Political aspects of Islam are derived from the Quran, ḥadīth literature, and sunnah (the sayings and living habits of the Islamic prophet Muhammad), history of Islam, and elements of political movements outside Islam.[1] Traditional political concepts in Islam include leadership by elected or selected successors to Muhammad, known as Caliphs in Sunni Islam and Imams in Shia Islam; the importance of following the Islamic law (sharia); the duty of rulers to seek Shura or consultation from their subjects; and the importance of rebuking unjust rulers.[2]

A significant change in the Muslim world was the defeat and dissolution of the Ottoman Empire (1908–1922).[3] In the modern era (19th-20th centuries), common Islamic political themes have been resistance to Western imperialism and enforcement of sharia law through democratic or militant struggle. Events such as the defeat of Arab armies in the Six-Day War, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the end of the Cold War and the fall of communism as a viable alternative have increased the appeal of Islamic movements such as Islamism, Islamic fundamentalism, and Islamic democracy, especially in the context of popular dissatisfaction with secularist ruling regimes in the Muslim world.[4][5][6]

Pre-modern Islam

Main articles: Early history of Islam, Early Muslim conquests, Historical reliability of the Quran, and Historicity of Muhammad

The origins of Islam as a religious and political movement are to be found in the life and times of the Islamic prophet Muhammad and his successors.[7] In 622 CE, in recognition of his claims to prophethood, Muhammad was invited to rule the city of Medina. At the time the local Arab tribes of Aus and Khazraj dominated the town, and were in constant conflict. Medinans considered Muhammad as an impartial outsider who could resolve the conflict. Muhammad and his followers thus moved to Medina, where Muhammad drafted the Constitution of Medina. The laws Muhammad established during his rule, based on the Quran and his own doing, are considered by Muslims to be sharia or Islamic law, which Islamic movements seek to establish in the present day. Muhammad gained a widespread following and an army, and his rule expanded first to the city of Mecca and then spread across the Arabian peninsula through a combination of diplomacy and military conquests.[7]


Close-up of one leave showing chapter division and verse-end markings written in Hijazi script from the Birmingham Quran manuscript, dated between c. 568 and 645, held by the University of Birmingham.
Close-up of one leave showing chapter division and verse-end markings written in Hijazi script from the Birmingham Quran manuscript, dated between c. 568 and 645, held by the University of Birmingham.

In Islam, "the Qurʾān is conceived by Muslims to be the word of God spoken to Muḥammad and then passed on to humanity in exactly the same form as it was received".[8] While the Quran doesn't dwell on politics, it does make mention of concepts such as "the oppressed" (mustad'afeen), "emigration" (hijra), the "Muslim community" (Ummah), and "fighting" or "struggling" in the way of God (jihād), that can have political implications.[9] A number of Quranic verses (such as 4:98) talk about the mustad'afeen, which can be translated as "those deemed weak", "underdogs", or "the oppressed", how they are put upon by people such as the pharaoh, how God wishes them to be treated justly, and how they should emigrate from the land where they are oppressed (4:99). Abraham was an "emigrant unto my Lord" (29:25). War against "unbelievers" (kuffār) is commanded and divine aid promised, although some verses state this may be when unbelievers start the war and treaties may end the war. The Quran also devotes some verses to the proper division of spoils captured in war among the victors. War against internal enemies or "hypocrites" (munāfiḳūn) is also commanded.[9] Some commands did not extend past the life of Muhammad, such as ones to refer quarrels to Allah and Muhammad or not to shout at or raise your voice when talking to Muhammad.[10] Limiting its political teaching is the fact that the Quran doesn't mention "any formal and continuing structure of authority", only orders to obey Muhammad,[10] and that its themes were of limited use when the success of Islam meant governance of "a vast territory populate mainly peasants, and dominate by cities and states" alien to nomadic life in the desert.[11]

Islamic State of Medina

The Constitution of Medina was drafted by Muhammad. It constituted a formal agreement between Muhammad and all of the significant tribes and families of Yathrib (later known as Medina), including Muslims, Jews, Christians,[12] and Arab Pagans.[13][14][15] This constitution formed the basis of the first Islamic state. The document was drawn up with the explicit concern of bringing to an end the bitter intertribal fighting between the clans of the Aws (Aus and Khazraj) within Medina. To this effect it instituted a number of rights and responsibilities for the Muslim, Jewish, Christian, and Pagan communities of Medina, bringing them within the fold of one community: the Ummah.[16]

The precise dating of the Constitution of Medina remains debated but generally scholars agree it was written shortly after the hijra (622 CE). [Note 1] [Note 2] [Note 3] [Note 4] It effectively established the first Islamic state. The Constitution established: the security of the community, religious freedoms, the role of Medina as a haram or sacred place (barring all violence and weapons), the security of women, stable tribal relations within Medina, a tax system for supporting the community in time of conflict, parameters for exogenous political alliances, a system for granting protection of individuals, a judicial system for resolving disputes, and also regulated the paying of blood money (the payment between families or tribes for the slaying of an individual in lieu of lex talionis).[citation needed]

Early Caliphate and political ideals

See also: Caliphate and Islamic ethics

Islamic conquests 622–750: .mw-parser-output .legend{page-break-inside:avoid;break-inside:avoid-column}.mw-parser-output .legend-color{display:inline-block;min-width:1.25em;height:1.25em;line-height:1.25;margin:1px 0;text-align:center;border:1px solid black;background-color:transparent;color:black}.mw-parser-output .legend-text{}  Expansion under Muhammad, 622–632   Expansion during the Rashidun Caliphate, 632–661   Expansion during the Umayyad Caliphate, 661–750
Islamic conquests 622–750:
  Expansion under Muhammad, 622–632
  Expansion during the Rashidun Caliphate, 632–661
  Expansion during the Umayyad Caliphate, 661–750

After the death of Muhammad, his community needed to appoint a new leader, giving rise to the title of caliph ("successor").[7][23] Thus, the subsequent Islamic empires were known as Caliphates.[23][24] Alongside the growth of the Umayyad Caliphate, the major political development within early Islam in this period was the sectarian split and political divide between Kharijite, Sunni, and Shiʿa Muslims; this had its roots in a dispute over the succession of the Caliphate.[23][25] Sunni Muslims believed the caliphate was elective, and any Muslim might serve as one. Shiʿites, on the other hand, believed the caliphate should be hereditary in the line of Muhammad, and thus all the caliphs, with the exception of Ali, were usurpers.[26] However, the Sunni sect emerged as triumphant in most of the Muslim world, and thus most modern Islamic political movements (with the exception of Iran) are founded in Sunni thought.

