'Lone Wolf' Terrorism and the Classical Jihad : On the Contingencies of Violent Islamic Extremism

H. Hamoudi
{"title":"'Lone Wolf' Terrorism and the Classical Jihad : On the Contingencies of Violent Islamic Extremism","authors":"H. Hamoudi","doi":"10.25148/LAWREV.11.1.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\"11 Florida International University Law Review 19 (2015)It is nearly impossible to describe Muslim expansionism in the centuries following the death of the Prophet Muhammad - broadly undertaken in service of the Islamic doctrine of jihad - as being somehow compatible with modern norms of international relations, including self-determination and noninterference in the affairs of other states. To detractors, this seems to suggest a certain tension in modern Muslim thought that jihadist movements have been able to exploit. Modern Muslim intellectuals, that is, are forced to somehow reconcile an expansionist past, which was not only tolerated by early jurists interpreting Islam's sacred texts but indeed exhorted by them as a duty of the Muslim community, with modern realities, where the jihad as it was historically understood has become something of an embarrassment. In so doing, the argument runs, they leave themselves exposed to the \"literalist\" claims of the jihadists, who can call up such sources at will and demonstrate the true Islamicity of their actions relative to modernists who can only rely on abstract principles and vague apologies that sound suspiciously Western. The purpose of this paper is to explore the fallacy of this conclusion through the examination of \"lone wolf\" terrorism. This form of terrorism is quite relevant not only because of its inherent danger, but also because the methods of the lone wolf terrorist have been broadly accepted by a panoply of the most extreme Islamist organizations, very much including the so called Islamic State. I will show that even if early and medieval Muslim jurists hardly incorporated a worldview that rested on principles of mutual tolerance and respect toward other states and other religions, they nonetheless regarded the jihad as a fundamentally conservative doctrine, meant to preserve the Muslim state as it was and direct violence exclusively in external directions, in an organized and systematic attempt to expand what was known as the House of Islam into the universal Muslim state. The notion of lone wolf terrorism - individually directed and organized violence, executed beyond the meaningful control of the caliph - was entirely foreign. Moreover, it depends on deliberate violation of one of classical Islam's core concepts in international relations, that of respect for the terms of a covenant of security, or aman, when granted by a non-Muslim power to a Muslim or the reverse.","PeriodicalId":300333,"journal":{"name":"FIU Law Review","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FIU Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25148/LAWREV.11.1.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

"11 Florida International University Law Review 19 (2015)It is nearly impossible to describe Muslim expansionism in the centuries following the death of the Prophet Muhammad - broadly undertaken in service of the Islamic doctrine of jihad - as being somehow compatible with modern norms of international relations, including self-determination and noninterference in the affairs of other states. To detractors, this seems to suggest a certain tension in modern Muslim thought that jihadist movements have been able to exploit. Modern Muslim intellectuals, that is, are forced to somehow reconcile an expansionist past, which was not only tolerated by early jurists interpreting Islam's sacred texts but indeed exhorted by them as a duty of the Muslim community, with modern realities, where the jihad as it was historically understood has become something of an embarrassment. In so doing, the argument runs, they leave themselves exposed to the "literalist" claims of the jihadists, who can call up such sources at will and demonstrate the true Islamicity of their actions relative to modernists who can only rely on abstract principles and vague apologies that sound suspiciously Western. The purpose of this paper is to explore the fallacy of this conclusion through the examination of "lone wolf" terrorism. This form of terrorism is quite relevant not only because of its inherent danger, but also because the methods of the lone wolf terrorist have been broadly accepted by a panoply of the most extreme Islamist organizations, very much including the so called Islamic State. I will show that even if early and medieval Muslim jurists hardly incorporated a worldview that rested on principles of mutual tolerance and respect toward other states and other religions, they nonetheless regarded the jihad as a fundamentally conservative doctrine, meant to preserve the Muslim state as it was and direct violence exclusively in external directions, in an organized and systematic attempt to expand what was known as the House of Islam into the universal Muslim state. The notion of lone wolf terrorism - individually directed and organized violence, executed beyond the meaningful control of the caliph - was entirely foreign. Moreover, it depends on deliberate violation of one of classical Islam's core concepts in international relations, that of respect for the terms of a covenant of security, or aman, when granted by a non-Muslim power to a Muslim or the reverse.
“独狼”恐怖主义与古典圣战:论暴力伊斯兰极端主义的偶然性
11《佛罗里达国际大学法律评论》(Florida International University Law Review, 2015)先知穆罕默德死后的几个世纪里,穆斯林的扩张主义基本上是为伊斯兰圣战教义服务的,几乎不可能将其描述为与现代国际关系准则(包括自决和不干涉他国事务)在某种程度上兼容。对批评者来说,这似乎表明现代穆斯林思想中存在某种紧张关系,圣战运动已经能够利用这种紧张关系。也就是说,现代穆斯林知识分子被迫在某种程度上调和扩张主义的过去,这不仅被解释伊斯兰教神圣文本的早期法学家所容忍,而且实际上被他们劝诫为穆斯林社区的责任,而现代现实是,历史上对圣战的理解已经成为一种尴尬。这种观点认为,这样做,他们将自己暴露在圣战主义者的“字面主义”主张之下,圣战主义者可以随意查阅这些资料,并证明他们的行为具有真正的伊斯兰性,而现代主义者只能依靠抽象的原则和含糊的道歉,听起来像是西方的。本文的目的是通过对“独狼”恐怖主义的考察来探讨这一结论的谬误。这种形式的恐怖主义非常重要,不仅因为其固有的危险,还因为独狼恐怖分子的方法已被最极端的伊斯兰组织广泛接受,其中包括所谓的伊斯兰国。我将表明,即使早期和中世纪的穆斯林法学家几乎没有将世界观建立在相互宽容和尊重其他国家和其他宗教的原则之上,他们仍然认为圣战是一种基本保守的教义,旨在保持穆斯林国家的现状,并将暴力直接指向外部方向,通过有组织和系统的尝试将所谓的伊斯兰之家扩展到普遍的穆斯林国家。独狼恐怖主义的概念——个人指挥和有组织的暴力,在哈里发的有效控制之外执行——是完全陌生的。此外,它还依赖于故意违反经典伊斯兰教在国际关系中的核心概念之一,即尊重非穆斯林国家授予穆斯林或相反授予穆斯林的安全盟约或阿曼的条款。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信