Pan-Islamism denotes a move towards achieving Islamic unity for all Muslims under one state, commonly referred to as a caliphate. The idea of a caliphate was first conceptualized during the time of Prophet Muhammad, who was seen as the de facto spiritual and political leader of all Muslims. In the modern era, the idea of a Muslim caliphate was popularized by Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (jrank.org). He was an Islamic philosopher and political activist. He worked as an advisor to the King of Afghanistan in which it has been documented that he advised on the resistance of Britain's advances in the Muslim world. Instead, he advocated for a push towards closer relations with Russia.
It is his advocacy for a united front by all Muslims irrespective of their ideological differences, and his sympathy for Russia that perhaps shaped the views of the British government on Islam. However, the Ottoman Sultans from the beginning of the 1860s became the strongest advocates of a Muslim caliphate even making it the official state policy. Sultan Abdul Aziz became the first head of the caliphate, and the practice caught on to his successors (jrank.org). The Sultans viewed the idea of a caliphate as a resurgence of Islam after it had lost its influence to western influences of the British and its allies, Russia, and Constantinople.
Ultimately, the Ottoman dream failed, but it served to galvanize the Muslim community especially in the Sahel region and parts of Asia on the idea of nationalism as a means to oppose the European rule and that of the imperialist Ottoman sultans. After the Second World War, there was a wave of decolonization in the Muslim world and Arab nationalism took center stage putting the idea of an Islamic caliphate on the back foot.
Britain's view on Pan-Islamism
In Wilfred Scawen Blunt's book, "The Future of Islam", Britain's perception of Islam is discussed in detail in chapter five of the book titled "England's Interest in Islam." In the book, he primarily targets the readership of the British people, especially as seen from the extremely bias standpoints against Pan-Islamism. The convergence of the interests of the Musulman population was disturbing to England especially in the British Indian Empire, which had the largest population in all of England's controlled territories. The idea of pan-Islamism was not compelling, given the savage nature in which they regarded Muslims. "I take it the sentiment generally of Continental Europe—I do not speak of England—towards Mohammedanism is still much what it has always been, namely, one of social hostility and political aggression.” (Wifred, 176).
They, however, perceived the political body of Islam as weak and thus anticipated huge territorial losses. Despite the perceived weakness, it was Britain and its allies resolve that the movement should be broken as they reasoned that only they had the sole authority over Islam. England counted on France to have a foothold of Tunis and Algiers, which they reasoned would
lead to success in uprooting the culture of Islam from the Sahara. Such a result would have enticed Italy into Tripoli further weakening the Ottoman Empire.
Success in the Sahara region was projected to push the Muslim populations to the west and central regions that were under the control of the Germans hence creating a problem for their rivals. There was, however, fear that the intended losses of Islam in Africa could backfire and act a source of rejuvenation for further calls for pan-Islamism. It called for the British to assess their weaknesses and those of their allies. They found out that the French did little to assimilate Muslims in their captured territories an issue they foresaw would cause trouble for the French and themselves.
The projected fall of the Ottoman Empire would spell a loss of the moral and religious authority of the Musulman world. However, perhaps the greatest fear of the British and its allies was Russia's relationship with the Muslim world. It was Russia official policy to encourage Islam and even established institutions of higher learning to support the course. A Muslim world closer to the Russians would tilt the balance of power against Britain, which had hitherto been the superior power." The present policy of Russia, whatever it may be in Europe, is far from hostile to Mohammedanism in Central Asia. As a religion, it is even protected there, and it is encouraged by the Government in its missionary labors among the idolatrous tribes of the Steppes, and among the Buddhists, who are largely accepting its doctrines in the extreme East It has a university of its own in Bokhara, a seat of learning still renowned throughout Asia, and it is thither and not to St. Sophia that the Sunite Mussulmans east of the Caspian proceed for their degrees." (Wifred, 184)
The Shiite Mohammedanism in Persia also posed a problem to the British, owing to its closeness to Russian growing conquests in the face a Persian monarchy, that the British thought was not strong enough to resist the Russian advances. There was also fear that Britain's sustained push for the failure of the Caliph with political power would result in the emergence of a spiritual caliph. The caliph would be more symbolic than pragmatic, which would remove the role of taxation and administration from him and as such endear the people closer to him.
The English also counted on the fall of Constantinople as they reasoned it would push further Muslim populations towards its rule to seek guidance. In a bid to protect herself from Russia, England was forced to enter into a treaty of convenience with the Ottoman Empire, which is ironic for they also counted on its fall to gain its territories.