Muhammad's closest companions, the four "rightly guided" Caliphs who succeeded him, continued to expand the state to encompass Jerusalem, Ctesiphon, and Damascus, and sending armies as far as the Sindh.[27] The Islamic empire stretched from Al-Andalus (Muslim Spain) to the Punjab under the reign of the Umayyad dynasty.

An important Islamic concept concerning the structure of ruling is the Shura, or consultation with people regarding their affairs, which is the duty of rulers mentioned in two verses in the Quran, 3:153, and 42:36.[28] One type of ruler not part of the Islamic ideal was the king, which was disparaged in the Quranic mentions of the Pharaoh, "the prototype of the unjust and tyrannical ruler" (18:70, 79) and elsewhere. (28:34)[29] The phrase Ahl al-Ḥall wa’l-‘Aḳd (Arabic: أهل الحل والعقد, lit.'those who are qualified to unbind and to bind') was used in order to denote those qualified to appoint or depose a caliph or another ruler on behalf of the Ummah.[30]

Election or appointment

See also: Islamic democracy

Al-Mawardi, a Muslim jurist of the Shafii school, has written that the caliph should be Qurayshi. Abu Bakr Al-Baqillani, an Ashari Islamic scholar and Maliki lawyer, wrote that the leader of the Muslims simply should be from the majority. Abu Hanifa an-Nu‘man, the founder of the Sunni Hanafi school of fiqh, also wrote that the leader must come from the majority.[31]

Western scholar of Islam, Fred Donner,[32] argues that the standard Arabian practice during the early Caliphates was for the prominent men of a kinship group, or tribe, to gather after a leader's death and elect a leader from amongst themselves, although there was no specified procedure for this shura, or consultative assembly. Candidates were usually from the same lineage as the deceased leader but they were not necessarily his sons. Capable men who would lead well were preferred over an ineffectual direct heir, as there was no basis in the majority Sunni view that the head of state or governor should be chosen based on lineage alone.

Majlis ash-Shura

Deliberations of the Caliphates, most notably Rashidun Caliphate were not democratic in the modern sense rather, decision-making power lay with a council of notable and trusted companions of Muhammad and representatives of different Arab tribes (most of them selected or elected within their tribes).[33] (see also: Shura).

Traditional Sunni Islamic lawyers agree that shura, loosely translated as 'consultation of the people', is a function of the caliphate. The Majlis ash-Shura advise the caliph. The importance of this is premised by the following verses of the Quran:

"...those who answer the call of their Lord and establish the prayer, and who conduct their affairs by Shura. [are loved by God]"[42:38]

"...consult them (the people) in their affairs. Then when you have taken a decision (from them), put your trust in Allah"[3:159]

The majlis is also the means to elect a new caliph. Al-Mawardi has written that members of the majlis should satisfy three conditions: they must be just, they must have enough knowledge to distinguish a good caliph from a bad one, and must have sufficient wisdom and judgment to select the best caliph. Al-Mawardi also said in emergencies when there is no caliphate and no majlis, the people themselves should create a majlis, select a list of candidates for caliph, then the majlis should select from the list of candidates.[31][unreliable source?] Some modern interpretations of the role of the Majlis ash-Shura include those by Islamist author Sayyid Qutb and by Taqiuddin al-Nabhani, the founder of a transnational political movement devoted to the revival of the Caliphate. In an analysis of the shura chapter of the Quran, Qutb argued Islam requires only that the ruler consult with at least some of the ruled (usually the elite), within the general context of God-made laws that the ruler must execute. Taqiuddin al-Nabhani, writes that Shura is important and part of "the ruling structure" of the Islamic caliphate, "but not one of its pillars," and may be neglected without the Caliphate's rule becoming un-Islamic. However, These interpretations of Shura (by Qutb and al-Nabhani) are not universally accepted and Islamic democrats consider Shura to be an integral part and important pillar of Islamic political system.[citation needed]

Separation of powers

See also: Ulema, Islamic ethics, and Islam and secularism

In the early Islamic Caliphate, the head of state, the Caliph, had a position based on the notion of a successor to Muhammad's political authority, who, according to Sunnis, were ideally elected by the people or their representatives,[34] as was the case for the election of Abu Bakar, Uthman and Ali as Caliph. After the Rashidun Caliphs, later Caliphates during the Islamic Golden Age had a much lesser degree of democratic participation, but since "no one was superior to anyone else except on the basis of piety and virtue" in Islam, and following the example of Muhammad, later Islamic rulers often held public consultations with the people in their affairs.[35]

The legislative power of the Caliph (or later, the Sultan) was always restricted by the scholarly class, the ulama, a group regarded as the guardians of Islamic law. Since the law came from the legal scholars, this prevented the Caliph from dictating legal results. Sharia rulings were established as authoritative based on the ijma (consensus) of legal scholars, who theoretically acted as representatives of the Ummah (Muslim community).[36] After law colleges (madrasas) became widespread beginning with the 11th and 12th century CE, a student often had to obtain an ijaza-t al-tadris wa-l-ifta ("license to teach and issue legal opinions") in order to issue legal rulings.[37] In many ways, classical Islamic law functioned like a constitutional law.[36]

Practically, for hundreds of years after Rashidun Caliphate and until the twentieth century, Islamic states followed a system of government based on the coexistence of sultan and ulama following the rules of the sharia. This system resembled to some extent some Western governments in possessing an unwritten constitution (like the United Kingdom), and possessing separate, countervailing branches of government (like the United States) — which provided Separation of powers in governance. While the United States (and some other systems of government) has three branches of government — executive, legislative and judicial — Islamic monarchies had two — the sultan and ulama.[38]

According to professor Olivier Roy this "de facto separation between political power" of sultans and emirs and religious power of the caliph was "created and institutionalized ... as early as the end of the first century of the hegira." The sovereign's religious function was to defend the Muslim community against its enemies, institute the sharia, ensure the public good (maslaha). The state was instrument to enable Muslims to live as good Muslims and Muslims were to obey the sultan if he did so. The legitimacy of the ruler was "symbolized by the right to coin money and to have the Friday prayer (Jumu'ah khutba) said in his name."[39]

Sadakat Kadri argues that a large "degree of deference" was shown to the caliphate by the ulama and this was at least at times "counterproductive". "Although jurists had identified conditions from mental incapacity to blindness that could disqualify a caliph, none had ever dared delineate the powers of the caliphate as an institution." During the Abbasid caliphate:

When Caliph Al-Mutawakkil had been killed in 861, jurists had retroactively validated his murder with a fatwa. Eight years later, they had testified to the lawful abdication of a successor, after he had been dragged from a toilet, beaten unconscious, and thrown into a vault to die. By the middle of the tenth century, judges were solemnly confirming that the onset of blindness had disqualified a caliph, without mentioning that they had just been assembled to witness the gouging of his eyes.[40]

According to Noah Feldman, a law professor at Harvard University, the legal scholars and jurists lost their control over Islamic law due to the codification of Sharia by the Ottoman Empire in the early 19th century:[41]

How the scholars lost their exalted status as keepers of the law is a complex story, but it can be summed up in the adage that partial reforms are sometimes worse than none at all. In the early 19th century, the Ottoman empire responded to military setbacks with an internal reform movement. The most important reform was the attempt to codify Shariah. This Westernizing process, foreign to the Islamic legal tradition, sought to transform Shariah from a body of doctrines and principles to be discovered by the human efforts of the scholars into a set of rules that could be looked up in a book. [...] Once the law existed in codified form, however, the law itself was able to replace the scholars as the source of authority. Codification took from the scholars their all-important claim to have the final say over the content of the law and transferred that power to the state.

Obedience and opposition

Muhammad's widow, Aisha, battling the fourth caliph Ali in the Battle of the Camel (16th-century miniature from a copy of the Siyer-i Nebi)
Muhammad's widow, Aisha, battling the fourth caliph Ali in the Battle of the Camel (16th-century miniature from a copy of the Siyer-i Nebi)

According to scholar Moojan Momen, "One of the key statements in the Qur'an around which much of the exegesis" on the issue of what Islamic doctrine says about who is in charge is based on the verse

"O believers! Obey God and obey the Apostle and those who have been given authority [uulaa al-amr] among you" (Qur'an 4:59).

For Sunnis, uulaa al-amr are the rulers (Caliphs and kings) but for Shi'is this expression refers to the Imams."[42] According to scholar Bernard Lewis, this Qur'anic verse has been

elaborated in a number of sayings attributed to Muhammad. But there are also sayings that put strict limits on the duty of obedience. Two dicta attributed to the Prophet and universally accepted as authentic are indicative. One says, "there is no obedience in sin"; in other words, if the ruler orders something contrary to the divine law, not only is there no duty of obedience, but there is a duty of disobedience. This is more than the right of revolution that appears in Western political thought. It is a duty of revolution, or at least of disobedience and opposition to authority. The other pronouncement, "do not obey a creature against his creator," again clearly limits the authority of the ruler, whatever form of ruler that may be.[43]

However, Ibn Taymiyyah — an important 14th century scholar of the Hanbali school — says in Tafseer for this verse "there is no obedience in sin"; that people should ignore the order of the ruler if it would disobey the divine law and shouldn't use this as excuse for revolution because it will spell Muslims bloods. According to Ibn Taymiyya, the saying, 'Sixty years with an unjust imam is better than one night without a sultan`, was confirmed by experience.[44] He believed that the Quranic injunction to "enjoin good and forbid evil" (al-amr bi-l-maʿrūf wa-n-nahy ʿani-l-munkar, found in Quran 3:104 and Quran 3:110 and other verses) was the duty of every state functionary with charge over other Muslims from the caliph to "the schoolmaster in charge of assessing children's handwriting exercises."[45][46]

Sharia and governance (siyasa)

Main article: Siyasa

Starting from the late medieval period, Sunni fiqh elaborated the doctrine of siyasa shar'iyya, which literally means governance according to sharia, and is sometimes called the political dimension of Islamic law. Its goal was to harmonize Islamic law with the practical demands of statecraft.[47] The doctrine emphasized the religious purpose of political authority and advocated non-formalist application of Islamic law if required by expedience and utilitarian considerations. It first emerged in response to the difficulties raised by the strict procedural requirements of Islamic law. The law rejected circumstantial evidence and insisted on witness testimony, making criminal convictions difficult to obtain in courts presided over by qadis (sharia judges). In response, Islamic jurists permitted greater procedural latitude in limited circumstances, such as adjudicating grievances against state officials in the mazalim courts administered by the ruler's council and application of "corrective" discretionary punishments for petty offenses. However, under the Mamluk sultanate, non-qadi courts expanded their jurisdiction to commercial and family law, running in parallel with sharia courts and dispensing with some formalities prescribed by fiqh. Further developments of the doctrine attempted to resolve this tension between statecraft and jurisprudence. In later times the doctrine has been employed to justify legal changes made by the state in consideration of public interest, as long as they were deemed not to be contrary to sharia. It was, for example, invoked by the Ottoman rulers who promulgated a body of administrative, criminal, and economic laws known as qanun.[48]

Shiʿa tradition

In Shiʿa Islam, three attitudes towards rulers predominated — political cooperation with the ruler, political activism challenging the ruler, and aloofness from politics — with "writings of Shi'i ulama through the ages" showing "elements of all three of these attitudes."[49]

Kharijite tradition

Main article: Khawarij

Islamic extremism dates back to the early history of Islam with the emergence of the Kharijites in the 7th century CE.[25] The original schism between Kharijites, Sunnis, and Shiʿas among Muslims was disputed over the political and religious succession to the guidance of the Muslim community (Ummah) after the death of the Islamic prophet Muhammad.[25] From their essentially political position, the Kharijites developed extreme doctrines that set them apart from both mainstream Sunni and Shiʿa Muslims.[25] Shiʿas believe Ali ibn Abi Talib is the true successor to Muhammad, while Sunnis consider Abu Bakr to hold that position. The Kharijites broke away from both the Shiʿas and the Sunnis during the First Fitna (the first Islamic Civil War);[25] they were particularly noted for adopting a radical approach to takfīr (excommunication), whereby they declared both Sunni and Shiʿa Muslims to be either infidels (kuffār) or false Muslims (munāfiḳūn), and therefore deemed them worthy of death for their perceived apostasy (ridda).[25][50][51]

The Islamic tradition traces the origin of the Kharijities to the battle between 'Ali and Mu'awiya at Siffin in 657 CE. When 'Ali was faced with a military stalemate and agreed to submit the dispute to arbitration, some of his party withdrew their support from him. "Judgement belongs to God alone" (لاَ حُكْكْ إلَا لِلّهِ) became the slogan of these secessionists.[25] They also called themselves al-Shurat ("the Vendors"), to reflect their willingness to sell their lives in martyrdom.[52]

These original Kharijites opposed both 'Ali and Mu'awiya, and appointed their own leaders. They were decisively defeated by 'Ali, who was in turn assassinated by a Kharijite. Kharijites engaged in guerilla warfare against the Umayyads, but only became a movement to be reckoned with during the Second Fitna (the second Islamic Civil War) when they at one point controlled more territory than any of their rivals. The Kharijites were, in fact, one of the major threats to Ibn al-Zubayr's bid for the caliphate; during this time they controlled Yamama and most of southern Arabia, and captured the oasis town of al-Ta'if.[52]

The Azariqa, considered to be the extreme faction of the Kharijites, controlled parts of western Iran under the Umayyads until they were finally put down in 699 CE. The more moderate Ibadi Kharijites were longer-lived, continuing to wield political power in North and East Africa and in eastern Arabia during the 'Abbasid period. Because of their readiness to declare any opponent as apostate, the extreme Kharijites tended to fragment into small groups. One of the few points that the various Kharijite splinter groups held in common was their view of the caliphate, which differed from other Muslim theories on two points.

By the time that Ibn al-Muqaffa' wrote his political treatise early in the 'Abassid period, the Kharijites were no longer a significant political threat, at least in the Islamic heartlands. The memory of the menace they had posed to Muslim unity and of the moral challenge generated by their pious idealism still weighed heavily on Muslim political and religious thought, however. Even if the Kharijites could no longer threaten, their ghosts still had to be answered.[52] The Ibadis are the only Kharijite group to surivive into modern times.

Modern era

Reaction to European colonialism

In the 19th century, European colonization of the Muslim world coincided with the French conquest of Algeria (1830), the fall of the Mughal Empire in India (1857), the Russian incursions into the Caucasus (1828) and Central Asia (1830-1895), and ultimately in the 20th century with the defeat and dissolution of the Ottoman Empire (1908–1922), to which the Ottoman officer and Turkish revolutionary statesman Mustafa Kemal Atatürk had an instrumental role in ending and replacing it with the Republic of Turkey, a modern, secular democracy[53] (see Abolition of the Caliphate, Abolition of the Ottoman sultanate, Kemalism, and Secularism in Turkey).[53]

The first Muslim reaction to European colonization was of "peasant and religious", not urban origin. "Charismatic leaders", generally members of the ulama or leaders of religious orders, launched the call for jihad and formed tribal coalitions. Sharia, in defiance of local common law, was imposed to unify tribes. Examples include Abd al-Qadir in Algeria, Muhammad Ahmad in Sudan, Shamil in the Caucasus, the Senussi in Libya and Chad, Mullah-i Lang in Afghanistan, the Akhund of Swat in India, and later, Abd al-Karim in Morocco. All these movements eventually failed "despite spectacular victories such as the massacre of the British army in Afghanistan in 1842 and the taking of Kharoum in 1885."[54]

The second Muslim reaction to European encroachment later in the century and early 20th century was not violent resistance but the adoption of some Western political, social, cultural and technological ways. Members of the urban elite, particularly in Egypt, Iran, and Turkey, advocated and practiced "Westernization".[55]

The failure of the attempts at political westernization, according to some, was exemplified by the Tanzimat reorganization of the Ottoman rulers. Sharia was codified into law (which was called the Mecelle) and an elected legislature was established to make law. These steps took away the ulama's role of "discovering" the law and the formerly powerful scholar class weakened and withered into religious functionaries, while the legislature was suspended less than a year after its inauguration and never recovered to replace the Ulama as a separate "branch" of government providing separation of powers.[55] The "paradigm of the executive as a force unchecked by either the sharia of the scholars or the popular authority of an elected legislature became the dominant paradigm in most of the Sunni Muslim world in the 20th century."[56]

Modern political ideal of the Islamic state

Main article: Islamic state

See also: Islamism, Islamization, Political Islam, and Political quietism in Islam

In addition to the legitimacy given by medieval scholarly opinion, nostalgia for the days of successful Islamic empires simmered under later Western colonialism. This nostalgia played a major role in the Islamist political ideal of the Islamic state, a state in which Islamic law is preeminent.[57] The Islamist political program is generally to be accomplished by re-shaping the governments of existing Muslim nation-states; but the means of doing this varies greatly across movements and circumstances. Many democratic Islamist movements, such as the Jamaat-e-Islami and Muslim Brotherhood, have used the democratic process and focus on votes and coalition-building with other political parties.

Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri of al-Qaeda have promoted the overthrow of secular governments.[58][59][60]
Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri of al-Qaeda have promoted the overthrow of secular governments.[58][59][60]

Sayyid Qutb, an Egyptian Islamist ideologue and prominent figurehead of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, was influential in promoting the Pan-Islamist ideology in the 1960s.[61] When he was executed by the Egyptian government under the regime of Gamal Abdel Nasser, Ayman al-Zawahiri formed the organization Egyptian Islamic Jihad to replace the government with an Islamic state that would reflect Qutb's ideas for the Islamic revival that he yearned for.[62] The Qutbist ideology has been influential on jihadist movements and Islamic terrorists that seek to overthrow secular governments, most notably Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri of al-Qaeda,[58][59][60][63] as well as the Salafi-jihadi terrorist group ISIL/ISIS/IS/Daesh.[6] Moreover, Qutb's books have been frequently been cited by Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki.[64][65][66][67][68][69]

Sayyid Qutb could be said to have founded the actual movement of radical Islam.[60][61][63] Radical Islamic movements such as al-Qaeda and the Taliban embrace the militant Islamist ideology, and were prominent for being part of the anti-Soviet resistance in Afghanistan during the 1980s.[70] Both of the aforementioned militant Islamist groups had a role to play in the September 11 terrorist attacks in 2001, presenting both "near" and "far" enemies as regional governments and the United States respectively.[70] They also took part in the bombings in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005. The recruits often came from the ranks of jihadists, from Egypt, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, and Morocco.[70]

Compatibility with democracy

General Muslim views

Western scholars John Esposito and Natana J. DeLong-Bas distinguish four attitudes toward sharia and democracy prominent among Muslims today:[71]

Polls conducted by Gallup and Pew Research Center in Muslim-majority countries indicate that most Muslims see no contradiction between democratic values and religious principles, desiring neither a theocracy, nor a secular democracy, but rather a political model where democratic institutions and values can coexist with the values and principles of sharia.[72][73][74]

Islamic political theories

Muslih and Browers identify three major perspectives on democracy among prominent Muslims thinkers who have sought to develop modern, distinctly Islamic theories of socio-political organization conforming to Islamic values and law:[75]

20th and 21st centuries

Main articles: 1973 oil crisis, Afghanistan conflict (1978–present), Arab Cold War, Arab–Iranian conflict, Arab–Israeli conflict, Arab Spring, Arab Winter, and War on Terror

Further information: Antisemitism in the Arab world, Anti-Zionism, History of Egypt under Gamal Abdel Nasser, International propagation of Salafism and Wahhabism, Iran-Saudi Arabia conflict, Petro-Islam, Relations between Nazi Germany and the Arab world, Siege of Mecca in 1979, Six-Day War, Yom Kippur War, and War of Attrition

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founding father of the Republic of Turkey, serving as its first president from 1923 until his death in 1938. He undertook sweeping progressive reforms, which modernized Turkey into a secular, industrializing nation.[53][76][77]
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founding father of the Republic of Turkey, serving as its first president from 1923 until his death in 1938. He undertook sweeping progressive reforms, which modernized Turkey into a secular, industrializing nation.[53][76][77]

Following World War I, the defeat and dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, and the subsequent abolition of the Caliphate by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, founder of the modern Republic of Turkey,[53] many Muslims perceived that the political power of their religion was in retreat. There was also concern that Western ideas and influence were spreading throughout Muslim societies. This led to considerable resentment of the influence of the European powers. The Muslim Brotherhood was created in Egypt as a movement to resist and harry the British.

Between the 1950s and the 1960s, the predominant ideology within the Arab world was pan-Arabism, which de-emphasized religion and encouraged the creation of socialist, secular states based on Arab nationalist ideologies such as Nasserism and Baathism rather than Islam.[78] However, governments based on Arab nationalism have found themselves facing economic stagnation and disorder. Increasingly, the borders of these states were seen as artificial colonial creations - which they were, having literally been drawn on a map by European colonial powers.

Today, many Islamist and Islamic democratic political parties exist in most Muslim-majority countries, alongside numerous insurgent Islamic extremist, militant Islamist, and terrorist movements and organizations.[1][59][79][80][81] Both of the following terms, Islamic democracy and Islamic fundamentalism, lump together a large variety of political groups with varying aims, histories, ideologies, and backgrounds.

Contemporary movements

Some common political currents in Islam include:

Sunni and Shia differences

According to scholar Vali Nasr, political tendencies of Sunni and Shia Islamic ideology differ, with Sunni Islamic revivalism "in Pakistan and much of the Arab world" being "far from politically revolutionary", while Shia political Islam is strongly influenced by Ruhollah Khomeini and his talk of the oppression of the poor and class war. Sunni revivalism "is rooted in conservative religious impulses and the bazaars, mixing mercantile interests with religious values." ... Khomeini's version of Islamism engaged the poor and spoke of class war.

This Cleavage between fundamentalism as revivalism and fundamentalism as revolution was deep and for a long while coincided closely with the sectarian divide between the Sunnis - the Muslim world's traditional `haves`, concerned more with conservative religiosity - and the Shia - the longtime outsiders,` more drawn to radical dreaming and scheming."[94]

Graham Fuller has also noted that he found "no mainstream Islamist organization (with the exception of [shia] Iran) with radical social views or a revolutionary approach to the social order apart from the imposition of legal justice."[95]

See also


  1. ^ W.M. Watt argues that the initial agreement was shortly after the hijra and the document was amended at a later date specifically after the battle of Badr (AH [anno hijra] 2, = AD 624).[17]
  2. ^ R. B. Serjeant argues that the constitution is in fact eight different treaties which can be dated according to events as they transpired in Medina with the first treaty being written shortly after Muhammad's arrival. [18] [19]
  3. ^ Julius Wellhausen argues that the document is a single treaty agreed upon shortly after the hijra, and that it belongs to the first year of Muhammad’s residence in Medina, before the battle of Badr in 2/624. Wellhausen bases this judgement on three considerations; first Muhammad is very diffident about his own position, he accepts the Pagan tribes within the Umma, and maintains the Jewish clans as clients of the Ansars[20][21]
  4. ^ Moshe Gil, a skeptic of Islamic history, argues that it was written within five months of Muhammad's arrival in Medina.[22]


