What do you think?
Rate this book
Islam after Communism: Religion and Politics in Central Asia
Adeeb Khalid combines insights from the study of both Islam and Soviet history in this sophisticated analysis of the ways that Muslim societies in Central Asia have been transformed by the Soviet presence in the region. Arguing that the utopian Bolshevik project of remaking the world featured a sustained assault on Islam that destroyed patterns of Islamic learning and thoroughly de-Islamized public life, Khalid demonstrates that Islam became synonymous with tradition and was subordinated to powerful ethnonational identities that crystallized during the Soviet period. He shows how this legacy endures today and how, for the vast majority of the population, a return to Islam means the recovery of traditions destroyed under Communism.
Islam after Communism reasons that the fear of a rampant radical Islam that dominates both Western thought and many of Central Asia’s governments should be tempered by an understanding of the politics of antiterrorism, which allows governments to justify their own authoritarian policies by casting all opposition as extremist. Comparing the secularization of Islam in Central Asia to experiences in Turkey, the former Yugoslavia, and other secular Muslim states, the author lays the groundwork for a nuanced and well-informed discussion of the forces at work in this crucial region.
Islam after Communism reasons that the fear of a rampant radical Islam that dominates both Western thought and many of Central Asia’s governments should be tempered by an understanding of the politics of antiterrorism, which allows governments to justify their own authoritarian policies by casting all opposition as extremist. Comparing the secularization of Islam in Central Asia to experiences in Turkey, the former Yugoslavia, and other secular Muslim states, the author lays the groundwork for a nuanced and well-informed discussion of the forces at work in this crucial region.
253 pages, Paperback
First published December 19, 2006
10 people are currently reading
422 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
September 14, 2018
A very insightful and often harrowing book about the impact of Communist rule on the peoples of Central Asia. While today they are marginal to world events, historically speaking the regions of Bukhara, Samarkand, Tashkent and others in Central Asia were among the most intellectually and culturally important centers of Islamic civilization. When the Tsars invaded and annexed them to the Russian empire in the 19th century, their status began to decline. But it was only with the Bolshevik Revolution that Central Asia was really torn off from the rest of the world, with its culture and society never transforming indelibly.
The era of Stalinist rule over Central Asia completely changed the region, including popular understandings of Islam, The traditional schools and clerical establishments that had transmitted the religion ceased to exist. Because the repression was so total, the historical record is not even entirely clear what happened. But by the time the worst of the purges had ended, the mosques, schools and clergy that had been the holders and transmitters of Central Asia’s ancient religious culture had been completely eradicated. Mosques that had existed for hundreds of years were levelled, while famous clerics and intellectuals disappeared into Siberian gulags. It was like a thick blanket of fog had descended over the region and by the time it lifted almost nothing was left of the old society.
In the decades after the worst of the repression had ended, new understandings of Islam began to take hold. Instead of a religious philosophy, so to speak, Islam became a component of ethnic identity. Contrary to popular belief the Soviet Union encouraged distinct nationalist identities among its subject peoples, as long as such identities were subsumed into a broader current of Soviet patriotism. Most everyone in Central Asia then and now considers themselves “Muslim,” but their Muslimness is very much tied and inextricable to the identity of being Uzbek, Tajik or Kazakh - provincial identities which themselves had been largely defined by the Russians.
Because of the decades of isolation from the rest of the world that they experienced under the Soviet Union, their understanding of what it means to be Muslim is also very different from their coreligionists in the rest of the world. For most, it is much more tied to a Russian identity and there is less of an emotional attachment to the causes and issues that other Muslims around the world tend to hold dear. It is a difficult dynamic to explain but it is familiar to me and Khalid does a good job of articulating it. The way that people practice Islam is unique and very much tied to ethnic community. Women and older men are widely expected to practice the religion “on behalf” of the community, which is by definition Muslim as a collective. Young men are exempted from abiding by rules, but since the Prophet Muhammad received revelation at 40 and died at 65, these are key markers of when they should start taking such matters more seriously. This is obviously a novel way of conceiving Islam which is alien to most Muslims around the world and throughout history, but it is the understanding that grew in isolated local conditions under Russian rule.
