• Home
  • About RSIS
    • Introduction
    • Building the Foundations
    • Welcome Message
    • Board of Governors
    • Staff Profiles
      • Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
      • Dean’s Office
      • Management
      • Distinguished Fellows
      • Faculty and Research
      • Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
      • Visiting Fellows
      • Adjunct Fellows
      • Administrative Staff
    • Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
    • RSIS Endowment Fund
    • Endowed Professorships
    • Career Opportunities
    • Getting to RSIS
  • Research
    • Research Centres
      • Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
      • Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
      • Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
      • Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
      • International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
    • Research Programmes
      • National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
      • Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
    • Future Issues and Technology Cluster
    • [email protected] Newsletter
    • Other Research
      • Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
    • Graduate Programmes Office
    • Overview
    • MSc (Asian Studies)
    • MSc (International Political Economy)
    • MSc (International Relations)
    • MSc (Strategic Studies)
    • NTU-Warwick Double Masters Programme
    • PhD Programme
    • Exchange Partners and Programmes
    • How to Apply
    • Financial Assistance
    • Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
    • RSIS Alumni
  • Alumni & Networks
    • Alumni
    • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
    • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
    • International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
    • SRP Executive Programme
    • Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
  • Publications
    • RSIS Publications
      • Annual Reviews
      • Books
      • Bulletins and Newsletters
      • Commentaries
      • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
      • Commemorative / Event Reports
      • IDSS Paper
      • Interreligious Relations
      • Monographs
      • NTS Insight
      • Policy Reports
      • Working Papers
      • RSIS Publications for the Year
    • Glossary of Abbreviations
    • External Publications
      • Authored Books
      • Journal Articles
      • Edited Books
      • Chapters in Edited Books
      • Policy Reports
      • Working Papers
      • Op-Eds
      • External Publications for the Year
    • Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
  • Media
    • Great Powers
    • Sustainable Security
    • Other Resource Pages
    • Media Highlights
    • News Releases
    • Speeches
    • Vidcast Channel
    • Audio/Video Forums
  • Events
  • Giving
  • Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
RSISVideoCast RSISVideoCast rsis.sg
Linkedin
instagram instagram rsis.sg
RSS
  • Home
  • About RSIS
      • Introduction
      • Building the Foundations
      • Welcome Message
      • Board of Governors
      • Staff Profiles
        • Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
        • Dean’s Office
        • Management
        • Distinguished Fellows
        • Faculty and Research
        • Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
        • Visiting Fellows
        • Adjunct Fellows
        • Administrative Staff
      • Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
      • RSIS Endowment Fund
      • Endowed Professorships
      • Career Opportunities
      • Getting to RSIS
  • Research
      • Research Centres
        • Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
        • Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
        • Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
        • Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
        • International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      • Research Programmes
        • National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
        • Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      • Future Issues and Technology Cluster
      • [email protected] Newsletter
      • Other Research
        • Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      • Graduate Programmes Office
      • Overview
      • MSc (Asian Studies)
      • MSc (International Political Economy)
      • MSc (International Relations)
      • MSc (Strategic Studies)
      • NTU-Warwick Double Masters Programme
      • PhD Programme
      • Exchange Partners and Programmes
      • How to Apply
      • Financial Assistance
      • Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
      • RSIS Alumni
  • Alumni & Networks
      • Alumni
      • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
      • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
      • International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
      • SRP Executive Programme
      • Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
  • Publications
      • RSIS Publications
        • Annual Reviews
        • Books
        • Bulletins and Newsletters
        • Commentaries
        • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
        • Commemorative / Event Reports
        • IDSS Paper
        • Interreligious Relations
        • Monographs
        • NTS Insight
        • Policy Reports
        • Working Papers
        • RSIS Publications for the Year
      • Glossary of Abbreviations
      • External Publications
        • Authored Books
        • Journal Articles
        • Edited Books
        • Chapters in Edited Books
        • Policy Reports
        • Working Papers
        • Op-Eds
        • External Publications for the Year
      • Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
  • Media
      • Great Powers
      • Sustainable Security
      • Other Resource Pages
      • Media Highlights
      • News Releases
      • Speeches
      • Vidcast Channel
      • Audio/Video Forums
  • Events
  • Giving
  • Contact Us
  • instagram instagram rsis.sg
Connect

Getting to RSIS

Map

Address

Nanyang Technological University
Block S4, Level B3,
50 Nanyang Avenue,
Singapore 639798

View location on Google maps Click here for directions to RSIS

Get in Touch

    Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
    RSISVideoCast RSISVideoCast rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
    instagram instagram rsis.sg
      RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    RSIS Intranet

    S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
    Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University

    Skip to content

     
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • CO06023 | Paternalism, Ijtihad & Counter-Terrorism
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • Commentaries
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • IDSS Paper
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers
    • RSIS Publications for the Year

    CO06023 | Paternalism, Ijtihad & Counter-Terrorism
    Zhou Suli

    07 April 2006

    download pdf
    RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due credit to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected].

