement# as Lonnolly ar.ues# is a =division of labor that fell out of that historic compromise within predominantly Lhristian states@ that =provided fra.ile protection a.ainst sectarian conflict and intolerance for a few
&*

&,

-cAlister &!!"# p) &&!) Hurd &!!*)

3+3

centuries)@ However# he continues# it also =spawned practices of public life too do.matic and terse to sustain the creative tension needed between democratic .overnance and critical responsiveness to the politics of becomin.) And the destructive orientations it supported to non3Lhristian countries left a lot to be desired too)@& 9he impact of these Adestructive orientations0 are felt today in ?estern representations of Apolitical $slam)0 9his is not to deny that there are forms of $slamism# such as those espoused by Rhomeini and his followers in post3revolutionary $ran# the Armed $slamic Eroup :Crench acronym E$A; in Al.eria# the National $slamic Cront :N$C; in Sudan# the 9aliban in Af.hanistan and Al3Jaeda .lobally# which are trans.ressive or re.ressive by almost any standard of Bud.ment) :9he e>tent to which al3Jaeda can be le.itimately associated with any version of A$slamic0 tradition is 1uestionable# however# because the .roup adamantly reBects the authority of all established $slamic authorities) Accordin. to Larapico# =Al3 JaedaOdo not respect or abide by $slamic law as understood by those who know what it is about) 9hey are reactionary nihilist3anarchists with no positive vision or pro.ram2 even the .oal of an S$slamic stateS per se is more imputed than articulated)@&+; 9hese parties and movements# however cate.orized# threaten the status of almost any conceptualization of a private sphere and any attempt to democratically ne.otiate the relationship between reli.ion and politics# and deserve international condemnation) ?ith re.ard to such cases# $ a.ree with Al.erian historian -ohammed Arkoun in his observation that# =the tyranny of faith in militant $slam is no more acceptable than the tyranny of reason)@&' Tet these e>treme forms of $slamist politics are the e>ception rather than the rule)&< As Larapico concludes# =there is no evidence of a mass followin. or
Lonnolly "<<<# p) ) Larapico &!!,) &' 8obert D) %ee# A$ntroduction#0 in Arkoun "<<*# p) >)
&

&+

&<

Ayoob &!!*# p) ,) 3'3

widespread public support in North Africa# the %evant or the Arabian Peninsula for a .roup callin. itself al3Jaeda# much less al3Jaeda in EuropeOal3Jaeda is not representative of $slamism and its pronouncements are not consonant with those of any maBor $slamist party)@/! -y point is that not all forms of what secularist authority desi.nates as Apolitical $slam0 pose this kind of threat) 9here is more .oin. on than is su..ested by authoritative secularist cate.orizations) As %ePine and Salvatore ar.ue# =the vocabulary of social science :in turn influenced by the .rammar of theories of civil society; cannot completely capture the rich and comple> idiom of these movements)@/" APolitical $slam0 raises important critical 1uestions about the foundational principles of collective life# includin. secularist collective life) 9he shift of many $slamist movements in recent years away from radical politics and toward a more Acultural0 orientation does not attest to the Afailure of $slamism0 as 7livier 8oy has su..ested)/& As EUle has shown# the result of this shift is that# =instead of disappearin. as a reference# $slam penetrates even more into the social fiber and ima.inary# thereby raisin. new political 1uestions# 1uestions not addressed solely to -uslims but concernin. the foundational principles of collective life in .eneral)@// $n sum# most varieties of Apolitical $slam0 operate outside both the epistemolo.ical and e>planatory confines of secularist tradition and secularist $nternational 8elations theory) Dy failin. to conform to the cate.ories available to $nternational 8elations theorists for understandin. reli.ion and politics# these forms of politics pose a challen.e the epistemolo.ical and cultural assumptions of the academics and policy3makers who
Larapico &!!,) -ark %ePine and Armando Salvatore# ASocio38eli.ious -ovements and the 9ransformation of ALommon Sense0 into a Politics of ALommon Eood0# in %ePine and Salvatore &!!,# p) ,") /& 8oy "<<&) // EUle &!!&# p) "+*)
/! /"

3<3

have been immersed in these secularist traditions) 9he rise of different traBectories of Apolitical $slam0 provides an opportunity to revisit these assumptions and to rethink the policy recommendations that follow from them)/* 9he ne>t two sections focus on two traBectories of secularism# laicism and Kudeo3Lhristian secularism# and their conse1uences for forei.n policy toward Apolitical $slam)0

Laicism, political Islam, foreign policy

Political scientists are socialized in the tenets of classical liberalism with its emphasis on the benefits of a strict separation of reli.ion and politics) 9his is laicism) %aicism is a form of political authority that is particularly influential in contemporary European forei.n policy) $t is most powerful when it appears as the natural order that emer.es when there is no ideolo.y present#@/, rather than as =a specific fashionin. of spiritual lifeO carved out of Lhristendom)@/ %aicism denominates itself as public# neutral and value3free# and denominates reli.ion as its private# affective and value3laden counterpart) 9he public sphere is the domain of reason# obBectivity# deliberation and BusticeI and the private the domain of subBectivity# transcendence# effeminacy and affect) %aicism warns a.ainst Areli.ion0 in the public sphere and construes it as unnatural# undemocratic and even theocratic) 8eli.ion is assi.ned a fi>ed place out of this sphereI it is to be e>cluded from the spheres of power and authority in modern societies as well as

An e>ample is -ahmood &!!, :"<&;# which concludes that =in order to understand $slamism0s enmeshment within# and challen.es to# assumptions at the core of the secular3liberal ima.inary# one must turn not to the usual spaces of political stru..le :such as the state# the economy# and the law; but to ar.uments about what constitutes a proper way of livin. ethically in a world where such 1uestions were thou.ht to have become obsolete)@ /, -cAlister ar.ues that# =the specific politics of women in the United States was presented as the .ender order that emer.ed when there was no ideolo.y present)@ -cAlister &!!"# p) &/&) / Lonnolly "<<<# p) &/)
/*

3"!3

from political analyses of these spheres) 9he relationship between reli.ion and politics is thus subBect to a set of rules considered to be universally applicable re.ardless of cultural# historical or political circumstance) %aicist representations of Apolitical $slam0 correspond to what Daniel# in his discussion of Lhristian3$slamic relations in the "<th3century# describes as =the two e>tremes of administrative pra.matism and missionary fanaticism)@/+ $n the former# Apolitical $slam0 is represented as an epiphenomenal e>pression of more fundamental structural# material or psycholo.ical interests) 9he $slamic resur.ence is seen as =a product of socioeconomic and political woesI it is locally rooted)@/' 8o.er 7wen# Eraham Culler# Cred Halliday# Dassam 9ibi# and# in some of his writin.s# Kohn Esposito# adopt variations of this approach) 7wen describes Apolitical $slam0 as a response to =the perceived failures of the secular developmentalist ideolo.ies and strate.ies which had been used to le.itimate most newly independent re.imes)@/< Culler ar.ues that# =most re.imes see almost any form of political $slam as a threat# since it embodies a maBor challen.e to their unpopular# failin. and ille.itimate presidents3for3life or isolated monarchs)@*! Halliday attributes the rise of Apolitical $slam0 to =a .eneral reBection of the secular modernity associated with radical nationalist politics and with the modernizin. stateI@*" and 9ibi ar.ues that# =the foremost issue related to the pertinence of politicized reli.ion for $8 is e>actly the Arevolt a.ainst the ?est0 directed a.ainst the e>istin. secular order)@*& Esposito stresses that# =the failures of increasin.ly discredited secular forms of
Daniel &!!!# p) /&+) Eer.es "<<<# p) /!) /< 7wen &!!*# p) ", ) As -ahmood :&!!,# p) &*; ar.ues# =in this view# the proBect of restorin. orthodo> $slamic virtues crucially depends upon an oppositional stance toward what may be loosely defined as a modernist secular3liberal ethosFan ethos whose a.ents are often understood to be postcolonial -uslim re.imes in cahoots with dominant ?estern powers)@ *! Culler &!!&# p) ,") *" Halliday &!!,# p) "&&) *& 9ibi &!!!# p) ',+)
/+ /'

