Contrast and compare the political ideology, support base and political strategy of the Pakistani Jamaat-i-Islami and the Iranian Islamic Revolution

Résumé du document

The events of the beginning of this century has shown the resistance and the diversity of Islamism. According to Bobby S. Sayyid, Islamism is a discourse that attempts to centre Islam within the political order. Islamism can range from the assertion of a Muslim subjectivity to full-blooded attempt to reconstruct society on Islamic principles, and Islamists are people who use the language of Islamic metaphors to think through their political destinies, and those who see in Islam their political future. Thus, Islamism is not an essence, but a discursive construction of reality. Consequently, understanding Islamism means necessary taking account of the ideologies, programmes and practices of the various groups, which claim that Islam has a comprehensive view of the world. Islamism is what Islamists make and say about it. That is why the concept of Islamism can only be understood through an examination of the differences and similarities between its main groups. Thus, the purpose of this essay is to compare the political theories, social support and politics of the two of the major radical Islamic movements: the Pakistani Jamaat-i-Islami (the Jamaat), and the Iranian Islamic Revolution (the IR). The Jamaat and the IR explained the need for the setting of an Islamic state and proposed to lead this process with popular support. Consequently, these movements encompass abstract explanations and positive actions, which are inter-related in such a manner that one cannot be comprehended without the other. That is why we will contrast the theoretical logics, and the socio-political dynamics of the Jamaat and the Iranian Revolution.

Extraits

[...] cit., p Ibid, p. 496-498; and G. Kepel, Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam (London/ New York: I.B. Tauris, 2002), p Ahmad, op. cit., p. 498-499; Kepel, op. cit., p Kepel, op. cit pp 112-113. Abrahamian, op. cit., p D. Billion, ‘KHOMEYNI Ruhollah (1902-1989)', in Cordelier, Serge Le dictionnaire historique et politique du 20e siècle (Paris: La Découverte, 2000), p Ahmad, op. [...]

[...] Beeman, ‘Images of the Great Satan: Representations of the United States in the Iranian Revolution', in Keddie, Nikki R. (ed.) Religion and Politics in Iran: Shi‘ism from Quietism to Revolution (New Haven/ London: Yale University Press, 1983), pp. 191-217. - Didier Billion, ‘KHOMEYNI Ruhollah (1902-1989)', in Cordelier, Serge Le dictionnaire historique et politique du 20e siècle (Paris: La Découverte, 2000), pp. 401-402. - Frédéric Grare, Political Islam in the Indian Subcontinent. The Jamaat-i- Islami (New Delhi: Manohar, 2001), p - Gilles Kepel, Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam (London/ New York: I.B. [...]

[...] In Islamic Government, he called for the overthrow of the Shah and the establishment of an Islamic government. He defended the idea that monarchy was a pagan institution and that Mohamed had declared that for Allah ‘king of the kings' was the most hated titles Khomeini considered this nickname as the equivalent of shah of the shah. Moreover, Khomenei resorted the discourse of the intellectual Ali Shariati to re-interpret the class struggle with an Islamic rhetoric. He began to render the Marxist difference between ‘oppressors' and ‘oppressed' with the Koranic terms mostakbirine (the men of arrogance) and mostadafine (the weakened or the disinherited ones). [...]

[...] Sayyid, A Fundamental Fear: Eurocentrism and the emergence of Islam (New York: Zed books, 1997), p This sentence is inspired by the title of an article written by a constructivist scholar in International relations, Alexender Wendt: ‘Anarchy is what state make of it'. For critics of fundamentalism as a relevant analytical tool to analyse Islamism, see notably: Sayyid, op. cit., p. 7-18; and particularly for Khomeini's ideology, see: E. Abrahamian, Khomeinism: Essays on the Islamic Republic (London: I. B. Tauris, 1993), p. 13-17. [...]

[...] Ahmad, ‘Islam Fundamentalism in South Asia: the Jamaat-i-Islami and the Tablighi Jamaat of South Asia', in Marty, Martin E., Appleby, R. Scott Fundamentalisms observed (Chicago/ London: The University of Chicago Press, 1991), p Thus, as Emmanuel Sivan has put it, Islamisms are primarily cultural phenomena despite their political dimension. See E. Sivan, Radical Islam (New Heaven: Yale University Press, 1985), p Similarly Sayyid writes: ‘Islamism is only possible in a world in which there is suspicion of a western meta-discourse. [...]