ARAB POLITICAL THOUGHT IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY
Shahid Jamal Ansari
Cosmos Books, E-79, Abul Fazl Enclave,
Jamia Nagar, Okhla, New Delhi – 110 025
Pages: 164
Price: Rs. 300 (India) Elsewhere $15
Reviewed by SAAD BIN ZIA
Well, for all of us who have been trying hard to understand the Arab Political System there are no definite clues or answers to this pertinent question. Everyone of us slightly interested in Arab politics might, eventually, grab a book dealing, even though remotely, with this subject. No matter how many books and research/newspaper articles one might read the problem gets more and more complicated instead of resolving into simpler terms. This is precisely due to the extraordinary interest shown by a particular creed of western scholars known as “Orientalists” and the resultant body of works produced by them wherein they have deliberately tried to distort the true history of the Arab. However, there rose a lobby in the Arab World that endeavoured to nullify the false propaganda being carried out by these Orientalists. The works produced by such scholars were dubbed as “Apologetic Dialectics” or “Defensive Attitude” adopted against the Orientalists’ onslaught. Consequently, the reader is rendered confused – whether to accept the former or believe in the latter – as both of them appear to be true and logical.
But here is a book that is – for the majority of its part – based on the original sources that try to analyse the various socio-religious and political currents in the Arab World in one of the most crucial phases of modern history of the world. Arab Political Thought in the Twentieth Century gives a detailed account of selected ideologies prevalent in the public spheres of the Arab countries as well as “attempts to present a broad, comparative view of Arab thought in the twentieth century through a selection of appropriate writings of Arab intellectuals” (P. iii).
After going through the basic tenets of these philosophies one may feel that they are nothing but an armoured shield against the Orientalist attacks. Nonetheless, a very minute analysis of their real dynamics reveals that this is a misconceived notion. In fact, as the author Shahid Jamal Ansari argues, “Arab political thought comprises, in varying degrees, the four elements accepted as general characteristics of [an] ideology, a philosophy of history, an analysis of man’s present stage of development, a projection into the future and a plan of action” (P.01). Ansari has touched upon some of the most critical but “overlapping” issues facing the Arab world: Arab Nationalism, Pan-Arabism, Regionalism, Local Nationalism, Religion (Islam) and Arab Socialism. The book can be an excellent original source for non-Arabic knowing researchers.
Introduction appears nothing more than a literature review of some of the Orientalists writings critical of the Arab countries and an attempt to counter baseless allegations levelled against them. At times the author has gone far too across to defend the Arab stance or so to say to negate the Orientalist misdemeanour. Basically this chapter deals with the issue of “Islamic Resurgence” and its causes in Arab world with special reference to the Orientalist literature and an attempt to undo the harm caused to Islam and Muslims by such works.
In the same chapter, explaining the qualities of an objective researcher, Ansari writes, “A research scholar has to be neutral in his/her approach to any field of study. One might be attracted to a certain topic, as this is how research begins, but he/she should not be influenced by his/her sympathy towards one group or another” (P.12). However, surprisingly enough the author himself, in the very beginning, shows his profound likeness for a particular group (in his case it is Muslim Brotherhood or Ikhwanul Muslimeen). For example, while countering the Halpern’s allegations against Ikhwanul Muslimeen as being “fascist” and “totalitarian,” Ansari notes, “The Muslim Brothers were not national fanatics like the Fascists in Italy during the 1920s. In reality they totally opposed the idea of Egyptian nationalism for which some Egyptians were calling during the beginning of the twentieth century. They also opposed the concept of Arab nationalism, if it did not lead to complete Islamic unity…. [They] have always rejected the idea that the movement leader should have absolute authority or be worshipped…. The Egyptian Muslim Brothers did not propagate a retrogressive ideology. They offered various suggestions that would help Muslims cope with the modern age and break the chains of tradition” (Pp.4-5). “The most important Islamic organization, which has influenced in a variety of ways the Muslim thought throughout the world… is the Muslim Brethren or Jam’iyat al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin” (P.85).
Chapter Two Arab Nationalism contains English translations of Arabic writings of three Arab intellectuals namely Darwish al-Jundi, ‘Abd-al-Rahman al-Bazzazz and Sati al-Husri with a few introductory lines on each of them. In this chapter Ansari alleges that both Ataturk and Nasser dumped ‘religious leaders’ and ‘Ikhwanul Muslimeen’ “because the religious hierarchy posed a challenge to the establishment of the modern national state” (P.18).
Chapter Three Arab Nationalism and Pan-Arabism “attempts to clarify the role of pan-Arabism and to explain its significance within the foreign policies of Arab states” (P.35). Here Ansari takes Ajami to task full length and peels off even the innermost thought of Ajami dissecting the dichotomous nature of Ajami’s obsession with “defeating the pan-Arabism”.
Chapter Four Regionalism and Local Nationalism deals with the issue of locating the “Local Nationalism” within the broad framework of “Regionalism”. Here an effort has been made to study the features of nationalism of some Arab countries and to see whether or not they clash with broader regional perspective. It also discusses the tensions between ‘Local Communism’ and labels it as “The Climax of anti-Arabism and its extension”. Well, this is a highly debatable question. Hence it is next to impossible to arrive at a common consensus on this subject. The main focus of the author is on Lebanese Nationalism and Syrian Nationalism only, obviously, for their unique characteristic features. It might have been more useful had he discussed a few more nationalist movements in the Arab countries particularly that of Algeria that occupies a more special status in history.
The impression that the reader gets after reading the opening lines of the Chapter on Islam As Religion And Ideology is that the Islamists are reactionary forces who are trying to assert their Islamic identity as a “reaction to the Western domination” (P.83). Also, the author argues that the reformist approaches adopted by the Islamists towards the latter half of the nineteenth century “embodied in varying degrees Western views of social organization and change borrowed from a variety of Western sociologists and historians” (P.84). This assumption needs further probing. On the same page Ansari mentions “Real Islam was expressed in diffuse ways….” Interestingly enough he has avoided explaining the term “real Islam”. Is it the one that he feels right or the universally accepted doctrine of Islam?
Ansari’s criticism of the Wahhabi Movement is absolutely unfounded. The use of such a language with respect to a great movement that sought to purify the Islamic society from the unwanted practices that had crept in, is evident that the author has been swayed away by the Orientalist writings. It also depicts that he does not hold this movement in as high esteem as he does the Ikhawanul Muslimeen. Which is why he has never ever tried even a wee bit to defend such an important reality. It is quite unbecoming for a scholar of West Asian Studies to be carried away by his personal likes and dislikes instead of according an objective and judicious treatment to various phenomena of this region because each and every word of his carries weight and would be received with much care and attention.
However, it is heartening to see that he has dealt in good details the efforts of King Faisal of Saudi Arabia for an ‘Islamic Call’ and his explicit understanding of the issues internal as well as external that are hell-bent on dislodging the world Muslim Ummah from one common point of unification is – for the majority of its part – based on the original sources.
One would always read the Conclusions with much keen interest searching for some new paradigm being proposed by the author on the topic under consideration. However, here the reader gets slightly disappointed because no new dimension seems forthcoming. It is factually incorrect to state that ‘Abd al-Wahhab founded the “Wahhabi Movement”. In fact he never propagated his own theory or Fiqh. Actually, he urged the Muslims to abandon the “corrupt practices” or “innovations” in Islam and revert to the original source i.e. the Holy Qur’ān, the Prophetic teachings and Sahaba – the revered Companions of Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless and greet him). To be more precise it was never a movement at all in any sense of the word. ‘Abd al-Wahhab was simply an Islamic preacher whose main emphasis was to adopt the path of Aslaf or the ‘great men of Islam’ in our daily lives.
The quality of printing as well as the paper used is a very big turn-off. A little more time should have been devoted to the proof-reading aspect. One of the glaring mistakes appears on page number 18: “Ataturk made wide use of religious leaders of Anatolia in 1991-22”; here the date should have been “1919-22” instead. Similarly there are proofing errors in the names appearing in the footnotes (2&3), (P.32) where ‘Abd-ar-Rahman’ and ‘Sati al-Husri’ have been mentioned as ‘Abd-ai-Rahman’ and ‘Sati ai-Husri’ respectively. Overall it is an interesting book to learn about the political underpinnings in the Arab World in the twentieth century.
modernblokester@gmail.com