muslim minorities
Recently Published Documents

This research deals with the issue of the Moriscan refugee crisis after the fall of Andalusia to the Spanish in 1492, and the brutal policies they carried out against the refugees. The research also deals with the policy of the Ottoman Empire towards this ordeal, which represented the largest global humanitarian crisis during the 16th and 17th centuries AD. The Ottoman Empire played a major role in the process of saving these Muslim and Jewish refugees, and their homeland in different parts of the Ottoman geography. The Ottoman Empire also succeeded in adopting an integrative policy for these refugees that took into account their social and sectarian specificities, as well as the societal privacy of the new settlement areas. This policy has contributed to creating dynamism and vitality in these areas, and transforming Andalusian refugees into an active force on all cultural, social and economic levels. On the other hand, the Spanish and European refugee crisis revealed the mentality of the issue of religious freedom and the lack of recognition of other religious sects. At the same time, this crisis reflected the Ottoman mentality towards the issue of non-Muslim minorities and how the state interacted with them, and its ability to manage diversity within the Ottoman society. In this context, we will try in this research to present a different analytical approach to the issue of Andalusian Muslim and Jewish refugees, as well as knowing the strategy of the Ottoman Empire towards it and the backgrounds that motivate it. This topic will be addressed through four axes as follows: -First: Andalusia and its importance in attracting immigrants in the Middle Ages -Second: The historical and political circumstances in which the Andalusian refugee crisis arose -Third: The Andalusian refugee crisis and the position of the Ottoman Empire on it -Fourth: The Ottoman Empire's strategy towards the refugee crisis -Fifth: The policy of the Ottomans towards the refugees from Andalusia.

AbstractThe Aceh Jinayat Qanun, which is often considered violating Human Rights, has become the choice of the non-Muslim minorities as their rational choice. This study aims to analyze non-Muslims’ choice of The Aceh Jinayat Qanun implemented by the Sharia Court in Aceh and its underlying motives. This study relies on field research involving observations, in-depth interviews with Sharia Court judges, Head of the Islamic Sharia Service, Acehnese clerical figures, and Non-Muslims involved in criminal cases handled by the Sharia Courts. This study also analyzes Sharia Court decisions on criminal cases involving non-Muslims and various related documents issued by the Sharia Courts, police, and prosecutors. The study was undertaken between July 2017 and March 2020. The study shows that the Acehnese non-Muslims do not select The Aceh Jinayat Qanun because of its religious values but based on practicality, efficiency, and socio-cultural consideration. The Sharia-based sentences, which have often been conceived as inhuman and violate fundamental human rights, are chosen and become the rational choice for non-Muslims in solving their legal issues. This paper concludes that the implementation of the Sharia on non-Muslim has not always been negative. This paper demonstrates non-Muslims’ interest to choose Sharia-based criminal justice or The Aceh Jinayat Qanun over the Criminal Code. This can be seen as their rational choice over a more efficient, low-cost, effective, and fast legal process offered by The Aceh Jinayat Qanun sentencing system.

<p>This article critically examines why the dualism of the Islamic model occurs in Southeast Asia. This article uses a historical approach with the literature method to identify how is the map of the distribution of majority and minority Islam in Southeast Asia, what causes the dualism of the Islamic model in Southeast Asia, and how the minority model occurs in the minority Islamic countries. The results show that Islamic syncretism in the archipelago is a logical consequence of the complicated process of struggling religious reflection. His entity also received many challenges from local Indigenous. The majority of Islam is largely determined by the success of harmonizing Islam with political, social and cultural conditions. On the other hand, poor harmonization with the rulers, military invasion, and colonialism cause Muslim minorities. Islamic minority models can be classified into three parts: First, Separatists, such as the Moro Philippines Muslim Separatist movement. Second, accommodating Pattani Muslims in Thailand and Singapore. Third, Genocide happened to Rohingya Muslims in Burma and Khmer Muslims in Cambodia. Furthermore, research on each minority model can be carried out further to enrich the treasures of Islamic studies in Southeast Asia.</p><p><em>Artikel ini menelaah secara kritis mengapa terjadi dualisme model Islam di Asia Tenggara. Artikel ini menggunakan pendekatan historis dengan metode kepustakaan akan mengidentifikasi: Bagaimana peta persebaran Islam mayoritas dan minoritas di Asia Tenggara, apa yang menyebabkan dualisme model Islam di Asia Tenggara, dan bagaimana model keminoritasan yang terjadi pada negara-negara Islam minoritas. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Sinkretisme Islam di Nusantara merupakan konsekuensi logis dari proses pergulatan refleksi keagamaan yang rumit. Entitasnya pun banyak mendapatkan tantangan dari Indigeneous lokal. Islam mayoritas sangat ditentukan oleh keberhasilan harmonisasi Islam dengan kondisi politik, sosial, dan budaya. Sebaliknya harmonisasi yang kurang baik dengan penguasa, invasi militer, dan kolonialisme menjadi faktor penyebab minoritas Islam. Model-model minoritas Islam dapat diklasifikasikan menjadi tiga </em><em>bagian: Pertama, Separatis, seperti gerakan Separatis Muslim Moro Philipina. Kedua, Akomodatif, muslim Pattani di Thailand dan Singapura. Ketiga, Genosida, terjadi kepada muslim Rohingya di Burma dan Muslim Khmer di Kamboja. Selanjutnya penelitian terhadap masing-masing model minoritas bisa dilakukan untuk semakin memperkaya khazanah studi Islam di Asia Tenggara.</em></p>