    Commentary

    THERE is growing consensus amongst groups opposed to violent extremism that the only way to effectively and permanently neuter support for these extremists is to attack their ability to recruit by de-legitimizing their ideology. This can be done by providing a counter- ideology — to battle ideas with ideas. There are two basic approaches in this ideological battle. The first is the paternalistic approach of imposing an alternative view on the community on what is the true interpretation of Islam. The second approach emphasizes the practice of ijtihad or a more consensual approach to understanding Islam.

    When one looks at Al Qaeda’s message, one sees that it is simple, comprehensive and accessible to a wide audience. It states that Islam is under attack from the West and its allies, and conveniently interprets all world events in accordance with this view. Hence, disparate regional conflicts, involving Muslim populations in Kashmir, Palestine, Chechnya, Iraq and Afghanistan provide powerful evidences for Al Qaeda’s conspiratorial claims. Regardless of the different socio-political and economic conditions, Al Qaeda’s solution to the problem is simple. All Muslims are to take up armed struggle against the West and their lackeys. The compact narrative is easily transferable from current battle fronts to relatively peaceful areas such as Southeast Asia. For example, Indonesian terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah, which has adopted Al Qaeda’s transnational ideology, seeks to establish its brand of Islamic rule in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines and Australia.

    Countering Al Qaeda

    On the other hand, the opposing voices have been weak and unclear. In one camp are those who propose to hand out to the public an equally compact and palatable diet of counter- ideologies that would also be accessible to them. Psychological operations are to be conducted where information, packaged in an easily comprehensible way, are fed to a wide audience. A new set of ideas is to replace that of Al Qaeda’s. These ideas are broadly that Islam is not under attack, that Islam is compatible with democracy, and that it is not necessary to implement Shariah as understood in accordance with the stringent standards of the legal traditionalists.

    Clearly, education of the masses is necessary where education seeks to replace the “wrong” ideas with the “right” ones. A kind of paternalism is involved, where individuals are fed counter-ideologies, without encouraging them to critically question these “right” ideas. Paternalism here refers to the attitude or system where a group of elites make decisions on behalf of others purportedly for their good, even if this might be contrary to the latter’s opinions. Hence the paternalistic system deprives individuals of their freedom to critically evaluate, and only nominally serves their interests while in fact pursuing the actual agenda of fighting terror, and generally preserving the current status quo.

    In the other camp are those who see the rise of violent extremism as reflective of a crisis within the Muslim world following a long period of stagnation. It is alleged that individuals are no longer practising Islam’s essential value of ijtihad (personal reasoning). Many religious institutions have also adopted an unquestioning attitude. This has allowed the revival of radical approaches to Islam. One example would be the call for a return to the legalist tradition which requires states to strictly apply classical interpretation of the Shariah laws without questioning its applicability in the current context. Another example is the revival of the theological puritanical tradition which requires one to live as the Prophet and his companions had lived. The most significant phenomenon under this trend is the Wahabi Movement.

    The need for Ijtihad

    The point then is to seek the revival of the practice of ijtihad as a possible solution, and scholars have been busy doing so in the study of Islamic texts. Applying different conceptual tools to understand the Hadith (the Prophet’s Sayings) and the Shariah, scholars argue that it is important to understand the socio-political context in which the words were spoken or codified in the texts. For example, the circumstances of Revelation (circumstances in which the Prophet revealed God’s Words) must be understood in order to decipher the true meaning of the Prophet’s teachings. Who was the Prophet addressing? What was the social context? What was the value which he held important when these words were spoken?

    The same applies to the understanding of the Shariah. It must be understood that the Shariah was developed by the Jurists over the span of a few centuries after the death of the Prophet. The Jurists had studied the Quran and the Sunnah (the Prophet’s Ways) to extract principles and values of Islam and apply them in the existing social context. Hence, while the laws might have been applicable to the context then, they may no longer be applicable today. It is therefore also essential to decode the Shariah to understand the true meaning of Islam.

    However, some problems may arise. For example, having decoded the text, some scholars find that the principles and values extracted from the text are actually universal values such as justice, benevolence, compassion and wisdom, creating what some may consider a watered-down version of Islam. Scholars then debate this problem. Further, it has also been suggested that there exists a hierarchy to the Quranic values that are revealed in the verses. Scholars again debate which values are more important. For example, is it more important to punish someone for committing a crime in order to uphold justice, or is it more important to show benevolence and help the perpetrator reform?

    The important and, still unanswered question, is how accessible are these debates to the general public? As long as these issues are not adequately addressed, can the intellectual practice of ijtihad on Islamic texts be of any value to counter-terrorism? If the Islamic scholars are too engaged in the intellectual debates to be able to provide true guidance to ordinary Muslims, what is to happen to counter terrorism efforts?

    Dilemma of paternalism and ijtihad

    The dilemma of paternalism and the practice of ijtihad is thus this: paternalism negates the essence of ijtihad where true intellectual debate is to take place. Paternalism looks for quick fixes to the current violent extremist problems, proposing a set of ideas taken to be the correct one; the practice of ijtihad in decoding the ideas of Islam is still subjected to much debate, unable to lend much help to current counter-terrorism efforts. However, it is the practice of ijtihad that has the ability to revive Islam’s ability to guide after long periods of stagnation in the Muslim world following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

    Which way should efforts be concentrated on would therefore depend on one’s goal: whether one is looking for a quick fix and to protect the current status quo, or whether one is ready for genuine change or progress to take place. Regardless of the existing tension between paternalism and ijtihad, ultimately, a balancing act, no matter how difficult, is preferred: Islamic scholars could draw up a working formulation of ideas which could then be actively promoted, whilst at the same time continue the existing intellectual debates. Most importantly, the greater Muslim population must be engaged in these practices of ijtihad.

    About the Author

    Zhou Suli is a Research Analyst with the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Nanyang Technological University.

    Categories: Commentaries / Terrorism Studies

    Last updated on 02/10/2014

    RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due credit to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected].

    Commentary

    THERE is growing consensus amongst groups opposed to violent extremism that the only way to effectively and permanently neuter support for these extremists is to attack their ability to recruit by de-legitimizing their ideology. This can be done by providing a counter- ideology — to battle ideas with ideas. There are two basic approaches in this ideological battle. The first is the paternalistic approach of imposing an alternative view on the community on what is the true interpretation of Islam. The second approach emphasizes the practice of ijtihad or a more consensual approach to understanding Islam.

    When one looks at Al Qaeda’s message, one sees that it is simple, comprehensive and accessible to a wide audience. It states that Islam is under attack from the West and its allies, and conveniently interprets all world events in accordance with this view. Hence, disparate regional conflicts, involving Muslim populations in Kashmir, Palestine, Chechnya, Iraq and Afghanistan provide powerful evidences for Al Qaeda’s conspiratorial claims. Regardless of the different socio-political and economic conditions, Al Qaeda’s solution to the problem is simple. All Muslims are to take up armed struggle against the West and their lackeys. The compact narrative is easily transferable from current battle fronts to relatively peaceful areas such as Southeast Asia. For example, Indonesian terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah, which has adopted Al Qaeda’s transnational ideology, seeks to establish its brand of Islamic rule in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines and Australia.

    Countering Al Qaeda

    On the other hand, the opposing voices have been weak and unclear. In one camp are those who propose to hand out to the public an equally compact and palatable diet of counter- ideologies that would also be accessible to them. Psychological operations are to be conducted where information, packaged in an easily comprehensible way, are fed to a wide audience. A new set of ideas is to replace that of Al Qaeda’s. These ideas are broadly that Islam is not under attack, that Islam is compatible with democracy, and that it is not necessary to implement Shariah as understood in accordance with the stringent standards of the legal traditionalists.

    Clearly, education of the masses is necessary where education seeks to replace the “wrong” ideas with the “right” ones. A kind of paternalism is involved, where individuals are fed counter-ideologies, without encouraging them to critically question these “right” ideas. Paternalism here refers to the attitude or system where a group of elites make decisions on behalf of others purportedly for their good, even if this might be contrary to the latter’s opinions. Hence the paternalistic system deprives individuals of their freedom to critically evaluate, and only nominally serves their interests while in fact pursuing the actual agenda of fighting terror, and generally preserving the current status quo.

    In the other camp are those who see the rise of violent extremism as reflective of a crisis within the Muslim world following a long period of stagnation. It is alleged that individuals are no longer practising Islam’s essential value of ijtihad (personal reasoning). Many religious institutions have also adopted an unquestioning attitude. This has allowed the revival of radical approaches to Islam. One example would be the call for a return to the legalist tradition which requires states to strictly apply classical interpretation of the Shariah laws without questioning its applicability in the current context. Another example is the revival of the theological puritanical tradition which requires one to live as the Prophet and his companions had lived. The most significant phenomenon under this trend is the Wahabi Movement.

    The need for Ijtihad

    The point then is to seek the revival of the practice of ijtihad as a possible solution, and scholars have been busy doing so in the study of Islamic texts. Applying different conceptual tools to understand the Hadith (the Prophet’s Sayings) and the Shariah, scholars argue that it is important to understand the socio-political context in which the words were spoken or codified in the texts. For example, the circumstances of Revelation (circumstances in which the Prophet revealed God’s Words) must be understood in order to decipher the true meaning of the Prophet’s teachings. Who was the Prophet addressing? What was the social context? What was the value which he held important when these words were spoken?

    The same applies to the understanding of the Shariah. It must be understood that the Shariah was developed by the Jurists over the span of a few centuries after the death of the Prophet. The Jurists had studied the Quran and the Sunnah (the Prophet’s Ways) to extract principles and values of Islam and apply them in the existing social context. Hence, while the laws might have been applicable to the context then, they may no longer be applicable today. It is therefore also essential to decode the Shariah to understand the true meaning of Islam.

    However, some problems may arise. For example, having decoded the text, some scholars find that the principles and values extracted from the text are actually universal values such as justice, benevolence, compassion and wisdom, creating what some may consider a watered-down version of Islam. Scholars then debate this problem. Further, it has also been suggested that there exists a hierarchy to the Quranic values that are revealed in the verses. Scholars again debate which values are more important. For example, is it more important to punish someone for committing a crime in order to uphold justice, or is it more important to show benevolence and help the perpetrator reform?

    The important and, still unanswered question, is how accessible are these debates to the general public? As long as these issues are not adequately addressed, can the intellectual practice of ijtihad on Islamic texts be of any value to counter-terrorism? If the Islamic scholars are too engaged in the intellectual debates to be able to provide true guidance to ordinary Muslims, what is to happen to counter terrorism efforts?

    Dilemma of paternalism and ijtihad

    The dilemma of paternalism and the practice of ijtihad is thus this: paternalism negates the essence of ijtihad where true intellectual debate is to take place. Paternalism looks for quick fixes to the current violent extremist problems, proposing a set of ideas taken to be the correct one; the practice of ijtihad in decoding the ideas of Islam is still subjected to much debate, unable to lend much help to current counter-terrorism efforts. However, it is the practice of ijtihad that has the ability to revive Islam’s ability to guide after long periods of stagnation in the Muslim world following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

    Which way should efforts be concentrated on would therefore depend on one’s goal: whether one is looking for a quick fix and to protect the current status quo, or whether one is ready for genuine change or progress to take place. Regardless of the existing tension between paternalism and ijtihad, ultimately, a balancing act, no matter how difficult, is preferred: Islamic scholars could draw up a working formulation of ideas which could then be actively promoted, whilst at the same time continue the existing intellectual debates. Most importantly, the greater Muslim population must be engaged in these practices of ijtihad.

    About the Author

    Zhou Suli is a Research Analyst with the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Nanyang Technological University.

    Categories: Commentaries / Terrorism Studies

    Last updated on 02/10/2014

    Back to top

    Terms of Use | Privacy Statement
    Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
    This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
    OK
    Latest Book
    CO06023 | Paternalism, Ijtihad & Counter-Terrorism

    Commentary

    THERE is growing consensus amongst groups opposed to violent extremism that ...
    more info