Table Of ContentAmerican University in Cairo
School of Humanities and Social Sciences
Competing Models of the Modern Islamic State:
Wahhabi vs. Muslim Brotherhood Ideologies
A Thesis Submitted to
Political Science Department
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
The Degree of Master of Arts
By
Mohammad Abdul-Monaem Abdul-Hamid Affan
Under the supervision of Dr. Heba Raouf Ezzat
December/2014
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
FIRST AND FOREMOST I THANK ALLAH THE MOST MERCIFUL
I AM DEEPLY GRATEFUL TO MY ADVISOR PROF. HEBA RAOUF EZZAT FOR HER
CONTINUOUS ACADEMIC SUPPORT AND EXPERT ADVICES AND INSTRUCTIONS.
I OWE HER TOO MUCH
I WISH TO EXTEND MY CORDIAL THANKS AND GRATITUDE TO MY ACADEMIC
READERS: PROF. ASHRAF AL SHERIF AND PROF. AMAL HAMADA FOR THEIR
METICULOUS AND INFORMATIVE INSIGHTS AND COMMENTS
I AM DEEPLY INDEBTED TO PROF. RABAB EL MAHDY, THE RESPONSIBLE OF
ENGAGED SCHOLARS FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM FOR HER GREAT EFFORTS AND
HELP
I AM ALSO THANKFUL TO ALL MY PROFESSORS AND ADMINISTRATIVE
ASSISTANTS IN POLITICAL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT IN AMERICAN UNIVERSITY IN
CAIRO
I CANNOT FIND ENOUGH WORDS TO EXPRESS MY DEEP LOVE AND
APPRECIATION TO MY PARENTS AND WIFE FOR THEIR ENCOURAGEMENT AND
SUPPORT
FINALLY, I DEDICATE THIS WORK TO THE SOULS OF EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION
MARTYRS
NEVER FORGET … NEVER FORGIVE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgement
Table of Contents
List of Tables
List of Figures
Transliteration
CHAPTER ONE: A BACKGROUND ………………………………………………………... 1
I. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 1
II. Research question, hypothesis, and objectives.…………………………………………….. 3
III. Theoretical Framework……………………………………………………………………... 6
a. Political legitimacy: a search for definition ................................................................ 6
b. Different approaches to the political legitimacy …………………………………….. 8
c. Max Weber’s theory of political legitimacy and its critics ………………………… 10
IV. Methodology …………………………………………….………………...……………….. 14
CHAPTER TWO: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ……………………………………… 16
I. The Islamic state: its rationale and definition …………………………………………….. 16
A. The Ummah …………………………………………………………………………….. 17
B. The Islamic shari‘ah …………………………………………………………………… 20
C. The Caliphate “al-khilāfah” …………………………………………………………… 24
II. Problematics associated with the Islamic state definition …………………………………. 26
A. Applying Western terminologies and concepts …………….…………………………. 26
B. The dilemma of the classical political Islamic thought ……………………………….. 27
C. The underdevelopment of the political classical Islamic thought …………………….. 31
D. The inevitable overlap between the sacred Divine shari‘ah and the human thought …. 33
III. The modern state: its historical origin, evolution, and characteristics …………………….. 35
IV. Emergence of the modern state in the Islamic experience ….……………………………… 41
CHAPTER THREE: BIRTH OF ISLAMISM ……………………………………………... 46
I. Islamism: what, why, and who?……………………………………………………………. 46
II. Tale of two ideologies: Wahhabism and Muslim Brotherhood ………….………………... 58
A. The historical and societal context ……………………………………………………... 59
B. The founding ideologues ………………………………………………………………. 64
C. The main religio-political doctrines ……………………………………………………. 70
CHAPTER FOUR: MAKING A MODERN STATE ISLAMIC ………………………….. 84
I. Foundation of the Saudi state ……………………………………………………………… 86
II. The Saudi state of exception ……………………….……………………………………… 91
i. The constitutional order ……………………………………………………………. 92
ii. The mode of legitimacy ……………………………………………………………. 93
iii. The power structure and distribution ………………………………………………. 99
iv. The pattern of citizenship ……………………………………………………...….. 102
III. Competing models of the modern Islamic state …………………………………………... 103
CHAPTER FIVE: ISLAMIST OPPOSITION IN AN ISLAMIC STATE………………. 117
Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………………. 126
BIBLIOGRAPHY …………………………………………………………………………… 131
List of Tables:
Table (1): Institutional features of the different Weberian forms of domination……………... 12
Table (2): Ideological differences between main versions of Islamism..………………………. 57
Table (3): The main differences between Wahhabism and Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology..... 83
Table (4): The main differences between Wahhabi and Muslim Brotherhood’s models of the
Islamic state………………………………………………………………………………….....115
List of Figures:
Fig.1: Categorization of Islamism according to the historical evolution……………………….. 57
Fig.2: Different theories of the modern Islamic state…………………………………………... 86
Fig.3: Islamist traditions shaping al-ṣaḥwa al-islāmiyyah’s ideology………………………… 120
Transliteration:
أ ʾ ض ḍ
ا ā ط ṭ
ب b ظ ẓ
ت t ع ʿ
ث ṯ غ gh
ج j ف f
ح ḥ ق q
خ kh ك k
د d ل l
ذ ḏ م m
ر r ن n
ز z ـه h
س s و w
ش sh ي i
ص ṣ
CHAPTER ONE: A BACKGROUND
I. INTRODUCTION:
The birth of the modern state in the Muslim world was associated with a relatively new
phenomenon in the Islamic experience, which is the emergence of multiple contradicting
doctrines and ideologies for the Islamic state. In contrary to the case in other polities preceding
the modern state in the political history of Islam (i.e., empire state, sultanates, kingdoms, city-
states, or the more primary forms as tribes), contemporary Sunni Muslims – and even Islamists –
do not agree upon one model or theory for the Islamic state. Despite the fact that all are claiming
Islamic reference, there are diverse theories, which include: the authoritarian traditional theory of
Wahhabism, the democratic theory claimed by Islamic democrats as Rashid al-Ghannoushi, the
theocratic democracy of Abu al-A„la al-Mawdudi, the idealistic theory of al-ḥākimiah (the
governance) of Sayyid Quṭb, and the semi-theocratic theory, the rule of religious scholars
„ulamā‟ , as in case of Afghani Taliban and Somali legal courts systems, which represent a Sunni
counterpart of the Shiite Velayat-e-Faqih theory1.
The emergence of the modern state carried many challenges to the traditional model of
the Islamic governance. The modern state is characterized by specific patterns of legitimacy,
constitutionality, citizenship, and sovereignty, which are different from those of the traditional
Islamic state. Therefore, many scholars point to inherent incompatibility between both states.
Bertrand Badie, for instance, states that the political modernity contradicts the cultural patterns
and the societal organizations of the Muslim World.2 In accordance to him, Heba Raouf argues
1 Abdelilah Belkeziz, The state in contemporary Islamic thought: a historical survey of the major
Muslim political thinkers of the modern era (London: I. B. Tauris, 2009).
2 Bertrand Badie (trans. by nakhlah friefer), al-dawlatan: al-dawlah wa al-mojtama„ fi al-gharb
wa fi dar al-islam (Beirut ; al-dār al-baiḍā‘: al-markaz al-ṯaqāphi al-‗arabi, 1996), 289.
1
that the modern state disintegrates and expropriates the Islamic notions of al-jamā„ah ―the
Group‖ and al-ummah, resulting in distortion and limitation of the Islamists‘ political
imagination about the modern Islamic governance.3
Recently, Wael Hallaq claims that the Islamic modern state is an ―Impossible State‖. He
argues that: ―The Islamic state, judged by any standard definition of what the modern state
represents, is both impossible and a contradiction in terms.‖4 He mentions many major
incompatibilities between both state models, including: positivist rational paradigm of the
modern state vs. the metaphysical normative paradigm of the Islamic state, the autonomous
sovereignty as one of the form-property in the modern state vs. the affirmation of the God
sovereignty in the Islamic state, and the centrality of the morality in the subject production in the
Islamic state vs. the technology of the subject production by the modern state, which aims at
creation of an efficient productive citizen.5
In the aftermath of the Arab Spring, with the success of the Political Islam movements to
seize power in some countries, such as Egypt and Tunisia, the problematic of the Islamic state
was raised again and ignited serious conflict between Islamists and seculars. They combated
around many issues, as: the identity of the state, codification of the shari'ah, and the constitution,
what resulted in severe political polarization in the Arab Spring countries. Nevertheless, another
hidden conflict seems to begin simultaneously in the camp of the Islamists itself between the
Wahhabism and the Muslim Brotherhood, the two major Sunni Islamic movements. The
3 Heba Raouf Ezzat ―naẓarāt fi al-khiāl al-syāsi lel-islāmyyin: eshkāliāt manhajiah wa syāsiah‖
in islāmyoun wa democratyoun: eshkāliāt benā‟ tayyār Islāmi democrāti, ed. Amr Shoubky
(Cairo: markaz al-drāsāt al-syāsiah wa al-estrātijiah, 2006), 44.
4 Wael B. Hallaq, The Impossible State: Islam, Politics, and Modernity's Moral Predicament
(New York: Columbia University Press, 2013), ix – xiv.
5 Ibid., 5 – 12 & 155-160.
2
increasingly prominent role of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab Spring challenges Al Sa„ud‟s
position within the Sunni Islamic world.6 In addition, the Muslim Brotherhood seems to
challenge the Saudi model of the Islamic governance and refutes the historical Saudi claim that
their ʿulamā‟-backed political system is the authentic Islamic model of governance. The political
gains of the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates across the region were thought to reveal the
obsolescence of the Saudi Islamic state model.7
II. RESEARCH QUESTION, HYPOTHESIS AND OBJECTIVES:
The Wahhabi and the Muslim Brotherhood movements are considered the major modern
Islamic movements in the Sunni Muslim World. Each of them calls for a different model of the
Islamic state. The Wahhabi ideology adopts a traditional state model,8 based on traditional
legitimacy, centralized hierarchical power, and patriarchal form of state-society relationship. In
contrast, The Muslim Brotherhood took a more adaptive approach, blending modern Western
political thought with the Islamic tradition.9 However, there are two main political trends within
the Muslim Brotherhood: a democratic one which could be traced in the writings of the founder
of the movement: Ḥassan Al-Bannā,10 and reaches its maturity by follower intellectuals as
6 Simon Mabon, ―Kingdom in Crisis? The Arab Spring and Instability in Saudi Arabia‖,
Contemporary Security Policy 33, 3 (2012): 548.
7 Stratfor Report, ―Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood: Unexpected Adversaries.‖
http://www.defenceviewpoints.co.uk/articles-and-analysis/saudi-arabia-and-the-muslim-
brotherhood-unexpected-adversaries/pdf (accessed 9-4-2014).
8 Simon Bromley, ―The States-system in the Middle East: Origins, Development, and Prospects‖
in A Companion to the History of the Middle East, ed. Youssef M. Choueiri, 518
(Oxford: Blackwell Companions to World History, 2005).
9 Stratfor Report, ―Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood: Unexpected Adversaries.‖
10 Tariq Ramadan, ―Democratic Turkey Is the Template for Egypt‘s Muslim Brotherhood‖, New
Perspectives Quarterly 28, 2 (2011): 42.
3
Rashid al-Ghannoushi, and an idealistic radical trend, exemplified in the concept of al-ḥākimiah
of Sayyid Quṭb.11
The ideological and political divide between the Saudi political system and the Muslim
Brotherhood is rooted in their histories. Despite their alliance and cooperation during 1950s and
1960s against their common enemy: the Nasserism, many evidences point to the negative stance
of the Saudi regime from the Muslim Brotherhood ideology. At the beginning, the King „Abd al-
„Aziz Al Sa„ud, the founder of the Saudi state, refused to allow the Muslim Brotherhood to
establish a legal branch in the kingdom.12 Later on, the clash between the Saudi regime and al-
ṣaḥwa al-islāmiyyah (the Islamic Awakening) group, which represents a Brotherhood-like
version of Islamism, in the wake of the Gulf War in 1990s negatively affected the relationship
between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Saudi regime.13 Recently, the Saudi state declared the
Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group.14
Therefore, the research question is: what are the differences between the Islamic state
model in the Wahhabi ideology and the models adopted by the Muslim Brotherhood? And why
these differences are perceived by the Wahhabi regime as dangerous and perverted doctrines,
which should be banned and criminalized in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia?
My hypothesis is that the Muslim Brotherhood‘s theories of the Islamic state are in stark
contrast with the Wahhabi model, regarding: the constitutional order, the mode of legitimacy, the
11 Ana Belén Soage, ―Hasan al-Banna And Sayyid Qutb: Continuity or Rupture?‖ The Muslim
World, 99 (2009): 294.
12 Stratfor Report, ―Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood: Unexpected Adversaries.‖
13 Stephane Lacroix, Awakening Islam: Religious Dissent in Contemporary Saudi Arabia
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2011), 3.
14 BBC News: Middle East, 7 March 2014. “Saudi Arabia declares Muslim Brotherhood
terrorist group'”, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26487092 (accessed 12-4- 2014).
4
power structure and distribution, and the pattern of citizenship. Both Muslim Brotherhood
versions: the democratic and the radical, represent a direct threat on the authoritarian
conservative model of the Wahhabi ideology. Therefore, the fears of emergence of a new Sunni
Islamic state model that may de-legitimize the Saudi regime are responsible for this negative
Saudi stance from the Muslim Brotherhood ideology.
The objectives of this study include:
a. Reviewing the political legitimacy theories and their different approaches in defining this
concept.
b. Defining the concept of the Islamic state and explaining how the emergence of the modern
state carried many challenges to the traditional model of the Islamic governance.
c. Discussing the emergence of the Wahhabi and the Muslim Brotherhood movements,
highlighting the political and historical contexts, and the main religious scholars and
intellectuals affecting their political ideologies.
d. Comparing the Wahhabi and the Muslim Brotherhood models of the Islamic state regarding:
the constitutional order, the mode of political legitimacy, power structure and distribution,
and the pattern of citizenship.
e. Exploring how the Saudi regime built its political legitimacy and the religious principles
upon which it relies.
f. Explaining how the Muslim Brotherhood political doctrines represent a threat to the religious
base of the traditional legitimacy of the Saudi regime, and how the spread of the former was
associated with legitimacy crises and political unrest in the Saudi Kingdom; the fact that
could account for the negative Saudi attitude towards the Muslim Brotherhood ideology.
5
