BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Center for International and Regional Studies - ECPv6.15.15//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Center for International and Regional Studies
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Moscow
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0400
TZNAME:MSD
DTSTART:20090328T230000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0400
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:MSK
DTSTART:20091024T230000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0400
TZNAME:MSD
DTSTART:20100327T230000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0400
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:MSK
DTSTART:20101030T230000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0400
TZNAME:MSK
DTSTART:20110326T230000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101004T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101004T180000
DTSTAMP:20260411T084659
CREATED:20141023T151857Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105925Z
UID:10000826-1286179200-1286215200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Mary Ann Tetreault on Education in the Gulf
DESCRIPTION:Mary Ann Tétreault\, the 2010-2011 CIRS Visiting Scholar and the Una Chapman Cox Distinguished Professor of International Affairs at Trinity University in San Antonio\, was invited to deliver the October CIRS Monthly Dialogue lecture on the subject “Who Am I? International Education and Identity in the Gulf.” \n \n \nThe lecture was based on the phenomenon of transplanting foreign universities – particularly from the United States – into the Gulf. Tétreault pointed out that there were two interesting aspects to the American education model that has been established in many Gulf states. The first aspect is that “the model that is being transplanted to the Gulf is a model that Americans seem to have backed off from – it’s too expensive.” In America\, high quality education is not something that is provided for all; many connect higher education solely to jobs rather than to human development\, and see higher education as wasteful as job prospects for graduates decline while salaries and benefits shrink. The second aspect revolves around the question of compatibility. Tétreault asked: “How compatible are the values of American education with societies in the Gulf? And how can we get some compatibility between what is a questioning and interrogating educational philosophy and one where people memorize\, accept\, and have a much stricter view.” \n \n \nDuring her research\, Tétreault argued that she first had to gauge people’s expectations of universities and educational systems. Students attend university for a variety of different academic and social reasons; university faculty have certain expectations of their students; and the public too is an important stakeholder. Traditionally\, “universities are funded by taxpayers and by the public in general and so the public has expectations too – what are these kids learning? Are they going to be able to graduate and go out and get jobs? Will they contribute to the growth of our society?” \n \n \nTétreault’s research focused on the American University of Kuwait (AUK)\, where she taught and conducted focus groups and interviews with students\, faculty\, and administrators for four months in spring 2010. Using AUK as her case study\, the main research question that structured her project was “What is the contribution of these American universities to education in the Gulf?” At AUK\, Tétreault observed that there was a great deal of negotiation that took place between the American values of the university and the Kuwaiti cultural mores that existed in the broader society. She noted that there was a significant amount of friction between these two ideals. Other contentious issues between American and Kuwaiti values center on questions of censorship; gender; and academic freedom and autonomy. \n \n \nTétreault concluded by saying that there are serious compatibility issues between the effects of an American-style education and the Gulf society it is being transplanted into. Long-term issues such as the question of academic freedom\, censorship\, and the role of women in society are just some of the cultural clashes that are occurring and may have long-term effects in the future. In her findings\, Tétreault did\, however\, observe that AUK does display many features of American education that are valuable to students and the larger community. For example\, faculty devotes a significant amount of time to students\, and there is a great deal of attention paid to student development. Tétreault concluded that the students who go to AUK do internalize American values: “they think they should be independent\, they think they should be autonomous\, and they think they should be able to go out into the economy” and find opportunities as Kuwaitis who are both American-trained and compatible with their own society. \n \n \nMary Ann Tétreault’s publications include books and articles about democratization\, social movements\, gender\, oil markets\, war crimes\, international political economy\, world politics\, and American foreign policy. Her regional focus is the Gulf\, with an emphasis on Kuwait about which she has written many articles and two books\, The Kuwait Petroleum Corporation and the Economics of the New World Order and Stories of Democracy: Politics and Society in Contemporary Kuwait. Her forthcoming co-edited book\, Political Change in the Arab Gulf States: Stuck in Transition\, is scheduled to be published in December.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, Publications Coordinator 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/mary-ann-tetreault-education-gulf/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_21901_16741_1414680973-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101006T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101006T180000
