Is Rise of Islamic Crescent Possible?

أَعُوذُ بِاللّٰهِ مِنَ الشَّيْطَانِ الرَّجِيمِ

بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ

In the name of ALLAH, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Is Rise of Islamic Crescent Possible?

Constantin von Hoffmeister has written an opinion piece at SubStack titled "How America and Israel Prevent the Rise of an Islamic Civilization-State From spiritual unity to geopolitical sovereignty?" The article says "The Islamic world possesses everything necessary to become one of the great centers of world power. It has enormous energy reserves, vital maritime routes, ancient civilizations, and a population exceeding two billion people. Yet it remains politically fragmented, militarily dependent, and divided by rivalries that serve the interests of outside powers. From Tehran to Riyadh, from Istanbul to Islamabad, Muslim nations have allowed their differences to outweigh their common destiny. The United States has long benefited from this condition, while Israel has acquired a position of military and political importance far beyond what its size would otherwise suggest. The result is a civilization rich in resources but poor in collective sovereignty. Islam has preserved a common spiritual identity across centuries, but that identity has not yet acquired the political form necessary to resist foreign domination.

The title "How America and Israel Prevent the Rise of an Islamic Civilization-State: From spiritual unity to geopolitical sovereignty is a political commentary essay published on Euro-Siberia. The piece examines why the global Muslim community (Ummah) functions as a spiritual collective rather than a unified geopolitical power bloc, and explores the external and internal factors preventing that transition. The Core Arguments of the Essay are as follow:-

• External Fragmentation. The essay argues that U.S. and Israeli foreign policies maintain regional dominance by keeping Middle Eastern states divided through sanctions, military interventions, and bilateral security arrangements.

• Security Dependencies. It contends that wealthy Gulf monarchies trade strategic autonomy for American military protection and arms sales, which prevents the formation of independent regional defense architecture.

• Limits of Unilateral Deterrence. The author notes that individual states like Iran cannot forge broader regional unity through military deterrence alone, especially when sectarian and political rivalries divide neighboring Muslim governments.

• Path to Sovereignty. The piece concludes that transitioning from spiritual solidarity to geopolitical sovereignty requires deliberate diplomatic, economic, and security cooperation among major Muslim-majority nations to overcome manufactured rivalries.

Broader Geopolitical Perspectives

Discussions around the concept of an Islamic "civilization-state" versus the modern nation-state system span several distinct viewpoints among analysts and policymakers:-

• Anti-Imperialist and Pan-Islamic Views. Commentators in outlets such as the Tehran Times argue that Western military bases and alliances exploit sectarian fault lines to keep West Asia dependent on foreign powers. Proponents of this view call for self-reliant regional pacts—such as recent discussions surrounding multilateral defense agreements among Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Iran—to secure collective sovereignty.

• U.S. and Israeli Security Perspectives. Policymakers and analysts at institutions like the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security and The Washington Institute view transnational political Islam and pan-Islamic state projects as direct threats to existing sovereign borders, regional stability, and Israeli security. From this perspective, U.S. partnerships with allied Arab states serve as a stabilizing buffer against Iranian expansionism and militant groups.

• Structural and Internal Factors. Many international relations scholars, including analyses from Geopolitical Monitor, emphasize that the absence of a unified Islamic bloc stems largely from internal divisions rather than external interference alone. Competing national interests, Sunni-Shia geopolitical rivalries, differing governance models, and economic priorities frequently lead Muslim-majority countries to pursue separate bilateral relationships with global powers like the United States, China, and Russia.

The historical context must be raised to connect directly to the geopolitical argument of the original essay. Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I and the end of European colonial rule across South Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa, modern Muslim-majority states inherited borders, legal codes, and governance models designed by imperial powers rather than organic regional evolution. Historians and political economists widely examine how these colonial frameworks continue to shape contemporary sovereignty and regional unity.

Colonial Mechanisms of Division and Control

• Arbitrary Borders and Fragmentation. Agreements such as the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement and post-WWI League of Nations mandates carved former Ottoman territories into separate nation-states. These boundaries frequently split cohesive communities while grouping rival populations together, making regional political integration difficult.

• Divide-and-Rule Policies. Both the British East India Company and French colonial administrations institutionalized religious, ethnic, and sectarian distinctions through separate electorates, communal censuses, and targeted recruitment into colonial armies. Over time, these administrative categories hardened into deep political divisions that outlasted direct foreign rule.

• Persistent Extractive Institutions. In a book "Prisoners of Empire: How Former Colonies Were Set Up to Fail", historian Amal Chatterjee examines how former colonies across the Global South remain constrained by the administrative, legal, and economic structures left behind by empires. From land ownership and resource extraction to education and law, post-independence institutions often replicate colonial systems that concentrate power in narrow elites and tie national economies to external markets.

• Psychological and Ideological Legacy. Thinkers such as Frantz Fanon, Edward Said, and Malik Bennabi analyzed how colonial education and cultural dominance fostered what Bennabi termed "colonizability"—an internal mindset of dependency and inferiority that persists even after formal political independence is achieved.

Connection to Contemporary Geopolitics

• Institutional Path Dependency. When newly independent states adopted Western-style bureaucratic and security apparatuses, their ruling elites often relied on former colonial powers—and later the United States—for military backing, economic aid, and regime survival.

• Barriers to a Civilization-State. In the view of the Euro-Siberia essay and similar critiques, contemporary external alliances and security dependencies build directly upon this post-WWI foundation. Because national borders, sectarian rivalries, and elite economic interests remain tied to the post-colonial order, transitioning from fragmented nation-states toward a unified geopolitical bloc faces both external resistance and deeply embedded internal structures.

There is a famous verse by Allama Muhammad Iqbal from his poem Jawab-e-Shikwa ("Yoon to Syed bhi ho, Mirza bhi ho, Afghan bhi ho / Tum sabhi kuch ho, batao to Musalman bhi ho?"), which critiques how lineage, tribal pride, and outward labels replaced genuine spiritual commitment and unity. The central theme in Islamic intellectual history and post-colonial scholarship is a dark truth: how colonial regimes deliberately reshaped not just the borders of Muslim lands, but also the religious consciousness, legal frameworks, and social institutions of Muslim societies. Lets touch a little about how Colonialism Reshaped Religious Life and Identity in Muslim countries?

• Privatization of Faith. As analyzed by researchers at the Yaqeen Institute, European administrators systematically dismantled Sharia courts and replaced commercial, criminal, and administrative law with European legal codes. By confining Islamic law strictly to personal status matters like marriage and inheritance, colonial rule pushed faith out of public governance and into the private sphere.

• Dismantling of Waqf Institutions. Colonial powers seized Waqf (charitable Islamic endowments) that historically funded independent schools, mosques, hospitals, and orphanages. Redirecting these assets stripped religious scholars (ulama) of financial independence and severed the traditional link between Islamic education and social welfare.

• Educational Dualism. As noted by the Institute of Policy Studies, colonial education split knowledge into "secular" and "religious" tracks. Western-style schools trained new administrative elite fluent in European languages and Eurocentric worldviews, while traditional seminaries (madrasas) were marginalized from state power.

• Redefining "Moderation" and Reform. Colonial administrators and Orientalist scholars actively promoted interpretations of Islam that stripped away its political and collective dimensions, framing compliance with imperial rule as "enlightened" or "moderate".

The most devastating element introduced in Islamic countries was marginalization of Islamic doctrine as shown below:-

• Colonial Sponsorship of Compliant Clerics. During European rule in South Asia, North Africa, and the Middle East, colonial administrators actively patronized religious figures and orders that preached political quietism. British officials in India, for example, solicited religious rulings (fatawa) declaring British India Dar al-Islam (Abode of Peace) to neutralize armed resistance and frame anti-colonial struggle as unlawful rebellion.

• Subjugation of Religious Institutions. Following independence, many post-colonial regimes nationalized major mosques, religious endowments (awqaf), and historic seminaries such as Al-Azhar. By placing scholars on state payrolls, authoritarian governments turned independent religious authorities into state functionaries tasked with legitimizing monarchs, military dictators, and compromised elites.

• Selective Use of Classical Texts. Both colonial authorities and post-colonial rulers amplified classical Sunni juristic maxims written during periods of severe civil war—such as avoiding rebellion (fitna) against an unjust ruler—while suppressing the equally foundational Islamic principles of shura (consultation), hisbah (accountability), and speaking truth to a tyrannical ruler (kalimat haqq 'inda sultan ja'ir).

• Weaponizing "Moderation." In modern geopolitics, external powers and domestic regimes frequently define "moderate Islam" not in terms of theological balance (wasatiyyah), but as political compliance. Any religious discourse that challenges authoritarian governance, economic exploitation, or foreign hegemony is labeled "extremist" and suppressed.

While critics view state-backed quietism as a distortion of faith designed to protect illegitimate power, Islamic scholarship includes distinct viewpoints on the relationship between doctrine and political authority:

• Reformist and Revivalist Critique. Thinkers like Abul A'la Maududi, Sayyid Qutb, and Ali Shariati argued that reducing Islam to personal piety and obedience to corrupt rulers stripped the faith of its core mandate to establish justice (adl) and resist tyranny (taghut).

• Classical Juristic Caution. Traditionalist scholars—including figures like Abdallah bin Bayyah and Hamza Yusuf—contend that classical jurists prioritized public order and stability not out of cowardice, but because violent upheaval historically destroyed social fabric, religious institutions, and innocent lives without producing just governance.

• Institutional Reform Approaches. Many contemporary Muslim political theorists argue that the solution lies neither in passive submission to dictators nor in violent rebellion, but in rebuilding independent civil society, constitutional accountability, and autonomous religious institutions free from state capture.

شرک و الحاد میں ڈوبے ہوئے انسان ہیں ہم

بس نام کے دنیا میں ہی مسلمان ہیں ہم

Muslim Thinkers & Scholars across the Muslim world diagnosed this crisis in different ways, leading to major intellectual debates that continue even today:-

• Spiritual and Moral Revival. Thinkers like Allama Iqbal and Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi argued that political subjugation was a symptom of internal spiritual decay. Iqbal maintained that colonial education produced individuals who were culturally alienated, and he called for reconstructing religious thought to restore inner conviction (khudi) and collective purpose.

• Institutional and Political Awakening. Movements led by figures such as Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, Muhammad Abduh, and later Abul A'la Maududi argued that Islam could not survive merely as a set of rituals. They sought to revive Islamic political and social thought to challenge both Western cultural dominance and stagnant local traditions.

• Internal Accountability vs. External Blame. Many contemporary Muslim historians emphasize that while colonial powers exploited these vulnerabilities, internal stagnation, sectarian rigidity, and dynastic corruption had already weakened Muslim societies before European arrival.

The Conclusion

Let’s revert to the beginning para "The Islamic world possesses everything necessary to become one of the great centers of world power. It was a powerful civilization before falling from grace and removal of the dividing factors the "Muslim Nations" may rise again. "It has enormous energy reserves, vital maritime routes, ancient civilizations, and a population exceeding two billion people".

The countries may retain their geographical boundaries but must open borders for common people (as Muslim Ummah citizens) and allow free trade among all Muslim lands.

The political fragmentation may be eliminated by formation of "United Muslim Council" (on the foot prints of UNO) with clear terms for foreign affairs, military engagement, Financial model to march towards common destiny. This will provide "Collective Muslim Ummah Sovereignty" as envisaged by a common spiritual identity in Quran and Hadiths. As Allama Iqbal said "May Muslims unite for the guardianship of the Sanctuary; From the banks of the Nile to the soil of Kashgar".

ایک ہوں مسلم حرم کی پاسبانی کے لیے

نیل کے ساحل سے لے کر تا بہ خاکِ کاشغر

Iqbal's, "guarding the Sanctuary" (Haram ki pasbani) meant more than defending physical territory. It symbolized protecting the core values of Tawhid (monotheism), Risalat / Prophethood of Muhammad (PBUH); honouring human dignity without the shade of cast creed and colour of skin, justice, and spiritual independence through collective strength, knowledge, and action. The eventual reversing of civilizational decline is possible only by intellectual awakening and moral bound unity of Ummah.