3""3

nationalismOstren.thened new voices who appealed to an $slamic alternativeO@*/ APolitical $slam0 is portrayed as a backlash a.ainst modernity in .eneral and unBust domestic economic and political conditions in particular) $n a second variation of laicism# Apolitical $slam0 is represented as a threat to the scientific mana.ement of the modern public sphere that must be controlled) As Hirschkind describes this position# the term =political $slam@ is adopted to identify =this seemin. unprecedented irruption of $slamic reli.ion into the secular domain of politics and thus to distin.uish these practices from the forms of personal piety# belief# and ritual conventionally subsumed in ?estern scholarship under the unmarked cate.ory =$slam)@@** $n this view# Apolitical $slam0 is represented as =opposed to the principles of modern livin. and inconsistent with the .ame of modern politics# science and development# and therefore deservedly facin. e>tinction)@*, $t is a menacin. departure from the norm of the separation of reli.ion and politics# and harbors the potential to be irrational# dan.erous and e>tremist) APolitical $slam0 is a refusal of the privile.ed status of the modern private sphere and a trans.ression a.ainst secular democratic cate.ories of public and private) %aicism is what -ahmood describes as an =evaluative stance@* in which Apolitical $slam0 emer.es as either a reaction a.ainst unfavorable political and economic conditions andGor a dan.erous infrin.ement upon modern secular discourse and institutions) $n both cases# =the neolo.ism A$slamism0Oframes its obBect as an eruption of reli.ion outside the supposedly =normal@ domain of private worship# and thus as a
Esposito "<<+# p) &) Hirschkind "<<+# p) "&) *, Ashis Nandy# A9he Politics of Secularism and the 8ecovery of 8eli.ious 9olerance0 in ?alker and -endlovitz "<<!# p) "*!) * -ahmood uses the term in discussin. the study of A-uslim women0 and in particular =the assumptions tri..ered in the ?estern ima.ination Mby this termN concernin. $slam0s patriarchal and miso.ynist 1ualities)@ -ahmood &!!,# pp) "'<3<!)
*/ **

3"&3

historical anomaly re1uirin. e>planation if not rectification)@*+ Some approaches focus on e>plainin. political $slam# while others are more concerned with rectifyin. it) 9hese evaluative stances are politically si.nificant because they are politically effective) 9heir importance# as -ahmood observes# =is not simply a 1uestion of ideolo.ical bias# but rather the way these criti1ues function within a vast number of institutional sites and practices aimed at transformin. economic# politics# and moral life in the -iddle EastF from international financial institutions to human ri.hts associations to national and local administrative bureaucracies)@*' Cramin. Apolitical $slam0 as either epiphenomenal or as a reactive infrin.ement upon secular public space contributes to the insistence on the part of the international community that -uslim3maBority states follow a laicist traBectory of development and modernization# with its emphasis on a particular form of separation between A$slam0 and Apolitics)0 9his set of assumptions is particularly influential in contemporary European political relations with the -uslim3maBority countries of North Africa and the -iddle East) Eilles Repel for e>ample ar.ues that the =separation of the secular and reli.ious domains is the prere1uisite for liberatin. the forces of reform in the -uslim world)@*< Accordin. to Repel $slam must be reconciled with modernity# meanin. that the shortcomin.s of $slam in politics are to be remedied throu.h the importation of ?estern3 style democracy# the secularization of civil society and the separation of mos1ue and state) APolitical $slam0 is constitutionally ill e1uipped to contribute to public life in -uslim3maBority societies) %aicist assumptions about Apolitical $slam0 are also influential amon. U)S) forei.n policy3makers en.a.ed with -uslim3maBority societies) As Eer.es ar.ues2
$bid)# p) "'<) $bid)# p) "<") *< Repel &!!*# p) &<,)
*+ *'

3"/3

Actual American policies toward $slamic movements and states reveal a deep residue of ambivalence# skepticism# and mistrustOthe United States has not only supported its traditional friendsFin their fi.ht a.ainst $slamistsFbut has done little persuade them to open up the political field to e>istin.# le.itimate opposition forces),! Development and forei.n assistance pro.rams prioritize the privatization of reli.ion in the name of modernization# development and democratization) 9his mentality peaked durin. the heyday of modernization theory in the "<,!s and "< !s#," and also stood behind the state imposition of secularism :much lauded in ?estern accounts; that accompanied the foundin. of the modern 9urkish republic),& At least three si.nificant policy conse1uences follow from the commitments and assumptions identified here as laicism) Cirst# the laicist framin. of Apolitical $slam0 makes it difficult for oppositional politics cast in Areli.ious0 lan.ua.e to flourish in the public spheres of -uslim3maBority societies) As Eer.es observes# =a strain of skepticism e>ists within U)S) forei.n policy3makin. circles re.ardin. the compatibility between political $slam and democracy) U)S) discourse# replete with implicit references to $slamists0 political behavior# views revolutionary $slam as antidemocratic and autocratic)@,/ Nasr a.rees2 =as secularism is commonly viewed as a prere1uisite for viable democracy# the rise in the fortunes of $slamic revivalism is viewed with alarm)@,* Tet# as Asad and others point out# .iven the structures of authority in these societies Areli.ious0 activists of any kind# e>tremist or not# have little choice but to en.a.e state
Eer.es "<<<# p) &/") Cor a triumphalist account of the potential of ?estern civilization see Emerson "< !) Cor a contrastin. account see Erovo.ui "<< ) ,& See Parla and Davison &!!*) ,/ Eer.es "<<<# p) /) Cor an statistical challen.e to the alle.ed correlation between $slamic reli.ious beliefs and autocracy see the survey findin.s in $n.lehart &!!/) ,* Nasr "<<,# p) & &)
,!

,"

3"*3

institutions and discourse2 =$slamism0s preoccupation with state power is the result not of its commitment to nationalist ideas but of the modern nation3state0s enforced claim to constitute le.itimate social identities)@,, Collowin. Asad# -ahmood contends that# =it is not that the pietists have =politicized@ the spiritual domain of $slam :as some scholars of $slamism claim; but that conditions of secular liberal modernity are such that for any world3makin. proBect :spiritual or otherwise; to succeed and be effective# it must en.a.e with the all3encompassin. institutions and structures of modern .overnance# whether it aspires to state power or not)@, Hirschkind makes a similar point when he su..ests that# =to the e>tent that the institutions enablin. the cultivation of reli.ious virtue become subsumed within :and transformed by; le.al and administrative structures linked to the state# the :traditional; proBect of preservin. those virtues will necessarily be =political@ if it is to succeed)@,+ Non3he.emonic articulations of $slamic political tradition must en.a.e state structures in order to be effective in the public spheres of -uslim3maBority societies# an outcome that is unacceptable to laicists yet# parado>ically# necessary for political en.a.ement to occur) A second conse1uence of the laicist framin. of Apolitical $slam0 is that ne.otiations between public and private# sacred and secular# pietists and secularists# that are currently takin. place in -uslim3maBority societies appear as unnatural and ill3fitted attempts to realize a modern :laicist; ideal) Attempts to ne.otiate modalities of separation between reli.ion and politics are perceived to be what Partha LhatterBee and %) Larl Drown :thou.h from very different perspectives; have described as Aderivative
Asad "<<<# p) "<") -ahmood &!!,# pp) "</3<*) ,+ Hirschkind "<<+# p) "/) As Rin. observes# =the very fact that Athe mystical0 is seen as irrelevant to issues of social and political authority itself reflects contemporary# secularized notions of and attitudes toward power) 9he separation of the mystical from the political is itself a political decisionV@ Rin. "<<<# p) "! :emphasis in ori.inal;)
,,

