Islamic Approaches to Peace and Conflict Resolution Introduction
Peace and Conflict Resolution in Islam
Islamic Approaches to Peace and Conflict Resolution – Introduction
By Abdul Aziz Said, Nathan C. Funk, and Ayse S. Kadayifci
(summary by Nayla SAMMOUR SAWAYA)
In a world where boundaries between cultures, religions and civilizations have collapsed, there is a profound need for cross-cultural and multi-religious studies of peace.
Non-western approaches to peace and conflict resolution are important not only for the development and refinement of existing theories derived in the Western cultural context, but also for the promotion of cross-cultural dialogue and understanding.
WESTERN AND ISLAMIC APPROACHES TO PEACE
In the dominant western conception, peace is associated with the absence of war or organized violence and justice with an absence of gross violations of human rights. Peace is maintained through the threat of coercion and the institutionalization of regulations and decision-making procedures. Peace and conflict resolution are thought about in terms of rational order or problem solving predicated upon reason.
Peace occupies a central position among Islamic precepts, where it is closely linked to justice and human flourishing. Indeed, peace signifies an additional presence of human dignity, economic well-being and ecological balance. Peace in Islam begins with God; God is peace, for peace (al-salam) is one of the “most beautiful names” of God.
A COMMUNALLY EMBEDDED APPROACH TO CONFLICT RESOLUTION
From western perspective, conflict is viewed as natural and potentially positive, and not merely as a source of instability and threat; attempts to merely suppress conflict through coercive power and authoritative rules are viewed with disfavour in contrast to attempts to broker durable, mutually beneficial resolutions to problems, satisfying the interests of competing parties in a “win-win” solution.
Muslim approaches to conflict resolution draw on religious values, traditional rituals of reconciliation and historical practices of communal and inter-communal coexistence.
These mechanisms aim to empower family groups and community members to participate in matters of common concern, strong emphasis is placed on linkages between personal and group identity.
PROBLEMS OF REPRESENTATION
While Muslim writers assert that Islam can contribute to international peace and human dignity, Islam has been viewed as an actual or potential problem, and research questions have been framed around threat perceptions rather than potentially positive aspects of intercultural encounter.
Given the extent to which narratives of confrontation have defined the parameters of popular as well as academic literature on Islam, much contemporary debate about Islam revolves around issues of representation and misrepresentation.
Karl Marx and Max Weber both studied non-Western cultures and presumed that because of the unique power of Western innovations in technology, social organization and production, the West was unambiguously on the cutting edge of history and that to study Islam was to study the human past.
Thus, it is assumed from the nineteenth century that the separation of religious and political authority is good not only for both religion and politics but also that public dialogue about matters of spiritual or religious significance is either dangerous or simply unacceptable.
Operating within the framework of such assumptions, social science has tended to ignore the vigorous Islamic revivalist movements, to explain them away, or to identify them as atavistic reactions to modernization. The focus has been largely on the more militant expressions of Islamic identity, and on the extent to which they constitute a threat to Western interests.
The dominant frame of reference is the “confrontation vs. compatibility”.
The future development of cross-cultural inquiry is of considerable importance in so far as it can help to provide both fresh contributions to theories of conflict resolution and constructive channels for the perennial religious impulse. Studies of Islamic approaches to peace and conflict resolution provide new angles of insight into universal human dilemmas, as well as important supplementation to studies to recognize contemporary Islamic activism not as backward-looking rejection of the modern world, but as deeply felt expression of cultural identity and a critique of domestic as well as international political orders.
FIVE ISLAMIC APPROACHES TO PEACE
-Power Politics: Peace through Coercive Power
Based on pessimistic reading of human nature, Islam is used as a language for legitimation of power and authority and for the preservation or social order; threats to a given political order are often framed as a threat to Islam. The power-political approach views peace as an absence of war, and underscores political necessities created by the restlessness of political subjects and the threatening posture of external enemies.
-World Order: Peace through the Power of Law
Peace is a condition of order defined by the presence of such core Islamic values as justice, human dignity, cultural coexistence and ecological stability, and not merely by an absence of direct violence. A situation in which these values are not present may be characterized as disorderly, unstable and un-Islamic.
-Conflict Resolution: Peace through the Power of Communication
Traditional Islamic approaches are explored: reconciliation, methods of mediation and arbitration. These methods affirm a restorative conception of peace and justice, encompassing notions of compensations for losses, attentiveness to issues of “face” or social esteem, renunciation for the sake of the whole and forgiveness.
-Non-Violence: Peace through Will Power
Adherence to Islam requires non-violent solidarity against oppression, the promotion of renewal through broad-based social movements and training for programs of direct non-violent action. Only a linkage of just ends with just means can secure authentic justice, peace and human dignity.
