Introduction
Secular states are based on the need to separate the state from religion. Secular states are neutral and do not support any religion. On the contrary, Islamic countries are based on the need to introduce Islamic law within political systems. Religious laws restrict democracy and respect for freedoms and rights as part of secular states restricted by religious laws. The true political rule should be based on divine laws such as Islamic laws. This discussion is based on case studies of Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966) and Jamal Abd alNasser, Egypt’s Liberation, 1953. In Iran, case studies are based on Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and Mohammad Mossadegh. The discussion is based on similarities and differences that arise from visions of leaders of Islamic states on the state.
Egypt: Sayyid Qutb and Abd AlNasser
British political rule in Egypt is an important political circumstance that motivated Qutb to develop radical ideas about democracy and western cultures. Even after acquiring western education in early life, Qutb refused to view life in the western way. According to Qutb, political rules should be based on a divine rule. Abd alNasser argues that British rule in Egypt led to moral decay. The only solution to moral decay was a revolution as a surgical precision of cutting out immoral leaders whose moral actions penetrated deeply into the larger Egyptian society. As a result, British rule with no regard to divine intervention and Islamic law corrupted the perception and imagination of Egyptians and leaders.
Sayyid Qutb is described as the most influential politician on the politics of Sunni Islamists. Journalists have described Qutb as a philosopher of Islamic terror. However, there are instances when Qutb inspired non-violent mobilization so that political reforms could be established in Egypt and the larger Middle East. Qutb’s Islamic vision of the state involves the use of Sharia law as a system of rule. Qutb asserts that Islamic law is derived from divine powers. Abd alNasser also states that politics should not be at the mercy of the majority as part of attempts to disregard democracy. Abd AlNasser visions of the state are based on the need to guarantee democracy by the majority while eliminating any need for a state to be based on Islamic laws or any other religious laws.
Qutb indicts western culture and European American power. Besides, Qutb argues that corruption in the Middle East is a contributor to high levels of human suffering. The only solution to challenges affecting Muslims in the Middle East is to achieve social transformation. For Abd alNasser, social transformation is achieved through righteous Muslims, who respect Islamic laws and the Quran as the guide for morality. Qutb’s visions are different with the visions of secular states. Abd AlNasser visions are based on the need to be neutral regarding religion; however, Qutb’s Islamic vision states that the state should never be neutral in matters concerning religion. Islamic law is necessary for rulers and government to achieve social transformation.
Qutb views western and secular states as anti-Muslim, racist, sexually promiscuous, and pro-Israel. Besides, secular states are morally and spiritually impoverished. Primary reasons that have led to high levels of immorality and low levels of spiritual reflection in secular states such as the united states is based on lack of divine guidance. Qutb believes that spiritual reflection in religion and politics is necessary so that the society avoids sexual promiscuity. Abd alNasser also asserts that constitution is necessary for Islamic states as well as secular states that need to guarantee high levels of integrity. Major differences with Abd AlNasser involve the need to achieve the rule of law based on constitutional jurisdiction. In the visions of Abd AlNasser, true governance must not be based on Islamic/Sharia law.
Modernity as a concept of secular states has led to the decay of institutions. Qutb argues that pagan ignorance is high in the United States as part of experiences while he was studying in the country. Qutb also adds that there is no divine truth in religion and politics. A high level of disregard to God is a common characteristic of secular states. On the contrary, Abd AlNasser visions are based on the need to separate religion from the state. Divine intervention is not a necessary component in achieving civil rule. Democratic principles but not religion should be the guide for political rule. As a result, secular states guarantee religious tolerance while Islamic state visions are based on the need to adhere strictly to Islam as a religion and guide of politics.
Abd alNasser also asserts that Greek philosophy, Judaism, Christianity, the scientific revolution, and European enlightenment cannot apprehend divine authority. Such systems are also hostile to people who apprehend divine power. Islamic state visions are based on the need to apprehend divine authority so that all members of the society are respected based on their ability to respect the divine authority.
Qutb says that Arab nationalist, socialists, monarchs, and theocrats are anti-God with no divine command. In particular, legislative authority belongs to God. In Abd AlNasser visions, legislative authority belongs to voters who transfer the powers to voted leaders. Democracy and elections play a significant role in the political spheres of secular states. Qutb as a champion for argues that Islamic law for legislation is necessary. Freedom of religion has led to high levels of immorality and lack of spiritual reflection in secular states.
Religion is not a private affair in Islamic countries. Qutb asserts that the state must never remain neutral regarding religion and religious truth. Besides, all facets of life should be subjected to Islamic law. However, according to Abd AlNasser, a significant difference can be identified. Abd AlNasser does not recognize religion as a public affair but a private affair. The state ensures that each citizen receives a right to any religious view of their choice without restriction. Qutb asserts that worship and social institutions are similar and should never be separated.
One similarity identified based on Qutb’s views relates to Islamic support for material innovation. Qutb consider creativity and innovation as part of God’s gifts to improve economic and social life. As a result, Qutb does not view material innovation as well as scientific innovations as negative consequences. Abd AlNasser also believes that each person in the society has gifts and talents from God so that they can engage in the constructive development of the society. Qutb support material innovation because the Quran acknowledges the existence of persons with different abilities and talents so that the society can depend on each other.
Iran: Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and Mohammad Mossadegh
The Iranian revolution of 1979 was initiated by Ayatollah. During the Iranian revolution, an overthrow of the Iranian monarchy symbolized the ability of Muslims to challenge constituted political authority and actually taking over. The Iranian monarchy has introduced political systems that cause suffering to Iranians thereby leading to the need for revolution.
In the case of Mohammad Mossadegh, British and American governments had orchestrated a coup to remove Mohammad Mossadegh as the prime minister of Iran. The British and American governments had interest over the Anglo-Iranian oil company’s exclusive control over Iran’s oil. The British and allies decided to boycott oil from Iran thereby leading to massive economic challenges.
Mohammad Mossadegh is one of the political leaders who initiated a revolution against control of Iranian oil fields by the British and the Americans. During Mossadegh rule, oil and social life was controlled by foreigners. Foreigners used proxies where citizens have no will to control oil resources. As a result, poverty affected the society. Mossadegh organized revolt so that Iranians could be liberated from foreign oil interests who had become cruel to Iranians.
One of the similarities between Mossadegh and Ayatollah visions relates to political revolts. Mossadegh and Ayatollah initiated political on domestic oppression which is evident in historical and modern politics of Iran states. Oppression of citizens began when Mossadegh and Ayatollah introduced the need to eliminate governance systems that support creation of social classes and exploitation of oil resources. As part of ideological strategies, Mossadegh and Ayatollah ensured that governments and representatives of western government are prevented from exploiting Iranian oil resources. Iran had witnessed political rule that had no regard for the welfare of citizens. As a result, opposition leaders never oppressed based on differences in political views that do not support political leaders.
Mossadegh and Ayatollah views are also based on the need to use the military or coup and revolutions to achieve law and order. Mossadegh and Ayatollah believes that the military and political coups should be used to control activities of citizens viewed as the enemy of the state. Revolutions and coups are a contrast to civil rule. Mossadegh and Ayatollah ensured that law and order are maintained through the constitution and the need to respect rights and freedoms of the Iranian citizens. Revolts and coups are used as a tool to achieve a stable political rule. Furthermore, self-governance cannot be achieved without developing radical ideas against the state.
Mossadegh and Ayatollah liberation, as well as any other liberalization in Islamic states, have similarities. The first similarity identified relates to the need for political unity. Mossadegh and Ayatollah were committed towards a society where an Iranians speaks fairly about another Iranian. Mossadegh and Ayatollah also had similar visions about the unity of citizens. Unity of citizens ensures that citizens can support one another based on solutions that can assist in improving the lives of citizens. Mossadegh and Ayatollah were concerned about leaders with solutions so that Iranians do not engage in personality attacks while developing the nation after liberation from the British. Political unity is based on divisions that were created by oppressive regimes. Persons who were loyal to the oppressive regime, as well as persons who developed negative views towards the state, had differences which led to class differences. An Iranian socaity divided along social classes cannot achieve a common goal.
The second similarity of Mossadegh and Ayatollah relates to the need for pardon, forgiveness, and love for brethren. Mossadegh and Ayatollah assert that the key motivation for initiating revolution was to develop an Iranian society where love for all Iranians could be achieved. Iran as states should based on the same principle of forgiveness, pardon, and love. A leader is a person who unites all citizens towards a common goal without creating class differences such as the poor and the rich. According to Mossadegh and Ayatollah, love for brethren is based on the need to introduce social policies where all citizens can obtain affordable health-care and education so that social and economic differences become insignificant. Islamic state visions especially that of Mossadegh and Ayatollah, is viewed as similar to the need for social, economic, and political cohesion. Oil wealth should be shared equally among all Iranians.
Mossadegh and Ayatollah were concerned about solutions to difficulties affecting Iranians. During oppressive regime rule, political, economic, and social life of Iranians was affected by the government that only considered interest of the elite. Governments and policies are designed so that solution to common difficulties can be eliminated. The need to achieve independent rule as well economic and social freedom motivates Mossadegh and Ayatollah as leaders to design policies that eliminate poverty.
Religion doe surface as part of motivations for Mossadegh and Ayatollah to rule Iranians. As a result, a major similarity between Mossadegh and Ayatollah is the need to unite religion and politics. The inability to consider religion as part of politics is one of the reasons that led to Qutb being a fierce dissident and critic of Abd alNasser. Qutb asserts that the state can never be neutral to religion. Egypt needed Islamic laws so that political rule can achieve divine powers. Mossadegh and Ayatollah assert that religion is part of the state. The government is convened about the welfare of all citizens while maintaining a using Islamic law to maintain law and order.
The cure for ills such as economic problems and political issues is a common vision for both Mossadegh and Ayatollah. Economic problems are based on societal divisions between social classes. Social class distinctions in Iran before liberation led to conflict and differences among society members. Political issues relating to forced rule that had no regard for citizen rights motivated Mossadegh and Ayatollah to imitative revolution through military. Up to date, military as part of government in suppressing the opinions of dissidents is still being witnessed in most Islamic states.
The common goal of Mossadegh and Ayatollah when initiating revolution was to develop a society where social class is not the basic distinction of citizens. Economic ills such as poverty and poor economic reforms should be eliminated so that social welfare of all citizens is considered. However, it can be argued that oppressive regimes are capitalists who do not consider the interest of citizens. As such, it is necessary to view sec Mossadegh and Ayatollah as champions against class distinctions. Social class distinctions are part of societies such as Iran. The existence of the middle class, the wealthy and the lower class citizens is a clear indication that Iran has challenges in terms of vision of Mossadegh and Ayatollah as leaders in the Middle East.
Muslim countries also recognize roles and responsibilities for professionals. Mossadegh and Ayatollah, after criticizing oppressive regime, sought assistance from professors and students in Iarnaian universities. However, Mossadegh and Ayatollah asserts that none of the professors advanced any idea or solution to problems affecting Iranians. Each professor confined himself or herself to advancing their selves to Mossadegh and Ayatollah. Mossadegh and Ayatollah also recognize the need to respect the role of educational institutions in achieving growth and development in political spheres.
Conclusion
Mossadegh and Ayatollah ideologies are based on the fact that Islamic states should be based on Islamic laws so that sexual promiscuity as part of secular states does not affect the society. However, Abd alNasser avoids any mention of religion as part of strategies required to achieve unity in Egypt after British rule. In the current Middle East politics, what is common is that there lack of religious freedom. Qutb states that Islam should be viewed as the guide for leaders and citizens. High levels of religious intolerance towards the states have led to high levels of terrorism. Opposition leaders are also suppressed through military rule as experienced in the case of Abd al-Nasser. Mossadegh and Ayatollah also assert that oppressive regimes interested in sharing oil wealth with foreigners should be opposed and eliminated from the system.
Bibliography
Euben, Roxanne and Zaman Qasim, Muhammad. 2009. “Princeton Readings in Islamist
Thought: Texts and contexts from Al-Banna to Bin Laden.” Chapter 5, Sayyid Qutb. Princeton University press.
Euben, Roxanne and Zaman Qasim, Muhammad. 2009. “Princeton Readings in Islamist
Thought: Texts and contexts from Al-Banna to Bin Laden.” Chapter 6, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Princeton University press.
Gamel Abdel al-Nasser. 1955. “Egypt’s liberation: The Philosophy of revolution.” Washington,
DC: Public Affairs Press.
Laden, Rober.2004. “Iran and the National Front, a speech by Prime Minister Mohammad
Mosaddeq, 27 September 1951.” Tehran: Foreign Ministry of Iran.
Qutb, Sayyid. 1998. “Milestones.” Islamic Book Service.