DTSTAMP:20260411T084659
CREATED:20141026T133703Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210902T095901Z
UID:10000993-1286352000-1286388000@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Birol Baskan on the 2010 Turkish Referendum
DESCRIPTION:Birol Başkan\, Visiting Assistant Professor of Government at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\, delivered a Focused Discussion on the topic\, “Turkey at the Crossroads: The Last Referendum and its Implications” on October 6\, 2010. Başkan’s talk focused on how the September 12\, 2010\, referendum in Turkey left the country at the crossroads of choice. Did Turkey move towards a more liberal democracy or towards religious authoritarianism? The decision to vote “yes” or “no” was considered to be a decision between “Islamism” and “secularism” in Turkey\, he argued. \n \n \nThe 2010 referendum mainly revolved around making constitutional changes to the judiciary and the outcome was that “21 million people said ‘yes’ and 15 million people said ‘no.’ So\, the referendum was in favor of the amendments introduced by the Justice and Development party\,” Başkan said. \n \n \nThese changes are historically significant. Exactly thirty years ago\, the professor said\, “the 1980 military coup in Turkey left incredible scars on Turkish historical memory:” The parliament and various political parties were closed down\, and political leaders were arrested\, expelled\, tortured\, and killed. During that turbulent time\, “the Turkish military destroyed all the societal networks – the leftist and the nationalist groups in Turkey – and\, unintentionally\, prepared the ground for Islamic revivalism.” As a result of the coup d’état\, the 1982 constitution was enshrined\, which\, Başkan argued\, “established the foundation of the contemporary political system in Turkey.” \n \n \nThe agenda regarding the establishment of the constitution\, according to Başkan\, had two basic objectives: “to insulate the high echelons of the state against political influence and to set boundaries around political action and discourse.” In order to achieve these\, the government played a secondary role in making appointments. For example\, “In making military appointments\, military promotions\, and military expulsions\, the government was a junior partner of the supreme military council\,” he said. The constitutional court could thus act with impunity and had closed down 21 political parties\, which is a record in Europe. \n \n \nThe problem with this type of a governance structure is that it lacks democratic legitimacy and so “the judiciary does not feel obliged to follow what the society wants\, but only serve the higher interest of the state.” As such\, “the Turkish state in all high level appointments in the judiciary and the military is a self-regulating institution.” In other words\, it has a democratic façade. \n \n \nIn 2007 there was a referendum that didn’t attract so much international media speculation. In this referendum\, the people voted for Turkey to make a transition from a parliamentary system to a semi-presidential system where the public elects the president. Başkan argued that “the October 2007 referendum added considerable strength to the democratic legitimacy of the appointment system in Turkey by making the president popularly elected\, and the September 12\, 2010\, referendum paved the way for the possibility of a broad sector of judges and prosecutors to rise to the top. This will dilute the ideological rigidity of the Turkish judiciary” and much more democracy-loving personnel can hopefully rise to the higher echelons of the country’s governance. \n \n \nIn conclusion\, Başkan said that these reforms raised once again the question: “Where is Turkey heading?” Currently\, “Turkey has made a huge leap towards liberal democracy\,” but\, he said\, “this is not enough. Turkey should introduce stronger measures to improve freedoms and rights” such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion. For many years\, the Turkish legal education system had been extremely successful in “training men of law who feel obliged to serve the state and the regime\, not the society\,” but in future\, “Turkey needs to train democracy-loving and democracy-respecting generals\, judges\, prosecutors\, and state university professors” in order to complete the transition towards becoming a full liberal democracy. \n \n \nBaşkan received a B.A. in International Relations and in Economics from Koc University\, Istanbul\, Turkey in 1998 and a Ph.D. in Political Science from Northwestern University in 2006. Başkan taught at State University of New York-Fredonia in 2006-2007 and at Qatar University in 2007-2010. His research looks at the roles religion\, religious institutions\, and grassroots religious groups play in creating\, maintaining\, undermining and destroying political order in the Middle East. He recently completed a book manuscript contracted to Syracuse University press. Currently\, he works on several projects\, one of which is a book project analyzing the role of religion in state and nation building in the Gulf. At SFS-Qatar\, Başkan teaches courses on comparative politics\, religion and politics\, and methodology.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/birol-baskan-2010-turkish-referendum/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22056_20021_1414919142-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101010T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101011T180000