-Transformation: Peace through the Power of Love
This approach defines peace as a condition of all embracing harmony perceived through the inward renewal and transformation of human consciousness. The cultural community is the context and the receptacle of human realization; renewal takes place within each person through inward cleansing and loving surrender to the divine.
The purpose of this study is to suggest new ways of organizing knowledge about Islam, within the context of emerging global perspectives on the promotion of human solidarity and the full utilization of cultural and spiritual resources for the advancement of peace.
Theory of the State – Chapter 1
By Majid Khadduri
(summary by Wioletta STOPA)
SOCIETY AND THE STATE
Muslim thinkers, inspired by Greek predecessors believe that “man is a social animal”: he can live only as a member of society. No individual, except God - Allahu ahad - can live alone; men were created to live together. To Muslim thinkers, from the Prophet Muhammed to Ibn Khaldum, the individual’s rights and obligations were always defined in terms of the community interests.
In the Qur’an it is often referred to as a distinct “nation” (umma) or a “brotherhood”, bound by common obligation to a superior, divine authority. The conception of the umma or brotherhood constituted the basis of the Islamic community. The greater emphasis seemed to have been attached to the group; the individual counted for little by himself. Only through the family, clan or cavitas, to which the individuals belonged, could they claim the right to protection by means of custom or social mores.
Not only is Society regarded as indispensable for the survival of man, but also inherent in it is the concept of authority. The Islamic conception of umma presupposes the existence of a set of divine commands, endowed by a Supreme Legislator, constituting its “fundamental law” or “constitution”. This is regarded as absolutely necessary since society without authority was impossible.
THE JURIDICAL BASIS OF THE STATE
The foundation of the Islamic social polity was made on the basis of a compact of agreement, being understood that this agreement was by no means one between two equals. It was a compact of submission which reflects the nature of Allah’s covenant with man.
Was the Islamic state based on a single-contract theory or two contracts? According to al-Farabi and Hobbes, the isolated individuals agreed on a universal contract of submission to a ruler who is vested at once with exclusive power. Only the possession of sovereignty resided with Allah, while its exercise was instructed to rule with justice. Allah accordingly was the titular head of the state and its source of governing authority; Muhammad was its head of government. The position of Muhammad as the executive head of the governing authority was filled by a caliph, but not his prophetic function of communication and promulgating the divine law. The caliph declared that he was merely to administer and enforce the divine law. The caliph’s powers were derived from and limited by the divine law; only his appointment was made by the people.
THE DIVINE UNIVERSAL NOMOCRACY
It is to be noted that in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam god never had been regarded as the immediate ruler of this subjects; only his representatives on earth were the real executives. Hence the divine law, regarded as the source of governing authority, was the essential feature in the process of control under these systems. According to the definition of nomocracy which is defined as “a system of government based on a legal code; the rule of law in a community”, Israelite, Christian and Islamic states, which were based on divine legal orders, can be called nomocracies. The universal nomocracy of Islam, like the Republica Christiana in the West, assumed that mankind constituted one supra-national community, bound by one law and governed by one ruler. While Islam tolerated Christianity and Judaism as religion, Islamdom and Christendom, as two universal states, could not peacefully coexist.
Foundations and Purposes of Political Authority — Chapter 2
by Ibn Khaldun
(summary by Sotirios PETROVAS)
The article is an arrangement from An Arab philosophy of History: Selections from the Prolegomena of Ibn Khaldun of Tunis (1332-1406). It is a series of political theory considerations
STATE AND SOCIETY
“State is to society as form is to matter”. State and society cannot exist without one another. Any disturbance of either of them will cause a disturbance in the other (e.g.: downfall of empires; the change of ruler is not disturbing, for each successor resembles his predecessor. The true force which operates on society is solidarity and power, both persist through successive rulers. If solidarity vanishes, the whole ruling class disappears.
SOCIAL SOLIDARITY IS BASED ON KINSHIP
Solidarity is based on blood ties or other relationship that has the same effect; indeed, all men are concerned by the injury inflicted on their next of kin, and resent the oppression of their relative. Even with a distant degree of kinship, there is a widespread knowledge of kinship.
Solidarity in tribes
Characteristics of men: aggressiveness and lust for power. The state or the rulers restrain their subjects from attacking each other and preserve them from oppression, unless it be the oppression of the state itself. External aggression is warded off by a defence which can succeed only when men are united by a strong solidarity arising out of kinship.