  1. ^ a b Ayoob, Mohammed; Lussier, Danielle N., eds. (2020). "Islam's Multiple Voices". The Many Faces of Political Islam: Religion and Politics in Muslim Societies (2nd ed.). Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press. pp. 26–44. doi:10.3998/mpub.11448711. ISBN 978-0-472-12640-8. LCCN 2019025041.
  2. ^ Abu Hamid al-Ghazali quoted in Mortimer, Edward, Faith and Power: The Politics of Islam, Vintage Books, 1982, p.37
  3. ^ Feldman, Noah, Fall and Rise of the Islamic State, Princeton University Press, 2008, p.2
  4. ^ Wagemakers, Joas (2021). "Part 3: Fundamentalisms and Extremists – The Citadel of Salafism". In Cusack, Carole M.; Upal, M. Afzal (eds.). Handbook of Islamic Sects and Movements. Brill Handbooks on Contemporary Religion. 21. Leiden and Boston: Brill Publishers. pp. 333–347. doi:10.1163/9789004435544_019. ISBN 978-90-04-43554-4. ISSN 1874-6691.
  5. ^ Litvak, Meir (2021). "Islamic Radical Movements and Antisemitism: Between Old and New". In Lange, Armin; Mayerhofer, Kerstin; Porat, Dina; Schiffman, Lawrence H. (eds.). An End to Antisemitism! – Volume 5: Confronting Antisemitism in Modern Media, the Legal and Political Worlds. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter. pp. 133–148. doi:10.1515/9783110671964-009. ISBN 9783110671964.
  6. ^ a b Baele, Stephane J. (October 2019). Giles, Howard (ed.). "Conspiratorial Narratives in Violent Political Actors' Language" (PDF). Journal of Language and Social Psychology. SAGE Publications. 38 (5–6): 706–734. doi:10.1177/0261927X19868494. hdl:10871/37355. ISSN 1552-6526. S2CID 195448888. Retrieved 3 January 2022.
  7. ^ a b c Polk, William R. (2018). "The Caliphate and the Conquests". Crusade and Jihad: The Thousand-Year War Between the Muslim World and the Global North. The Henry L. Stimson Lectures Series. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. pp. 21–30. ISBN 978-0-300-22290-6. JSTOR 10.2307/j.ctv1bvnfdq.7. LCCN 2017942543.
  8. ^ Calder, Norman; Mojaddedi, Jawid; Rippin, Andrew, eds. (2004). "The life of Muḥammad". Classical Islam: A Sourcebook of Religious Literature (1st ed.). New York and London: Routledge. pp. 16–35. ISBN 9780415505086. LCCN 2003043132.
  9. ^ a b Cook, Michael (1983). Muhammad. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 51–60. ISBN 0192876058.
  10. ^ a b Cook, Michael (1983). Muhammad. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 56–7. ISBN 0192876058.
  11. ^ Cook, Michael (1983). Muhammad. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 59. ISBN 0192876058.
  12. ^ R. B. Serjeant, "Sunnah Jāmi'ah, pacts with the Yathrib Jews, and the Tahrīm of Yathrib: analysis and translation of the documents comprised in the so-called 'Constitution of Medina'", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (1978), 41: 1-42, Cambridge University Press.
  13. ^ See:
    • Reuven Firestone, Jihād: the origin of holy war in Islam (1999) p. 118;
    • "Muhammad", Encyclopedia of Islam Online
  14. ^ Watt, William Montgomery. Muhammad at Medina
  15. ^ R. B. Serjeant. "The Constitution of Medina." Islamic Quarterly 8 (1964) p.4.
  16. ^ Serjeant (1978), page 4.
  17. ^ Watt, William Montgomery. Muhammad at Medina. pp. 227-228
  18. ^ R. B. Serjeant. "The Sunnah Jâmi'ah, Pacts with the Yathrib Jews, and the Tahrîm of Yathrib: Analysis and Translation of the Documents Comprised in the so called 'Constitution of Medina'." in The Life of Muhammad: The Formation of the Classical Islamic World: Volume iv. Ed. Uri Rubin. Brookfield: Ashgate, 1998, p. 151
  19. ^ see same article in Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 41 (1978): 18 ff. See also Caetani. Annali dell’Islam, Volume I. Milano: Hoepli, 1905, p.393.
  20. ^ see Wellhausen, Excursus, p. 158.
  21. ^ Julius Wellhausen. Skizzen und Vorabeiten, IV, Berlin: Reimer, 1889, p 82f
  22. ^ Moshe Gil. "The Constitution of Medina: A Reconsideration." Israel Oriental Studies 4 (1974): p. 45.
  23. ^ a b c van Ess, Josef (2017). "Setting the Seal on Prophecy". Theology and Society in the Second and Third Centuries of the Hijra, Volume 1: A History of Religious Thought in Early Islam. Handbook of Oriental Studies. Section 1: The Near and Middle East. 116/1. Translated by O'Kane, John. Leiden and Boston: Brill Publishers. pp. 3–7. doi:10.1163/9789004323384_002. ISBN 978-90-04-32338-4. ISSN 0169-9423.
  24. ^ Pakatchi, Ahmad; Ahmadi, Abuzar (2017). "Caliphate". In Madelung, Wilferd; Daftary, Farhad (eds.). Encyclopaedia Islamica. Translated by Asatryan, Mushegh. Leiden and Boston: Brill Publishers. doi:10.1163/1875-9831_isla_COM_05000066. ISSN 1875-9823.
  25. ^ a b c d e f g Izutsu, Toshihiko (2006) [1965]. "The Infidel (Kāfir): The Khārijites and the origin of the problem". The Concept of Belief in Islamic Theology: A Semantic Analysis of Imān and Islām. Tokyo: Keio Institute of Cultural and Linguistic Studies at Keio University. pp. 1–20. ISBN 983-9154-70-2.
  26. ^ Lewis, Bernard, The Middle East : a Brief History of the last 2000 Years, Touchstone, (1995), p.139
  27. ^ [1] Archived September 30, 2005, at the Wayback Machine
  28. ^ Lewis, The Middle East, (1995), p.143
  29. ^ Lewis, The Middle East, (1995), p.141
  30. ^ Bosworth, C. E.; van Donzel, E. J.; Heinrichs, W. P.; Lewis, B.; Pellat, Ch.; Schacht, J., eds. (1960). "Ahl al-Ḥall wa'l-ʿAḳd". Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. 1. Leiden: Brill Publishers. pp. 263–264. doi:10.1163/1573-3912_islam_SIM_0381. ISBN 978-90-04-16121-4.
  31. ^ a b Process of Choosing the Leader (Caliph) of the Muslims: The Muslim Khilafa: by Gharm Allah Al-Ghamdy Archived 2011-07-07 at the Wayback Machine
  32. ^ The Early Islamic Conquests (1981)
  33. ^ Sohaib N. Sultan, Forming an Islamic Democracy Archived 2004-10-01 at the Wayback Machine
  34. ^ Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World (2004), vol. 1, p. 116-123.
