The Islamic Theory of International Relations

Abstract

This book provides a remarkable reformist approach to Islam in generaland to the Islamic theory of international relations in particular. The authorbegins by attributing the tragic condition of the modem Islamic world to itsstagnation, brought about by the predominance of taqlid. Only with a resolutionof the ”time-place issue” p. 4), a phrase that recurs throughout the book in relationto the necessity of distinguishing between what is permanent and what isa mere dated application in another time and place, does AbQSulaymzin believethat “the badly needed original dynamic and realistic policies” (p. 4) can befound.The author distinguishes between the Shari’ah and fiqh (writings of Islamicjurists), which he maintains has been inaccumtely considered to be “law in itselfand not a secondary source of Islamic law” p. 4). The siyar (i.e., juristic writingsrelated to international relations), AbuSulayman argues, is not “an Islamic lawamong nations’’ that constitutes “a sort of unified classical legal code” (p. 7).He also criticizes some writers for overlooking the diversity of classical opinion,saying that Majid Khadduri in particular presented only the “strict position”of al Shifi‘i while ignoring “the equally authoritative opinion of Abu Hanifah”AbuSulayman insists that it is necessary to understand the Qur’an and theSunnah “in the context of conditions at a time when the early Muslims wereconfronted by unceasing aggression and persecution” (p. 35) and criticizes theuse of abrogation (naskh) to exclude a more tolerant outlook. It is necessaryfor today‘s Muslims, the author says, ”to go back to the origins of Muslim thought. . . . and reexamine and reform their methods and approaches” (p. 49). Thetask of developing the required new methodology, he argues, must not be leftto the ulama alone, because they “no longer represent the mainstream of Muslimintellectual and public involvement” and are not educated in “the changes. . . inthe world today” (p. 76).Characterizing “modern Muslim thought in the field of external affairs”- particularly an “aggressive attitude involved in the classically militant approachto jihad” in the case of “a people who are [now] weak and backward ...