3",3

discourses0 of a more successful and authentic ?estern secular ideal),' Secularism is thus =dictomized between a noble ?estern invention and an i.noble non3?estern imitation)@,< APolitical $slam0 is construed in oppositional terms vis3Q3vis these derivative laicist discourses) $t is represented as a unitary and unified threat to otherwise viable local variations of ?estern secularism) 9ibi advances a version of this ar.ument when he su..ests that# =political $slam and its concept of order are based on hostile attitudes vis3Q3 vis the .lobalization of ?estern models and the universalisation of their valuesI it revives worldviews not consonant with European concepts of world order)@ ! As Au.ustus 8ichard Norton has shown convincin.ly# however# this is simply not the case) As Norton demonstrates# =the Shi0i resur.ence in %ebanon has not been a simple reflection of Shi0ism0s supposed reBection of secular authorityOHistory is replete with e>amples of accommodation# and most %ebanese Shi0a do not reBect the le.itimacy of all temporal states# thou.h they find the %ebanese state# as it has functioned# ille.itimate)@ " A third conse1uence of the laicist framin. of Apolitical $slam0 is that it precludes effective en.a.ement between secularists and what Hefner has identified as moderate Acivil $slamists0 such as the -uhammadiyah and Nahdlatul Ulama in $ndonesia and the New $slamist movement in E.ypt) & Daker describes the latter as an influential moderate $slamist movement that emer.ed out of the -uslim Drotherhood rou.hly two decades a.o2
,'

See LhatterBee :"<</a# p) ,; for the ar.ument that post3 and anti3colonial nationalism was never fully dominated by ?estern models of nationhood2 =the most powerful as well as the most creative results of the nationalist ima.ination in Asia and Africa are posited not on an identity but rather on a difference with the =modular@ forms of the national society propa.ated by the modern ?est)@ 7n the concept of a derivative discourse see LhatterBee "<</b) Cor the ar.ument that $slamic modernism is a Aderivative discourse0 see Drown &!!!) ,< -ar> &!!/# p) viii) ! 9ibi &!!!# p) '*') " Au.ustus 8ichard Norton# A8eli.ious 8esur.ence and Political -obilization of the Shi0a in %ebanon0# in Sahliyeh "<<!# p) &/"3/&) & 8obert ?) Hefner# A-uslim Democrats and $slamist Piolence in Post3Soeharto $ndonesia0# in Hefner &!!,# p) &<')
3" 3

Under authoritarian conditions# they have constituted themselves as a fle>ible and resilient =intellectual school#@ neither attached to one particular movement nor an e>tension of official authority# yet nevertheless able to .ive coherence to their collective interpretive and practical work in a multitude of fields) / Cramin. Apolitical $slam0 as either epiphenomenal or as an infrin.ement upon neutral public space eclipses the democratic potential of forms of $slamism pursued by the E.yptian New $slamists# the 9urkish Kustice and Development Party :KDP;# Rhatami0s reform movement in $ran# Kamaat3i3$slami in Pakistan and other similar movements) As Asad su..ests# these instances of what Lasanova describes as Adeprivitized reli.ion#0 and others such as the "<<& elections in Al.eria and the "<<+ rise of the ?elfare Party in 9urkey# =are intolerable to secularists primarily because of the motives imputed to their opponents rather than to anythin. the latter have actually done) 9he motives si.nal the potential entry of reli.ion into space already occupied by the secular)@ * $n short# laicism in forei.n policy contributes to the perception that a particular ?estern version of the separation of reli.ion and politics offers the only path toward liberal democracy# a position described by Amartya Sen2 =9he liberty that is increasin.ly taken in 1uick .eneralizations about the past literature of non3?estern countries to Bustify authoritarian Asian .overnments seems to have its analo.ue in the e1ually rapid ?estern belief that thou.hts about Bustice and democracy have flourished only in the ?est# with the presumption that the rest of the world would find it hard to keep up with the ?est)@ , 9he term Apolitical $slam0 strives to encompass a ran.e of different forms of politics# many of which e>ist beyond the reach of secularist epistemolo.y) As %ePine
Daker &!!/# p) & /) Asad "<<<# p) "<") , Amartya Sen# AHumanity and Litizenship0# in Lohen and Nussbaum &!!&# p) ""')
/ *

3"+3

and Salvatore ar.ue# =there are concepts of the common .ood deployed by contemporary -uslim socio3reli.ious movements that do not adhere to the dynamics or normsFand indeed# as we learn from Coucault# the techni1ues of power and subBectivityFof the main historical traBectories of European public spheres)@ 9o reco.nize these forms of politics

and come to terms with their effects re1uires acknowled.in. that the secularist traditions used to interpret them .enerate and rely upon particular and contestable ontolo.ical and epistemolo.ical assumptions) Secularist epistemolo.y is not pre3.iven but is socially and historically constructed) Corms of politics associated with Apolitical $slam0 therefore pose not only a political challen.e# but also and more fundamentally an epistemolo.ical and ontolo.ical challen.e to European and American cate.orizations of Areli.ion0 and Apolitics#0 to Euro3American conceptualizations of secularization) As Asad concludes# =if the secularization thesis no lon.er carries the wei.ht it once did# this is because the cate.ories of politics and reli.ion turn out to implicate each other more profoundly than we thou.ht)@ +

Judeo- hristian secularism, political Islam, foreign policy

9his implication of reli.ion in politics described by Asad is evident in the second traBectory of secularism that has influenced ?estern# and particularly American# understandin.s of Apolitical $slam)0 $n "<!+# President 9heodore 8oosevelt confessed privately that# =it is impossible to e>pect moral# intellectual and material well3bein. where -ohammedanism is supreme)@ ' Echoin. these sentiments several decades later#
%ePine and Salvatore &!!,# pp) *+3') Asad "<<<# p) "<&) ' 8oosevelt to Sprin. 8ice# " Kuly "<!+# in -orrison# Letters of Theodore Roosevelt# ,2 <'3<<# cited in %ittle &!!&# p) ",)
+

3"'3

Keane Rirkpatrick observed that# =the Arab world is the only part of the world where $0ve been shaken in my conviction that if you let the people decide# they will make fundamentally rational decisions)@ < 8obert ?) -erry# president and publisher of Congressional Quarterl and a former reporter for the !all "treet #ournal# ar.ued in his &!!, book "ands of Empire that the inseparability of reli.ion and politics is =etched in the cultural consciousness@ of the world0s -uslims)+! Kudeo3Lhristian secularism is a form of political authority that is particularly influential in American politics and forei.n policy) $t is an evaluative stance in which Apolitical $slam0 is seen as the manifestation of a uni1ue# culturally rooted and irrational commin.lin. of reli.ion and politics that differs from the Kudeo3Lhristian separationist approach to reli.ion and state) $n this view# there is a connection between the $slamic reli.ion and the failure to modernize and secularize -uslim3maBority societies)+" 9he potential for secularization is a conse1uence of the inherent cultural and reli.ious characteristics of particular communities) -uslim3maBority societies are culturally and reli.iously une1uipped or only weakly e1uipped to secularize in comparison to their Kudeo3Lhristian counterparts) As a result# the reli.iousGsecular line is a fi>ed marker of civilizational difference) 9he forms of politics identified as Apolitical $slam#0 and specifically the unwelcome incursion of Areli.ion0 into public space# are seen as a natural# thou.h re.rettable# conse1uence of fi>ed differences between reli.ions and civilizations)

Lited in Rramer "<</# p) /+) Lited in Secor &!!,) -erry ar.ues that the United States is wa.in. a civilizational war a.ainst A$slam)0 See Lhapter "! :A9he ?orld of $slam0;# -erry &!!,) +" $n a relatively nuanced e>ample of this position Duruma and -ar.ulit :&!!*# p) "&'; ar.ue that# =the main difference between contemporary $slam and Protestantism is not that the former is more political# but that it insists on a .reater moral re.ulation of the public sphere by reli.ious authority)@
< +!