SOLIDARITY IS THE BASIS OF SOVEREIGNTY
The end of solidarity is sovereignty. Solidarity is what makes men unite their efforts and defend themselves. But every society needs a restraint, a chief who will keep men from injuring each other — the chief must have a powerful support, otherwise he will not be able to carry out his function. This domination is called sovereignty, which exceeds the power of a simple leader followed by others whom he cannot compel. The sovereign ruler has such power. A leader will always to try to turn his rule into sovereignty, as power is the desire of men’s souls.
Solidarity is the basis of kingship
Kingship and dynasties can only be founded upon solidarity; victory goes indeed to the side with the most solidarity and whose members are most ready to die for each other. But kingship is fought over with much competition, war occurs. And the masses are not aware of this struggle as they have forgotten the origin of their ruler, whose power is consolidated and no longer based upon social solidarity.
Nature of Kingship
It is a position natural to mankind. Man can only survive in groups, and if they co-operate — it is therefore impossible to survive in a state of anarchy, without a sanction which restrains them from mutual aggression. This sanction is provided by a strong king.
Concentration of authority
It is in the nature of states that authority becomes concentrated in one person. Why? Because of solidarity, formed by the union of many groups, from which emerges a leading family. A prominent individual is at the head of this family. He will then have pride and soon think himself as a god. Were there many rulers, the result would be chaos.
Territorial limits of the state
Each state has appointed territories that it cannot exceed; its functions thereon are to protect against enemies, enforce orders, raise taxes, awe the population, etc. The state is stronger at the centre than at the periphery, the centre being like a heart, if it is defeated, all provinces will be wiped out.
Religion as the basis of the empire
A dominion can only be secured by victory, and victory goes to the side with more unity of purpose and solidarity. Religious fervour can put aside the competitiveness and jealousy felt by the embers of the group by turning them towards the truth, a truth they are prepared to die for. Inversely, when religious fervour weakens and gets corrupted, religion ceases to play a role and victory belongs to the more cohesive side.
spiritual and temporal powers
Kingship arises out of the necessary association of human beings and is based on coercion, which is an animal tendency. Stemming from his aims and desires, the orders of the king may soon become unbearable burdens for the subjects, who will feel the need to rebel themselves. It is therefore imperative to impose political laws. The state cannot establish or consolidate itself without them. Laws are founded on reason.
The laws laid down by God are useful for both this and for the after life, for men are not created for this world of vanity and evil whose end is death and annihilation. Religion leads to happiness in the afterlife and divine laws seek to prescribe the conduct of men in all affairs. The state is therefore patterned on religion. Aspects that arise from the sole requirements of statecraft are blameworthy as they lack the light of God.
Political law reflect apparent, worldly interests, whereas God’s aim is the salvation of mankind. It is therefore imperative to have the people conform themselves to religious laws in matters concerning both worlds. Thus Kingship is founded on reason for the proportion of worldly interests. The Caliphate is the ruling of the people according to the insight of religious dictatesandworldly matters derived from them.The caliphate is thus a guardian of religionand a director of worldly affairs in the light of that religion.
spiritual and temporal powers in islam and christianity
A chief is needed to lead men towards advantageous things and keep away from harmful ones. This is the King’s objective.
Islam, as all-inclusive, calls for the Jihad, which is obligatory for infidels. In other religions, holy war is permissible for self defence only, and religious leaders do not concern themselves with worldly affairs. These religions do not demand dominion over other peoples, but merely the establishing of their faith among themselves.
The Ottoman Jihad Fatwa of November 11, 1914 - Chapter 3
By
(summary by Senem YAZAK)
In 1914, the Ottoman Empire entered World War I on the side of the central powers and to legitimate this effort enjoin Muslim support beyond the boundaries of the Empire, the official mufti pronounced a jihad fatwa. The jihad fatwa was a legal ruling declaring that the Ottoman war policy was consistent with Sharia’s rules defining the parameters of righteous military struggle and that the support for the Empire’s jihad was incumbent (obligatory) upon all Muslims whether they lived under the Ottoman rule or under the rule of the Allied powers. This illustration of the use of Islam to advance the interests of a state created fear in Europe.
Islamic Jurisprudence and Modern Needs: the Challenge of Renewal - Chapter 4
By AbdulHamid, A.AbuSulayman
(summary by Farida OMAR)
Before, the Muslim world was the center and master of the civilized world.
Today, the Muslim world is weak, relatively backward, frustrated, suffering from internal tensions, full of conflicts, and controlled and abused by foreign powers.
Muslims are often regarded as a problem in world politics.
Question: How did such a state of affairs come about?
How can the Muslims alter this condition?
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND DEFINITIONS
Islam appeared in the early 7th century.
The Prophet is the descendant of Ishmael (son of Abraham).