جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « coexistence » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

Turkey, since its establishment by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, put one of bases and fundamental principle of its governmental system on the basis of secularism. One of the key factors of secularism in modern Turkey's Ottoman legacy is that government would supervise on religion institutionally. By establishment of Republic in 1923, the state defined its interest basis on secularization and various sectarian groups. The victory of AKP in November 2002 elections, as an Islamic party, has raised important questions about the future of secularism and Islamism in the country. The main characteristics of Turkish secularism is different from American and French one and Turkish people interprets the concept not only on basis of separation between government and religion but elimination of religion from public sphere. The major controversy in Turkey is about the definition of secularism and freedom of religion that resulted from fundamental principles such as the role of religion and government. The study of existing literature about Turkey shows the earlier researches mainly emphasize issues such as security, democracy and process of Turkey joining the Europe Union, and it seems they ignored the Islamists' approaches towards their concepts and identity, especially towards secularism. Accordingly, the authors would try to answer the following questions: what is the AKP' stance on secularism, as an Islamic party? The findings of article suggest the AKP intended to separate the religion from government by accepting the secularism as a governance model in order to guarantee the religious freedom.

Over the last decades, especially after the Islamic Revolution of Iran gained victory, westerners have taken anti-Islam attitude seeking to suggest the idea that Islam is inconsistent with the rules and norms of the contemporary modern society and there seems to be no common ground for Muslims and the followers of the other living religions of the world to have a peaceful coexistence. The coexistence of Muslims with the followers of the other religions within a particular society and internationally is worth studying, but the most controversial case is when a community of non-Muslims is living in an Islamic society under an Islamic government. Under such circumstances, does Islam act in Muslims’ interests and against the interests of the followers of other religions or recognize their presence and grant them rights to have a social life? To answer the above question, the present article, adopting a descriptive and analytical approach and drawing upon Islamic sources, i.e. the Qur’an and the traditions of the infallible Imams (may peace be upon them), tries to deal with the subject in question. To do this, it first to give a definition for the concept of ‘non-Muslim citizens’ and then enumerates the rights and duties that they have under an Islamic government. The rights of non- Muslims falling under such titles as ‘human dignity’, all-out immunity’, ‘religious freedom’, legislative rights’, and ‘freedom of socio-political activities’ have been explained and their duties have been studied under such rubrics as ‘respecting to the laws of Islamic society’, ‘fulfilling the contracts with the Islamic government’, ‘refusing to interact with the enemies of an Islamic state’ and ‘paying tax’. In case the conditions of being a citizen are met, there would be no difference between Muslim citizens and n0n-Muslim citizens in having their own social rights and they are all considered one and the same nation and subjects of the same country who can live together peacefully.

The present era is that of the domination of modernity over the previous intellectual traditions. But historical analyses and forecast of the changes have led to the formation of three notions in this regard. Fokoyama and his colleagues believe in the end of conflicts and acceptance of liberal-democracy; Samuel Huntington through his theory of Clash of Civilizations argues that the spread of modernity and modernization in the sphere of other civilizations causes disorderliness and strain which will be manifested in the form of retaliatory reactions to the West. Seyed Mohammad Khatami’s notion of Dialogue Among Civilizations, which combines pluralism of modernity with traditions, relies on the philosophical bases of the ancient world for his ethical universalism and advocates dialogue among civilizations. The author tries in the present article to prove that civilization has an expansive, extravert approach to the globalization, while culture has an introvert, contractive approach towards this phenomenon. Hence through propounding globalism and pluralistic exchange whose objective is coexistence of cultures, a better model for globalization and international relations could be found.