The relationship between state and non-Muslim communities has been a delicate issue since the founding of the Turkish Republic despite the principle of secularism stated in its constitution. Against this background, the association of national identity with Sunni-Islam has been the main marker of inclusion/exclusion to the national identity. Especially since 2002 when the Justice and Development Party (JDP) came to power, the debates with regard to freedom of religion and the rights of religious minorities came to fore. Over the course of decades there have been numerous studies approaching the state’s perspective towards religious minorities. However, there are still scarce amount of academic studies that focuses on citizenship experiences of the members of these communities in their daily and social life practices. In this article, we first provide a historical perspective of the state towards religious minorities from the establishment of the Republic until today including the JDP period. In the second part of this study we aim to explore recasting perspectives of the non-Muslim minorities over the previous decade by taking the standpoint of the members of Greek Orthodox, Jews and Armenian communities. To this end, we conduct in-depth interviews with the members of these communities who are residing in Istanbul. Finally, new negotiation fields which have been flourishing among these communities will be addressed.

The process of migration and cross border mobility occurs for a number of reason or background such as politics, economics, education and so forth has made a number of Muslim leave their homeland to another countries. Due to this migration, a significant number of Muslims becomes a diasporic communities in other countries and sometimes lives as religious minority group in non-Muslim country. It is reported that  one third of Muslims in the world live as minority in a number of countries both in the West and also in some  Asian countries such as India, Japan, South Korea, etc.  In general,  the existing academic discourse and publication has focused more Muslim in the West, and overlooked the Muslims minority in Eastern countries which is also considered as non-Muslim land such as Japan, South Korea, and such.  This article discusses the Muslim minorities in South Korea, with  a specific focus on Indonesian Muslim as it made up a significant number of Muslim in South Korea recently. Their challenge, balancing their personal identity and loyal citizenship as well as integration issues will also discussed from fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) of minorities (fiqh al-aqaliyyat) point of view.

Contemporary Muslims face the challenge of how a legal system that was formulated in the classical period of Islam can respond to the multitudinous challenges that present-day Muslims encounter. Is there a need for reformation in Islam? If so, where should it begin and in which direction should it proceed? Addressing this gap in Western scholarship, and contributing to the ongoing debate in Islamic scholarship, Shi‘ism Revisited: Ijtihad and Reformation in Contemporary Times (1) explores how modernity has impinged on the classical formulation of Islamic law, and (2) analyzes how Shi‘i jurists have responded to the intersection of shari’a (Islamic law) and modernity. The study is original and groundbreaking in that it seeks to tackle issues such as how Islamic law is being revised by Shi‘i scholars on cases such as human rights, gender equality, the rights of non-Muslim minorities, and reconfiguring the rational and moral basis of Islamic law. Such questions have required scholars to apply ijtihad (independent reasoning) in providing solutions to the pressing questions in the religious and social fields. By examining the principles and application of Islamic legal theory (usul al-fiqh) and reformation in Shi‘ism, as well as the current discourse on juristic hermeneutics and the basis of a new ijtihad, this research addresses topics that have attracted much public attention. Since such issues have been largely neglected by Western scholarship, this book provides a unique analysis of ijtihad and reformation in the Shi‘i world.