DTSTAMP:20260411T084659
CREATED:20140924T222915Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105857Z
UID:10000911-1286733600-1286820000@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Migrant Labor in the Gulf - Working Group III
DESCRIPTION:On October 10–11\, 2010\, CIRS held its third and final meeting of the “Migrant Labor in the Gulf” working group. Each participant submitted a draft paper in advance of the meeting. The goal of the meeting was for those taking part to critique each other’s work and advise the authors as they prepare a final draft for submission to a planned edited volume titled Migrant Labour in the Gulf (Columbia University Press/Hurst\, 2012). \n \n \nCIRS launched the “Migrant Labor in the Gulf” initiative in 2008. The working group is composed of experts in the field of migrant labor who hail from a variety of different academic disciplines\, including anthropology\, sociology\, history\, and political science. The working group is also composed of the four CIRS Research Grant awardees: Andrew Gardner from the University of Puget Sound/Qatar University\, Arland Thornton and Nathalie Williams from the University of Michigan\, Susan Martin from Georgetown University\, and David Mednicoff from the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. \n \n \nThe participants adopted different perspectives on migrant labor. Some focused on macro trends that drive migration and define labor patterns within the GCC and among sending countries. In addition\, several participants employed ethnographic methods to analyze the lived experiences of the migrants themselves. \n \n \nThe term “migrant labor” was historicized in order to analyze how the relationship between the citizen and the migrant in the Gulf has traditionally centered around the question of labor. Connections between the Gulf and other parts of the world were built around the pearling industry\, trade\, kinship relations\, and religion. Migrant labor is usually depicted as a transient activity\, and although many laborers are indeed short-term employees\, this masks the fact that there are long-term and more culturally and socially-integrated forms of labor that exist in the Gulf. Importantly\, historicizing migrant labor in the Gulf is useful in pointing out all the actors that are often excluded from discussions. Racialized hierarchical systems can be attributed to British colonial relations\, and the establishment of the multinationals and the oil industry in the region. \n \n \nFurther\, the participants examined the issue of gender in relation to migrant labor. Migrant labor in the Gulf tends to be highly gendered\, where construction work and public sector work is dominated by males\, and domestic work is performed by females. In general\, and not just in the Gulf\, domestic work falls outside of the purview of a country’s labor laws because domestic work is not considered part of the market economy. However\, the participants argued that including domestic work within the framework of labor was not necessarily a solution to the problems associated with this type of employment. Here\, the participants agreed that migrants should not be examined solely in terms of labor\, but their social relations\, political beliefs\, and social formations should be examined as well. \n \n \nAnother key discussion was based on GCC states’ nationalization plans. The researchers spoke about the importance of not overlooking these schemes as the development of local human resources is a main target for most Gulf nations in the future. There has been little research regarding these nationalization schemes because of the difficulties of their implementation. As the Gulf strives toward knowledge based economies\, long-term development is regarded as the responsibility of the national workforce. Although the nationalization strategies of the GCC countries differ\, nationalization policies are geared towards breaking decades-long dependence on foreign labor in both the public and private sectors. In future\, lower illiteracy rates\, better global technological connectivity\, and more women in leadership roles all pave the way for increased diversification of the Gulf economies. \n \n \nThe working group addressed other significant issues such as the ‘kefala’ system\, human trafficking\, illegal migration\, and regional regulation efforts. The participants relied on a variety of data sources\, including in-depth interviews\, field observation\, survey research\, as well as demographic and other statistical data. The edited volume will be the first of its kind to be produced within the region.  \n \n \n  \n \n \n\nClick here for the working group’s agenda\nRead about the working group’s first and second meeting\nRead more about this research initiative\n\n \nParticipants include:\n \nAttiya Ahmad\, Wesleyan UniversityZahra Babar\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarMary Breeding\, The World BankJane Bristol-Rhys\, Zayed UniversityJohn T. Crist\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarAndrew Gardner\, University of Puget SoundMehran Kamrava\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarPardis Mahdavi\, Pomona CollegeSusan Martin\, Georgetown UniversityDavid Mednicoff\, University of Massachusetts–AmherstSuzi Mirgani\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarCaroline Osella\, School of Oriental and African Studies\, University of LondonFilippo Osella\, University of SussexKasim Randeree\, Oxford UniversityHélène Thiollet\, Sciences PoArland Thornton\, University of Michigan\, Ann ArborNathalie E. Williams\, University of Michigan\, Ann Arbor \n \n \n  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/migrant-labor-gulf-working-group-iii/
