Hatsuki AishimaiPh.D. Student at Graduate School of Asian and African Area Studies, Kyoto Universityj
[tisεwεw@AWAEAtJnζ€€Θj]
@
| Due to the events in the United States of America since
the eleventh of September, the floor had opened with unusually tense atmosphere.
Cameras from a Japanese TV broadcasting station were ready to film the analysis
of academics, both from Japan and abroad, on the current situation of the
Islamism-secularism conflict in the Muslim world from the specialists' point
of view. This was my third year I would participate in an International
Symposium of the Islamic Area Studies Project; however, I cannot recall
any sessions in the past that had gained as much public attention as this.
Firstly, professor Masato IIZUKA, the chair and the leader of session 1, regretfully announced the absence of professor Amr HAMZAWY. According to the chairman, Professor Hamzawy's Egyptian origin gave rise to difficulties in purchasing the airfare tickets from Germany. The title of his paper was "Notions of Islah ("reform") and Tajdid ("renewal") in the Egyptian Public Sphere: The Tension between Continuity and Change in Contemporary Islamist Discourses." The opportunity of enjoying his presence at meetings in the near future was desired by all. Session 1 brought together six panellists who presented how Islamism and secularism are in contest in the countries that they specialised in. An abstract of the session defined 'Islamism' as "political activism based on the belief that all human life must be guided by Islamic principles." On the other hand, 'secularism' was given as "a philosophical trend that seeks to separate political and civil affairs from religious." The aim of the programme was not to reach a single understanding on the issue of Islamism and secularism in various countries by comparing and contrasting cases. Rather, the aim of session 1 was to seek a new academic sphere by creating "a multidisciplinary paradigm for the research of the Islamism-secularism conflict." This is because one of the goals of the Islamic Area Studies Project is to develop new methods for approaching the issues related to Islam and Muslim society. For this reason, although session 1 was composed of specialists in various Islamic areas and academic disciplines, all of those presenting material attempted to demonstrate what Islamism and secularism mean and how they are related to each other in their respective fields. The speakers dealt with secularism and Islamism from two perspectives. Firstly, Islamism was analysed from a legal perspective by looking into codified personal laws and actual cases at the courts. Syrian and Indian cases were presented as the foundation on which to build the discussion at the floor. Professor Hiroyuki YANAGIHASHI analysed personal law in the Muslim majority state of Syria, in order to understand how fiqh deals with the kind of legal issues that occur in modern societies. His paper took up two central issues in codified personal law: indirect acknowledgement (iqrar bi-'l-nasab) and marriage of a minor ("Between the Classical Law and the Contemporary Legislation in the Arab Countries.") Then, on the subject of Muslims situated in the midst of "a plethora of religious communities," Professor Nilima CHANDIRAMANI spoke on the Indian situation in which family/personal law discriminates against Muslim women in the name of custom or religion. Moreover, she stressed the necessity of the Indian government reforming the Muslim family law as they did for Hindus, and as other governments of Muslim majority states (i.e. Pakistan) had also done ("Muslim Family Law: Gender Biases.") Both speakers cited cases clearly demonstrating that Muslim women in Syria and India respectively were treated legally on an unequal basis to men, especially in the realm of marriage. In these cases, Islamism was functioning as the driving force to maintain the legal rights of male Muslims that they have historically possessed. For this reason, if female Muslims attempt to reform existing personal laws in their states, their movements are labelled as secularism. However, in reality, both male and female Muslims are struggling to proclaim the authenticity of their ideal Islam. Secondly, Islamism was also examined from the Islamist movements' point of view. In these cases Islamism functions as the alternative to the Establishment in secular states containing a substantial number of Muslim citizens. Case studies from Indonesia, Central Asia (post-Soviet Union), and Turkey were brought in to show the dynamism of Islamist movements in relation to their secular governments. Professor Yasuko KOBAYASHI presented the development of the Ajinomoto Case (late 2000 to January 2001) in order to show how the increase and decrease of pluralism is discussed among Indonesian Muslims. A fatwa issued from Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI, Indonesian Ulama Council) against a Japanese food product company, Ajinomoto, stirred up the debate between those intellectuals endeavouring to increase religious pluralism (President Abdurrahman Wahid and liberal intellectuals) and those who prefer MUI to be responsible for clearly presenting guidance for their religious life. Theoretically speaking, fatwa is a form of legal advice in Islam which has no legal enforcement. The person who receives the fatwa is left by her/himself to decide whether s/he wants to follow mufti's advice or not. However, the Ajinomoto case clearly exhibited the actual effects which MUI's fatwa had on the company's reputation and finance due to the reaction of Indonesian Muslims. Professor Kobayashi is concerned that if the influence of MUI's fatwa on the lives of Indonesian Muslims continues to increase, religious pluralism, which is necessary