3"<3

$n short# =all forms of $slamism :from its more militant to its more 1uiescent; are seen as the products of a rovin. irrationality)@+& Kudeo3Lhristian secularism is based on the assumption that distinctions between reli.ious and political authority are not only absent from the history of -uslim3maBority societies# but are not e>pected to materialize in the future) As %ewis ar.ues in an e>ample of this thesis# =the identity of reli.ion and .overnment is indelibly stamped on the memories and awareness of the faithful from their own sacred writin.s# history and e>perience)@+/ Harris has su..ested that# =a future in which $slam and the ?est do not stand on the brink of mutual annihilation is a future in which most -uslims have learned to i.nore most of their canon# Bust as most Lhristians have learned to do) Such a transformation is by no means .uaranteed to occur# however# .iven the tenets of $slam)@+* $slamic civilizations# accordin. to this view# lack any indi.enous form of secularism and reBect the secularism imported from the ?est)+, As Darber su..ests# =$slam posits a world in which the -uslim reli.ion and the $slamic state are cocreated and inseparable# and some observers ar.ue it has less room for secularism than any other maBor world reli.ion)@+ %ewis describes this scenario as a =clash of civilizationsFthe perhaps irrational but surely historic reaction of an ancient rival a.ainst our Kudeo3Lhristian herita.e# our secular present# and the worldwide e>pansion of both)@++ $n Islam and the !est# he ar.ues that political and reli.ious authorities have become increasin.ly separate in the ?est since the rise of secularism# and increasin.ly united in the -iddle East since the rise of $slam in the +th century L)E)2
-ahmood &!!,# p) "<<) %ewis "<+ # p) *!) +* Harris &!!*# p) ""!) +, See %ewis &!!& and %ewis "<</) + Darber "<< # p) &! ) ++ %ewis "<<!# p) !)
+& +/

3&!3

$slam wasOassociated with the e>ercise of power from the very be.innin.O9his association between reli.ion and power# between community and polity# canObe seen inOthe reli.ious te>ts in which -uslims base their beliefs) 7ne conse1uence is that in $slam reli.ion is not# as it is in Lhristendom# one sector or se.ment of life re.ulatin. some matters and e>cludin. othersI it is concerned with the whole of life# not a limited but a total Burisdiction)+' 9his perspective also makes its way into European commentaries) Lonsider the followin. e>cerpt from a &!!/ book review by A)L) Eraylin. of the $inancial Times2 $t is hard not to feel that one of many thin.s the Palestinian philosopher Edward Said criticizes western observers forFnamely# seein. $slamic civilization as frozen and backward3lookin.# fallin. behind the scientific# technolo.ised# industrialised west because it is locked in an unpro.ressive medievalismFmay be ri.ht after all) E>planations for this are uncomfortable to offer# but both ?heatcroft and Cletcher imply a plausible one) It is that the dis%unction &et'een religious and secular aspects of life in the 'est, and its openness to de&ate, self()uestioning and change, is precisel 'hat traditional Islam lac*s) As a result# it is in the westOthat technolo.ical and industrial pro.ress has occurred) And with this pro.ress have come more fle>ible forms of social or.anization# leadin. :however fitfully; to the evolution of democracy and human ri.hts)+< Kudeo3Lhristian secularism is a set of practices and dispositions that predisposes those influenced by it to see the $slamic Arefusal0 to honor the special status of the secular
+' +<

%ewis "<<*# pp) "/,3 ) Eraylin. &!!/# p) , :emphasis added;)

3&"3

private sphere as confirmation of the hopelessness of A$slamic civilization)0 Darber illustrates this in his su..estion that# =$slamOis relatively inhospitable to democracy and that inhospitality in turn nurtures conditions favorable to parochialism# antimodernism# e>clusiveness# and hostility to =others@Fthe characteristics that constitute what $ have called Kihad)@'! $n such accounts $slam and modernity are incommensurable worldviews that lead to the creation of incompatible social and political systems) Policy options are limited to either tense coe>istence# violent confrontation or# in some cases# conversion)'" APolitical $slam0 is defined a priori as a threat to democracy# the privile.ed status of the private sphere and a step toward theocracy) 9his presumptive trans.ression is often linked rhetorically to the alle.ed -uslim proclivity for terrorism and totalitarianism# both of which also refuse to honor the privile.ed status of the private sphere)'& As with laicism# one conse1uence of this perspective on $slam and politics is that the forms and de.rees of separation and accommodation between public and private# sacred and secular# reli.ion and politics that do e>ist in contemporary -uslim3maBority societies either do not appear at all# or appear as unnatural and ill3fitted imitations of a superior yet unrealizable ?estern Asecular0 ideal) 9he difference between laicism and Kudeo3Lhristian secularism is that in the latter $slam is seen as incompatible with an modality of separation between politics and reli.ion# while in the former it is not) Cor laicists# -uslim3maBority societies can be Amodernized0 if# like 9urkey# they follow in the footsteps of their Asecular0 ?estern role models and enforce the e>clusion of reli.ion from politics) 9his laicist thinkin. underlies the forei.n policies of many European countries# as they seek to en.a.e in diplomatic
Darber "<< # p) &!,) 9his e>plains in part the efforts of some North American evan.elical Protestants to attempt to convert -uslims in $ra1 to Lhristianity followin. the &!!/ American invasion) '& See for instance Pipes "<<*# p) / and Pipes "<<,)
'! '"

3&&3

dialo.ue with Apolitical $slamists0 to lure them toward a European model of secularism and punish them economically and politically should they stray from this traBectory) An e>ample of this attempted en.a.ement is the Crench and 8ussian position advocatin. direct dialo.ue with Hamas after the Palestinian elections of Kanuary &!! ) Cor Kudeo3Lhristian secularists# the prospects for transformation are less optimistic) 9his is reflected in contemporary American forei.n policy which operates on the assumption that it is necessary to Astamp out0 $slamist political movements on the .rounds that Aconversion0 to modern Asecular0 politics is simply impossible) 9his position is reflected in the American position toward Hamas# which refused en.a.ement on the .rounds that# accordin. to President Dush# Hamas has =one foot in politics and another in terror)@'/ 9hou.h not identical# this kind of thinkin. is reflected and reinforced by -erry0s ar.ument# cited above# that the inseparability of reli.ion and politics is =etched in the cultural consciousness@ of the world0s -uslims)

Political Islam reconsidered

Lontrary to the assumptions underlyin. laicist and Kudeo3Lhristian secularist understandin.s of $slam and politics# the relationship between public and private# sacred and secular and $slam and democracy in -uslim3maBority societies is comple> and contested) As Ayoob ar.ues# =the distinction between temporal and reli.ious affairs and the temporal authority0s de facto primacy over the reli.ious establishment continued
'/

Eeor.e ?) Dush# cited in Davis &!! )