CATEGORIES:Focused Discussions,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/09/events_16641_11211_1411597755-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101019T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101019T180000
DTSTAMP:20260411T084659
CREATED:20141026T145532Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105853Z
UID:10001019-1287475200-1287511200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Iraq in the Balance: Security and Democracy After the U.S. Troop Withdrawal
DESCRIPTION:In light of the United States’ withdrawal of troops from Iraq\, CIRS organized a panel discussion to analyze the political upheavals that have taken place in Iraq and to gauge the possible outcomes. The panel took place on October 19\, 2010\, at the Intercontinental Hotel in Doha and featured Anthony Cordesman\, the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic & International Studies\, Laith Kubba\, Director of Middle East & North Africa at the National Endowment for Democracy\, and Rend Al-Rahim\, Executive Director for The Iraq Foundation. \n \n \nAnthony Cordesman began with an overview of the current security and military operations in Iraq. Addressing the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq\, he said that “the U.S. now has four Advisory and Assist brigades in Iraq. These are full combat brigades” that provide military assistance to Iraqi forces. The U.S. continues to fly aircraft over Iraq to provide satellite intelligence and there are major airbases in neighboring Kuwait\, military facilities in Qatar\, fleet headquarters in Bahrain\, as well as other naval capabilities in the area. “Withdrawal\,” therefore\, “is relative\,” argued Cordesman. The United States will continue to play a role in Iraq\, but “when the new Iraqi government comes to office\, it has to define what the strategic partnership agreement means\,” he said. \n \nThe U.S. Transition in Iraq: Iraqi Forces and the U.S. Military Aid  from Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar  \nCurrently\, Iraq is importing and building up its military capabilities to aid in its counter- insurgency operations. However\, Cordesman warned\, “even if you delivered equipment tomorrow\, Iraq does not have the facilities – the training and the background – to make that equipment effective. There is probably no worse way to acquire military equipment than to rush large amounts into a force that isn’t prepared.” To this effect\, the United States is providing military advisory missions and is assisting with the purchase of military equipment and trainers. “This\, in part\, is driven by the fact that Iraq remains under a major budget crisis and will remain in that crisis for at least two to three years\,” he said. \n \n \nIn terms of the ongoing threat of violence\, Cordesman argued that\, despite media portrayal\, the levels of violence have decreased and have become concentrated in certain areas. He said that “the patterns of violence are not easily measurable\,” but\, in comparison to Afghanistan\, there is greater stability. There remains a worrying level of outside interference\, foreign support\, and importing of illegal weapons for extremist purposes from Syria and Iran\, which back Sunni and Shiite causes respectively. \n \n \nIn conclusion\, Cordesman argued that\, in future\, “you cannot develop effective police without an effective judicial system and jails\, and you cannot develop either one without an effective government presence in the field.” The United States will continue to support Iraq and give aid depending on how much Iraq needs or allows. Cordesman said that he has often heard Iran being described as the hegemon of the Gulf\, but\, to put things into perspective\, “in the last five years\, ignoring Iraq\, the Gulf Cooperation Council countries have spent more than ten times as much on defense as Iran\, and more than seventeen times as much on arms imports.” \n \nIraq and the Military Balance in the Gulf  from Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar  \nRend Al-Rahim gave the second speech in which she outlined the current precarious position in which Iraq finds itself. She argued that “we are\, in fact\, in a situation where Iraq is verging on tipping in one direction or another.” Indeed\, “the next four years are going to indicate what Iraq is likely to be as a state.” \n \n \nDuring her talk\, Al-Rahim focused on three essential questions. The first concerns whether Iraq will remain one country\, or whether it will become divided along ethnic and religious lines. The second question wonders whether democracy will become the prevailing governing ideology\, or whether Iraq will revert to its historical system of autocratic and authoritarian rule. The third and final question asks whether Iraq will become a functional state that is able to maintain security for its people and deter external threats and pressures. \n \n \nThe answers to these questions\, Al-Rahim said\, can be defined by the problems that arise from constitutional and political challenges in the country. There are a variety of problems associated with Iraq’s constitution. She noted that “the constitution was written in a period of about three months\, but\, most importantly\, it was written without the participation of the Sunni community who boycotted the