for the multiethnic country, will be neglected, and institutionalised Islam in the form of absolutism will rule the public and private sphere ("Official Fatwa and Ummah in Indonesia: The Ajinomoto Case.") Speaking on Central Asia, Professor Bakhtiyar BABAJANOV introduced the debates which took place between the reformist and traditionalist 'ulama in Uzbekistan, from the end of the 1970s, through the period of Perestroika and up to the state's Independence, with regard to the political status of Muslims in a non-Islamic state. His paper was based on various forms of sources. They were variously handwritten (i.e. letters and treaties) and printed sources (i.e. legal and illegal pamphlets), audiocassettes of theological disputes and khutbas. ("Muslim Society in a Non-Islamic State: Viewpoints of Traditionalist-Ulama and Reformist-Ulama in the Ferghana Valley Before and After Gaining Independence.") Then, Fumiko SAWAE discussed the forms of newly developing Islamism in Turkey, which were present in three Islamist journals (i.e. monthly Panel and Yeni Zemin, quarterly Bilgi ve Hikmet) published in the first half of the 1990s. The Islamist intellectuals in Turkey are not graduates of the faculty of theology but those who received secular education at universities. They were the ones who wrote the articles for these journals. Whilst seeking the establishment of a social order based on Islamic doctrines, Sawae points out that Islamists in the 1990s had formed their arguments based on the academic discourse of the West. They accused the government of advocating dogmatic secularism. Then, Islamism was presented as an alternative ideology for the tackling of issues which emerged in the course of modernising the state after the Western model. Moreover, based on the idea that Muslims can choose the form of their state, Islamists started to argue that their Islamism could contribute to Islamic political arguments from a different point of view to those who were located in the more democratic and developed society. This shift in the trends of Islamism is also reflected in the party platform of Rafae Partisi (RP, Welfare Party 1983-1998) and its heir, Fazilet Partisi (FP, Virtue Party, 1997-2001). RP's policies aimed to transform Turkish society based on an Islamic value system; however, FP called for democracy, human rights and freedom of faith and thought. ("The Reorientation of the Islamists in Turkey: An Analysis of 'Islamist Journals' in the 1990s.") Secularism (laiklik) has always been at the core of Turkey since its establishment in 1923. The Indonesian government also pursued the same step by pushing aside Piagam Jakarta (Jakarta Charter, shari'a) and bringing in Pancasila (the Five Principles, ensuring equality among religions). Thus, the Islamists' discourses had to be controlled by both governments. At the same time, the state was careful enough to maintain the religiosity among the Turkish nation in order to prevent the spread of communism. On the other hand, the 1990s was the age in which both countries faced the rise of Islamism. Indonesian Islamism emerged from a fatwa issuing institution financed by the government. The Ajinomoto case showed that neither MUI nor the government intended to impose a certain form of Islam on their nation but rather that Indonesian Muslims themselves actively followed what seemed authentic Islam to them. Turkish Islamism also emerged from such an unexpected place-universities with secular education. Moreover, both the Turkish and Indonesian examples suggested that Islamists in the 1990s had started to take into consideration the necessity of advocating pluralism in order to bring success to their movements. On the other hand, Islamists who wish for a society which functions perfectly according to the principles of Islam were also present. Session 1 ended with Professor Franscois BURGAT's speech on the historical genealogy of the term 'Muslim terrorism' by referring to the foreign policies of the West. He argues that in the French case, the government labelled any political or economical decisions made by states of the Middle East (i.e. Egypt, Algeria, Iraq) that were inconvenient for the French, as 'Muslim violence.' By citing a Yemeni newspaper article on the act of Terrorism which took place in September in the US, he attempted to show the existing gap in the understanding of the incident between the West and Muslim countries. ("Islamists in Politics in Early 2001: Facts and Ideologies.") Because this international symposium was a gathering of the specialists on the Muslim society in the modern context, the general discussion which followed these presentation was preoccupied with the concerns on the current affairs between the US and Taliban. Being a young researcher who is about to start her career, I learned by attending this symposium, (not restricted to session 1) the importance of choosing the audience, in relation to career. Especially after the September 11th affairs, general public which is represented by the mass media were seeking for the 'specialists' who could explain the events which were taking place in front of their eyes. However, although both speaking for the general public and the fellow researchers are equally important things, they are completely different acts. Thus, being a responsible academic is to choose the audience, because one cannot speak for the both at once. Moreover, all the academics do not have to choose the research topic which would suit the taste of the general public or governmental policy. From this perspective, Professor Kobayashi and Ms. Sawae presented papers with stimulating arguments and accumulative data which would lead towards prosperous future of the secularism-Islamism issues in the Islamic areas studies. |
@