Ottoman view on Pan-Islamism
In his book, "Pan-Islamism" Mushir Hosain Kidwai makes an attempt to show cause for the calls for a united Muslim front under a caliphate. In the book, he appears to target the readership of the Muslims and Indians. The call for pan-Islamism was not brought about a homogenous issue facing the Muslim world. different Muslims faced different issues depending on their localities. Colonialism only served to hasten the calls for the formation of a caliphate. From Spain's invasion of Morocco and later French, the Dutch entry into the East Indies to the Urabi rebels in Egypt, the clamor for Islamic revivalism grew. In the book, Kidwai tries to show it is Britain's and its allies' heavy-handedness that escalated the calls for pan-Islamism."Pan-Islam was neither a fanatical nor a secret movement, but one dedicated to defending Islam from Christian calumnies" (Mushir, 84)
The call for a caliphate begun as an offshoot of Muslim guerilla groups in various places most notably the Padri War of 1888 and the Bantern uprising. The galvanizing power of pilgrims was critical in ensuring the success of the movement. In the Middle East, it was emboldened by those returning from studies from Egypt, Syria, and Hijaz. It was especially the case for they had experienced firsthand the effects of British rule in Egypt.
Despite pan-Islamism being majorly an urban idea, the British perceived it as a threat to global security due its potential to spread fast. As a testament to its growth, the French government banned the publication of the pan-Islamic journal "al-Urwa al Wuthqa" (The firmest bond) in Paris (Mushir, 23). He further claims that the movement grew out of the realization of the impracticality of the European world order due to its lack of inclusiveness. Furthermore, it geared more towards enhancing their imperialist ideas rather than for the benefit of all. Pan-Islamism was. Therefore, an attempt to bring in a new world order that was hoped would suit the needs of the Mussulman populations. It was also a valuable tool with which to defeat the European ideology, which had often involved the use of propaganda to cause uproar among the Muslim populations in the different rival colonial powers for political expediency.
The German view of Islam was divided though it was mainly influenced by the views of Britain and France. It was hinged on the false assumption that Islam had experienced explosive growth in Africa and as such, there was a need to accommodate Muslims in their empire, a view that was also shared by the British. However, it was not for the love of Islam but rather for the strengthening of power against their rivals in the scramble for the Muslim world. As such, calls for the formation of a caliphate were also as a means of protecting the sanctity of Islam from the constant power struggles between Britain, its allies, and their rivals Germany and Russia.
Comparison between the British and Ottoman view on Pan-Islamism.
Both authors; Mushir and Blunt had contrasting opinions on Pan-Islamism and were often bias in their assessment. Wilfred's view on pan-Islamism echoed the sentiment the British had on Islam and the fear of its growth that followed. An Islamic caliphate would most certainly have had warm relations with Russia, which would have put Britain at a disadvantage in the global stage. Such an eventuality would have made British rule on Musulman world untenable. On the other hand, Mushir's view echoed those of many Muslims at the time who felt oppressed and saw a Caliphate for all Muslims as a tool with which to counter European imperialism in their lands.
The dilemma for Britain was that in a bid to have stability in the Muslim lands, they needed to assimilate with the Muslims and encourage them to practice Islam to avoid a back clash. It is on this issue that both proponents and opponents of Pan-Islamism tend to agree. "But enough of this line of reasoning, which after all is selfish and unworthy. The main point is that England should fulfill the trust she has accepted of developing, not destroying, the existing elements of good in Asia. She cannot destroy Islam, nor dissolve her own connection with her. Therefore, in God's name, let her take Islam by the hand and encourage her boldly in the path of virtue. This is the only worthy course, and the only wise one, wiser and worthier, I venture to assert, than a whole century of crusade."(Wilfred, 214)
Ultimately, the clamor for Pan-Islamism failed especially with the onset of decolonization that brought about increased calls for Arab nationalization. Whether it was defeated by the implicit actions of Britain and its allies or the disunity of the many different Muslim spheres, it would be hard to tell. It is, however, clear that Pan-Islamism in the 19th and early 20th century had lasting implications on global geopolitics
Works Cited
B, Wilfred S. The Future of Islam. Ann Arbor: Univeristy of Michigan Press, 2005. Project Gutenberg. 27 Feb. 2016 http://www.gutenberg.org/files/17213/17213-h/17213-h.htm#CHAPTER_V
K, Mushir. Pan-Islamism. White fish: kessinger publishing, 1906
Jrank.org staff . "Pan-Islamism - Late Ottoman Politics." jrank.org. 2016. 27 Feb. 2016. <http://science.jrank.org/pages/10587/Pan-Islamism-Late-Ottoman-Politics.html>.
