نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استاد، گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه باقرالعلوم (ع)، قم، ایران.
2 استادیار، گروه فقه سیاسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران؛ استاد سطوح عالی، حوزه علمیه قم، قم، ایران.
3 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه جامعه‌شناسی سیاسی، دانشگاه باقرالعلوم (ع)، قم، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The concept of the Islamic ummah, because it is based on a bond of faith and transcends geographical boundaries, appears at first glance to be incompatible with the nation-state model and its associated concepts, including nation, citizenship, and borders. This apparent incompatibility raises the question of how the ummah relates to the nation, state, citizenship, and borders in the political thought of Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, and whether an emphasis on ummah-based identity and responsibility entails the rejection of the nation-state, legal membership, and territorial sovereignty. Using a descriptive-analytical method and drawing on conceptual analysis and the interpretive reconstruction of Ayatollah Khamenei’s works and statements, this study examines these relationships. The findings indicate that much of the alleged conflict stems from placing side by side concepts that belong to different levels of the political community. Accordingly, the ummah and the nation pertain to the level of collective identity, the state to the level of political organization, citizenship to the level of legal membership, and borders to the level of the territory within which jurisdiction is exercised. In Ayatollah Khamenei’s thought, ummah-based identity does not replace national identity; rather, it broadens the scope of Muslims’ belonging and responsibility. National and ummah-based identities are therefore compatible. The state, in turn, is the political organization through which society is administered and values are institutionally realized. An ummah-centered orientation does not entail rejecting republicanism or the role of the people. Citizenship is a legal relationship between the individual and the state, independent of religious affiliation; therefore, non-Muslims can also be members of the political community and enjoy public rights. A border, in turn, constitutes the recognized limit of the direct exercise of state sovereignty, although it does not determine the ultimate boundaries of Islamic belonging and responsibility. The findings also indicate that, beyond the absence of conceptual conflict, the compatibility of the nation-state with the ummah requires two substantive and formal conditions. Substantively, the acceptance of borders and national interests must not lead to the exclusion of transnational Islamic and human responsibilities. Formally, the fulfillment of these responsibilities must respect the will of the people, the law, and the sovereignty of the state exercising authority over the territory concerned. Accordingly, the study’s four-level model demonstrates that expanding the scope of ummah-based identity and responsibility does not require expanding the scope of political sovereignty or rejecting the nation, the state, citizenship, and borders.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)