Some Common Patterns of Islamic Revival in Post-Soviet Central Asia and Challenges to Develop Human Rights and Inclusive Society

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

It is a very interesting and well presented text which may be also of great use for those dealing with the question od radicalisation of Islam in other parts of the world, its factors and its influence on modernizing processes and human rights observation in local societies. I do not have any critical comments but I would suggest to check the English language, especially syntax, which sometimes seems a bit problematic (e.g. footnote 9) and spelling in general (e.g. p. 6: "process “threat construction”" should read "process of “threat construction”"; p. 11 "explained that his husband" should read "explained that her husband", etc.).

Author Response

Response to REVIEWER #1:

We thank our reviewer very much for her/his time that s/he read our manuscript and gave positive feedback about it.

-We edited English, corrected Grammar, style, and syntax.

-We corrected the spelling in the p. 6, p. 11, also corrected footnote 9 (in revised version footnote 13).

Reviewer 2 Report

This subject is very interesting and deserves elaboration. I understand that the authors must be careful for their own safety, but the core of the article is the data collected during courses on human rights, which would provide a scientific basis for this study, but of course anonymised. As the article stands, this data appears too late at page 9.

Besides serious issues with the English ("his husband"! page 11), the rest of the discussion is frustrating because it is either too obvious, i.e. that present day Hanafite Islam is dogmatic, irrational and uncongenial to human rights, or seems to fail to identify the issues at work in the double instrumentalisation of Islam by local nationalist elites and by Saudi Arabia as proxy for US hegemonic desires.

As the conclusion rightly but too cursorily and belatedly states, there are many kinds of Islam, and future advances will require elaborating an Islamic discourse on the value of the individual with no reference to Western human rights.

The study might gain some depth from a broader historical and geographic framework embracing the fate of reformers (al-Afghani, Muhammad Abduh...?) at the hand of Europeans powers to gain the hindsight of a longue durée approach. Empires rely on local and "traditional" elites to rule distant provinces. "Tradition" is of course the fruit of mnemonic engineering, hence using the notion of social/collective memory might be of use here too. I have found Paul Connerton more useful than Jan Assmann.

The concept of "Securitization" is defined too late at page 6 and "security realm in security terms" is not too helpful. 

"Puritanism" applied to Islam might be confusing.

Isn't Islam always or at least inherently political?

"Superstitious" (footnote 4) has no place in a scholarly article as it defines the religion of the other.

You seem to oppose Islamic or traditional societies to inclusive societies characterised by the presence of human rights or at least a discourse on human rights. What would an exclusive society be like?

"neo-orientalist and essentialist framing" (page 2) are not very reader-friendly expressions. Explain or delete.

I am looking forward to read the next version of your article as your personal experiences are well worth sharing.

Author Response

Response to REVIEWER 2:

We want to thank our reviewer very much, whose invaluable and collegial comments and suggestions help us make our arguments more clear and more accurate. We accepted the comments and suggestions of our reviewer. 

(1)We want to clarify that our paper is based on data collected, first, during informal communications with the representatives of Kazakhstani and Kyrgyzstani Muftiyats, scholars and religious practitioners from all Central Asian countries (but all of our sources of information are anonymized), second, while teaching the classes of human rights. 

(2)We corrected the spelling in the p. 6, p. 11 and edited the English language.

(3) This paper is conceptual-normative. Therefore, it is based on [human rights’] values prescription. It may seem that this paper discusses the obvious issues like “dogmatic, irrational and uncongenial to human rights nature of present-day Hanafite Islam”. This fact is well-known by the Western-educated and conscious of the contemporary notion of human rights scholars and experts in the field. However, a majority of the so-called local intellectuals, scholars, politicians, and state officials (who tend to be the staunch supporters of the “traditional Hanafite Islam/ religion”) not only in Central Asian countries but also in the Russian Federation, Turkey, India, where Hanafite Islam has strong historical roots, may have a different view. One of the aims of this paper is to raise awareness about this phenomenon. 

The first author’s experience in participating in the state-funded projects related to Islam and his professional dialogue with some state organs in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan indicate that the governments, scholarly community, and public opinion in Central Asian countries uncritically support local “traditional Islam”. However, the rise of conservative religiosity and conservative groups has led to the problems concerning the development of human rights as analyzed in this paper. This situation may exacerbate in the future. However, this phenomenon is not considered and discussed by scholars even in Central Asian studies, except by some human rights activists in media publications.   

#We decided not to touch the factor of foreign actors in spreading Salafism in Central Asia. The financial, political, and missionary support of some Gulf states, like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, is well-known. However, it may add to the “discourse of danger” and securitization of “non-controllable” Islam in the region’s countries.

(4) As our reviewer recommended, we elaborated on the issue that there “are many kinds of Islam” (in the introduction, p. 1-2, and conclusion p. 13). Also, we introduced some information about Islamic discourse on human rights and the value of the individual. (p. 13).

(5)We briefly explained the process of indigenization in the context of creating “homo Soveticus” (p.4), in line with the comments of our reviews that “Empires rely on local and "traditional" elites to rule distant provinces”.

(6) In line with Paul Connerton’s ideas, we briefly discussed the position of Islam as one of the cornerstones of the collective memory of Central Asian societies (p.1) and the concomitant phenomenon of the inertia in social structures and retraditionalization (p. 9).

(7)As our reviewer suggested, we explained the concept of securitization in the introduction (p. 2). Additional information about securitization in identity-related issues in the section about securitization is provided (p. 6).

(8) and (10) As our reviewer recommended, we deleted the concepts “puritanical” (in all paper) and “superstitious” (footnote 4 (in revised version footnote 8)).

(9) The first author accepts that Islam is not inherently political. Contrary to widespread opinion in academia, he believes that it is not plausible to accept that Prophet Muhammad was a political leader and established and administered the city-state Madina. As such, Madina cannot be depicted as the so-called “first Islamic” city-state since the Muslims were a minority and Prophet Muhammad was a community leader. (the statement attributed to him, he was a “[God’s] slave Prophet but not “ruling” Prophet”). Almost all leading Islamic scholars (Abu Hanifa, Imam Hanbal, Al-Maturidi, and others) abstained from any collaboration with the state officials and tried to be independent of the state. The acceptance of the position of “qadi” by Abu Yusuf signified the beginning of the crisis in Islamic thought and freedom of opinion of “ulema.” The first author found very insightful the views of Prof. Ahmet Kuru in his recently published book “Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment: A Global and Historical Comparison” that the collaboration of ulema with the state led to the decline of Islamic civilization. This book’s ideas also indicate that Islam should not have seen as inherently political.  

(11) In our view, exclusive society is characterized by non-acceptance of biological (racial, ethnic), ideational (secular vs. religious), and religious diversity (believer in “traditional” vs. “non-traditional” religion), ethnic and religious exclusivism. Ethnic nationalism and religious exclusivism are real threats in Central Asian countries. Conservative Central Asian Islam may be no less exclusivist than the so-called non-traditional religious groups against whom the state and non-state actors try to support and promote traditional Islam, which, is conservative Hanafite Islam.

(12) As our reviewer recommended, we explained the concepts of neo-orientalism and essentialist framing in the footnotes (p. 2, footnote 6 and 7).

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Congratulations for the great improvements achieved.