3&/3

throu.h the rei.n of the three .reat Sunni dynastiesFthe Umayyad# the Abbasid# and the 7ttoman)@'* Halliday maintains that =a separation of reli.ion and state# indeed a reBection of all worldly# political activity# is Bust as possible an interpretation of $slamic thinkin. as anythin. the $slamists now offer)@', %apidus su..ests that a =fundamental differentiation@ between state and reli.ion has e>isted in -uslim societies since classical Umayyad and AAbbasid periods)' He ar.ues that the inte.ration of state and reli.ious community has characterized only a small se.ment of -iddle Eastern and other -uslim linea.e or tribal societies)'+ Esposito notes that the relation between -uslim reli.ious and temporal authorities# includin. Shi0i $slam in $ran# has been ambi.uous) As he ar.ues# =despite the popular ?estern ima.e of Shi0i $slam as a reli.ion of revolution and martyrdom# its relationship to the state in $ran throu.hout $slamic history has been diverse and multifacetedOthe relationship of the ulama to the state in $ranian history varied from royal patrona.e to opposition# dependin. on the sociopolitical conte>t)@'' 9here is disa.reement over the proper relationship that should obtain between political and reli.ious authorities in -uslim3maBority societies# and a ran.e of institutional arran.ements have reflected this conflicted relationship historically) As -uhammad Asad ar.ues# =the political ordinances of Jur0an and SunnahOdo not lay down any specific form of state2 that is to say# the shari0ah does not prescribe any definite pattern to
Ayoob &!!*# p) <) Halliday "<< # p) ""') ' %apidus "<+,# pp) / /3/',) =Despite the ori.ins of $slam and its own teachin.s about the relationship between reli.ious and political life# $slamic society has evolved in un3$slamic ways) $n fact# reli.ious and political life developed distinct spheres of e>perience with independent values# leaders and or.anizations) Crom the middle of the tenth century effective control of the Arab3-uslim empire had passed into the hands of .enerals# administrators# .overnors# and local provincial lordsI the Laliphs had lost all effective political power) Eovernments in $slamic lands were henceforth secular re.imesFsultanatesFin theory authorized by the Laliphs# but actually le.itimized by the need for public order) Henceforth# -uslim states were fully differentiated political bodies without any intrinsic reli.ious character# thou.h they were officially loyal to $slam and committed to its defense)@ '+ %apidus "<< # p) &*) '' Esposito "<<<# p) "! )
'*

',

3&*3

which an $slamic state must conform# not does it elaborate in detail a constitutional theory)'< 9he relationship between $slam and democracy and the e>tent to which $slamic law is e1uipped to serve as a blueprint for .overnance is subBect to debate)<! As Hefner ar.ues# =rather than an unchan.in. reli.ious ideolo.y established "*!! years a.o# -uslim politicsOhas been shaped by broad chan.es in the state and society# especially those related to mass education# urbanization# socioeconomic differentiation# and the popular desire for public participation)@<" As su..ested by the public presence of the New $slamists in E.ypt# the -oroccan PKD :Parti pour la Kustice et le Developpement;# the ARP in 9urkey# the democratic coalition in $ndonesia that toppled Soeharto in "<<' :which included =a wealth of activists and intellectuals@ involved in an =effort to effect a foundational reorientation of -uslim politics@<&; the public and democratic ne.otiation of the relationship between reli.ion and politics in -uslim3maBority societies often takes place under the ae.is of what is labeled by secularists as Apolitical $slam)0 %ike secularism# Apolitical $slam0 is =a discursive tradition that connects variously with the formation of moral selves# the manipulation of populations :or resistance to it;# and the production of appropriate knowled.e)@</ As Ayubi has shown# it is =not an old doctrine that is currently bein. resurrected# but rather a new doctrine that is in the process now of bein. invented)@<* APolitical $slam0 is a diverse# contested and evolvin. set of lan.ua.es of reli.ion and
Asad "< "# p) &&) See DorouBerdi "<<+ and %awrence "<<') <" Hefner &!!"# p) ,!<) <& Hefner# A-uslim Democrats and $slamist Piolence in Post3Soeharto $ndonesia0# in Hefner &!!,# p) &+/) </ Asad "<< # p) +) Accordin. to Asad :"<< # pp) "*3",; =an $slamic discursive tradition is simply a tradition of -uslim discourse that addresses itself to conceptions of the $slamic past and future# with reference to a particular $slamic practice in the present) Llearly# not everythin. -uslims say belon.s to an $slamic discursive tradition) Nor is an $slamic tradition in this sense necessarily imitative of what was done in the past)@ <* Ayubi "<<&# p) ""<)
'< <!

3&,3

politics involvin. =a .eneral mobilization of people around cultural# political# and social issues that are presented and interpreted throu.h an $slamic idiom)@<, As Eickelman and Piscatori ar.ue# -uslim politics =relate to a widely shared# althou.h not doctrinally defined# tradition of ideas and practice#@< involvin. =the competition and contest over both the interpretation of symbols and control of the institutions# formal and informal# that produce and sustain them)@<+ As Ayubi ar.ues# =apart from a moral code and few Afi>ations0 related to dress# penalties# and halal+haram foods# drinks and social practices# there is no well3defined comprehensive social3political3economic pro.ramme that can be described as A$slamic)0@<' $slamic ideolo.ies# as Drumber. concludes# are =shaped by and encapsulated within a multitude of ideal social# political# and cultural identities that can contradict as well as complement one another)@<< 9his historical dynamism in the relationship between $slam and politics su..ests that the spectrum of movements# identities# individuals and activities desi.nated by authoritative secularist traditions as A$slamist0 are not the e>pression of deeper structural# psycholo.ical andGor material interests or the patholo.ical side3effect of anti1uated reli.ious commitments that are fundamentally incompatible with Amodernity)0 APolitical $slam0 is not a reflection of a commitment to irrational theopolitics or simply an oppositional discourse reflectin. economic and political malaise) $t is a diverse and multi3faceted set of lan.ua.es and discursive traditions in which moral and political order is ne.otiated and re3ne.otiated in contemporary -uslim3maBority societies) %ike secularism# it is a powerful tradition of ar.umentation and a resource for collective le.itimation) $t is neither merely an oppositional discourse nor a nostal.ic one# thou.h
?hite &!!&# p) ) See also Tavuz &!!/) Eickelman and Piscatori "<< # p) *) <+ $bid)# p) ,) <' Ayubi "<<&# p) &/!) << Drumber. &!!&# pp) """3""&)
<, <

3& 3

elements of both may be present) As -ahmood writes# =to read the activities of the mos1ue movement primarily in terms of the resistance it has posed to the lo.ic of secular3liberal .overnance and its concomitant modes of sociability i.nores an entire dimension of politics that remains poorly understood and undertheorized within the literature on politics and a.ency)@"!! Secularist epistemolo.y misses these dimensions of politics precisely because Apolitical $slam0 works outside of the epistemolo.ical assumptions of the authoritative public settlements that emer.ed from %atin Lhristendom# includin. particular formations of secularism) APolitical $slam0 contests the terms throu.h which secularist epistemolo.y or.anizes reli.ion and politics) $t stands apart from the most fundamental epistemolo.ical and ontolo.ical assumptions of the secularist settlement as it evolved out of %atin Lhristendom# includin. the rationalist assumptions that serve as the foundation of modern European3inspired formations of collective life)"!" $dentifyin. the epistemolo.ical limits of secularism makes it possible to identify some forms of Apolitical $slam0 as criti1ues of Euro3American traditions of secularism) As Asad ar.ues# =the important point is what circumstances obli.e $slamism to emer.e publicly as a political discourse# and whether# and if so in what way# it challen.es the deep structures of secularism)@"!& Sayyid Jutb# as Euben shows# appears in this li.ht as a dissenter from the epistemolo.ical and ontolo.ical foundations of the traditions of secularism that have come to or.anize public life in the ?est) Jutb criticized post3 Enli.htenment political theories that e>clude reli.ious authority from politics)"!/ He
-ahmood &!!,# p) /,) Euben &!!&# p) /*) "!& Asad "<<<# p) "<") "!/ Jutb was the author of ,ilestones and In the "hade of the -oran# amon. other works) Paul Derman describes the latter as =vast# vividly written# wise# broad# indi.nant# sometimes demented# bristly with hatred# medieval# modern# tolerant# intolerant# paranoid# cruel# ur.ent# cranky# tran1uil# .rave# poetic# leaned and analyticOa work lar.e and solid enou.h to create its
"!!

"!"

3&+3

ar.ued that the European imposition of a division between faith and reason# or what Derman describes as the =liberal idea that reli.ion should stay in one corner and secular life in another#@"!* upon the -uslim peoples had resulted in their alienation and humiliation)"!, As Euben has shown# Jutb0s theory challen.es secularism in a way that parallels internal ?estern reassessments of Enli.htenment tradition)"! His criti1ue of soverei.nty# for e>ample# stands as a =a rebuttal to the epistemolo.ical assumption that truths about the worldFpolitical or moralFcan be reached by way of human faculties# and that knowled.e of such truths can le.itimate human mastery over nature and human nature# and the e>clusion of divine authority from the public sphere)@"!+ $dentifyin. the epistemolo.ical limits of secularism also helps to e>plain why Apolitical $slam0 is perceived as more threatenin. to ?estern ways of life than political Lhristianity) 9he latter also challen.es the secular publicGprivate distinction on a variety of levels# often to a remarkable de.ree) Tet the reception of political Lhristianity in ?estern democracies differs from the reception of Apolitical $slam#0 as su..ested by the fact that the term Apolitical Lhristianity0 is rarely if ever used despite the public role of Lhristianity in European and American politics and forei.n policy)"!' 9his is because Euro3American secularist traditions evolved out of Lhristianity and remain indebted to Lhristian traditions in si.nificant ways) Even in many laicist traBectories of secularization# public Lhristianity is seen as a way station on the road to liberal
own shade)@ Derman &!!/# pp) &*3&<) "!* $bid) "!, 9he $slamists and the Arab nationalists# thou.h initially cooperative before and immediately followin. the "<,& E.yptian 8evolution that overthrew Rin. Carouk# went their separate ways not lon. afterwards) 9he most radical nationalists sou.ht to elevate the Arabs over other ethnic .roups# while the $slamists sou.ht to resurrect the caliphate in the form of a theocracy based in a strict interpretation of $slamic law) Not lon. after the 8evolution and followin. an assassination attempt alle.ed to be the work of the -uslim Drotherhood# Nasser be.an to repress the $slamists) Jutb thus spent most of the "<,!s and "< !s imprisoned in difficult conditions) "! Euben "<<+# p) /") "!+ $bid)# p) ,&) Kuer.ensmeyer :"<</# p) "+,; makes a similar ar.ument)
"!'

See Rirkpatrick &!!*) 3&'3

democracy# if not a si.nificant contributor to it) As 9oc1ueville famously observed# =for Americans the ideas of Lhristianity and liberty are so completely min.led that it is almost impossible to .et them to conceive of one without the otherO@"!< $t is often ar.ued that Lhristian values :and since ?orld ?ar $$ Kudeo3Lhristian values; serve as the basis of American national identity and the source of American political ideals) $slam# on the other hand# has a different history of ne.otiatin. the publicGprivate distinction than does either Lhristianity or the secularism that it spawned) Crom a LhristianGsecularist perspective# -uslim ne.otiations of public and private therefore appear forei.n# unnatural# or even none>istent)

onclusion

-artha Nussbaum has written that# =one of the .reatest barriers to rational deliberation in politics is the une>amined feelin. that one0s own preferences and ways are neutral and natural)@""! ?e may never achieve pure rational deliberation in politics) Tet in su..estin. that we e>amine our une>amined ways and preferences Nussbaum makes an important point) 9he traditions of secularism that have come to dominate ?estern ways of or.anizin. Areli.ion0 and Apolitics0 are amon. our most si.nificant une>amined ways and preferences) 9hey are considered to be neutral and natural startin. points for public deliberations about reli.ion and politics) As $ have shown# they are neither neutral nor natural) 9hey are political settlements and not uncontestable dictates of public discourse)""" 9hey are social and historical constructs) 9hese settlements and constructs have si.nificant implications for how Europeans and European settler
9oc1ueville "< <# p) &</) -artha Nussbaum# APatriotism and Losmopolitanism0# in Lohen and Nussbaum &!!&# p) "") """ Lonnolly "<<<# p) / )
"!< ""!

3&<3

colonies# includin. the United States# understand and relate to the rest of the world# and in particular the $slamic world) $n contemporary $nternational 8elations theory and practice# European and American forms of secularism are viewed as the standard3bearers) Non3?estern models of reli.ion and politics are seen as attempts to either appro>imate ?estern ideals or react violently a.ainst them) As Erovo.ui ar.ues# =the vast maBority of contemporary international theoristsOhave failed to reco.nize the validity of non3?estern lan.ua.es of politics and their intended moral orders as le.itimate conte>ts for ima.inin. the alternatives to the present moral order)@""& -any of the forms of politics desi.nated by secularists as Apolitical $slam0 are such non3?estern lan.ua.es of politics) 9hese lan.ua.es of politics operate lar.ely outside the epistemolo.ical confines of secularism and secularist $nternational 8elations theory) 9hey throw into disarray the fundamental terms throu.h which secularism or.anizes reli.ion and politics) $n addition# as Ayoob points out# many of these movements seek to challen.e ?estern he.emony in international relations# refusin. to =accept the current distribution of power in the international system as either le.itimate or permanent)@""/ As a result of these epistemolo.ical and political challen.es# secularists are 1uick to attribute the -uslim Arefusal0 to acknowled.e the special status of the secularist private sphere as a harbin.er of despotism in -uslim3maBority societies and a threatenin. challen.e to the ?estern or.anization of the publicGprivate divide) 9his leads to an indictment of the potential of $slamic tradition to contribute to the public life of -uslim3maBority societies# makin. it difficult# if not impossible# to ima.ine a non3he.emonic and non3do.matic role for $slam in public life# discourse and institutions)
""&
""/

Erovo.ui "<<'# pp) ,!!3!")

Ayoob &!!*# p) "!) 3/!3

9his epistemolo.ical narrowin. presents a maBor stumblin. block for secularist policy3makers in both Europe and the United States) As Coucault noted# =the problem of $slam as a political force is an essential one for our time and for years to come# and we cannot approach it with a modicum of intelli.ence if we start out from a position of hatred)@""* 9he blanket ascription of threat to all forms of $slamist politics starts out from such a position) $t empowers radicals who ar.ue that the ?est aspires to .lobal he.emony throu.h a crusade a.ainst A$slam#0 while silencin. their rivals who are either i.nored or classified as radicals and dismissed as Afundamentalists)0 $t fails to address the nuanced realities of contemporary politics in -uslim3maBority countries# in which movements like Hezbollah and Hamas have .ained a stron. and le.itimate political and cultural foothold that cannot be effortlessly washed away) As 9amimi observed after the Palestinian elections of &!! # =Hamas is not isolated at allI it has more windows open to it today than ever before)@"", Dlanket ascriptions of threat and indiscriminate anti3$slamic rhetoric and policy stren.then the radical frin.e elements of such .roups and disenfranchise their more moderate rivals) As 7ttaway concludes in a recent report from the Larne.ie Endowment# =No matter what the United States says or does# the $slamist parties will remain the stron.est players in the politics of Arab countries) 9he only 1uestion is whether they will continue to manifest that stren.th by competin. in elections# as they have done lately# or whether they will do so throu.h violence)@"" -y ar.ument leads to three conclusions re.ardin. how Europeans and American decision3makers should understand and respond to Apolitical $slam)0 Cirst# we need to think hard about definitions) Althou.h they do contest many of the fundamental assumptions embedded in ?estern traditions of secularism# the modalities of politics
""* "", ""

Coucault# cited in 85e &!!,) Eaess &!! # p) &+) 7ttaway &!! )

3/"3

desi.nated by secularists as Apolitical $slam0 are not necessarily aberrant) 9he 1uestion of how any particular instantiation of Apolitical $slam0 measures up vis3Q3vis indices of democratization or pluralization must be determined on a case3by3case basis) As Ayoob ar.ues# =no two $slamisms are alike because they are determined by the conte>ts in which they operate)@""+ Althou.h Apolitical $slam0 may appear in a trans.ressive or re.ressive capacity in some instances# it will not appear e>clusively in that capacity) Second# the forms and de.rees of separation between $slam and politics that do e>ist in contemporary -uslim3maBority societies are not ill3fittin. imitations of a ?estern secular ideal) 9hey are local modalities of separation and accommodation between reli.ion and politics that may or may not have any relation to the forms of secularism that emer.ed from European Lhristendom) 9hese European3inspired modalities of secularism need not be eliminated or overcome# but they do need to be Aparochialized0 in Lhakrabarty0s sense of the term)""' 9hird and finally# democratic modalities of separation and accommodation in -uslim3maBority settin.s can and often are promul.ated by those currently identified as A$slamists)0 Cor Apolitical $slam0 cannot be automatically situated in oppositional terms vis3Q3vis Asecularist0 or separationist discourses) $t is not a monolithic ontolo.ical threat to otherwise viable local variations of A?estern0 secularism) $nstead# like the traditions of secularism described in this paper# it is a discursive tradition mobilized in different ways with differin. conse1uences) $t is a tradition of ar.umentation) $t is a discourse in which relations between metaphysics# politics and contemporary forms of political order are deliberated and contested) $t is a lan.ua.e of politics)

""+ ""'

Ayoob &!!*# p) ")

Lhakrabarty &!!!)
3/&3

8eferences

Arkoun# -ohammed) Rethin*ing Islam2 Common Questions, .ncommon /ns'ers :8obert D) %ee# ed) and trans);) Doulder2 ?estview Press# "<<*) Asad# -uhammad) The 0rinciples of "tate and Government in Islam) Derkeley2 University of Lalifornia Press# "< ") Asad# 9alal) A9he $dea of an Anthropolo.y of $slam0# Center for Contemporar /ra& "tudies 1ccasional 0aper "eries) ?ashin.ton# D)L)2 Eeor.etown University# "<< ) Asad# 9alal) Genealogies of Religion2 3iscipline and Reasons of 0o'er in Christianit and Islam) Daltimore2 Kohns Hopkins University# "<</) Ayoob# -ohammed) APolitical $slam2 $ma.e and 8eality)0 !orld 0olic #ournal &"# no) / :Call &!!*;2 "3"*) Ayubi# Nazih N) 0olitical Islam2 Religion and 0olitics in the /ra& !orld4 New Tork2 8outled.e# "<<&) Daker# 8aymond ?illiam) Islam !ithout $ear2 Eg pt and the 5e' Islamists) Lambrid.e2 Harvard University Press# &!!/) Darber# DenBamin) #ihad vs4 ,c!orld2 6o' Glo&alism and Tri&alism are Reshaping the !orld) New Tork2 Dallantine Dooks# "<< :"<<,;) Derman# Paul) A9he Philosopher of $slamic 9error)0 5e' 7or* Times ,aga8ine :&/ -arch &!!/;2 &*3&<) DorouBerdi# -ehrzad) A$ranian $slam and the Caustian Dar.ain of ?estern -odernity)0 #ournal of 0eace Research /*2 " :"<<+;2 "3,) Drown# %) Larl) Religion and "tate2 The ,uslim /pproach to 0olitics) New Tork2 Lolumbia University Press# &!!!) Drumber.# Daniel) A$slamists and the Politics of Lonsensus)0 #ournal of 3emocrac "/2 / :&!!&;2 "!<3"",) Drumber.# Daniel) ADissonant Politics in $ran and $ndonesia)0 0olitical "cience Quarterl "" # no) / :&!!";2 /'"3*"") Durke# Kason) 1n the Road to -andahar2 Travels Through Conflict in the Islamic !orld) Dond Street Dooks# &!! ) Duruma# $an and Avishai -ar.alit) 1ccidentalism2 The !est in the E es of its Enemies) New Tork2 Pen.uin Dooks# &!!*)

3//3

Larapico# Sheila) ARillin. %ive '# Noisily2 9he E3'# %iberal Dissent and the %ondon Dombin.s)0 ,iddle East Report 1nline :Kuly "*# &!!,;) Lhakrabarty# Dipesh) 0rovinciali8ing Europe2 0ostcolonial Thought and 6istorical 3ifference) Princeton2 Princeton University Press# &!!!) LhatterBee# Partha) The 5ation and its $ragments2 Colonial and 0ostcolonial 6istories) Princeton2 Princeton University Press# "<</a) LhatterBee# Partha) 5ationalist Thought and the Colonial !orld2 / 3erivative 3iscourse) -inneapolis2 University of -innesota Press# "<</b) Lohen# Koshua and -artha L) Nussbaum :Eds);) $or Love of Countr 9 Doston2 Deacon Press# &!!&) Lonnolly# ?illiam E) !h I /m 5ot a "ecularist) -inneapolis2 University of -innesota Press# "<<<) Daniel# Norman) Islam and the !est2 The ,a*ing of an Image) New Tork2 Lolumbia University Press# "<'<) Davis# -atthew) AHamas win challen.es US policy0# DDL News $nternational# & Kanuary &!! :http2GGnews)bbc)co)ukG&GhiGmiddleWeastG* ,&"*!)stm# accessed +G"'G! ;) Denoeu># Euilain) A9he Cor.otten Swamp2 Navi.atin. Political $slam)0 ,iddle East 0olic $X2 & :&!!&;2 , 3'") Eickelman# Dale C) and Kames Piscatori) ,uslim 0olitics) Princeton2 Princeton University Press# "<< ) Emerson# 8upert) $rom Empire to 5ation2 The Rise to "elf(/ssertion of /sian and /frican 0eoples) Doston2 Deacon Press# "< !) Esposito# Kohn %) The Islamic Threat2 , th or Realit 9 :/rd ed);) New Tork2 7>ford University Press# "<<<) Esposito# Kohn %) 0olitical Islam2 Revolution, Radicalism, or Reform9 Doulder2 %ynne 8ienner# "<<+) Euben# 8o>anne %) Enem in the ,irror2 Islamic $undamentalism and the Limits of ,odern Rationalism) Princeton2 Princeton University Press# "<<<) Euben# 8o>anne %) ALontin.ent Dorders# Syncretic Perspectives2 Elobalization# Political 9heory# and $slamizin. Rnowled.e)0 International "tudies Revie' *2 " :&!!&;2 &/3*') Euben# 8o>anne %) ALomparative Political 9heory2 An $slamic Cundamentalist Lriti1ue of 8ationalism)0 #ournal of 0olitics ,<2 " :"<<+;2 &'3,,) Culler# Eraham) A9he Cuture of Political $slam)0 $oreign /ffairs '"2 & :-archGApril &!!&;2 *'3 !) Eaess# 8o.er) A$nterview2 Azzam 9amimi0# ,iddle East 0olic Pol) X$$$# no) & :Summer &!! ;2 &/3&<)
3/*3

Eer.es# Cawaz) /merica and 0olitical Islam2 Clash of Cultures or Clash of Interests9 Lambrid.e2 Lambrid.e University Press# "<<<) EUle# NilYfer) A$slam in Public2 New Pisibilities and New $ma.inaries)0 0u&lic Culture "*2 " :&!!&;2 "+/3"<!) Eowers# Andrew) A9he Power of 9wo0# $oreign 0olic :Sept)G7ct) &!!&;2 /&3//) Eraylin.# A)L) A9he New LrusadeFfor Understandin.)0 The $inancial Times !ee*end :-ay /G-ay *# &!!/;2 ,) Erovo.ui# Siba N) A8ituals of Power2 9heory# %an.ua.es and Pernaculars of $nternational 8elations)0 /lternatives &/ :"<<';2 *<<3,/!) Erovo.ui# Siba N) "overeigns, Quasi("overeigns, and /fricans2 Race and "elf(3etermination in International La') -inneapolis2 University of -innesota Press# "<< ) Halliday# Cred) The ,iddle East in International Relations2 0o'er, 0olitics and Ideolog ) Lambrid.e2 Lambrid.e University Press# &!!,) Halliday# Cred) Islam and the , th of Confrontation2 Religion and 0olitics in the ,iddle East) %ondon2 $)D) 9auris# "<< ) Harris# Sam) The End of $aith2 Religion, Terror and the $uture of Reason4 New Tork2 ?)?) Norton Z Lo)# &!!*) Hefner# 8obert ?) :Ed); Rema*ing ,uslim 0olitics2 0luralism, Contestation, 3emocrati8ation) Princeton2 Princeton University Press# &!!,) Hefner# 8obert) APublic $slam and the Problem of Democratization)0 "ociolog of Religion &2 * :&!!";2 *<"3,"*) Hirschkind# Lharles) A?hat is Political $slam60# ,iddle East Report &!, :December "<<+;2 "&3"*) Hurd# Elizabeth Shakman) A9he Political Authority of Secularism in $nternational 8elations)0 European #ournal of International Relations "!2 & :Kune &!!*;2 &/,3& &) $n.lehart# 8onald :Ed); Islam, Gender, Culture, and 3emocrac 2 $indings from the !orld Values "urve and the European Values "urve ) ?illowdale# 7N2 de Sitter Publications# &!!/) Kuer.ensmeyer# -ark) The 5e' Cold !ar9 Religious 5ationalism Confronts the "ecular "tate) Derkeley2 University of Lalifornia Press# "<</) Repel# Eilles) The !ar for ,uslim ,inds2 Islam and the !est) Lambrid.e# -ass)2 Delknap Press of Harvard University Press# &!!*) Rin.# 8ichard) 7rientalism and 8eli.ion2 Postcolonial 9heory# $ndia and Athe -ystic East)0 %ondon2 New Tork2 8outled.e# "<<<) Rirkpatrick# David D) A?rath and -ercy2 9he 8eturn of the ?arrior Kesus)0 The 5e' 7or* Times :April *# &!!*;) Rramer# -artin) A$slam vs) Democracy0# Commentar <,2 " :Kanuary "<</;2 /,3*&)
3/,3

%awrence# Druce) 3efenders of God2 The $undamentalist Revolt against the ,odern /ge) San Crancisco2 Harper Z 8ow# "<'<) %apidus# $ra -) AState and 8eli.ion in $slamic Societies)0 0ast and 0resent "," :"<< ;2 /3&+) %apidus# $ra -) A9he Separation of State and 8eli.ion in the Development of Early $slamic Society)0 International #ournal of ,iddle East "tudies P$ :"<+,;2 / /3/',) %awrence# Druce) "hattering the , th2 Islam :e ond Violence) Princeton# N)K)2 Princeton University Press# "<<') %ePine# -ark and Armando Salvatore :Eds); Religion, "ocial 0ractice, and Contested 6egemonies) New Tork2 Pal.rave -ac-illan# &!!,) %ewis# Dernard) !hat !ent !rong9 !estern Impact and ,iddle Eastern Response) 7>ford2 7>ford University Press# &!!&) %ewis# Dernard) Islam and the !est) 7>ford2 7>ford University Press# "<</) %ewis# Dernard) A$slam and %iberal Democracy0# /tlantic ,onthl :Cebruary "<</;) %ewis# Dernard) A9he 8oots of -uslim 8a.e)0 The /tlantic ,onthl & *+3 !) %ewis# Dernard) A9he 8eturn of $slam0# Commentar 2 / :September "<<!;2

"2 " :Kanuary "<+ ;2 /<3*<)

%ittle# Dou.las) /merican 1rientalism2 The .nited "tates and the ,iddle East since ;<=>) Lhapel Hill2 University of North Larolina Press# &!!&) %ynch# Lecelia) ADo.ma# Pra>is# and 8eli.ious Perspectives on -ulticulturalism)0 ,illennium2 #ournal of International "tudies &<2 / :&!!!;2 +*"3+ !) -ahmood# Saba) 0olitics of 0iet 2 The Islamic Revival and the $eminist "u&%ect4 Princeton2 Princeton University Press# &!!,) -ar1uand# David and 8onald %) Nettler :Eds); Religion and 3emocrac ) 7>ford2 Dlackwell Publishers# &!!!) -ar># Anthony ?) $aith in 5ation2 Exclusionar 1rigins of 5ationalism) New Tork2 7>ford University Press# &!!/) -cAlister# -elani) Epic Encounters2 Culture, ,edia and .4"4 Interests in the ,iddle East) Derkeley2 University of Lalifornia Press# &!!") -erry# 8obert ?) "ands of Empire2 ,issionar ?eal, /merican $oreign 0olic , and the 6a8ards of Glo&al /m&ition) New Tork2 Simon Z Schuster# &!!,) -itchell# 9imothy) Rule of Experts2 Eg pt, Techno(0olitics, ,odernit ) Derkeley2 University of Lalifornia Press# &!!&) Nasr# S)P)8) ADemocracy and $slamic 8evivalism0# 0olitical "cience Quarterl ""!# no) & :Summer "<<,;2 & "3&',)
3/ 3

7ttaway# -arina S) APromotin. Democracy after Hamas0 Pictory)0 Larne.ie Endowment for $nternational Peace ?orkin. Paper Series# Cebruary &# &!! ) :http2GGwww)carne.ieendowment)or.GpublicationsGinde>)cfm6fa[viewZid["+<+'Zpro.[z.pZpr oB[zdrl# accessed +G"'G! ;) 7wen# 8o.er) "tate, 0o'er and 0olitics in the ,a*ing of the ,odern ,iddle East :/rd ed);) %ondon2 8outled.e# &!!*) Parla# 9aha and Andrew Davison) Corporatist Ideolog in -emalist Tur*e 2 0rogress or 1rder9 Syracuse2 Syracuse University Press# &!!*) Pipes# Daniel) APolitical $slam is a 9hreat to the ?est0 in Islam2 1pposing Vie'points4 Ereenhaven Press# "<<,) Pipes# Daniel) ASame Difference2 9he $slamic 9hreatFPart $)0 5ational Revie' :November "<<*;) 85e# Konathan) A9he 9reason of the Llerics)0 The 5ation :Au.ust ",# &!!,;) 8oy# 7livier) Vers un Islam europen) Paris2 Editions Esprit# "<<<) 8oy# 7livier) L@chec de l@Islam politi)ue4 Paris2 Seuil# "<<&) Sahliyeh# Emile :Ed); Religious Resurgence and 0olitics in the Contemporar !orld) Albany# N)T)2 State University of New Tork Press# "<<!) Salvatore# Armando) 0olitical Islam and the 3iscourse of ,odernit ) 8eadin.# UR2 $thaca Press# "<<< :"<<+;) Secor# %aura) ASands of Empire02 Livilizations and their Discontents)0 The 5e' 7or* Times :oo* Revie'4 Kune & # &!!,) 9ibi# Dassam) APost3Dipolar 7rder in Lrisis2 9he Lhallen.e of Politicised $slam)0 ,illennium2 #ournal of International "tudies &<2 / :&!!!;2 '*/3' !) 9oc1ueville# Ale>is de :K)P) -ayer# ed); 3emocrac in /merica, Vol4 ;) New Tork2 Doubleday# "< <) van der Peer# Peter and Hartmut %ehmann :Eds);# 5ation and Religion2 0erspectives on Europe and /sia) Princeton2 Princeton University Press# "<<<) ?alker# 8)D)K) and S) -endlovitz :Eds); Contending "overeignties2 Redefining 0olitical Communit ) Doulder2 %ynne 8ienner# "<<!) ?hite# Kenny) Islamic ,o&ili8ation in Tur*e 2 / "tud in Vernacular 0olitics) Seattle2 University of ?ashin.ton Press# &!!&) ?hite# Stephen R) "ustaining /ffirmation) Princeton2 Princeton University Press# &!!!) Tavuz# -) Hakan) Islamic 0olitical Identit in Tur*e ) New Tork2 7>ford University Press# &!!/)
3/+3