Chapter 3: The Occidental Discourse of Jamal Al-Din Al-Afghani

The activities of this remarkable man [Afghani] thus encompassed practically all the lands of Islam and also those European Countries the governments of which are involved in the affairs of Muhammadan peoples. Afghanistan, Persia, Turkey, Egypt, India, all, at one time or another, experienced his potent contact and were affected by it. (Adams 2000:12)

The goal of this chapter is to analyze the Occidental discourse of Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1838-1897), who was one of the most influential and charismatic leaders of the Muslim world during the 1870s and who contributed to the future of Egypt in particular and of the Muslim world in general in several important ways, which I will explain in detail in the following paragraphs.

In this regard, the study argues that Afghani’s Occidental discourse was part of his larger understanding of reform and how it should be achieved. It also argues that Afghani’s interest in revolutionary political change and his willingness to work in unity with the Muslim governments and masses led him to promote many anti-Western views. The same factors also led Afghani to deemphasize his appreciation of the Western civilization and sciences when talking to Muslims and to focus instead on highlighting the threat Western colonialism posed to the Muslim world.

To prove the previous argument I will start with an overview of Afghani’s life and ideas about reform. Then I will analyze how Afghani viewed the West in general and America in particular. I will also examine Afghani’s views regarding the role of religion, particularly Islam, in the relationship between Islam and the West. I will conclude the chapter by summarizing the main characteristics of Afghani’s Occidental discourse.

1) Afghani’s Life

What are unique about Afghani’s life, in addition to his wide influence, were his continuous attempts to combine religious reform with political change. In this regard, Afghani, whose national origin and religious background are disputed (as some scholars believe that Afghani is a Sunni Muslim born and raised in Afghanistan and many others claim that he is a Shi’i Muslim born and raised in Persia) led a very active and productive life as a religious scholar who wanted to use his religious knowledge and political charisma to reform the thinking and circumstances of his contemporary Muslims (Keddie 1968:4). Today, Afghani is seen as the founder of the Islamic reform movement that spread all over the Muslim world in the second half of the nineteenth century, as the chief agitator against the incursion of European colonialism into the Muslim world during his life, and as the founder of the national movements in several Muslim countries, such as Egypt, Persia, and Turkey.

Afghani lived the life of a traveler, who toured the Muslim world and Europe advocating his ideas and beliefs and looking for alliances (among the political elites, the religious scholars, and the masses) that could help him put his ideas into practice. “Afghani,” Arthur Goldschmidt, Jr. (2002:180) noted, “pops up in almost every political movement that stirred in the Middle East in the late nineteenth century.” At the beginning of the 1860s, Afghani lived in Afghanistan and participated in the civil war that was fought between the sons of Afghanistan’s deceased ruler, Mohamed Khan. Afghani allied himself with of one the fighting brothers, Mohamed Azam, who was defeated by Shir Ali, who was supported by the British. In 1869, Afghani left Afghanistan and went on a tour, during which he briefly visited India, Egypt (forty days), Mecca, and Constantinople. In Constantinople, Afghani was warmly received by the Ottoman sultan, Abd al-Hamid and the leading scholars. Then, and as usual in Afghani’s life, he quickly gained fame and influence in the intellectual and political circles of his place of residence, but he also gained the envy and animosity of the ruling elite (both scholars and politicians). In March 1871, Afghani was forced to leave Constantinople for Egypt, where he stayed until September 1879.

Afghani’s years in Egypt were some of his life’s most fruitful years for several reasons (Keddie 1968:1-35). First, the 1870s in Egypt were a time when the negative influence of European colonialism was being widely felt by the Egyptian masses. It was during the 1870s when Egypt’s debt to Europeans rose dramatically and was followed by more European economic and political pressures on Egypt. Second, the 1870s were a time when an Egyptian national movement rose in popularity and sought to reform the country and to protect it against the incursion of the Europeans. Third, Egypt in the 1870s was one of the most modernized countries in the Middle East. Egypt had a large number of scholars and strong Islamic institutions (for example, Al-Azhar). Egypt also acted as an intellectual center for the Middle East, to which non-Egyptian Arab and Muslim intellectuals migrated to live and preach their ideas. For all the previous reasons, Egypt was a fertile soil for Afghani’s ideas, which focused on reforming Islamic thinking and on uniting Muslims against the incursions of the European nations.

Yet this did not mean that Afghani’s presence and activism in Egypt were welcomed by everybody. Afghani’s ideas created many enemies among two main groups. First, Afghani sought to reform Islamic thinking and education by emphasizing reason and rational thinking, teaching philosophy and natural sciences, and criticizing the stagnation of religious thinking and institutions at his time. Therefore, Afghani’s ideas gained many opponents among the Orthodox religious classes, who disagreed with Afghani’s liberal and philosophical approach to religion. Second, Afghani mixed his religious ideas with a direct call to the Muslim masses and to the religious scholars for action. Afghani, according to Keddie (1968:35), “helped organize and disseminate such tools of modern political action and education as the journal of opinion, the leaflet, and the secret political society, all of which have been important in changing the face of the Muslim world.” Afghani’s political activism ultimately alarmed Egypt’s political elite. Khedive Ismail welcomed Afghani and protected him. Yet soon after Ismail was forced to give up his chair to his son (Tawfiq), Afghani was expelled from Egypt.

After leaving Egypt, Afghani spent two years in India. Then he was expelled from India. He went to France, where he stayed for three years. According to Charles Adams (2000:8), Afghani engaged during his stay in Paris in a kind of “international propaganda,” to defend his agenda in Europe and to spread it from Europe to the Muslim world. In France, Afghani published editorials in the French press, engaged French writers, such as Ernest Renan, in intellectual dialogue on Islam and Islamic civilization. Thus, Afghani was perceived as an advocate for Muslim issues throughout Europe. In addition, Afghani worked with his closest Egyptian disciple (Mohamed Abduh) on publishing a weekly Arabic magazine that lasted for seven months. The magazine, called Al-Urwah a—Wathkah (the Indissoluble Bond), was printed in Paris and distributed throughout the Muslim world. The main goal of the magazine was to arouse Muslims against the incursions of the European colonialism. This pushed the British to ban the magazine from entering Egypt or India. Yet the magazine was distributed secretly and had a wide influence.

After the collapse of the magazine in 1884, Afghani traveled to Britain and then went to Russia and stayed there for four years. In 1889 he traveled to Persia and worked closely with the Persian shah for some time. In about 1891 Afghani was expelled from Persia. Then Afghani went to Baghdad, then to London. In 1892 Afghani was welcomed by the Ottoman sultan Abd al-Hamid in Constantinople, where Afghani stayed in “gilded captivity” until his death in 1897 (Adams 2000:12).

2) Afghani’s View of Reform

The Europeans have now put their hands on every part of the world. The English have reached Afghanistan; the French have seized Tunisia. In reality this usurpation, aggression, and conquest has not come from the French or the English. Rather it is science that everywhere manifests its greatness and power. Ignorance had no alternative to prostrating itself humbly before science and acknowledges its submission. In reality sovereignty has never left the abode of science. However, this true ruler is continually changing capitals. Sometimes it has moved from East to West, and other times from West to East. (Keddie 1968:102-103)

Afghani devoted his life and ideas to reforming Muslims’ conditions at two main levels: the religious and political. At the religious level, Afghani’s ideas centered on the importance of teaching modern sciences and philosophy to Muslims. In this regard, he criticized the Orthodox Islamic scholars for "dividing science into two parts: one they call Muslim science, and one European science,” which led them to forbid Muslims to learn “some useful sciences.” He also criticized the new schools that were opened in some Muslim countries, such as Egypt, to teach modern sciences for being incapable of spreading the spirit of knowledge and learning among Muslims. According to Afghani, what was lacking in both the traditional and the modern schools was the teaching of philosophy. Afghani defined philosophy as “the science that deals with the state of external beings, and their causes, reason, needs, and requisites” (Keddie 1968:105-106). But in general, Afghani meant the teaching of the spirit of scientific inquiry, the teaching of logic, and the spread of the rational way of thinking.

At the political level, Afghani’s ideas centered around two main notions. The first notion was Afghani’s belief in Islam’s ability to provide Muslims with an ideology that was capable of uniting them under the leadership of the Muslim caliphate and of encouraging them to change their circumstances (Imarah 1981:28-29). Throughout his writings, Afghani emphasized Islam’s call for Muslims to unite. He repeatedly quoted Quraniq verses that call on Muslims to unite with each other and to consider other Muslims as their brothers and sisters. He also called upon his contemporary Muslims to consider Islam as the only source of nationalism. “Muslims,” Afghani emphasized (Imarah 1981:35), “regardless of their countries, stay away from nationalities. They reject every kind of nationalism except Islamic nationalism. Once a believer in Islam truly believes, he would care less about his race and people [and care more about his religious link with other Muslims].”

Afghani blamed the disunity of Muslims on two main factors. The first factor was the Muslim rulers who, according to Afghani, cared about remaining in power and their prestige more than they cared about the interests of the Muslim masses. “The princes of the Orient,” Afghani (Imarah 1981:293) noted, “don’t care about what their titles really refer to. However, they care about having glorious titles and prestigious names. If an Eastern ruler loses his entire dynasty and money, and loses all his rights, but keeps his title he would be happy and would not care about what he lost.”

He also criticized the Muslim rulers, especially the Ottoman caliphs, for depending on foreign (European and non-Muslim) aides in running the Muslim countries more than they depended on Muslim assistants. He believed that the foreign experts or aides did not care enough about the real interests of the Muslim nations because their loyalties belonged to their original countries and peoples (Imarah 1981:48). He also believed that the Muslim countries should be governed only by two kinds of elites, the first being their own native leaders, who care about the interests of their own native people, and the second being the Muslim elites, even if they are foreigners, because Muslim elites should always care about the interests of Muslim masses in general (Imarah 1981:47-48).

The second factor that led to the disunity of Muslims, according to Afghani, was the lack of unity among the Muslim masses. In this regard, Afghani expressed frequently his disappointment in the lack of communication and caring among Muslims. “I cannot understand,” Afghani wondered (Imarah 1981:289), “how the Muslim nations reached this stage of lack of communication and ignorance about each other although they are geographically connected and close. Afghanis know and care very little about their Iranian brothers. And both Afghanis and Iranians hardly know anything about what is going on in India.”

Afghani believed that unity among the Muslim masses worldwide should start in the Islamic religious circles and schools (Imarah 1981:65). He also believed that the scholars were more capable than others of solving their differences, learning about other Muslim nations, and spreading Islamic unity and news among the Muslim masses. He felt that educating Muslims about their religious link with and duties toward other Muslims and educating them about the circumstances and suffering of other Muslims were first steps toward Islamic unity worldwide.

Afghani’s second main political goal was to agitate Muslims against European, specifically British, colonialism, especially in Egypt and in India. Most of Afghani’s Arabic political writings focused on describing the negative intentions of the British incursions into India and Egypt, on prescribing the actual and potential negative effects of those incursions, and on urging Muslims to unite with each other and to revolt against the British. Afghnai’s familiarity with East Asia and with the British occupation of India made him play the role of an alarmist against the British occupation all over the Arab world. “Whoever travels through the British colonies, like India,” Afghani warned (Imarah 1981:117), “can clearly see that the masses of those countries were subjugated to endless and immeasurable amounts of taxes and to temporary and permanent tariffs.” He also believed that the British intentionally divided the political elites of the countries they occupied in order to weaken them.

Therefore, Afghani repeatedly (Imarah 1981:161) warned the Egyptian khedive and the Ottoman caliph that Britain’s true intention was to occupy Egypt, which he considered (Imarah 1981:142) to be the “the most important Muslim nation” and the key to the Muslim East. Afghani’s message was at a time, in the late 1870s, when the true nature and intentions of the British incursion in Egypt were not clear or articulated. In response, Afghani was always disappointed with the lack of action on the part of the Ottoman and Egyptian rulers when it came to defending Egypt against the British invasion (Imarah 1981:155, 234).
3) Afghani’s Occidental Discourse

In the two previous sections I have explained how Afghani’s life and view of reform led him to try to utilize his religious knowledge and political charisma to encourage the Muslim masses to work with their governments to reform their conditions. Afghani also lived at a time when Western colonialism was spreading quickly in the Muslim world. Afghani used his prior knowledge of the circumstances of some Eastern European colonies, India in particular, to warn Egyptians against the threat of British colonialism. In this section, I will explain how these views influenced Afghani’s Occidental discourse and led him to hide his appreciation of some aspects of Western civilization.

1. Afghani’s Appreciation of Western Civilization

In May 1883, Afghani wrote an article in a French journal called Journal des Debats, responding to an article written by the French thinker Ernest Renan. According to Nikki R. Keddie (1968:85), Renan, in his article, accused Islam of being “hostile to the scientific and philosophic spirit.” He also criticized Arabs for being more hostile to science and philosophy than other Muslim nations. In response, Afghani wrote an article asking Renan to recognize the role Arabs played in leading the Muslim civilization and world and the role Muslims played in preserving and developing the sciences and philosophies originated by earlier civilizations, such as the Greeks, the Romans, and Persians.

The Arabs. …took up what had been abandoned by the civilized nations, rekindled the extinguished sciences, developed them and gave them a brilliance they had never had. Is not this the index and proof of their natural love for sciences? It is true that the Arabs took from the Greeks their philosophy as they stripped the Persians of what made their fame in antiquity; but these sciences, which they usurped by right of conquest, they developed, extended, clarified, perfected, completed, and coordinated with a perfect taste and a rare precision and exactitude. Besides, the French, the Germans, and the English were not so far from Rome and Byzantium as were the Arabs, whose capital was Baghdad. It was therefore easier for the former to exploit the scientific treasures that were buried in these two great cities. They made no effort in this direction until Arab civilization lit up with its reflection the summits of the Pyrenees and poured its light and riches on the Occident. (Keddie 1968:184-185)


What is striking about Afghani’s French article was that it included pro-Western views that were hardly expressed in Afghani’s Arabic writings. In the French article, Afghani adopted an evolutionary view of the role religion plays in society. He believed that nations “Muslim, Christian, or pagan” at their birth are incapable of fully using “pure reason” to guide their own masses. Instead, nations use religious dogma to subjugate the masses and direct them. Therefore, nations, once mature enough, should adopt a more scientific and philosophical way of thinking (Keddie 1968:182-184). This evolutionary perspective led Afghani to admit some Occidental ideas that he never mentioned in his Arabic articles. First, he admitted that Muslim societies, like all Christian societies, should follow the evolutionary march from barbarism to advanced civilization. Second, he admitted that Islam at a certain point was an obstacle to the development of sciences. “In truth,” Afghani said (Keddie 1968:183), “the Muslim religion has tried to stifle science and to stop its progress. It has thus succeeded in halting the philosophical or intellectual movement and in turning minds from the search for scientific truth.” Third, he believed that Christian societies had advanced toward civilization more than the Muslim ones because they earlier freed themselves more from religion.

All religions are intolerant, each one in its way. The Christian religion, I mean the society that follows its inspirations and its teachings and is formed in its image, has emerged from the first period to which I have just alluded; thenceforth free and independent, it seems to advance rapidly on the road of progress and science, whereas Muslim society has not yet freed itself from the tutelage of religion. ...I cannot help from hoping that Muhammadan society will succeed someday in breaking its bonds and marching resolutely in the path of civilization after the manner of Western society. (keddie 1968:183)


The fact that Afghani hardly mentioned such Occidental perspectives in his Arabic writings, as I will show later, led some scholars, such as Nikki R. Keddie (1968:90), to accuse him of using double discourse, one directed toward the Muslim masses and the other directed toward Westerners. When speaking to the Muslim masses, Keddie believed that Afghani was more willing to use religion and religious discourse to motivate the masses politically. When talking to Westerners, Keddie thought (1968:90), Afghani used a more rational and philosophical approach that refrained from using religion. Regardless of the accuracy of Keddie’s hypothesis, it is clear that Afghani’s Occidental discourse when talking to Western audience was quite different from his Occidental discourse oriented toward the Muslim masses.

2. Afghani’s Occidental Discourse When Talking to Muslims

Most of Afghani’s Arabic Occidental discourse focused on one main goal, to encourage Arab Muslims to revolt against the British incursions in Egypt and India. To achieve his goal, Afghani developed and spread three main images of the West.

I will start with describing the British individual, in summary: he is possessed of little intelligence, steadfast, greedy and dissatisfied, stubborn, patient, and arrogant. The Arab or the Oriental is possessed of great intelligence, irresolute, satisfied, fearful, impatient, and humble. The British insists on his wrong opinion even if he has hastily said it. The Oriental will not insist on his correct opinion or on seeking his own rights. Therefore, the former (the British) will always overcome the latter because of his perseverance. And the latter (the Oriental) will lose all his rights because of his lack of patience. (Imarah 1981:75)


The first image dealt with the British/Western individual in contrast to the Muslim/Oriental individual. At this level Afghani could not hide his admiration of the character of the European individual. He saw Westerners as risk-taking people who are willing to challenge their own selves and their surrounding circumstances in order to achieve their goals. In contrast, he saw Easterners as ignorant and fearful people who complain too much but lack the patience and resolve needed to achieve their goals. On the other hand, he accused Westerners of being greedy people seeking to exploit the resources of the weaker nations. He also accused the Western individual of being deceptive and unwilling to admit his mistakes even if he is sure about them. In contrast he saw Muslims as less ambitious people, who are not willing to stand up for their rights even when they feel that they are treated unjustly.

The British, as a nation, no body can deny that they are one of the most civilized nations. They know the meaning of justice, and apply it; but only in their country, with the British, with themselves. (Imarah 1981:85)

The second image, which is the most widespread Occidental image in Afghani’s writings, dealt with the British as a nation in its relations with the Muslim countries. At this level Afghani held his most anti-Western views. First, He saw the British society as a racist society that knew the true meaning of justice and human rights but applied them only among its own people. Second, he saw Britain as a greedy nation seeking to exploit others. Third, Afghani’s most repeated image of the West is the image of Britain as a deceptive nation that skillfully hid its greed and animosity toward the Muslim/Eastern countries. In this regard, Afghani spoke constantly about how the British intervened in the Muslim nations under the guise of helping and supporting the Muslim masses and rulers. However, as Afghani believed, the true intention of the British was to divide the Muslim societies and rule them. Afghani believed that the British hid their true intentions not only because they were evil, but also because the British disliked wars and preferred to take over the Muslim countries through political manipulation and economic control. Afghani also believed that the British tended to hide their intentions in order to minimize Muslims’ resistance to their incursions and because they were militarily weak, especially in wars on land. He saw the British military as a weak military that lacked courage and that could be easily defeated if it was met with reasonable resistance by the Muslim masses.

Afghani believed that whenever the British entered a Muslim country they showed great respect to the country, its people, and its culture. They presented themselves as the best friends of the Muslim masses and the rulers. Then the British would start to agitate the various segments of the Muslim societies and elites against each other. They would provide the Muslim rulers with loans and weapons that they could use to fight their rival Muslim elites. Then, when all the various segments of the Muslim society were weak and defeated, the British intervened to impose their financial and military control over the Muslim countries. Therefore, Afghani advised Muslims repeatedly not to believe or trust the British.

The British controlled about one third of the world without shedding much of their blood or spending lots of money. …They did that by using the weapon of deception and dishonesty. They enter the countries and nations as cruel lions covered with the soft skin of snakes. They introduce themselves as honest servants and trustworthy aids, who only care about enforcing security and [providing] relief, improving order, stabilizing regimes, enforcing laws, empowering sultans, and through other types of tricks and conspiracies.

When they want to intervene in the affairs of an Eastern country and find out that this country is ruled by a strong intelligent governor, and when this righteous Muslim governor starts to hinder their plans and delay their march toward their goal, they begin to agitate his people against him. …They encourage his enemies. …They induce some members of the ruling family to revolt against and challenge him. This will give them the opportunity to intervene in the fight between the ruler and his competitors.

They may also do what they did with the Indians, when they spread all over the country as traders and trading companies. …Then, they divided the world of Indian rulers and encouraged each Indian prince (raja) to seek independence from the country [India] until the country got dismantled into small dynasties. Then they encouraged each prince to fight against another prince seeking to defeat him and to take over his dynasty. Ultimately, the vast Indian lands became a stage for fighting and every prince fell in need for money and soldiers to defend his dynasty or to overcome his [Indian] enemy. At that time, the British [deceptively] intervened with open hearts to lend a hand to the fighting parties. (Imarah 1981:290)


Once the British controlled a Muslim country, as Afghani prescribed, they started to dismantle its military and to fire the native employees from the administrative sector. They depended on foreigners in running the country. They cut spending on education and health care and devoted most of the country’s resources to paying its mounting debt. This scenario would lead the whole country, as Afghani predicted, into poverty and deprivation.

Two years ago [the British] entered Egypt, the land of peace and tranquility, at a time when the Egyptians were living in good economic conditions and in security. Today, because of the British justice and the good British administration, Egypt became the land of conspiracies, and the land of corruption and disorder. The [British] justice ruled to deprive thousands of citizens and to expel them from their government jobs, while they have children and have no other source of income. And the British replaced them with British employees. The market went into recession. The farmers could not work in their fields because of the lack of security and the spread of rioting. …Poverty dominated the farmers and they became unable to pay their debts and unable to pay their due taxes to the government (Imarah 1981:148).


In contrast to this image, Afghani saw Easterners as ignorant, unsophisticated people, who were easily deceived by the British at the beginning. Yet Afghani believed that Easterners came to realize quickly the negative effect of European colonialism on them at all levels. At the same time, Afghani complained frequently about the lack of action on behalf of the Muslim masses when it came to revolting against the British. He also criticized the Ottoman and Egyptian rulers constantly for their lack of action to defend Egypt.

The third image dealt with the relations among the European governments, especially the relations between the British and the French. At this level Afghani liked to refer to the existence of competition and animosity among the European nations over the control of the East. He believed that the European countries were driven in their internal competition with each other by their national interests and ambitions. In the early months following Britain’s occupation of Egypt in 1882, Afghani hoped that the other European powers would force Britain to withdraw from or ease its control over Egypt. When Europe failed to pressure Britain, Afghani expressed his huge disappointment.

The previous paragraphs reveal several important facts about Afghani’s Occidental discourse. First, they show that Afghani liked and hated the West simultaneously. He liked Western philosophy and sciences and the character of the Western individual and at the same time hated Western colonialism and its manipulations of the resources of the Muslim world. This ambivalent attitude, in addition to Afghani’s circumstance and view of reform, led him to hide his appreciation of the Western philosophy and sciences, to simultaneously praise and mock the character of the Western individual, and to use double discourse, one when talking to Muslims and the other when talking to Westerners.

4) Afghani’s View of America

Afghani used America to enforce his preconceived ideas about Western colonialism as a heartless system that was willing to discriminate against all of its colonies and that could only be resisted by the force of public uprisings. In this regard, Afghani only mentioned America twice in the Arabic writings I surveyed. In the first case, Afghani spoke proudly about Americans as an example of a people who revolted against British colonialism. Afghani (Imarah 1981:73) called George Washington “the great General Washington” because of Washington’s role in leading the American independence movement from the British. Afghani also spoke about how the British and Americans shared the same religion, Christianity, and how this fact did not protect the Americans from British injustice. He spoke about how the British kept imposing more taxes on the Americans until the latter decided to revolt. The American Revolution, for Afghani, was a proof that complaining against British injustice would not lead Muslims anywhere unless they revolted against the British as the Americans did.

In the second instance, Afghani referred to America as the place to which the Irish immigrated, running away from the religious persecution of the British (Imarah 1981:147). In this instance, Afghani was trying to give another example of the injustice of the British and that the British were willing to persecute their colonies’ masses, even if the colonized masses were Christian.

5) Role of Islam in Afghani’s Occidental Discourse

The essence of the East’s problem is the fight between the Easterner and the Westerner while each of them is putting on (disguised with) a religious disguise. The Westerner uses Christianity as a cause. The Easterner uses Islam. However, the peoples of the two religions resemble two deaf machines controlled by the hands of their movers. Those who dominate Christianity manipulate religion for the sake of the worldly life and they know the matters of their worldly life and what it requires. Those who practice Islam manipulate their worldly life for the sake of religion and because they don’t follow their religion’s guidance they lose both. (Imarah 1981:9)

In general, Afghani did not believe that Europe and the Muslim world were engaged in a religious war. He believed that the struggle between the East and the West was a struggle over power and resources and believed that whoever owned more knowledge and power could overcome and subjugate the other. Afghani (Imarah 1981:13) considered the Ottomans to be colonizers the same as the British and the Europeans. Moreover, he (Imarah 1981:16) saw the Ottomans as bad colonizers who had only mastered the art of war and did not know how to build civilizations. This is why he felt that it was normal for the Ottomans’ colonies to revolt against the Ottoman rulers. He also believed that if the Ottomans were good colonizers they would have kept their various colonies under their control even if the masses of those colonies were not Muslim.

In addition, Afghani thought that the British were mainly driven by their interests and greed and that they treated weaker nations unjustly even if they were Christian. For a proof, Afghani referred to the example of the British persecution of the Americans and of the Catholic Irish. He also referred to the continuous competition among the European nations over wealth and resources although all of them were Christian.

Therefore, Afghani did not really believe that the European colonization of the Muslim world was pushed by religious motives. Yet Afghani, in a few instances, used religiously loaded language to agitate Muslims against the British. For instance, Afghani (Imarah 1981:143) described the British as “the enemy of Muslims” who were pushed by “strong animosity” to dominate the Muslim nations. In the same instance, Afghani described Britain’s domination of Muslims as a way to “take revenge from the religion [Islam].” In another instance, Afghani (Imarah 1981:235) warned Muslims that “every Muslim should know that it is its [Britain’s] intention to end this religion [Islam] and its people [Muslims] from the earth.” In a third case, Afghani accused Britain of using religion to create divisions between the Sudanese, who were Muslims, and the people of Ethiopia (Habasha), who were Christian. Fourth, Afghani (Imarah 1981:293) accused the British of discriminating against Muslims and denying them jobs in the Indian government because of their Islamic religion.

6) Conclusion: General Characteristics of Afghani’s Occidental Discourse

I conclude this chapter by highlighting some key characteristics of Jamal al-Din al-Afghani’s Occidental discourse.

First, Afghani lived in Egypt at a time, during the 1870s, when Western pressures on Egypt were real and were widely felt. Those pressured could be traced to the beginnings of the 1840s, when several European countries allied with the Ottoman Empire to put an end to Mohamed Ali’s attempt to modernize Egypt. They were also felt during the 1850s, 1860s, and 1870s, when Egypt increasingly fell in debt to Europeans, who forced Egypt to appoint European observers over its economy. In addition, Afghani was able to predict the European occupation of Egypt that started three years after he left Egypt and lasted for more than seven decades.

Second, Afghani saw reform as the solution to Muslims’ decay and to the threats of European colonialism. He believed Muslims can reform their circumstances if they reform their understanding of Islam in a way that leads them to improve their circumstances and to unite together under the leadership of a righteous Muslim caliphate. He also believed that once Muslims reformed their thinking and unite together they would be able to resist Western colonialism. To achieve this goal, Afghani devoted his life to educating the Muslim masses and governments about his ideas and to warn them against the threat of Western colonialism.

Third, despite Afghani’s negative views of Western colonialism and its policies toward the Muslim world, he still looked up to Europe as a model of civilization that Muslims could learn from. In this regard, Afghani liked Western sciences, philosophy, and rationality. He also praised the Western individual for being active, independent, and risk-taking.

Fourth, to serve his reform project, Afghani used several discourse tactics to mobilize his information about the West and force Westerners to fit his agenda. In this regard, Afghani used the following distinct discourse strategies:

He used double discourse, one when talking to Muslims and another when talking to Westerners in order to remain consistent before his Muslim audience. When talking to Muslims Afghani emphasized his negative views of the West and deemphasized his positive ones.

Afghani exaggerated the weakness of the British soldiers and militaries in order to encourage Muslims to revolt against the British. He also exaggerated the readiness of Muslims to revolt against the British. He described Easterners as people who hated the British very much and saw no benefit or hope in the British occupation. He encouraged the Egyptian and Ottoman rulers to revolt against the British, promising them that if they revolted against the British, the Muslim masses would join and support them. He over-emphasized the weakness of the British military and the animosity that other European countries held against the British. In response, his expectations always fell short and he constantly ended up expressing disappointment, especially regarding the lack of action on behalf of the Muslim masses and rulers.

Afghani used binary language to contrast the character of the Western individual with the character of the Eastern individual. In this regard, Afghani believed that Westerners were more active and resolute than Easterners. But he still believed that Westerners were greedy, stubborn, and deceptive.

Although Afghani viewed America as a Christian nation, he saw America in a different and more positive light than the rest of Western countries. Afghani viewed America mainly as a country that was colonized by Europe. By doing so, he associated America with the Muslim countries that were subjugated by European colonialism. He also introduced America to the Muslim world as a positive model of a country that freed itself from colonialism.

Although Afghani did not believe that Western policies were motivated by religion, he used religion a few times to agitate Muslims against the British. Deep in his mind Afghani did not consider religion to be the main cause for the conflict between the West and the Muslim world, as he believed that politics were motivated by political and materialistic motives and interests more than anything else. Yet Afghani provides a dangerous example of how religion can be used as a political means to agitate the Muslim masses. Afghani’s political character and tendencies made him use religion in a few instances to agitate the Muslim masses against the British by portraying Britain as a nation whose policies in the Muslim world encompassed deep animosity to Islam and Muslims.