Ann Elizabeth Mayer

Islamic Banking and Credit Policies in the Sadat Era: the Social Origins of Islamic Banking in Egypt

In 1971 President Sadat charted a new course for the Egyptian economy, away from the socialism of the Nasser era and towards greater encouragement for the development of the private sector and investment by private individuals and companies, whether Egyptian or foreign. Starting gradually, the process of liberalisation gained momentum in the mid-70s. The most important landmark of the new policy came in 1974, when Law 43 of that year was enacted to give major incentives to both foreign and Egyptian private capital to invest in Egypt. One of the most striking consequences of the Inhtah, or open-door policy, was the sudden proliferation of banks, beginning in 1974. lEreviously, there had been in the Egyptian bag system only the four nationalised banks the Bank Misr, the Bank of Alexandria, the Bank of Cairo, and the National Bank of Egypt-and a small number of specialised banks dealing with mortgages, co-operative credit, social security, and the like. In addition to these and operating administratively as foreign banks outside the nationalised banlig system were the Arab African Bank and the Arab Internanonal Bank for Trade and Development. In a special category there was the new Nasser Social Bank, founded in 1971. Of course there was also the Central Bank of Egyptj which like central banks elsewhere, was the bankers bank, controller of the volume of credit, custodian of the buLk of government funds, and the governments agency and adviser in financial matters. After 1974 these organisations were quickly joined by dozens of new banks, which included several private banks as well as banks that were joint ventures between the naiionalised Egypiian banks and foreign partners. In 1980, various new banks were being set up, and it was apparent that the Sadat goverrunent viewed the continued expansion and development of banking as an important component of Egypts econoniic transformaiion.

Jennifer Heath and Ashraf Zahedi (eds.), Land of the Unconquerable: The Lives of Contemporary Afghan Women

In many ways, Afghanistan has proved to be unconquerable, but “Land of the Unconquerable” may not be the most apposite title for this valuable collection of twenty-four short chapters on Afghan women. Indeed, one could plausibly maintain that most Afghan women are, indeed, “conquered”—in the sense that they have no say in and no control over the lethal warfare and violent conflicts that have ravaged their country for decades. This collection covers the acutely disadvantaged and often parlous state in which Afghan women must try to live. Among other things, Afghan women are typically dead by age forty-four, those in the range from fifteen to forty-nine are three times more likely to die than men in that age range (75). Women are 600 times more likely to die in childbirth than their American sisters (189). Afghan women’s growing recourse to suicide via self-immolation, indications that they are grievously afflicted by depression and anxiety, and the increase in women resorting to begging on the streets betoken a state of abject misery (222–239).

Revisiting Jefferson’s Wall from a Contemporary Middle-Eastern Perspective

When he called for separation of religion and state, it is unlikely that Jefferson ever considered scenarios like the ones currently facing countries in the region comprising the Middle East and North Africa (here shortened to “Middle East” for convenience). I propose to bring an imaginary Jefferson to a contemporary vantage point where he could assess the fit between his eighteenth-century idea of a wall between religion and state and contemporary politics of religion in that region. I believe that I might persuade Jefferson that an unanticipated phenomenon, the ideologization of religion, had become the major threat to the freedoms that his wall aimed to protect. I propose also that I could convince Jefferson that, in certain circumstances, upholding Islam as the state religion under a traditional Islamic monarchy could actually help to secure space for democracy and religious freedom. I believe that I could get him to concede, albeit reluctantly, that in the contemporary Middle East, clinging to an absolutist policy of separating religion and state could be unwise and even counterproductive—and that in current circumstances, certain compromise formulations of constitutional principles concerning the role of religion would be the better option.

Women, the Koran and International Human Rights Law: The Experience of Pakistan (review)

journey. Particularly interesting would be further works building on this excellent book by Dudziak and further exploring the vexed tension in Marshall’s vision for the use of the law to transform Kenya and the limitations of rights discourse generally as an instrument of social transformation. Was Marshall right in insisting on a narrow reading of the rule of law even in deeply distorted societies? Should there be a boiler plate normative cure for the protection of minorities no matter the context as Marshall seemed to believe? These and other questions remain unanswered in Dudziak’s book. Yet it provokes them and unwittingly demands that answers be given. What is not in doubt, however, is the fact that Exporting American Dreams has established an inescapable bar that others must meet. Dudziak’s intellectual courage and boldness—going where others had not gone before—is inspiring and deeply welcome by those who seek to understand the breadth of Marshall’s passion for justice. His was a life lived in a rotund pursuit of justice through the rule of law. Even though there are obvious limitations to a quest for justice framed in those confines, no one can deny Marshalls’ profound impact on civil rights in the United States and his influence on Kenyatta, Mboya, and the emergent Kenyan state. Dudziak has weaved a classic tale that intertwines this gripping narrative in the hopeful diction of a thinker who seeks universal justice. Her book is a truly magnificent contribution to understanding Marshall, one of the towering figures of the twentieth century.

Islam, Menschenrechte und Geschlecht: Tradition und Politik

In Diskussionen über den Islam, Menschenrechte und Geschlecht findet sich eine bedauerliche Tendenz, Kultur auf Kosten der Politik zu betonen. Westliche Beobachterinnen muslimischer Gesellschaften assoziieren allzu leicht Gesetze, Praktiken und Prinzipien, die Frauen unterordnen, mit dem Islam und versäumen es dabei, genauer hinzusehen. Eine Uberbetonung des Islam verdeckt außerdem gemeinsame Strukturmerkmale, die die Situation von Frauen in muslimischen Gesellschaften und in der westlichen Welt kennzeichnen. Kritische Analysen staatlicher Praktiken, die sich auf Frauen auswirken, können zeigen, dass die Annahme eines mutmaßlichen Ost/West-Gegensatzes, wonach der Westen bereitwillig die Menschenrechte von Frauen unterstützt, während Moslems in islamischer Tradition diese ablehnen, falsch ist. Wenn aus wesdicher Sicht die Kritik an Frauen diskriminierenden Gesetzen in muslimischen Gesellschaften als Angriff auf islamische Tradition begriffen wird, so ist dies ein Missverständnis, das in problematischer Weise dazu führt, die Geschlechterpolitik gegenwärtiger muslimischer Staaten zu ignorieren. Dies zeigte sich im Jahr 2001, als die Mitglieder von Gulf 2000, einer internationalen E-MailListe zum Thema Golfregion, in eine langwierige, mit Beiträgen aus aller Welt geführte Debatte über die Behandlung von Frauen in Iran gerieten. Die Debatte entstand, nachdem ich Einwände gegen den Artikel eines amerikanischen Intellektuellen erhoben hatte, der den Ursprung der in Iran bestehenden islamischen Kleidungsvorschriften für Frauen auf die islamische Tradition zurückverfolgte, dabei jedoch völlig die staatlichen Zwangsmaßnahmen ignorierte, durch welche die Kleidungsvorschriften zu einem frauenrechtlichen Thema werden.1 Der Autor behauptete, dass nahezu alle Iranerinnen die offiziellen islamischen Kleidungsvorschriften freiwillig akzeptieren, worauf ich den Einwand erhob, dass er die Vorschrift, wonach Frauen eine staatlich verordnete Uniform tragen müssen, entpolitisiere. Dies löste eine ausgedehnte Debatte aus, in deren Verlauf viele Mitglieder der Mailing-Liste die Vorstellung zurückwiesen, wonach die offiziellen islamischen Kleidungsvorschriften des Iran, gegen die sich iranische Frauen mit Vehemenz wehren und deren Einhaltung nur mit aggressiver Überwachung, Prügel-, Geldund Gefängnisstrafen erzwungen werden kann, Aspekte einer staatlichen Politik sind, die Frauen unterordnet und ihnen Rechte verweigert. Stattdessen vertraten sie die Ansicht, dass alles, was ein muslimisches Land unter Verweis auf den Islam tue, ein direkter Ausdruck lo-