  35. ^ Judge Weeramantry, Christopher G. (1997). Justice Without Frontiers. Brill Publishers. p. 135. ISBN 90-411-0241-8.
  36. ^ a b Feldman, Noah (March 16, 2008). "Why Shariah?". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-10-05.
  37. ^ Makdisi, George (April–June 1989). "Scholasticism and Humanism in Classical Islam and the Christian West". Journal of the American Oriental Society. 109 (2): 175–182 [175–77]. doi:10.2307/604423. JSTOR 604423.
  38. ^ Feldman, Noah, Fall and Rise of the Islamic State, Princeton University Press, 2008, p.6
  39. ^ Roy, Olivier, The Failure of Political Islam by Olivier Roy, translated by Carol Volk, Harvard University Press, 1994, p.14-15
  40. ^ Kadri, Sadakat (2012). Heaven on Earth: A Journey Through Shari'a Law from the Deserts of Ancient Arabia ... Macmillan. pp. 120–1. ISBN 9780099523277.
  41. ^ Noah Feldman (March 16, 2008). "Why Shariah?". New York Times. Retrieved 2008-10-05.
  42. ^ Momen, Moojan, Introduction to Shi'i Islam, Yale University Press, 1985 p.192
  43. ^ "Freedom and Justice in the Middle East". Archived from the original on 2007-12-30. Retrieved 2008-11-05.
  44. ^ Lambton, Ann K. S. (2002). State and Government in Medieval Islam. Routledge. p. 145. ISBN 9781136605208. Retrieved 19 September 2015.
  45. ^ Ibn Taymiyya, Le traite de droit public d'ibn Taimiya. Translated by Henri Laoust. Beirut, 1948, p.12
  46. ^ Kadri, Sadakat (2012). Heaven on Earth: A Journey Through Shari'a Law from the Deserts of Ancient Arabia ... macmillan. p. 139. ISBN 9780099523277.
  47. ^ Bosworth, C.E.; Netton, I.R.; Vogel, F.E. (2012). "Siyāsa". In P. Bearman; Th. Bianquis; C.E. Bosworth; E. van Donzel; W.P. Heinrichs (eds.). Encyclopaedia of Islam (2nd ed.). Brill. doi:10.1163/1573-3912_islam_COM_1096.(subscription required)
  48. ^ Yossef Rapoport (2009). "Political Dimension (Siyāsa Sharʿiyya) of Islamic Law". In Stanley N. Katz (ed.). The Oxford International Encyclopedia of Legal History. Oxford: Oxford University Press.(subscription required)
  49. ^ Momen, Moojan, Introduction to Shi'i Islam, Yale University Press, 1985 p.194
  50. ^ Khan, Sheema (12 May 2018). "Another battle with Islam's 'true believers'". The Globe and Mail. The Globe and Mail Opinion. Retrieved 19 April 2020.
  51. ^ Hasan, Usama (2012). "The Balance of Islam in Challenging Extremism" (PDF). Quiliam Foundation. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2 August 2014. Retrieved 2015-11-17.
  52. ^ a b c Brown, Daniel (2017). A New Introduction to Islam (3rd ed.). Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. pp. 163–169. ISBN 9781118953464.
  53. ^ a b c d Cuthell Jr., David Cameron (2009). "Atatürk, Kemal (Mustafa Kemal)". In Ágoston, Gábor; Masters, Bruce (eds.). Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire. New York: Facts On File. pp. 56–60. ISBN 978-0-8160-6259-1. LCCN 2008020716. Retrieved 23 January 2021.
  54. ^ Roy, Olivier, The Failure of Political Islam by Olivier Roy, translated by Carol Volk, Harvard University Press, 1994, p.32
  55. ^ a b Feldman, Noah, Fall and Rise of the Islamic State, Princeton University Press, 2008, p.71-76
  56. ^ Feldman, Noah, Fall and Rise of the Islamic State, Princeton University Press, 2008, p.79
  57. ^ Benhenda, M., Liberal Democracy and Political Islam: the Search for Common Ground, SSRN 1475928
  58. ^ a b Gallagher, Eugene V.; Willsky-Ciollo, Lydia, eds. (2021). "Al-Qaeda". New Religions: Emerging Faiths and Religious Cultures in the Modern World. 1. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO. pp. 13–15. ISBN 978-1-4408-6235-9.
  59. ^ a b c Aydınlı, Ersel (2018) [2016]. "The Jihadists pre-9/11". Violent Non-State Actors: From Anarchists to Jihadists. Routledge Studies on Challenges, Crises, and Dissent in World Politics (1st ed.). London and New York: Routledge. p. 65–109. ISBN 978-1-315-56139-4. LCCN 2015050373.
  60. ^ a b c Moussalli, Ahmad S. (2012). "Sayyid Qutb: Founder of Radical Islamic Political Ideology". In Akbarzadeh, Shahram (ed.). Routledge Handbook of Political Islam (1st ed.). London and New York: Routledge. pp. 24–26. ISBN 9781138577824. LCCN 2011025970.
  61. ^ a b Polk, William R. (2018). "The Philosopher of the Muslim Revolt, Sayyid Qutb". Crusade and Jihad: The Thousand-Year War Between the Muslim World and the Global North. The Henry L. Stimson Lectures Series. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. pp. 370–380. ISBN 978-0-300-22290-6. JSTOR 10.2307/j.ctv1bvnfdq.40. LCCN 2017942543.
  62. ^ Lawrence Wright (2006). "2". The Looming Tower. Knopf. ISBN 0-375-41486-X.
  63. ^ a b Cook, David (2015) [2005]. "Radical Islam and Contemporary Jihad Theory". Understanding Jihad (2nd ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press. pp. 102–110. ISBN 9780520287327. JSTOR 10.1525/j.ctv1xxt55.10. LCCN 2015010201.
  64. ^ Scott Shane; Souad Mekhennet & Robert F. Worth (8 May 2010). "Imam's Path From Condemning Terror to Preaching Jihad". The New York Times. Retrieved 13 May 2010.
  65. ^ Robert Irwin, "Is this the man who inspired Bin Laden?" The Guardian (1 November 2001).
  66. ^ Paul Berman, "The Philosopher of Islamic Terror", New York Times Magazine (23 March 2003).
  67. ^ Out of the Shadows: Getting ahead of prisoner radicalization
  68. ^ Trevor Stanley. "The Evolution of Al-Qaeda: Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi". Retrieved 26 February 2015.
  69. ^ Qutbism: An Ideology of Islamic-Fascism Archived 2007-06-09 at the Wayback Machine by Dale C. Eikmeier. From Parameters, Spring 2007, pp. 85–98.
  70. ^ a b c Hunt, Michael (2014). The World Transformed, 1945 to the Present. New York City: Oxford. p. 495. ISBN 978-0-19-937102-0.
  71. ^ Esposito, John L.; DeLong-Bas, Natana J. (2018). Shariah: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press. pp. 142–143.
  72. ^ Esposito, John L.; DeLong-Bas, Natana J. (2018). Shariah: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press. p. 145.
  73. ^ "Most Muslims Want Democracy, Personal Freedoms, and Islam in Political Life". Pew Research Center. July 10, 2012.
  74. ^ Magali Rheault; Dalia Mogahed (Oct 3, 2017). "Majorities See Religion and Democracy as Compatible". Gallup.
  75. ^ Muslih, Muhammad; Browers, Michaelle (2009). "Democracy". In John L. Esposito (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  76. ^ "Atatürk, Kemal", World Encyclopedia, Philip's, 2014, doi:10.1093/acref/9780199546091.001.0001, ISBN 9780199546091, retrieved 9 June 2019
  77. ^ Books, Market House Books Market House (2003), Books, Market House (ed.), "Atatürk, Kemal", Who's Who in the Twentieth Century, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/acref/9780192800916.001.0001, ISBN 9780192800916, retrieved 9 June 2019
  78. ^ Browers, Michaelle L. (2010). "Retreat from secularism in Arab nationalist and socialist thought". Political Ideology in the Arab World: Accommodation and Transformation. Cambridge Middle East Studies. 31. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 19–47. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511626814.003. ISBN 9780511626814. LCCN 2009005334. S2CID 153779474.
  79. ^ Badara, Mohamed; Nagata, Masaki (November 2017). "Modern Extremist Groups and the Division of the World: A Critique from an Islamic Perspective". Arab Law Quarterly. Leiden: Brill Publishers. 31 (4): 305–335. doi:10.1163/15730255-12314024. ISSN 1573-0255.
  80. ^ Cook, David (2015) [2005]. "Radical Islam and Contemporary Jihad Theory". Understanding Jihad (2nd ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press. pp. 93–127. ISBN 9780520287327. JSTOR 10.1525/j.ctv1xxt55.10. LCCN 2015010201.
  81. ^ a b Zubaidah Rahim, Lily (2006). Capano, Giliberto; Howlett, Michael P.; Jarvis, Darryl S. L.; Ramesh, M. (eds.). "Discursive Contest between Liberal and Literal Islam in Southeast Asia". Policy and Society. Taylor & Francis. 25 (4): 77–98. doi:10.1016/S1449-4035(06)70091-1. ISSN 1839-3373. LCCN 2009205416. OCLC 834913646. S2CID 218567875.
  82. ^ Olivier Roy, Failure of Political Islam, (1994) pp.30-31
  83. ^ Arjomand, Said A. (1995). "The Search for Fundamentals and Islamic Fundamentalism". In van Vucht Tijssen, Lieteke; Berting, Jan; Lechner, Frank (eds.). The Search for Fundamentals: The Process of Modernisation and the Quest for Meaning. Dordrecht: Springer Verlag. pp. 27–39. doi:10.1007/978-94-015-8500-2_2. ISBN 978-0-7923-3542-9.
  84. ^ a b Ibrahim, Hassan Ahmed (January 2006). Son, Joonmo; Thompson, Eric C. (eds.). "Shaykh Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb and Shāh Walī Allāh: A Preliminary Comparison of Some Aspects of their Lifes and Careers". Asian Journal of Social Science. Leiden: Brill Publishers. 34 (1): 103–119. doi:10.1163/156853106776150126. eISSN 1568-5314. ISSN 1568-4849. JSTOR 23654402.
  85. ^ a b Laoust, H. (2012) [1993]. "Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb". In Bearman, P. J.; Bianquis, Th.; Bosworth, C. E.; van Donzel, E. J.; Heinrichs, W. P. (eds.). Encyclopaedia of Islam (2nd ed.). Leiden: Brill Publishers. doi:10.1163/1573-3912_islam_SIM_3033. ISBN 978-90-04-16121-4.
  86. ^ a b Haykel, Bernard (2013). "Ibn ‛Abd al-Wahhab, Muhammad (1703-92)". In Böwering, Gerhard; Crone, Patricia; Kadi, Wadad; Mirza, Mahan; Stewart, Devin J.; Zaman, Muhammad Qasim (eds.). The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. pp. 231–232. ISBN 978-0-691-13484-0. Retrieved 3 November 2020.
  87. ^ a b Esposito, John L., ed. (2004). "Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, Muhammad (d. 1791)". The Oxford Dictionary of Islam. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 123. ISBN 0-19-512559-2. Retrieved 3 November 2020.
  88. ^ a b "Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, Muhammad - Oxford Islamic Studies Online". www.oxfordislamicstudies.com. Oxford University Press. 2020. Retrieved 3 November 2020.
  89. ^ Olivier Roy, Failure of Political Islam (1994), p. 31.
  90. ^ Olivier Roy, Failure of Political Islam (1994), pp. 35-37.
  91. ^ a b c d e Kurzman, Charles (1998). "Liberal Islam and Its Islamic Context". In Kurzman, Charles (ed.). Liberal Islam: A Sourcebook. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 1–26. ISBN 9780195116229. OCLC 37368975.
  92. ^ Leeman, A. B. (Spring 2009). "Interfaith Marriage in Islam: An Examination of the Legal Theory Behind the Traditional and Reformist Positions" (PDF). Indiana Law Journal. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Maurer School of Law. 84 (2): 743–772. ISSN 0019-6665. S2CID 52224503. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 November 2018. Retrieved 24 October 2021.
  93. ^ Jahangir, Junaid (21 March 2017). "Muslim Women Can Marry Outside The Faith". The Huffington Post. Archived from the original on 25 March 2017. Retrieved 24 October 2021.
  94. ^ Shia Revival : How conflicts within Islam will shape the future by Vali Nasr, Norton, 2006, p.148-9
  95. ^ Fuller, Graham E., The Future of Political Islam, Palgrave MacMillan, (2003), p.26


The following sources generally prescribe to the theory that there is a distinct 20th-century movement called Islamism:

The following sources challenge the notion of an "Islamist movement":

These authors in general locate the issues of Islamic political intolerance and fanaticism not in Islam, but in the generally low level of awareness of Islam's own mechanisms for dealing with these, among modern believers, in part a result of Islam being suppressed prior to modern times.


Further reading

On democracy in the Middle East, the role of Islamist political parties, and the War on Terrorism: