Islamic Political Thought

“Reason” and “Rationality” have been the most controversial subjects in human thinking. Question of reason is faced not only with questions about the capacity of reason to discover truth, the possibility of choice, and the decisive role of reason in epistemology, but also it deals with questions about thought, freedom, and the nature of thought. Reason is a common point among all human beings; therefore, there is no difference between people in the amount of intellect, but the differences are due to the dominant epistemological paradigm in each period and the impact of historical, social and cultural conditions on the interpreting of that paradigm of intellect. In the last few centuries, the concept of reason and rationality has encountered major challenges. Western epistemological approaches such as post structuralism and methodological approaches such as genealogy, seek to find gaps of this concept in the historical process. On the other hand, the concept of reason in Islamic thought and its relationship with religion has always been controversial. Some contemporary Muslim thinkers, by giving originality to reason and respecting Western modernity, have a critical approach to traditional society and the way to achieve an ideal society with new outlook such as pluralism, critical religious rationality and democracy in a religious society based on rationality. Some other Muslim thinkers, by proposing views such as the theory of rationality and spirituality, go beyond the modernist approach to religion, seeking a way to avoid religious intellectual contradictions. This article tries to examine both Western and Islamic perspectives on reason and rationality.

"Human rights" as a fundamental issue in the present century has been a major parts of legal researches as well as one of the main features of democratic governments. Although it was theoretically first raised in the West but provoked various reactions from Islamic countries. In Iran, after the Constitutional Revolution, these issues were addressed. In a division, Shiite political thought can be divided into four sub-categories: political philosophy, political mysticism, political literature, and political jurisprudence. Because in Iran, Shiite jurists have always played a decisive role in various political, social, economic and cultural issues, it is necessary to refer to their opinion in this issue as well. Shiite jurists have also viewed Western human rights from three perspectives: denial, proof, and modification. Among Shiite jurists, the views of Allameh Jafari are interesting due to their special focus on this issue and the coherence of the issues raised by them. The main question pursues in this research is what is Allameh Jafari's view on human rights? This paper hypothesis is that Allameh Jafari, like most modern Shiite jurists, while accepting human rights issues, tries to adjust them according to religious sources and texts.

Confrontation and contrast between tradition and modernity brings the intellectuals of Muslim communities into different intellectual, social, and political conflicts. Some of those believe that the only way to rescue from the status quo is sinking in the Western culture and its slavish imitation. Some others insist on the traditions of the past, which are mingled with a lot of superstition, and impurities in the path of events and historical developments and need for refinement and revision. Among these attitudes, Imam Khomeini as a prominent scholar and Islamic thinker has a remarkable view that can support both traditional and modern views. He, on the one hand, insists on the original, valuable, and divine teachings like Qur’anic decrees and the Holy Prophet (PBUH) methods through the theory of Velayat-e Faqih and, on the other hand, in encounter with the Western civilization, chooses some parts being in accord with the divine Shari’ah, people’s interests and development of the society and rejected some immoral parts leading to corruption. In this research, my attempt is to answer the questions, what strategy did Imam Khomeini propose to solve the problem? How Imam Khomeini could combine between the tradition and modernity? Which one will be in order of priority in his list, tradition, or modernity? A qualitative research is perfomed to achieve the aim of this research and answer the research questions.

The weakness of Ottoman empire, in particular in the last years, adding to the materialistic tendencies of politicians, was attributed to not only a sort of disappointment of the religious state, but also exacerbating orientations to revitalize Islam. Nevertheless, with the exemption of current Turkey, other regions, dominated by Ottoman, were grappling with severely extremist trends which, in spite of their reduction, has been irritating the Islamic world after ages. Thus, what is the relation between Ottoman’s collapse and Salafists’ tendencies? The article by applying a historical analysis and investigating the pivots of Ottoman’s state, studies the reasons for Ottoman’s decline and by analyzing the effects of political vacuum as well as the disappearing of a supportively religious state in the area, scrutinizes the relationship between the collapse and the evolution of Salafists’ attitudes. Overall, Ottoman’s collapse contributed to the creation of a political vacuum, fed the appropriate context to raise Salafism in the Islamic world and Wahhabism is alleged a normal yet utilitarian approach to handle ever-increasing internal patches as well as internationally infuriating interventions at the time.

Justice is one of the old topics in the human thought history. It has occupied the minds of thinkers throughout history and they has offered various opinions about it. In Islamic thinkers, justice is one of the most important and controversial concept. In Shiite thought – that have historically relied less on government - it has been reduced as individual subject. After the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran and the formation of the Shiite government, it became necessary to present social ideas to govern the government in various fields. Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani is one of the jurists and thinkers of the Islamic Republic, who has expressed theories about justice based on Shiite teachings and the Holy Quran. By collecting his views in the field of justice and categorizing them, the researcher seeks to explain Ayatollah Mahdavi's views on justice. He defines justice as meaning giving the rights of others and believes that this level of justice of individuals has strengths and weaknesses that increase or decrease in proportion to the responsibilities and duties of individuals. In the following, two steps of justice, ie revolutionary consciousness and culture, are pointed out, and finally, the increase of social capital, the establishment and survival of governments, and the growth and introduction of capital and economic growth as political effects of justice in society are explained.

