The origins of Islamism: the Ottomans and the idea of Islamic unity

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say the archaeology of Islamism. Historical and sociological studies on Islamism are generally too eager to historicize it as an ideological movement that emerged in the nineteenth century against Westernization. In this definition, Islamism is a reaction tied or dependent on the West, a movement that also remains somewhat within its grammar and sphere of influence. That being so, it can be very easy to disregard all of its claims, proposals and discourses and to meet it again within the Western language. Yet Islamism has a dimension of being a response not only to Westernization or colonization but also to the problems within Islam itself, and these responses are not as new as the nineteenth century; they are a discourse and a movement that recurs in every period, concerning the essence of Islam.

What is the arkhe of Islamism? If this arkhe emerged in the nineteenth century, is there nothing in it that belongs to Islam, which has a tradition of 1,450 years? For instance, could the idea of Islamic Union (Ittihad-i Islam), which characterizes Islamism, and is a value that virtually all Islamists agree upon, not be thought of as the arkhe? If it can be, does its birth coincide with the nineteenth century, twelve centuries after the birth of Islam?

There is a general view that the idea of Islamic Union came somewhat more to the fore particularly in the period of Abdülhamid II, with the use of the institution of the Caliphate, with the aim of providing solidarity in the Islamic world. This is of course partly true, but it is too exaggerated in order to support the thesis that there was no idea of Islamic unity in earlier times and that this idea was entirely a product of this pragmatic use.

The truth is that the idea of the Islamic ummah has existed since the earliest times of Islam. The pilgrimage visits and the fact that the qibla of all Muslims in the world is one have always been a very objective and real compelling factor regarding the unity of Muslims. Moreover, even if it had not been used effectively before, or had not always formed an effective influence in every part of the Islamic world, the Caliphate was accepted as an office that in fact represented the Muslims of the whole world and was seen as the head of the political body of the whole Muslim world. That this head was not always sufficiently effective across the whole Islamic world shows not the absence but only the weakness of this feeling of a political body. Those who too heavily underline that the Caliphate was used in the period of Abdülhamid II as a geopolitical balancing element against European imperialism have belittled more than necessary the importance of its existence or role in earlier periods.

However, like all other consciousness of Islamic identity, many Islamic institutions are remembered more and cared about more when an attack or threat is felt. This presents a situation very parallel to the metaphorical meanings of body politics. Within the body, the organ that causes trouble is remembered. External attacks activate the body's defense mechanisms, make the body aware of itself and increase the internal solidarity of the organs. That the Caliphate, which represents the bodily integrity of Muslims, be remembered in the face of the Western challenge, and that a line of solidarity be formed around it, is the body's most natural reflex. Moreover, a sociological rule says that external attacks increase group solidarity. Internal elements that are normally strangers, rivals or distant to one another display a reflex of solidarity, of acting together or of discovering a common identity in the face of external attacks on the group.

In fact, this is the reason why many features of the movement that emerged as Islamism in the late Ottoman period were marked by these reflexes of remembering, becoming aware and defending. The political movement that normally becomes visible as Islamism can in fact be seen in every period of Islamic history as a movement of revival, renewal (tajdid) or jihad, and precisely as a fever the body displays against these external threats or internal infections, a defense reflex. Mawdudi's book "Revival Movements in Islam" records, besides the four imams of the schools of law, Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, Imam Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyyah, also Ahmad Sirhindi, known as Imam Rabbani, and Shah Waliullah Dehlawi as important links in this history.

That no Islamist movement or thought similar to that of the nineteenth century emerged from within the Ottoman political body, which for centuries in fact represented Islamic Union, must be because the body was working, for better or worse, without much disruption. Even so, a reaction or reflex of the ulema against the spread of beliefs and superstitions incompatible with the authentic understanding of Islam always worked quietly within the Ottomans, and at the stages where the infection reached advanced degrees, this reaction produced the Kadızadeli movement.

The nineteenth century, on the other hand, was a century in which another, Western political body came upon the Islamic world with all its menace, occupied its lands and gradually gained a crushing superiority in the world balance of power. It was obvious that this imbalance of power produced a situation that needed explaining for Islamic consciousness. If Muslims belonged to the true religion, why had they fallen so weak before the West, which represented falsehood? Was the problem in their religion? In their understanding of religion?

Looking back, it was impossible to make up with Islam for the many superstitions, ignorance, inertia and sloth that had flourished in the name of Islam. But the attacks coming threatened not only the body but also the Islamic consciousness that gave soul to this body. It was obvious that when this soul went, this body too would not remain. Islamism, which emerged in the nineteenth century, is therefore by nature a conservative and defensive discourse. For it is the struggle for survival of a body that is alive, even if aged, even if sick. It emerged as a response to the attacks coming and to the threats it perceived.

That the main theme of this movement was Islamic Union was inevitable in terms of the political aspect of the matter. That is why the basic emphasis of Abdülhamid and those after him, as of all Islamists of the period, from Sebilürreşad to the circle of Beyanü'l-Hak, and even of the circles of the Committee of Union and Progress, is Islamic Union. Islamic Union is at the same time an unavoidable way of preserving the integrity of the Ottoman political body. That is why even the non-Islamist elements of the Committee of Union and Progress, which claimed to stand for union, were not far from this theme. But without doubt they differed over the scope and ideals of this union or the political practices applied.

Let us continue later.