There is a common tendency among students of Middle East to classify Islamic Movements that contains political aspirations, also called with a catchy phrase “Political Islam”, as homogenous entities. This is a common mistake, I argue, that we should be critical of, if the goal is to contribute to this field with new ways of thinking rather than following the footsteps of Orientalists. The first part of this article will aim at indicating heterogeneous nature of “Political Islam” until Wahhabi notion of Political Islam.
First mistake is to portray these movements as being against party politics and following strict ideological positions. If we take the examples of Justice and Development Party in Morocco, Islamic Action Front in Jordan, Islamic Constitutional Movement in Kuwait, Islamic Salvation Front in Algeria all established their own political parties and run for parliamentary positions and moderated through their work in politics. For instance, Islamic Constitutional Movement was against women to vote but later changed his opinion on this issue. Islamic Parties in Morocco and Jordan basically regard themselves as moderate political forces which work for democratization of their countries rather than struggling to establish Sharia law. Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is also another example for moderation despite the fact of his suffering under suppression by Egyptian state. The movement was against party politics during the period before 1952 coup. They decided to run for parliamentary seats in elections as independents in 1984, 1987, 2000 and 2005. The movement formed alliances with different secular and liberal political forces.
Second point is the problem of using the terms “Wahhabi” or “Salafi” interchangeably, as if they are the same. However it is also important to note their differences. In a short historical chronology, they are inspired firstly with the studies of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, one of the four important scholars of Sunni sect of Islam from 9th century. Hanbali school of thought is better known for its insistence on Hadith (sayings or teachings of the Prophet) which was collected on his famous book al-Musnad. Later 13th century scholar, Ibn Taymiyyah developed the study of Hanbal for puritanism and fight against innovations in Islam. He was also remembered by his fatwa during Mongol invasion. It was obligatory, for Taymiyyah, to fight against Mongols, due to their man made law rather than following true Islam.
Until this point there is no separation between Wahhabis and Salafis since they derived from the same sources. Wahhabi understanding evolved in 18th century. A man from inner Arabian Peninsula, the city of Najd, Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab decided to spread his own interpretation of Islamic teaching, a mixture of Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Ibn Taymiyyah, claiming to be the true teachings of Islam by force. He was also not welcomed by his colleagues until he made an agreement with the later founder of Saudi State, Muhammad ibn Saud in 1744. Since then State-Wahhabi relations continued until this day. The Kingdom used this ideology as a source of legitimacy which also controlled the two holy cities of Islam (Mecca and Medina). Another interpretation of Islam other than Wahhabi was regarded as outcast in both domestic and international arena.
Two incidents remind the nature of the state-religion relationship. Domestically, the siege of Grand Mosque in Mecca in 1979 – same year with the Iranian Revolution – was a sign of decent inside the state. Islamic militants with the leadership Juhayman al-Otaybi who denied the legitimacy of the Kingdom occupied the Grand Mosque and take hostage of the pilgrims and left more than a hundred of them death. Saudi state turned this into a geostrategic policy and power struggle especially after the 1979 Iranian Revolution, following the establishment of the Islamic state with the Shia doctrines. This became obvious especially after Saudi Royalty allied with Saddam, although he was a Ba’athist leader, during Iran-Iraq war with the fear of Iran winning the struggle. The rivalry between Iran and Saudi Kingdom reached its peak when Saudi forces intervened to Iranian pilgrims in 1987, and despite both sides blames to each other on the reasons, more than 400 people died as a result of this. In addition to ally with the “enemy of my enemy”, Saudi kingdom provided the “Mujahedeen” (fighters) in the war zones around the Muslim majority countries with the profits from petro-dollars, in Afghanistan in 1979, Bosnia in 1992 and Chechnya in 1993. This was a trade of weapons with Wahhabi doctrine, which showed its signs after conflicts ended in these countries. This should give us a clue that Wahhabi doctrine is pro status quo and keeping alive with the help of the state.
However, what Saudi state didn’t take into account during its trade with the fighters was the evolution of a new generation of militants, which can be called, Jihadi Salafis.
