Islam/Political
Islam Has Always Been Political
Mohamed Ibn Guadi, Le Figaro, 17 June 2003
The recent statements by Dalil Boubakeur on the “harmful” role that the UOIF could play within the Republic call for a deeper examination of the issue. The debate cannot be posed solely in terms of citizenship. It is not about commenting word for word on Mr. Boubakeur’s remarks. But three elements or ideas emerge from his statements: the fundamentalist problem, reform, and politics in Islam. Islam cannot be reduced to these terms, but it is essential to understand their origin and meaning in order not to distort the debate.
On the twenty-fifth anniversary, in Iran, of the death of Dr. Ali Shariati, one of the theoreticians of the Islamic revolution, Dr. Hashem Aghajari was sentenced in November 2002 for offenses against Islam. Indeed, he had declared that a reform in Islam was necessary and that an “Islamic Protestantism” should be established. A professor of history at the University of Hamedan, Hashem Aghajari received the support of his students. That support turned into demonstrations in Iran. As laudable as such a statement by Aghajari may be, the condemnation by religious dignitaries remains justified, even consistent with orthodox theology, and therefore with Islam—for both historical and semantic reasons.
Even if they do not explicitly refer to an “Islamic Protestantism,” similar declarations are made across Europe by “secular Muslims.” However, invoking such directions for Islam is to disqualify oneself as a Muslim believer. There can be no reform in Islam, simply because the coming of Islam is itself a reform…
In Islamic theology, and even more so in the mind of Muhammad, Islam came to confirm previous revelations, namely Judaism and Christianity. But what those eager for Muslim-Christian dialogue seem to forget is that Islam confirms them, certainly—but its goal is also to correct them.
Moreover, the concept proper to Christian reform of the separation between Church and State is completely unknown in Islam. Religious institutions are not separated from civil institutions. The spiritual is inseparable from the temporal. This is yet another reason why modeling the experience of Christian reform onto Islam would be illogical and inappropriate.
Today, there is indignation over the politicization of Islam. But this term itself is also nonsensical. Islam has always been political. However, one should not assign it a pejorative connotation. The only form of political organization Muslims have known throughout their history, from the origins of Islam, has been the Islamic State. Arab nationalism was the only ideology foreign to Muslims, as it was imported from Europe. Nationalism was only a short and superficial episode in the history of the Arabs. For fourteen centuries, the Islamic State remained the norm and the reference point.
Whether one is shocked or not, the fact that Muslims can declare that the Qur’an takes precedence over the laws of the Republic is perfectly correct in Islam. One may be offended, but one cannot deny that such statements are coherent with fourteen centuries of Islamic history. The efforts of Muslims who wish to reconcile Islam and secularism are in vain. It is equally futile for Muslims to seek texts in support of such reconciliation. There exists no text from the hadiths or the Qur’an, or from Islamic exegetical commentaries, that specifies the place a Muslim should occupy in “infidel” territory, since in Islam there is the Muslim domain (Dar al-Islam) and the abode of war (Dar al-Harb).
Indeed, a Muslim cannot find himself in non-Muslim territory without viewing it as a territory where Islamic law must prevail. And from a sociological standpoint, this is precisely the problem in France. The problem, in truth, does not come from the Muslims, but from the French Republic. If France experiences such issues with Muslims on its soil, it is precisely because it has no defined opinion regarding Islam as a religion.
Is France hostile to Islam? It has never said so. Is it favorable to it? It has never said that either. It is this absence of commitment and conviction, combined with a lack of theological understanding of Islam, that creates the problem. This contrasts very sharply with the ritual to which foreigners obtaining naturalization in the United States are invited, swearing allegiance before the star-spangled banner… If many refuse to see the Christian reform experience as unique and specific to Christians, it is because it is difficult for the Western mind to understand that religions claiming the same origins, the same historical references, and the same God, could reach such diametrically opposed conclusions. That would also lead some to conclude that certain problems related to the Muslim world may hardly have a solution, like the Israeli-Arab conflict. When, on 3 November 2001, Bin Laden declared to al-Jazeera: “It is impossible to forget the hostility that exists between the infidels and us. It is a matter of religion and belief,” he was, unfortunately, right.
Islam gave birth to one of the most beautiful civilizations in human history. But its goal is also not to dominate, but to bring as many people as possible to embrace Muhammad’s message through submission to Islam. There is nothing shocking about Muslims wishing to be represented by UOIF leaders. It is a normal reaction since the UOIF represents an Islam purged of elements considered specific to the West (reform, secularism, integration, etc.). It is all the more illusory to think that so-called “reactionary” Muslims are the minority in France. The State knows it, and to deny it is precisely to offend Muslims.
Mohammed Ibn Guadi is an Islamic scholar at the University of Strasbourg. Translated from French: fr: Islam/Politique