The experience of Communism was not as uniformly negative as some paint it out to be. There were real gains in material wellbeing for many ordinary people. Pre-Communist society was hardly a cultural golden era, and, though there were vital links to the past that were severed with the arrival of the new rulers, some genuinely oppressive aspects of the ancien regime were also cast off. Muslim modernists like the Jadidists actually welcomed the revolution at first and saw it as a vehicle to put forward their own reformist ideas about Islamic thought and practice, though they were later eradicated as the Bolsheviks gained the strength to implement their full program.
Even greater than the Soviets, perhaps, has been the tragedy of the post-Soviet regimes, which have maintained all the brutality and totalitarianism of the Communists but without the attempts to socialize material goods for the benefit of the masses. The result has been brutal repression and the suffocating regulation of any independent thought or organization, including any practice of Islam not under the absolute control of the state, mixed with unchecked kleptocracy and rulers who maintain cults of personality. The way that Islam is regulated and managed in these countries basically precludes any form of genuine spiritual or intellectual role for the religion. The accepted state religion is merely a handmaiden for the policies of tyrannical government. Any small religious gathering, practice or study must registered and closely monitored by state officials. Those who dare to practice any sort of independent thought are deemed enemies of the state and wind up in prisons notorious for torture and humiliation, where a prisoners piety is often used as a weapon against them. In such an environment it is not surprising that jihadism has arisen from some quarters of Central Asian society, as it is the only form of Islam that could survive such Darwinian conditions while matching the ruthlessness and brutality of the state. It’s a sad state of affairs, particularly when ones takes into consideration what a site of cultural and intellectual flowering this region once was.
This is an excellent book about one of the least understood parts of the world. While it is an academic work it is quite accessible as an introduction to Central Asia and its history, particularly its fraught experience with Russian and Bolshevik rule. Khalid has a gift for covering a lot of ground in a short amount of space, thought this book only really suffices as an introduction to a very broad subject. Islam continues to exist in Central Asia, but in ways deeply colored by the Communist past and its promotion of state atheism and ethnic identity. It is interesting to see where things head in an era of globalization, which is continuing to transform religious ideas and practice around the world.
The era of Stalinist rule over Central Asia completely changed the region, including popular understandings of Islam, The traditional schools and clerical establishments that had transmitted the religion ceased to exist. Because the repression was so total, the historical record is not even entirely clear what happened. But by the time the worst of the purges had ended, the mosques, schools and clergy that had been the holders and transmitters of Central Asia’s ancient religious culture had been completely eradicated. Mosques that had existed for hundreds of years were levelled, while famous clerics and intellectuals disappeared into Siberian gulags. It was like a thick blanket of fog had descended over the region and by the time it lifted almost nothing was left of the old society.
In the decades after the worst of the repression had ended, new understandings of Islam began to take hold. Instead of a religious philosophy, so to speak, Islam became a component of ethnic identity. Contrary to popular belief the Soviet Union encouraged distinct nationalist identities among its subject peoples, as long as such identities were subsumed into a broader current of Soviet patriotism. Most everyone in Central Asia then and now considers themselves “Muslim,” but their Muslimness is very much tied and inextricable to the identity of being Uzbek, Tajik or Kazakh - provincial identities which themselves had been largely defined by the Russians.
Because of the decades of isolation from the rest of the world that they experienced under the Soviet Union, their understanding of what it means to be Muslim is also very different from their coreligionists in the rest of the world. For most, it is much more tied to a Russian identity and there is less of an emotional attachment to the causes and issues that other Muslims around the world tend to hold dear. It is a difficult dynamic to explain but it is familiar to me and Khalid does a good job of articulating it. The way that people practice Islam is unique and very much tied to ethnic community. Women and older men are widely expected to practice the religion “on behalf” of the community, which is by definition Muslim as a collective. Young men are exempted from abiding by rules, but since the Prophet Muhammad received revelation at 40 and died at 65, these are key markers of when they should start taking such matters more seriously. This is obviously a novel way of conceiving Islam which is alien to most Muslims around the world and throughout history, but it is the understanding that grew in isolated local conditions under Russian rule.
The experience of Communism was not as uniformly negative as some paint it out to be. There were real gains in material wellbeing for many ordinary people. Pre-Communist society was hardly a cultural golden era, and, though there were vital links to the past that were severed with the arrival of the new rulers, some genuinely oppressive aspects of the ancien regime were also cast off. Muslim modernists like the Jadidists actually welcomed the revolution at first and saw it as a vehicle to put forward their own reformist ideas about Islamic thought and practice, though they were later eradicated as the Bolsheviks gained the strength to implement their full program.
Even greater than the Soviets, perhaps, has been the tragedy of the post-Soviet regimes, which have maintained all the brutality and totalitarianism of the Communists but without the attempts to socialize material goods for the benefit of the masses. The result has been brutal repression and the suffocating regulation of any independent thought or organization, including any practice of Islam not under the absolute control of the state, mixed with unchecked kleptocracy and rulers who maintain cults of personality. The way that Islam is regulated and managed in these countries basically precludes any form of genuine spiritual or intellectual role for the religion. The accepted state religion is merely a handmaiden for the policies of tyrannical government. Any small religious gathering, practice or study must registered and closely monitored by state officials. Those who dare to practice any sort of independent thought are deemed enemies of the state and wind up in prisons notorious for torture and humiliation, where a prisoners piety is often used as a weapon against them. In such an environment it is not surprising that jihadism has arisen from some quarters of Central Asian society, as it is the only form of Islam that could survive such Darwinian conditions while matching the ruthlessness and brutality of the state. It’s a sad state of affairs, particularly when ones takes into consideration what a site of cultural and intellectual flowering this region once was.
This is an excellent book about one of the least understood parts of the world. While it is an academic work it is quite accessible as an introduction to Central Asia and its history, particularly its fraught experience with Russian and Bolshevik rule. Khalid has a gift for covering a lot of ground in a short amount of space, thought this book only really suffices as an introduction to a very broad subject. Islam continues to exist in Central Asia, but in ways deeply colored by the Communist past and its promotion of state atheism and ethnic identity. It is interesting to see where things head in an era of globalization, which is continuing to transform religious ideas and practice around the world.
March 10, 2008
While it had some interesting information, the complete one-sided hypocritical nature of the arguments lead to a complete lack of credibility for the author. I dont care what your politics are, but for me branding al-Banna (the man who started the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt) and Saaed Qutb (the jihadist whos essays are credited with being the insperation to al-Qaeda)as being respectable politicians is absolutely repulsive!
January 12, 2021
Adeeb Khalid analyzes Islam in Central Asia from the early period of the Soviet Union up to the post-independence period.
He starts with the global view of Islam, how it is viewed in the West, and how it is in Central Asia. He proves that Islam, being perceived as violent and harmful is created and is the result of the failed policy of twentieth-century global superpowers.
One of the main ideas of the book is the "accommodation" of Islam in the region. The USA used religion in order to invoke the local population and lead them to overcome the communist regime. Books were published in local languages and spread to foster an anti-communism mood. At the same time, the Soviet government was also engaged in using Islam to keep people under control. The main tool was the institutionalization of control over religious practices and traditions.
Both failed as USSR ceased to exist. However, the policies they rooted in the region resulted in further post-independence outcomes. The governmental institutional control of religion remains as a mechanism for regimes to stability and support from the West at the same time.
The author focuses mainly on Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in some parts, however, he gives a good picture of the state of Islam in Central Asia generally.
It is a good book for those who want to know about religion in Central Asia and Islam in the region. It gives an introduction to some actual global issues concerning Islam in the world and their reflection in Central Asia. To read this book much acquaintance with the region is not needed. But, it is a good start to studying the post-communism religion and politics if interested.
He starts with the global view of Islam, how it is viewed in the West, and how it is in Central Asia. He proves that Islam, being perceived as violent and harmful is created and is the result of the failed policy of twentieth-century global superpowers.
One of the main ideas of the book is the "accommodation" of Islam in the region. The USA used religion in order to invoke the local population and lead them to overcome the communist regime. Books were published in local languages and spread to foster an anti-communism mood. At the same time, the Soviet government was also engaged in using Islam to keep people under control. The main tool was the institutionalization of control over religious practices and traditions.
Both failed as USSR ceased to exist. However, the policies they rooted in the region resulted in further post-independence outcomes. The governmental institutional control of religion remains as a mechanism for regimes to stability and support from the West at the same time.
The author focuses mainly on Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in some parts, however, he gives a good picture of the state of Islam in Central Asia generally.
It is a good book for those who want to know about religion in Central Asia and Islam in the region. It gives an introduction to some actual global issues concerning Islam in the world and their reflection in Central Asia. To read this book much acquaintance with the region is not needed. But, it is a good start to studying the post-communism religion and politics if interested.
September 1, 2022
great book!
February 12, 2015
The auhtor takes a refreshing look at a complex issue: Islam and politics in Central Asia (with applications to the rest of the world as well). It offers up the generalizations made by the West (primarily Americans though as it turns out) and then complicates these generalizations to demonstrate how problematic it is to persist with the binary of "good" or moderate Muslims and "bad" or extreme Muslims. In the end, there is a whole spectrum of Muslims and beliefs, and most of the political issues of the the region are local in nature and have very little to do with Islam specifically (more rather to do with the economy, political, etc. which are however, admittedly informed by religious beliefs--but similarly so in pluralistic Christian nations too). There are of course terrorists among Muslims who do resort to violence, but Khalid reveals that these groups did not originate in Central Asia and have only recently (2004 or so) become an issue: Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan are the three nations most focused on (but Afghanistan is also discussed at length).
This book argues that history matters: 70 years of Soviet rule in Central Asia left a legacy that once ended in 1991, still had effects into the 21st century. It was transformative “in a mold that set Central Asia apart from much of the rest of the Muslim world. All form of Islamic expression came under sustained assault in the Soviet period: patterns of transmission of Islamic knowledge were damaged, if not destroyed; Islam was driven from the public realm; the physical markings of Islam, such as mosques and seminaries, disappeared. The Soviet period also saw the emergence of strong secular, ethnonational identities among Central Asians, as well as the creation of new political and cultural elites firmly committed to such identities. Independence has not meant the evaporation of these identities, nor of the elites that shaped them” (2).
As Central Asia "remains one of the least-known and least-understood parts of the world,” Khalid is smart to produce a book that explains why the region's nations did not become free-market democracies in the post-communist era as many naive westerners hoped (3).
By way of brief outline offered up by Khalid (a bit reductive of course, but sadly true of a significant number of Americans):
Fundamental, reductive understanding of post-9/11 Islam: “Why do they hate us? The United States (the West) hated by the Islamic states (both groups are monolithic). When journalists and scholars try to explain “good” vs. “bad” Muslims, they tend to equate being ok with American foreign policy as good and everything else as bad. Greater spectrum and poor terminology to begin with. Islam in Central Asia reveals the complexity of Islam as a historical phenomenon, its internal diversity, and the infinite possibilities that reside in it (202).
Islamist vs. Jihadist:
Islamism: political modernity (anti-communist)/political ideology based on scripture/not tradition vs.(13). Modernist. 1920s-40s
Jihadism: jihad interpreted in purely a military sense—conquest of power and championing of the shariat as the law of the land (16). Fundamentalist. 1980s
The USA supported extreme jihadists against Communism because it resisted the socialist powers that were anti-religion, pro-female education, and free/mandatory public education (17). “The last act of the Cold War was an American-Sponsored jihad against Soviet atheism” (18).
The Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989 and collapsed in 1991. US invaded Iraq that year, and the jihadists were none too happy about it. Al-Qaeda and the events of 9/11 have been thus described as the “unfinished business of the Cold War” (18).
It is convenient politically to blame actions on “fundamentalists” and now terrorists. U.S.’s war on terror—military and economic aid and diplomatic support come to those who speak out against it rhetorically (169). “The government of Islam Karimov [Uzbekistan] has had two overriding goals since the collapse of the Soviet Union: to suppress all domestic opposition and to achieve regional hegemony in Central Asia” (170). Islamic persecution is rather sever in Uzbekistan. “The mere possession of banned literature is proof of criminal intent” (180). The country and Karimov became loyal supporters of the U.S. post-9/11 and became viewed as “a stable, moderate force in a turbulent region” (185). “Central Asian regimes justify their policies toward Islam as a defense of secularism.” This gains them sympathy but the threat of Islamic militancy is vastly exaggerated for political gain (191). “Central Asia has many potential sources of instability [successions, the region’s economy, the ecological side effects of urbanization, etc.], and Islamic militancy ranks low on the list” (198).
This book argues that history matters: 70 years of Soviet rule in Central Asia left a legacy that once ended in 1991, still had effects into the 21st century. It was transformative “in a mold that set Central Asia apart from much of the rest of the Muslim world. All form of Islamic expression came under sustained assault in the Soviet period: patterns of transmission of Islamic knowledge were damaged, if not destroyed; Islam was driven from the public realm; the physical markings of Islam, such as mosques and seminaries, disappeared. The Soviet period also saw the emergence of strong secular, ethnonational identities among Central Asians, as well as the creation of new political and cultural elites firmly committed to such identities. Independence has not meant the evaporation of these identities, nor of the elites that shaped them” (2).
As Central Asia "remains one of the least-known and least-understood parts of the world,” Khalid is smart to produce a book that explains why the region's nations did not become free-market democracies in the post-communist era as many naive westerners hoped (3).
By way of brief outline offered up by Khalid (a bit reductive of course, but sadly true of a significant number of Americans):
Fundamental, reductive understanding of post-9/11 Islam: “Why do they hate us? The United States (the West) hated by the Islamic states (both groups are monolithic). When journalists and scholars try to explain “good” vs. “bad” Muslims, they tend to equate being ok with American foreign policy as good and everything else as bad. Greater spectrum and poor terminology to begin with. Islam in Central Asia reveals the complexity of Islam as a historical phenomenon, its internal diversity, and the infinite possibilities that reside in it (202).
Islamist vs. Jihadist:
Islamism: political modernity (anti-communist)/political ideology based on scripture/not tradition vs.(13). Modernist. 1920s-40s
Jihadism: jihad interpreted in purely a military sense—conquest of power and championing of the shariat as the law of the land (16). Fundamentalist. 1980s
The USA supported extreme jihadists against Communism because it resisted the socialist powers that were anti-religion, pro-female education, and free/mandatory public education (17). “The last act of the Cold War was an American-Sponsored jihad against Soviet atheism” (18).
The Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989 and collapsed in 1991. US invaded Iraq that year, and the jihadists were none too happy about it. Al-Qaeda and the events of 9/11 have been thus described as the “unfinished business of the Cold War” (18).
It is convenient politically to blame actions on “fundamentalists” and now terrorists. U.S.’s war on terror—military and economic aid and diplomatic support come to those who speak out against it rhetorically (169). “The government of Islam Karimov [Uzbekistan] has had two overriding goals since the collapse of the Soviet Union: to suppress all domestic opposition and to achieve regional hegemony in Central Asia” (170). Islamic persecution is rather sever in Uzbekistan. “The mere possession of banned literature is proof of criminal intent” (180). The country and Karimov became loyal supporters of the U.S. post-9/11 and became viewed as “a stable, moderate force in a turbulent region” (185). “Central Asian regimes justify their policies toward Islam as a defense of secularism.” This gains them sympathy but the threat of Islamic militancy is vastly exaggerated for political gain (191). “Central Asia has many potential sources of instability [successions, the region’s economy, the ecological side effects of urbanization, etc.], and Islamic militancy ranks low on the list” (198).
July 23, 2012
Quite honestly could be my favorite history book recently read. In only 200 pages, Khalid does a great job of doing a quick survey of Islamic Theology, a quick history of Central Asia, and a detailed explanation of Islam's history in the region from the beginnings of Bolshevik control up to the 21st century.
What really amazes me about this book is how Khalid uses just a few short sentences to explain a concept that I have trouble making clear in paragraphs. He explains the complexity of Islamic thought in the region, how clerics have interacted with state power, and how modern rulers of Central Asian Republics have used Islam as a shadowy boogeyman in foreign relations. And he does this all with just a few short keystrokes.
Although Khalid writes this book as a survey (it is endnoted, not footnoted), it may help to have some basic knowledge before you start. I'm sure if I gave this book to my mother she would have some questions about things that Khalid takes as assumed knowledge, but in this day and age, having wikipedia nearby is nearly always a good idea.
Read this book. If you're hearing about the spectre of Islam haunting Central Asia, if you think that life in the USSR was so bad that any alternative is a good alternative, if you think that "Islamicism" is a thing and that Islam stands as a monolith, read this book. There are hundreds of other reasons to read this book, too, but those are the ones I'll give off the top of my head.
What really amazes me about this book is how Khalid uses just a few short sentences to explain a concept that I have trouble making clear in paragraphs. He explains the complexity of Islamic thought in the region, how clerics have interacted with state power, and how modern rulers of Central Asian Republics have used Islam as a shadowy boogeyman in foreign relations. And he does this all with just a few short keystrokes.
Although Khalid writes this book as a survey (it is endnoted, not footnoted), it may help to have some basic knowledge before you start. I'm sure if I gave this book to my mother she would have some questions about things that Khalid takes as assumed knowledge, but in this day and age, having wikipedia nearby is nearly always a good idea.
Read this book. If you're hearing about the spectre of Islam haunting Central Asia, if you think that life in the USSR was so bad that any alternative is a good alternative, if you think that "Islamicism" is a thing and that Islam stands as a monolith, read this book. There are hundreds of other reasons to read this book, too, but those are the ones I'll give off the top of my head.
July 21, 2021
4.5 stars. I thought this book was very well written. The author reasserted his claim frequently and appropriately to make two main points- 1. Islam is diverse 2. Islam in Central Asia is less tied to religion and more about national identity. I learned a great deal about Central Asia. At times I wished he would reiterate what certain terms meant, but otherwise I thought this was well written.
July 21, 2020
This book is valuable. The main thesis that it suggests is that Central Asia's culture were under de-islamization for a long governance of Soviet Union.
June 28, 2019
মধ্য এশিয়ার চারটি স্তান - তুর্কমেনিস্তান, উজবেকিস্তান, কিরঘিযস্তান আর কাজাখস্তান। এই চারটিকে এক সময়ে বলা হত তুর্কিস্তান। তখন আজকের মানচিত্র ছিল না। সোভিয়েত ইউনিয়ন গঠনের পর এই মানচিত্রের সীমারেখা অংকন করা হয়। মুসলিমপ্রধান এই দেশগুলোতে বলশেভিকরা ক্ষমতা নেবার বেশ আগে থেকেই জারের শাসন বলবত ছিল। তবে প্রথম বিশ্বযুদ্ধের শেষ সময়ে এ অঞ্চলে কিছুটা জাতীয়তাবাদী এক ধর্মীয় আন্দোলনের জন্ম হয়। যার নাম জাদিদ বাদ। জাদিদ বাদের কথা ছিল - প্রথাগত মাদ্রাসা শিক্ষার সাথে বিজ্ঞান শিক্ষার সমন্বয়, আধুনিকতার প্রসার আর জারের শাসন থেকে বেরিয়ে আসার স্বপ্ন দেখা। বলা বাহুল্য, সেই স্বপ্ন ধুলোয় মিশে যায় বলশেভিকরা ক্ষমতায় এলে। তবে বহু জাদিদ পরে কম্যুনিস্ট পার্টিতে যোগ দেন। কারণ, তাদের অনেকেই আরবির সাথে সাথে রুশ জানতেন। সোভিয়েত ইউনিয়ন ভেঙে যাবার কিছু আগে থেকেই সিয়াইএ এ অঞ্চলে ধর্মের প্রসারে বেশ কিছু গোপন কার্যক্রম চালায়। যেমন- কয়েক লক্ষ কোরান শরিফ স্থানীয় ভাষায় মুদ্রণ করে এ অঞ্চলে পাচার করা হয়। যদিও ৮৭ সালের দিকে গর্বাচেভ গ্লাসনস্ত আর পেরোস্ত্রোইকা শুরু করলে সিআইএ এর সেই পরিকল্পনা অনেকটা যেন মাঠে মারা যায়. কারণ, ধর্ম তখন এমনিতেই বাঁধ ভাঙা জোয়ারের মতো সমাজে ঢুকে পড়ে. লুকিয়ে ঢোকার কোনো বাধ্যবাধকতা তখন আর ছিল না. ইউনিয়নের পতন হলে আশা করা গিয়েছিল, কমুনিস্ট শাসনের সত্তরের বছরে ধর্ম পালন নিয়ে যে রাখঢাক ছিল, সেটি উঠে যাবে। কিন্তু বাস্তবে কিন্তু তেমনটা ঘটেনি। কারণ শুরু দিকে রশিতে কিছুটা ঢিল দিলেও পরে উজবেকিস্তানের প্রেসিডেন্ট ইসলাম করিমভ দেখতে পায়, আফগানিস্তানের আগুন তাজিকিস্তান হয়ে ধেয়ে আসছে তার দেশের দিকে। ফলে তিনি ফিরে গেলেন সেই সোভিয়েত সময়ে। ধর্ম পালনের স্বাধীনতা রইলো, তবে নিয়ন্ত্রিত রূপে। এইযে সোভিয়েত পরবর্তী সময়ে এ অঞ্চলে ইসলামের অবস্থান- এসব নিয়েই আলোচনা হয়েছে এ বইতে।
যারা মধ্যে এশিয়ার এ দেশগুলোর ইতিহাস কিংবা বর্তমান সমাজ নিয়ে জানতে আগ্রহী, এ বইটি কেবল তাদের জন্যেই।
যারা মধ্যে এশিয়ার এ দেশগুলোর ইতিহাস কিংবা বর্তমান সমাজ নিয়ে জানতে আগ্রহী, এ বইটি কেবল তাদের জন্যেই।
January 15, 2015
Felt obliged to re-read this considering recent events among them IS-recruitment to Syria in Central Asia, and this is one biased account, if not in complete denial. It serves as a handy introduction to CA, though, still other less biased books is a neccessity.
August 6, 2008
I learned a lot from this updated account of post-Soviet Islam in Central Asia. It was a great resource for my summer research project on traditional believers and gov't Islam in CA.
May 22, 2013
Works well as a primer on Islam in Central Asia (with a useful bibliography at the end of it all), but for more depth look elsewhere.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews