1. Into the Latter Half of the IAS Project:

Re-examining Three Issues
KISAICHI Masatoshi
Unit 2 Leader

As the five-year Islamic Area Studies Project begun in April 1997 has entered its latter half, we are now moving to draw together the research developed over the past three years. Until now we have published twenty volumes of the Working Paper Series, two volumes of the English IAS Series, as well as numerous workshops, proceedings and research reports. Last October, at the midpoint of the project, we hosted the international symposium Beyond the Border: A New Framework for Understanding the Dynamism of Muslim Societies. Here, researchers from countries worldwide were invited to present their research in what developed into a stimulating exchange of ideas. Not only was this symposium a successful academic exchange but also a big step in heightening awareness of the project. We are now proceeding in full efficiency without the delaying complications experienced at the outset.

These achievements alone are no guarantee, however, that the IAS Project in the remaining two years will have produced constructive results that will lead the way for 21st-century research. It is true that we launched this project with ambitions of opening up new horizons. But such future success is contingent on the careful re-examination of the three issues that we members discussed and agreed upon at the start of the project.

The First Issue: Islam and Western Modernization

The first issue we must consider is whether a return to Islamic culture can successfully replace Western modernization, which in Third World countries has been disclosing its drawbacks: stalling democratization, the exacerbation of poverty and human-rights problems, and environmental destruction. Of course we do not attempt to find a clear answer to this question, nor do we presume ourselves capable of doing so. However, the fact that the IAS Project is supported by the Japanese government, and that television and the press have been taking up the topic of Islam often (NHK and Asahi Shimbun have both produced much-discussed reports on Islamic topics over the past 12 months) are proof that a strong interest in the alternative of Islamic culture does exist in Japan. Such increase in public awareness cannot be entirely unrelated with the implementation of this research project.

This March I visited Egypt, Thailand and Indonesia to conduct research according to the theme of Unit 2, Democratization and Popular Movements in Islamic Areas. One aspect that struck me in all three countries was the vivacity and the cheerful faces of the Muslim people. Often these people would be living in slums, under unsanitary and unfavorable conditions. However, what I saw in them was completely different from the dark expressions and decadent splendour of the youth I had seen in city slums and villages in Japan and the West, who had grown accustomed to living under a constant feeling of vague unrest.

Scholars of different disciplines have joined forces in this project to study a variety of aspects related to Islamic areas. Here, it is imperative that the members of the project share an awareness of the same issues in order to produce collaborative results, and not a mere compilation of various personal research. I would like to remind us that we have all set forth in an effort to produce joint research on various aspects of civilization.

The Second Issue: The Historical Axis

The second issue to be addressed is the question of how the historical axis would be included in the geographical plane of area studies. We also discussed how we would build a new methodology for area studies led by historians. I have written more of this in the article "Fumbling for a New Outlook on Area Studies" (Sophia, Volume 184; Sophia University, 1997). Having published this article prior to the outset of the IAS Project, I did not touch upon any ensuing issues of the project in the paper. What I did discuss therein were 1) the importance of scholars in the humanities--particularly historians--participating in the realm of area studies, which has been dominated by social scientists, 2) the necessity of historians to re-define the framework of historiography through active participation in area studies, and 3) the importance of and difficulties faced by the catalyst/supervisor figure necessary to construct this new discipline.

My views have not changed since I wrote this aforementioned thesis; however, after experiencing three years of this research project, I have new insights on the implications of area studies conducted by historians. In the paper in question I stated that area studies sets its priorities depending on the present political and social conditions of the world, and issues such as democratization and environmental problems have priority over others. And historians, whether their expertise be ancient history, have the responsibility to search out themes that are directly pertinent to the world today.

Democratization and environmental problems are issues that may seem peculiar to contemporary society. However, one cannot resolve contradictory interests between environmental protection and local inhabitants, for example, or understand the factors that hinder and accelerate the process of democratization, without actually analyzing historical sources and achieving a careful understanding of the historical background and culture of a given place. It is imperative that historians have the courage to leap into seemingly unrelated topics if such "current" issues are ever to be solved. Without this effort, we will continue seeing these problems explained on a case-by-case basis as will be convenient according to government policy, international power-dynamics, and the control-hungry values of developed nations of the West and Japan.

Looking back at the three years of the IAS Project, I am still doubtful of whether the historians involved have truly grasped this concept. True, it may be unrealistic to ask a scholar of ancient history to include environmental issues and democratization in their research. However, continuing to avoid current issues here will not only narrow down the potentials of historiography itself but will be counterproductive in overcoming the limitations of area studies. There are many other current issues needing the contributing of historians: problems such as poverty and starvation, ethnic and gender-based discrimination along with other human-rights issues, disease and death. Historians involved in area studies must consciously select topics pertinent to todayﾕs world and thus provide valuable insight into these problems. It is precisely this shared goal that enables area studies and history to be joined collaboratively.

The Third Issue: Groundwork Research

The third issue to be faced is the importance of basic-level research. When this project was started, SATO Tsugitaka, the leader, said, "In area studies, we will not underestimate the importance of deciphering even one page of an ancient manuscript." I interpret this as a call to include the axis of time in our research. In other words, area studies does not deal merely with the present, but is aimed at understanding the present. I too am in accordance with SATO's remark; the question now lies in how we will put this to work.

There are two points to this issue. The first lies in how we can secure the understanding of researchers specializing in politics, economics, and international relations. It is not an easy task to convince specialists of Middle Eastern and South East Asian politics of the importance of reading medieval manuscripts, much less involving these scholars in collaborative research. This is a problem that has yet to be solved, even after three years of the project.

The second difficulty lies in whether the government and supporting organizations would understand the importance of such groundwork research in order to shed light on contemporary issues. When universities and research institutions encourage easy and tangible research results due to changes in administration or in an effort to attract more students, it is obvious that the future of foundational research is at stake.

To study a medieval manuscript in order to attain insight on contemporary societyﾑthis is the type of groundwork that area studies needs. For this reason, this year I have started a new research group under Unit 2, entitled Reason and Religion. Here we will reconsider the basic issues of democratization, human rights, political structure, and the family as seen in Islamic societies and Islamic areas in general. I believe that when looking at contemporary politics, it is crucial that we view the Islamic concepts of freedom, the individual, the intellect, violence, and gender from the basic levels of Islamic thought and philosophy.

In order to successfully conduct area studies based on groundwork research, we will also be needing the cooperation of those studying the current world. In organizing workshops, in forming research groups, I call upon scholars of the modern world to make a conscious effort to include scholars of history, philosophy, and archaeology in comparative and collaborative studies. For instance, when studying the dynamics of power in modern Arab politics, I ask that you invite historians of the Abbasid or Mamluk period to form a forum of joint research. Although friction may occur at first, this is only to be expected among scholars specializing in such different periods, regions, and disciplines. If we shy away from this, there will never be a difference seen in the results of individual research and the collaborative results hoped for in area studies.

Towards Area Studies as a Collective Impulse

What can be expected, then, from the IAS members once an awareness of these three issues is shared? Renewed appreciation for the historical depth and present-day energy of Islamic civilization would be enjoyed. But the real benefit would be an awakened desire in the scholars to derive a message for the future from their historical studies of Islamic civilization. I would like to call this the "collective impulse" of area studies. This impulse would be born primarily of three factors. One cause may be love for and adherence to a geographical region. This would be seen in resolution to prioritize the study of rural communities and subcultures over the study of nations and institutions of power. Another source of the "collective impulse" may be coming in contact with research conducted by researchers with these values. Such research is powerful and speaks to the heart. A third cause is the solidarity that will be born where researchers with this shared mission come together. In the 1990ﾕs we experienced unimaginably horrendous incidents in Japan, as those caused by the Aum Shinrikyo cult. Similar cases have been on the rise in the West as well. From a general viewpoint, one can conclude that these problems reflect the failings of Western civilization. One of the tasks expected of us scholars is to seriously discuss what kind of civilization we must build in the 21st century. And for us members of the IAS Project, this means that we must begin by experiencing the "collective impulse" of area studies.