"Otherness" is one of the most important dimensions in understanding Islamic discourse in international relations. This arises from a critique of the ontology, epistemology, and methodology of the Western discourse of international relations. In fact, the formation of the Islamic discourse of international relations has two dimensions. On the one hand, the principles governing international relations with a focus on rationalist approaches are criticized, and on the other hand, its identity elements are presented based on the political discourse of Islam. This article tries to examine the process of otherness in the Islamic discourse of international relations by focusing on the Islamic Revolution of Iran approach in international politics.

One of the fundamental principles of the Islamic Republic of Iran in its foreign policy during the last four decades have  been to support the liberating movements, specifically the Islamic movements. This policy has been formed according to ideals of Iranians, and based on the Islamic worldview of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its revolutionary discourse. In fact, it has been emphasized in our constitutional law and other legal documents. On the other hand, support of these movements is not only in the direction of our national and ideological benefits, but also, according to completely lawful standards of international law and specifically human rights concerning fate determination and the right of lawful defense. In spite of all these facts, since the victory of the Islamic revolution, the Western countries and, following them, the Western media have continuously accused Iran of supporting terrorism and terroristic groups. This paper is going to explain the difference between these events and the terroristic groups according to international law, human rights and humanitarian principles.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, different views have been introduced regarding the role of Islam in Central Asia and the Caucasus, depending on the historical context of the communist system and its collapse. The main question of this article is whether in the Central Asia and Caucasus region, radical Islam has intellectual and philosophical foundations or not. The hypothesis of this article is: "Radicalism has grown since the collapse of the Soviet Union, due to socio-economic crises, and also due to the influence of foreigners that is coincided with the identity crisis." On the other hand, in the post-Soviet era, we see that in Central Asia and the Caucasus, the religious tradition is redefined along with national and historical heritage and become as an element of legitimizing a system.

The emergence of new social movements in the Middle East with the aim of reforming or changing the established system and with different characteristics from traditional and classical movements is one of the topics that has attracted the attention of sociologists and social researchers. In this study, using a descriptive-analytical method, based on Ted Robert Greer's theory of "relative deprivation", an attempt has been made to investigate the emergence of new social movements in the Middle East and to examine whether another factor was involved in the emergence of this phenomenon or not. In order to facilitate the process of research and show real evidence, the Egyptian revolution will be discussed as a case study. Thus we organize the present article in the framework of the following questions: "Does the theory of 'relative deprivation' have the ability to explain new social movements in the Middle East, such as the Egyptian revolution?" And "What factors besides this theory can enhance the ability to explain these movements?" The results obtained from the analysis of the January Revolution in Egypt and the role of social media Revolution indicate that although the developments of Islamic societies are rooted in the dissatisfaction of the people of these countries with the situation of their society, however, the role of "mass media" in motivating and organizing people to participate in the main streets and squares of the city cannot be ignored. In fact, the "relative deprivation" of Egyptian society during the rule of Hosni Mubarak has acted as a motivating factor of people and social media and networks such as Facebook have played the role of catalyst.

Realism is one of the approaches that has long been considered as the dominant paradigm in the study of international politics and has played an important role in shaping it. So, it has been criticized by many theoretical schools of international relations. To address these challenges, neorealism led by Kenneth Waltz sought a methodical and scientific reading of realism that conformed to conventional scientific principles and had the ability to explain international relations. The result of Waltz's attempt was neorealism based on the assumptions of positivism. Opposite to positivist views for the analysis of international politics are the religious theories of international relations. Islamic theory is the most important high-powered religious theory for understanding, explaining, and interpreting international politics. This article seeks to express the meta-theoretical foundations of both neorealist and Islamic theory and to take steps to develop the theoretical framework of the Islamic theory of international relations.

Investigating Russian literature shows that from Moscow’s point of view, the Iran-Iraq war was rooted in historical, political, and religious challenges. According to the Russians, geopolitical disputes after the fall of the Ottomans, the dispute over the Arvand River, ethnic Kurdish tensions, and long-standing disputes between Shiites and Sunnis are the four key factors that ignited the fires of the Iran-Iraq war. Meanwhile, Moscow had specific interests and policies toward Iran. Examining Russian literature shows that during the years of the Iran-Iraq war, Moscow made extensive efforts to establish a socialist system in Iran through influence in the leftist political current in this country. The Soviet Union which was deeply concerned about the continuation of the Iranian revolution within its borders, supported Saddam against Iran through arms, military, and intelligence assistance to Iraq. Also, looking at this war from a Russian perspective shows that the Iran-Iraq war not only did not limit US influence in the region, but also increased Washington's military and security presence in the West Asian region.  Hence, the Soviet Union, which had hoped to find a way to gain access to the waters of the Persian Gulf by exploiting the instability of West Asia and providing security guarantees to the countries of this region, failed to achieve its goals. The Soviets also imagined that the Eight-Year War would prevent the continuation of the revolutionary movement of the Iranian people, and that the Islamic Republic would collapse as a result of the costs and problems of the war. But the leadership of the war by Imam Khomeini (may God have mercy on him) and the unparalleled performance of the Iranian people and warriors prevented the realization of the Soviet dream of forming a communist system in Iran.