Ilyse R. Morgenstein Fuerst’s book, Indian Muslim Minorities and the 1857Rebellion: Religion, Rebels, and Jihad, is a masterful exploration of how animperial discourse of religion in the nineteenth-century defined Islam,Muslims, and jihad. Specifically, Fuerst calls attention to the significanceof the 1857 Rebellion by Indians against the British East India Company,and argues that British official histories of the Rebellion fundamentally alteredhow colonial officials, European scholars, and Indians thought andwrote about religion. Thus she builds on the work of previous scholars ofreligion such as Tomoko Masuzawa, who has argued that the concept ofuniversal religion is a constructed category, and David Chiddester, who hasshown how colonialism constructed both religions and races. Additionally,Fuerst’s book draws on historians such as Thomas Metacalf, who haveexplored the various ways the 1857 Rebellion transformed the business ofempire. However, Fuerst’s unique contribution lies in revealing the ways anofficial British discourse about Muslims and their supposed propensity forviolence, and the Indian Muslim engagement with this discourse, racializedand minoritized Muslims. This discourse presented as fact that all Muslimswere essentially homogenous and dangerous to imperial interests ...

This article analyses the Russian government’s securitisation of inter-ethnic relations, and national minorities’ responses to such processes. While Russia’s securitising dynamics have been linked to threats associated with ethnic groups (perceived as) culturally distant from the Russian majority (such as non-Slavic and Muslim minorities), this article argues that securitisation can affect all of Russia’s national minorities (including Slavic and well-integrated communities). Through the analysis of the securitisation of three, partly converging, spheres of domestic politics (civil society, migration, and minority issues) the article highlights forms of (in)security impacting upon national minorities with reference to their experience of securitisation and format of their civic engagement. The article contributes to research exploring the relationship between security and minority studies, through a bottom-up perspective focusing on national minorities’ experience of securitisation. It employs empirical data based on semi-structured interviews with minority representatives held in 2015–2016 in six locations in the Russian Federation.

Latin America is a multistate and polyglot region with diverse races, ethnicities, and cultures, yet it shares historical legacies, institutional frameworks, and political and socioeconomic challenges. Crystallized as the “farthest West” in the global expansion that started with Iberian transatlantic colonialism and forced intercivilizational encounters, shared development, and inner diversity, it is an ideal laboratory for comparative institutional analysis. This perspective has enabled enlightening processes that encompass multiple countries and affect their political, social, and cultural experiences. At various historical junctures, political figures, intellectuals, and social movements led strategies of mutual recognition and reconnection among sister nations and states. This book claims that in addition to approaching the region with a comparative lens, one should also address it from a transnational perspective that accounts for the twin processes of nation-state building and multistate linkages. The chapters follow the connections among countries and those that unfold in the transnational arena in ways that show the significance of a regional perspective, without obliterating the consciousness of distinct political development. Chapters address issues of key historical and contemporary relevance, including the belated construction of state boundaries; the interplay between state claims and transnational dynamics; political exile; international wars and conspiracy theories; regional counterinsurgency and its transnational impact on policies of transitional justice; the tension between regional principles protecting democracy and those predicating nonintervention; the emergence of social movements with a transnational vision; and processes of transnational legitimization and delegitimization of Jewish and Muslim minorities. The concluding chapter discusses transnational challenges and twenty-first-century dilemmas.

<p>The current wave of insurgency in the southern provinces of Thailand, where the majority of population are Muslim, sparked up in 2004 but shows no sign of ending in the near future. The insurgency caused by the conflict in the region which, along the time, has risen and fallen depending on surrounding circumstances. Given the scale and intensity of the conflict, it has increasingly attracted the attention of the outside world especially the Islamic world since the conflict is believed to be connected with religious elements. Despite of this, no specific Islamic countries have played a direct role in intervention in the conflict. The only intervention involved in the conflict was carried out by the OIC, a representative of 57 Islamic countries. This essay attempts to examine the intervention of the OIC into the conflict in the southern provinces of Thailand in the name of Islamic countries in order to protect the rights of Muslim minorities as it claims and will explore the consequences of the tension between the OIC’s mission to uphold these rights and sovereign states.</p>