process and refused to participate in the negotiations that produced the constitution. They were eventually persuaded to ratify the constitution.” Al-Rahim noted that “because of the haste with which the constitution was written\, it is riddled with internal contradictions\, ambiguities\, lack of clarity\, and is essentially\, an unbalanced document that does not have a fully-fleshed conception of what the state is and how the state is going to function.” Indeed\, “if the Iraqi federal government was to follow the constitution today\, literally and strictly […] it would not be able to provide internal security – the article about security specifically says the federal government is in charge of Iraq’s security against external threats; it does not talk about internal threats.” Al-Rahim argued\, “to the extent to which the Iraqi government functions\, it is functioning extra constitutionally.” \n \n \nThere are two major areas – internal and external – where there are serious political challenges\, Al-Rahim argued. The first of these is “the reductionist approach to Iraqi society that began in 2003 that was adopted by the U.S. administration” and this is the view of Iraq as being divided into Shiite\, Sunni\, and Kurdish factions that have their own conflicting agendas. She argued that “this is neither an accurate\, nor a healthy description of Iraqi society.” The second problem is the unease with which Iraq is identified within the region and how it relates to neighboring countries. Al-Rahim questioned whether Iraq can actually identify itself as an Arab country given the sizeable Kurdish and Shiite populations that do not consider themselves Arabs. \n \n \nFinally\, Al-Rahim argued that because of these constitutional and political variables\, “there is still no common agreement among the political elite about what Iraq is or indeed what Iraq should be.” \n \n \nThe third and final speaker was Laith Kubba whose talk centered on the question “what impact will the U.S. withdrawal have on Iraq’s role in the region?” He also questioned whether the country would be able to stabilize after the withdrawal\, especially with the prospect of civil war looming on the horizon. \n \n \nFor the eighty years before the invasion\, Kubba argued\, Iraq was a balancing force in the region and “maintained a strong position among the Arab countries; it was quite influential and independent.” However\, “with the invasion in ’03 that order inside Iraq ended\,” he said\, and it has become a weak state that no longer poses a threat to its neighbors\, or to the international community. \n \n \nKubba outlined the current trends that are driving the Iraqi political scene\, both internally and externally. He argued that for a combination of economic and political reasons\, the U.S. significantly reduced its troops. “Back in ’08\, as Obama was elected\, there was the dawn of a new policy on Iraq.” The focus has now shifted back onto the Iraqi government as “the perception of a diminishing U.S. presence throws the ball back to Iraqi players.” \n \n \nExternally\, a weakened Iraq will change the nature of the power balance in the region. “When the U.S. invaded Iraq\, it more or less warned the neighbors not to interfere in Iraq; Saudi Arabia was kept in check; Syria was kept at bay; Turkey\, for reasons of its own\, decided not to cooperate. So\, effectively\, Iran was in a position to do what it wanted because it had no working understanding\, or working relationship with the U.S. and it has built a very complex presence inside Iraq” that has made it extremely influential on a number of fronts\, both culturally and militarily. Importantly\, “As its neighbors look at Iraq\, can they be indifferent to what sort of order is emerging in Iraq? The answer for Iran\, Turkey\, Syria\, and Saudi Arabia is a definite ‘no.’” What happens in Iraq will have a direct influence and impact on their security and interests. Until Iraq becomes autonomous and independent\, neighbors will have opportunities to influence the country. \n \n \nLooking to the future of Iraq\, Kubba said that there are two competing visions. The first perceives of Iraq as a modern state that has a clear citizen-state relationship irrespective of communal loyalties. He argued that despite the upheaval caused by the U.S. invasion\, “the most positive outcome is that Iraq has set itself up with an electoral system” and there is now tremendous pressure on the government to take the public’s demands into account – something that Iraq has not experienced in a long time. The second vision sees Iraq as a weak and fractured state that has strong ethnically divided communal centers or provinces. The various factions will be encouraged to overlook political agendas in favor of sectarian ones. Finally\, Kubba argued that “the new order is yet to materialize; we are still in a transitional phase in Iraq and I think it will take a while before the new order is shaped.”  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/iraq-balance-security-and-democracy-after-us-troop-withdrawal/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Panels,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22006_20106_1414918515-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101025T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101025T180000
DTSTAMP:20260411T084659
CREATED:20141026T133315Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105846Z
UID:10000992-1287993600-1288029600@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Barbara Stowasser Lectures on Concepts of Time in Islam
DESCRIPTION:Barbara Stowasser\, Director of the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies at Georgetown University\, was invited to Doha to deliver aFocused Discussion on the subject of “Time Sticks” and concepts of time in Islam\, to Georgetown faculty and staff. \n \n \nStowasser began the lecture by noting that “time is essential to the very structure of Muslim communal life. Time of ritual and worship of Muslim obligation are regulated according to celestial events – both lunar and solar.” She studied how the hours of the five daily prayers of Sunni Islam are controlled by the movement of the sun as well as its absence\, and how these rituals have been reconfigured in today’s globalized world of regimented time-keeping. The Islamic calendar\, she argued\, has been instrumental in holding the Islamic world together over geographic distances and over many centuries. \n \n \nIn order to calculate prayer times in the pre-modern era\, it was common to use “time sticks.” These\, Stowasser said\, are simple astronomical technologies that use shadow-length to measure daylight hours. They were part of religious knowledge and practice in all pre-modern societies\, including that of the ancient Egyptians\, the Babylonians\, the Chinese\, the Greeks\, and the Romans. Unfortunately\, she said\, very few of these have been preserved in the Muslim world\, but are prominently described in the literature. \n \n \nStowasser explained the difference between the notion of “seasonal time” that was used in the past and our modern conception of “abstract time.” In a world where the day is divided into abstract\, standardized\, and equal hours\, “the five Islamic ritual prayers endow the day with a specific pulse that remains a vital sign of time perception in Muslim societies\,” as these prayers are pegged to the older tradition of seasonal time and unequal hours. For millennia\, other than those who resided on the equator\, Stowasser argued\, human patterns of living and working were organized around local astronomical time that differed along shorter and longer hours of daylight throughout the year. \n \n \nExamining prayer times and standardization problems that arise as a result of geographical latitudes\, Stowasser argued that they vary in length depending on their position between the equator and poles. Since “Islamic prayer times depend on terrestrial latitudes\, this requires that prayer times should be defined in terms of shadow increase\, not shadow length\, which varies according to degree of latitude\,” she said. Thus\, shadow length in Mecca and Medina would not correspond with shadow lengths in other latitudes. “In the classical hadith\, the historical and the normative are intertwined\,” said Stowasser\, and so\, over time\, the five daily prayers were negotiated and then established. \n \n \nSurveying different historical periods\, Stowasser said that in the Islamic world\, the beginning of a new day started at dusk\, and so was in keeping with the mechanisms of the lunar calendar. With the advent of the mechanical clock in the fourteenth century\, time gradually became standardized across the nations. In the modern era\, in order to coordinate regional time for the establishment of railroad and telegraph systems\, longitudinal calculation was required to organize different time zones separated by geographic distances. “Technological progress has meant chronographic and calendrical standardization that eventually took on global validity. The Islamic prayer times are now regionally computed\, often by electronic means\,” Stowasser said. Moreover\, “technology has also created the concept of linear time; a relatively recent Western invention that is replacing or is poised to replace the multiple subjective and situation specific times of the past […] The new form of clock-based time is producing a new form of global psychology where time equals punctuality\, efficiency\, and economic rationality.” \n \n \nIn conclusion\, Stowasser said that “by way of early conquest and expansion\, the Islamic realm fell heir to several much older civilizations that had long traditions of scholarship in the theoretical and applied sciences. From an early date\, the science tradition was integrated into an Islamic world view\,” said Stowasser. Currently\, we are faced with Eurocentric and Western-enlightened critiques that claim pre-Islamic civilizations were profoundly mistrusted by an ever stricter Islamic orthodoxy. She argued\, however\, that the pre-modern Islamic texts do not support this critique. “In the Islamic world today\, the Western calendar provides a global point of reference\, even where the Islamic year reigns supreme\,” but\, she said\, in some areas of Yemen and Saudi Arabia\, “the old system has survived and created a system of double time-keeping.” \n \n \nDuring the past several decades\, Stowasser’s research and publications have focused on Islam and gender\, which has made her one of the early pioneers on this topic in the West. Among her publications is Women in the Qur’an\, Traditions and Interpretation and she co-edited and contributed to the volume Islamic Law and the Challenges of Modernity. At Georgetown\, Stowasser developed and taught all the graduate courses on Qur’anic tafsirand introduced the study of Islam and gender into the curriculum. Stowasser was the former Chair of the Department of Arabic (now the Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies\, in Georgetown College).  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/barbara-stowasser-lectures-concepts-time-islam/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22061_20016_1414919267-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR