Article in International Studies · April 018 doi: 10. 1177/0020881718790687 citations reads 4,427 author: Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects

 

The Modernist Approach 

The modernist approach has emerged as a reaction to the basic ideas, principles and practices of 

the traditional approach to Islamic IR. This approach rejects rigidity in favor of dialogues 

between the Islamic and the non-Islamic states, favors encounter with Western secular 

modernity, and embraces scientific pursuit of knowledge through rationalist methods and 

empiricism (AbuSulayman 1978; Al-Alwani 1998). The modernist approach, as a whole, 

counters the traditional approach on religious as well as practical grounds.  

 

First and foremost, the modernists question the division of the world into Dar al-Islam and Dar 

al-Harb and they also discard the idea of jihad against the non-Muslims to push ahead the 

expansion of the Islamic moral order (See, Abo-Kazleh 2006, pp. 45–47; Hassan 2007, pp. 6–

10). They see this division as more a temporary issue rather than a religious edict sanctioned by 

the Qur’an. References to such a division are only found in the Hanafi fiqh, while other Islamic 

jurists viewed the world just as a single, integral world. Al-Shafi’i, a prominent Islamic jurist, for 

example, described the binary division as an ad hoc development rendered necessary by foreign 

---

18 

 

aggressions against the Islamic State originally founded by Prophet Muhammad. In the modern 

context, the division has lost its relevance since Muslim states maintain diplomatic, political, 

military and commercial relations with the non-Muslim states, participate in international 

organizations crafted by the non-Muslim West and are becoming parts of the ‘time-space 

compression’ covered under the rubric of globalization. Indeed, the Organization of Islamic 

Cooperation (OIC), founded in 1969, represents a total of fifty-seven member states and is 

dedicated not only to safeguard the interests of the Muslim world but also to promote 

international peace and harmony in cooperation with other states. The OIC thus largely validates 

the position of the modernists.  

 

The modernists view jihad against the non-Muslims, based on certain verses in the Qur’an, as the 

traditionalists’ religious zeal to justify permanent warfare and thus foreclose the avenues to 

peace between Islamic and non-Islamic states. They note several verses in the Qur’an that 

explicitly refer to peaceful co-existence between Muslims and non-Muslims (verses 5: 1 & 8: 

51), non-interference in the domestic affairs of other states (verses 4: 90 & 8: 72), cooperation to 

promote collective benefits ( verse 5: 2) and respects for cultural diversities and civilizational 

differences (verse 49: 13). Islam sanctions the use of force only in cases of self-defense, defense 

of the Faith and protection of properties; otherwise, peace is the best option. The Qur’an says: “O 

ye who believe! Enter into peace wholeheartedly” (verse 2: 208); and with regard to war, which 

the Qur’an declares an evil action, the second part of the same verse says: “….and follow not the 

footsteps of the Evil One; for he is to you an avowed enemy” (verse 2: 208).                 

                

The original inspirations for the modernist approach, as noted above, came from Jamal al-Din al-

Afghani and Muhammad ‘Abduh, the two very influential Muslim modernist thinkers. Both 

scholars, appalled by European ascendance and a corresponding Islamic decline beginning with 

the thirteenth century, dedicated their teachings and writings to advocate Islam’s revival through 

compatibility with reason and scientific progress, which Western secular modernism prides in 

(Euben 2002, p. 29). They claimed that Islamic religion was based on reason; the Qur’an itself 

justifies every action to guide human behavior. ‘Abduh even went to the extent of asserting that 

“Islam did not impose any conditions upon reason other than that of maintaining the faith” 

(Abduh 1966, p. 176). Reason is as important a gift from God as His revelations. The gist of al-

---

19 

 

Afghani and ‘Abduh’s arguments is that though Islam emphasizes a universal moral order 

embedded in justice, fairness and equality, it also encourages the pursuit of knowledge of the 

material world to ensure human survival and well-being, including that of the Muslims. Reason 

and scientific approaches to understand and exploit the material world thus commingle with the 

religion of Islam.  

 

Al-Afghani’s and ‘Abduh’s religious position, better known as ijtihad – the use of reason to 

capture and reinterpret developments in light of religious texts and sources, has real world 

implications. It not only negates the traditionalists’ view of an enemy image-driven world but 

also creates new spaces for dialogues between the Islamic and non-Islamic states and peoples. 

This is what is exactly happening in the age of globalization. Under globalization, cultural and 

civilizational barriers are losing their relevance, diverse ethics and religions are getting in touch 

with each other, ethnically and racially different peoples are coexisting and interacting in the 

same socio-political and legal framework of a state. Taking advantages of a loose global 

framework of human migrations and movements or the deliberate policies of some governments 

to encourage migrations from poor to rich countries, many Muslims are now living in the West, 

the traditionalists’ so-called Dar al-Harb, with complete security for their lives and properties, 

and guarantees for religious practices. Ramadan (Ramadan 1999, 125–127) uses the concepts of