Articulating “Responsibility” as a Prerequisite for the Arab Spring

2012 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 42-58
Author(s):  
Ahmed Elewa

In delineating the causes behind nonmilitant uprising and revolution in the Middle East, I propose that the import, the Arabization and Islamization of the term responsibility, as a key catalyst. Although the concept of responsibility is fundamental to the message of Islam, it is alluded to by an assortment of terms that seem to have fallen out of the day-to-day vernacular of Arab communities. The adoption of the term mas’uliyyah has served to express this fundamental concept. Furthermore, given its origin in post-Enlightenment Western political philosophy, the term provides a rare conceptual bridge between regions termed Western and Middle Eastern, in addition to being a linguistic vehicle capable of coarticulating modern Western and traditional Islamic thoughts. In this article, I trace the Arabization and Islamization of the term responsibility to nineteenth-century nahDah literature and its current establishment in different Islamic currents and schools. Moreover, I explain the utility of the term to express authentically Islamic vocabulary that has been forsaken in political terminology of the past two centuries.I propose that the presence of this now familiar term was instrumental in articulating the necessity of political change in a manner that resonated with millions of Arabs educated according to a modern Western model of education. Finally, I predict that the term responsibility will allow for a “new kinda fiqh” appropriate for an activated citizenry.

2012 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 42-58
Author(s):  
Ahmed Elewa

In delineating the causes behind nonmilitant uprising and revolution in the Middle East, I propose that the import, the Arabization and Islamization of the term responsibility, as a key catalyst. Although the concept of responsibility is fundamental to the message of Islam, it is alluded to by an assortment of terms that seem to have fallen out of the day-to-day vernacular of Arab communities. The adoption of the term mas’uliyyah has served to express this fundamental concept. Furthermore, given its origin in post-Enlightenment Western political philosophy, the term provides a rare conceptual bridge between regions termed Western and Middle Eastern, in addition to being a linguistic vehicle capable of coarticulating modern Western and traditional Islamic thoughts. In this article, I trace the Arabization and Islamization of the term responsibility to nineteenth-century nahDah literature and its current establishment in different Islamic currents and schools. Moreover, I explain the utility of the term to express authentically Islamic vocabulary that has been forsaken in political terminology of the past two centuries.I propose that the presence of this now familiar term was instrumental in articulating the necessity of political change in a manner that resonated with millions of Arabs educated according to a modern Western model of education. Finally, I predict that the term responsibility will allow for a “new kinda fiqh” appropriate for an activated citizenry.


2012 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Negin Nabavi

Revolutions are by nature unpredictable and unsettling. That the wave of revolutions in North Africa and the Arab Middle East began so unexpectedly and spread with such speed, leading to the fall of the governments of Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya, has added to the concern regarding the “new order” that is to come after the initial euphoria. From the outset, the fear has been that these revolutions will follow the same trajectory as Iran did in 1979—in other words, that they will marginalize those who launched the revolutions and provide the grounds for the rise to power of the most savvy, purposeful, and best organized of the opposition groups, namely, the Islamists. Yet when one considers the recent uprisings in the Arab world through the prism of Iran's experiences in 1979, the parallels are not so evident. Mindful of the variations and distinctions between each of the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya, it would appear that in broad terms, and beyond superficial similarities, there is little in common between the events of Iran in 1979 and what has happened in the past year in the Arab world.


2011 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 388-388
Author(s):  
Nathan J. Brown

Scholars of the Middle East based in social science disciplines—especially my own, political science—are likely to feel a bit more welcome by their colleagues as a result of recent events in the Middle East. Not only will we be informative conversationalists in the hallways for a while because of our regional expertise, but also, far more profoundly, the sorts of things that political scientists study, from voting patterns to regime change, are suddenly interesting subjects in the region. This is not to say that Middle East elections were not studied in the past or that research on political change was not undertaken—far from it. But the questions posed, the terms used, and tools employed were often different from those more prevalent in the discipline. Political scientists focusing on the Middle East are therefore likely to find this a gratifying time, ripe with opportunities for comparative and cross-regional analysis. And those nonregional specialists whose interests lie in a wide variety of topics from voting behavior to revolutions may work harder to incorporate Middle Eastern cases into their own work.


Author(s):  
A. Malashenko

The article analyses Middle Eastern conflicts in the early 2020s. The main focus is on the situation in Syria, Libya, and Yemen, three Middle Eastern conflicts that are progressing, with no solution in sight. These conflicts motivated by social, economic and political reasons became a progression of those protests that have started in 2011 and have been called “The Arab Spring”. These “revolutions” have been promoted by Islamist movements and groups whose activity became one of key factors of perpetual tensions in the region. So far, attempts by conflict parties to find consensual solutions have remained rather unsuccessful. Positive resolution of actual and potential conflicts in the Greater Middle East to a significant extent still depends on external regional and non-regional actors, such as Russia, Turkey, Iran, and the United States. However, each actor involved in these conflicts and in conflict management pursues its own goals. These actors try to retain their positions and influence in these Middle Eastern countries and in the region as a whole. According to the forecast made in the article, more conflicts in the region may be foreseen (in Iraq, the Persian Gulf states etc.) that could form the next wave of the “Arab Spring”.


2022 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 105-130
Author(s):  
E. S. Melkumyan

The painful consequences of political, economic and social shocks provoked by the Arab Spring forced the political elites of the Middle Eastern states to revisit traditional approaches to maintaining stability and security in the region. This inevitably aff ected the activities of the Gulf Cooperation Council, which was from the outset established in order to enhance cooperation between the countries of the region primarily in the fi eld of security. This paper attempts to identify the key milestones, factors and trends that have shaped the GCC decision-making process in the security sphere over the past 10 years since the beginning of the Arab Spring. The author shows that the Arab Awakening has encouraged the GCC member-states to deepen military-political integration, aimed at strengthening their defense capabilities, as well as their abilities to respond to external and internal challenges. The author notes that the GCC countries still view Iran as the main source of all these threats; moreover, con-sidering substantial strengthening of Iran’s infl uence in the Middle East their position has even hardened. Tehran is accused of meddling in the internal aff airs of the GCC member-states, supporting illegal Shiite groups operating on their territory, and instigating religious discord. In this context, it is quite natural that the Iran’s nuclear programme is of particular concern to the GCC. At the same time, the author emphasizes, that although the GCC member-states declare common approach towards Iran, their practical actions can vary signifi cantly. In particular, it was Qatar which opposed an excessively hard-line approach towards Iran. This fact, as well as accusations against Doha of supporting terrorist and extremist groups, led to two crises that shook the GCC in the 2010s. However, the fact that these crises have been eventually settled shows that security issues still press regional actors towards strengthening the capacities of the GCC. Especially since military threats have been compounded by a new threat — of the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The author concludes that this new threat, which has already incited the GCC to promote cooperation in a health sector, will also strengthen the member-states’ focus on various nonmilitary challenges including epidemiological and environmental ones.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document