Tampilkan postingan dengan label English Articles. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label English Articles. Tampilkan semua postingan

Jumat, 05 Juni 2015

A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH TO THE PHENOMENON OF HALAL FOOD: A CASE OF MALAYSIA

Adem EFE[1], Mehmet OZAY[2]

Abstract
The social interactions of Malay Muslims with non-Muslim Malaysians emerged depending on the circumstances have become the subject of various researchers in the modern era. The concept of Halal Food, which has been popularized through the establishment of various religio-bureaucratic institutions, can be considered as a unique area for the ethno-relations around the food consumption in Malaysia. In this sense, the relationship of ethno-social and religious segments structured around the phenomenon of Halal Food conditioned around deserves to be considered as a research field of Sociology of Religion. This treaty deals with concisely the phenomenon of Halal Food which draws attention as one of the salient stages of the socio-political changing process in the country. This process, as a conscious preference of Malay political elites, has been the subject of construction which was supposed to guarantee social existence of Malay Muslims who had been recognized socio-economically as the underprivileged segment. The phenomenon of Halal Food, brought up through the various institutions in Malaysia, has not been in the personal initiative of the Malay Muslims, instead it has already been moved to public arena by the force of implementation of law. The usage of this phenomenon in technical sense attracts attention as one of the strong symbolic expressions of institutionalized Islam. This process work as two dimensions. The first one is related to demands of Malay Muslims who became the subject of expansion of higher education and urbanization especially since the late of 1970s and specially 1980s. On the other hand, it has also functioned as a vehicle to make the non-Muslim minorities to recognize that Islam is the dominant religio-cultural aspect of the Malaysian society. As revealed by some researchers, there is no doubt that the practices during this era not only correspond to social demands in one side, but also are considered as reflections of Islamization in political field owing to the internal and external factors.

Keywords: Halal Food, Malay Muslims, Globalization, Social change.

This paper was presented in the II. International Halal and Healthy Food Congress, 7-10 November, 2013, Konya-Turkey.

See for details: 
http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/95036154/sociological-approach-phenomenon-halal-food-case-malaysia




[1]Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Theology–Isparta, Turkey
[2]Researcher, Kuala Lumpur, Malezya.

Rabu, 13 Maret 2013

“Preliminary Thoughts Upon The Policies of The Ottoman State In the 16th Century Indian Ocean”


Mehmet Özay                                                                                                                   13 Mart 2013

For a new perspective to understand the involvement of the Ottoman State into the political issues in the Indian Ocean in the 16th century. Further the function of the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam must be revisited to conceive the salient developments in the eastern and western parts of this ocean.

Abstract 
This article aims to sketch concisely about the relationships between the Ottomans and the Portuguese pertaining to the developments in the Indian Ocean in the first half of the 16th century. The purpose of the Portuguese Kingdom to establish hegemony in the eastern seas occurred in an era when Ottoman State’s borders reached nearly the central Europe. After annexing the Mamluk Sultanate, the Ottomans expanded its borders and became adjacent to the Indian Ocean. After having great efforts to be a vigorous power in the Black, Aegean and Mediterrenean Seas from the mid of the 15th century onwards, the Ottomans gave prominence on the advancement of the navy which was considered as complementary to the conventional army in the expansion of the state. Nonetheless, there are disputed accounts among the academicians pertaining to assessment of the Ottoman sea-power against its challenge to the Portuguese sea power in terms of the developments in the Indian Ocean.

World Journal of Islamic History and Civilization, History and Civilization, Academy of Islamic Studies, University of Malaya, 3 (1): 09-20, 2013, ISSN 2225-0883, IDOSI Publications, 2013, DOI: 10.5829/idosi.wjihc.2013.3.1.3102.

Kamis, 17 Mei 2012

ACEH REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION: CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES

By: Hasballah M. Saad                                                                  January, 2006 

Since 1873, when the first expeditions of Dutch mission arrived in Bandar Aceh Darussalam, later on named as Kota Raja, Acehnese people have lived within a very long conflict situation until 1942. Similar condition continued during the Japanese army invasion which took over control on Aceh until 1945. From the time of the independence day August, 17th,1945 up till now, many kinds of conflicts have been continuing, such as Civil War (1946), Second Aggression War (1948), Darul Islam Movement (1953-1962), Communist Party Rebellion (1965-1970), the Aceh Free Movement (1976- 2005) and later on the unbelievable tsunami and earthquake on December, 26th, 2004.

It is not very difficult to think about the impacts of such unrest on the civil society’s daily life. Thousands of public facilities such school buildings were destroyed, private properties damaged, community leaders and teachers killed during the conflict era. Consequently the younger generation who grow up during the conflict situations has exhibited a very unstable and violent character. And later on, the tsunami and earthquake brought a complete destruction and hopelessness to the Acehnese people. Just within the range of 10 minutes, the earthquake and the tsunami waves on the morning of December 26th, 2004, took the life of more than 300,000 people. Widows, orphans and homeless people were scattered over the coastal regions in Aceh.

The Tsunami, on the one side had created a very enormous effect on the people and coastal region in Aceh. It also affected the economic, political and cultural aspects of the Acehnese daily life: severe destruction to Aceh and the Acehnese population. On the other hand, the tsunami has caused the warring parties in the region to direct their attention to the fate of the Acehnese population who were then in the state of real emergency and helplessness. At least partly on this humanitarian basis, the two parties agreed to meet for the purpose of building peace for Aceh which was indicated by the signing of the peace agreement between the Aceh Free Movement and the Government of Indonesia in Helsinki, Finland on August, 15th, 2005.

Thanks God, it is really a blessing in disguise, even though the Acehnese and people around the world are facing the biggest challenge, the peace agreement has become a very important momentum for us to define the better future for Aceh, because of three reasons. First, the peace was achieved and could be very important modalities for development; rehabilitation and reconstruction of the New Aceh.3 Now we are coming to a very important question: What kind of New Aceh that we want to build? What kind of tool that we have in hand to prepare and what kind of model of development that has to be referred to in terms of our references?

We have to deal with the tsunami affected areas and the results of a very long conflict simultaneously. The mandate of the BRR Aceh and Nias4 at the beginning didn’t include the peace agreement consequences, such as compensation and re integration fund and management for former Aceh Free Movement members. That is something that has to be considered as additional part to the original mandate of BRR. For this case, consequently BRR has to adjust the organizational structure and its budget.

Second, the people around the world have a very strong willingness and commitment to take care and bring so many resources to Aceh, in terms of emergency relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction aids. The problem is how to manage and use the fund effectively and efficiently, without any misuse and or being useless. Transparency, accountability, and public participations have to be considered as important parts of the management of reconstruction process. The clear maps of problems and accurate identification of damage and needs are the other conditions to be considered.

Third, there is a common objective to be achieved between the Aceh Free Movement and the Government of Indonesia, to help and to provide a better future of life for Acehnese, after tsunami and at the end of the conflict. This objective was supported by not only by Civil Society, and the Acehnese people in Aceh, but also by the Acehnese Communities, and people around the world. For your information, currently there are more than 300 International NGOs and UN agencies working in Aceh conducting various programs. Some of these agencies work on humanitarian aids such as development of people houses, food supplies program, health and education services, and long term development program such as infrastructure development, public facilities, financial support and economic recovery.

The problem is there is very limited trust from the international side to both government agencies and BRR and its partners. So what should we do to provide better services to protect all of the third conditions as mentioned above?

There are two main important areas which have to be mentioned. First, the planning stage, even though the National Planning Agency has already provided the blue print of Rehabilitation and Reconstruction for Aceh and Nias Post Tsunami Era, the very important question remains to be answered related to the descriptions of New Aceh concept.

Many people have perceptions that the blue print of rehabilitation and reconstruction of Aceh and Nias is very much of physical oriented. This is caused by very poor and lack of understanding of local genuine, wisdom, values, character, and culture. In the blue print of development, culture development was put as a part of development that was identified as a physical aspect such as building, facilities, group of dancer, and so on. There are very poor in values system and it is beyond the meaning of any kind of performance and models of construction and physical development. Actually, within the frame of the New Aceh concept, any development aspects must consider the four system values: (1) Acehnese character and culture, (2) Islamic values as majority people references, (3) Nationality values as a part of the Indonesian State, and (4) Humanity values as a reference of human being.

The related question is how can we implement and elaborate those values system into the blue print of reconstruction? There is still an opportunity to be discussed, even though the blue print already exists. Shall we open the opportunity to evaluate and revise the plan of this development?

Second, does the Organizational Structure, Leadership and Management of BRR have a strong willingness to be criticized and open minded to adjust and improve the capacity, capability, sensibility of the team, in terms of moving toward the true and clear New Aceh concepts mentioned above. The four values system must be considered as a reference in all stages of development. It is not too late to make an adjustment, because we have another three years of four year reconstruction period.

Are we convinced that the New Aceh concepts could be achieved within the four year reconstruction period? I do believe that it is not easy for BRR and any other related agencies doing effective work without good and effective coordination. Political support from the Government of Indonesia, the Aceh Free Movement, and the Civil Society in Aceh and around the world is necessary and even vital. Who will take responsibility to provide the necessary support is not just BRR, but include all local government elements, community leaders, civil society leaders, ulamas, NGO activists, and politicians both at district, provincial and national levels.

We have to change the paradigm of development, not to provide and reconstruct the model we already had before. There is no any vision looking forward. Actually Aceh before tsunami and the end of conflict is not the desired picture of Aceh. We have to come to a new perspective, to give a maximum opportunity for the people of Aceh to achieve their own better life in the future, by providing the facilities, supports, references, and spirit to do it by their own way and capacity. The goal of development is how to push people to be more civilized, respect to human being, move to more modern lifestyle, but based on traditional root and their own cultural values. The character building is more important than physical construction and development.

How do we define the goal of development of Aceh to be more cultural based and put the character building as a central part of development should be considered in the future? How do we use the values system mentioned above to be a reference in any stages of development which are more important to be considered than building a very good physical construction planning, without a clear vision and philosophical values beyond the reconstruction and rehabilitation activities.
People who live in Aceh have to play the central and strategic role of development. Any kind of development that was planned in the blue print have to considered that the subject of rehabilitation and reconstruction is the people’s life in Aceh, as a part of Indonesia, with very specific conditions, because of conflict and tsunami impact.

The destruction in Aceh is not only caused by the natural disaster such as tsunami and earthquake, but also as the impact of a very long period of armed conflict, and so on. In the other part of the world such as Japan after the 2nd World War, or Germany after Hitler Regime, and other countries have a similar damages. In the Holy Qur’an, it is clearly related a story on Saba kingdom5 as a very clear example for us to learn such experiences. Macedonia, Greek and Mongol Kingdom in the West and South Asia Region in the past were gone with the time, because of their failure to rebuild after the damage. Their golden age was gone with the wind. But Japan and Germany and other First Countries, such as Italy, Great Britain, Spain, America, Australia, and Korea, tell us successful stories how to deal with their own problems in the past. The existing achievement of development depends on right and appropriate strategic of development design, management quality of the development process, and of course the quality of planning and design. Supported resources could be useless if we fail to prepare all the necessary conditions.

How about the Aceh case after the conflict and tsunami disaster? The answer is in the hand of all of us, BRR, the Government of Indonesia, the (former) Aceh Free. Movement, civil society in Aceh and around the world, and of course International Agencies as well as donor countries.

At the end of my speech, allow me on behalf of all of tsunami and conflict victims to extend our gratitude and thanks the Government of Norway, as well as the Holland and other European Union Countries who have committed to work hand in hand with the Government of Indonesia. And also for other countries who work very hard and donate so many important things to prepare a better future life for the Acehnese, for Indonesia.
Thank you for your kind attention.

Kamis, 12 April 2012

Prof. Dr. Anthony Reid ve Çalışmaları / Anthony Reid and His Works


Mehmet Özay                                                                                                                          12.04.2012

English 

Anthony Reid, one of the founding fathers of rediscovery of Southeast Asian history in the last few decades, has been inspiring many academicians in various fields of social sciences, and particularly history.

The attention which we are trying to take is related to his mentorship in Aceh history. The way of his study has become very encouraging for not only Acehnese, Indonesian, but also for some other researchers and nationalities such as Australian, Malaysian, Japanese, American, German, British etc.  We may argue that Prof. Reid has a special attention to Aceh history.

He developed his relations with Acehnese academicians such as Isa Sulaiman and became a board member of Aceh Institute. Though Isa Sulaiman passed away in the tsunami 26th December, 2004, Reid has continued to be mentor of some young intellectuals who come together at Aceh Institute.

The importance of Reid in terms of Aceh his attempts to organize international Aceh conferences after MoU Helsinki, 15th August, 2005. Thus he established a board of international members to highlight an institutions establishment. Though he had more difficulties throughout the process he seems to have succeeded to have held three conferences titled International Center of Aceh Indian Ocean Studies (ICAIOS). The first in 2007, at Hermes Palace in Banda Aceh, the second (2009) and third (2011) at Unsyiah and IAIN Ar-Raniry.


Turkish 

Güneydoğu Asya tarihi çalışmaları konusunda önemli isimlerin başında gelen Prof. Dr. Anthony Reid Avustralya kökenli bir akademisyen. Reid’i konu almamıza yol açan unsur nedir diye sorulabilir? Reid, sadece genel itibarıyla Güneydoğu Asya tarihi değil, özelde Açe tarihi konusunda köklü çalışmaları ile bir anlamda görece genç akademisyenlere rehber olmuş bir şahsiyettir. Bu rehberliği sadece görev yaptığı üniversite(ler) ile sınırlı olmamış, Açe’yi şu veya bu şekilde ilgi alanına almış başta Açeli, Endonezyalı olmak üzere Avustralya, İngiltere, Almanya, ABD, Japonya, Malezya gibi dünyanın hemen her yanından araştırmacılara, akademisyenler onun eserleri ile Açe’ye nüfuz etme gereği duymuşlardır.

Bu bağlamda, Reid’in, Açe’ye dair özel bir ilgi beslediğini söyleyebiliriz. 1990’lı yıllarda, Açe’nin önde gelen sosyologu İsa Süleyman başta olmak üzere, o dönem Açeli genç akademisyenler ile birlikte Açe Enstitüsü’nü kurmuş ve yönetim kurulu üyeliği yapmıştır. Bir anlamda kurumun ‘beyni’ hüviyetinde olan İsa Süleyman, 26 Aralık 2004 tarihinde gerçekleşen tsunamide hayatını kaybetmesi kuruma kan kaybettirmiş olabilir. Ancak Açe Enstitüsü “mentor” İsa Süleyman’ın yolundan gitmeye devam ediyor. Bu çerçevede Anthony Reid de danışmanlık noktasında söz konusu kurumu yalnız bırakmıyor.

Reid’in Açe için önemli kılan bir diğer yönü, elbette Helsinki Barış Anlaşması’nın imzalandığı 15 Ağustos 2005 tarihinden bugüne kadar gerçekleştirilmesine öncülük ettiği Uluslararası Açe Konferansları dizisi oldu. Bu konferanslar Uluslararası Açe ve Hint Okyanusu Konferansı (ICAIOS) olarak yapılandı ve kurumsallaşma konusunda önemli girişimler gerçekleştirildi. İlki 2007, ikincisi 2009 üçüncüsü 2011’de Banda Açe’deki çeşitli mekanlarda gerçekleştirilen bu konferanslar dizisi, özellikle Açe gerçeğini tarihi, kültürel, sosyal, ekonomik, barış süreci vb. bağlamları ile çok geniş bir katılımla ele alınmasında gözardı edilemeyecek bir birikimin oluşmasına neden oldu. Reid, bu konferanslar dizisi başlangıcında oluşturduğu uluslararası komite (ki içinde Türkiye’den de bir üye bulunuyor) ile bu oluşumun kurumsallaşmasını planlıyordu. Ve ilgili ülkeler adına katılımcı üyelerin gayretleri ile bu gerçekleştirilecekti. Ancak bu güne kadar sözde ülkeler adına yer alan katılımcıların (şayet varsa) çabalarının olumlu sonuç doğurduğu söylenemez. Örneğin, en son 2001 yılı Mayıs ayında yapılan üçüncü konferansın eş-başkanlığını yürüten kıymetli dostumuz Dr. Saiful Mahdi, Reid’in kişisel desteği olmasaydı, bu konferansın gerçekleştirilemeyeceğini dile getirmişti.  

Burada amacım, söz konusu kurumsallaşmayı detayına ele almak değil. Sadece Reid’in sadece Açe ve uluslararası akademi dünyası için değil, Açe halkı için ne anlam ifade ettiğini ortaya koymak adına kısada olsa bir değini yapmak istedim.

Uzun yıllar Singapur Ulusal Üniversitesi (NUS) Asya Araştırmaları Merkezi’nden görev yapan Reid, yaklaşık birbuçuk yıl once emekli oldu. Reid, emekliliğinin ardından doğduğu topraklara yani Avustralya’ya dönerek Avustralya Ulusal Üniversitesi’nde göreve başladı.

Aşağıda, benim de çeşitli çalışmalarımda kaynak olarak kullandığım Reid’in eserlerini sizlerle paylaşmak istiyorum. Bugüne kadar ulaştığım bu kaynaklara ilave olarak henüz “keşfedemediğim” eserleri olabilir. Bu bağlamda, siz okuyucuların katkısına açığım. Reid’in çalışmalarını en son yayınlanan eserden başlayarak yazıldığını hatırlatmak isterim.  

Anthony Reid'in Eserleri

Anthony Reid, R. Michael Feener and Patrick Daly (eds), Mapping the Acehnese Past. Leiden: 163-181, 259-278. (Kadı, İsmail Hakkı, Peacock, A.C.S. and Gallop, Annabel Teh. 2011. Writing History. The Acehnese embassy to Istanbul, 1848-52.)

Anthony Reid, To Nation By Revolution,Indonesia in the 20th century, NUS, Singapore, 2011.

Anthony Reid, “Chinese on the mining frontier in Southeast Asia” Chinese Circulations: capital, commodities, and networks in Southeast Asia / Eric Tagliacozzo and Wen-Chin Chang, (eds), Duke University Press, 2011.

Anthony Reid, Imperial Alchemy: Nationalism and Political Identity in Southeast Asia, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010.

Anthony Reid,  Aceh and the Turkish connection. In Arndt Graf, Susanne Schroeter, Edwin Wieringa (eds)  Aceh: history, politics and culture.  Singapore: 26-38, 2010.

Anthony Reid, “Fr Pecot and the Earlier Catholic Imprints in Malay”, In Lost Times and Untold Tales From the Malay World, (ed) Jan van Der Putten; Mary Kilcline cody, NUS Press, Singapore, 2009, pp. 177-186.

Anthony Reid and Michael Gilsenan (eds),  Islamic legitimacy in a plural Asia, Roudledge, London, 2007.

Anthony Reid, “Aceh between two worlds: an intersection of Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean”, Cross Currents and Community Networks; the history of the Indian Ocean world / edited by Himanshu Prabha Ray and Edward A. Alpers, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2007.

Anthony Reid, “Indonesia's post-revolutionary aversion to federalism”, Federalism in Asia, edited by Baogang He, Brian Galligan, Takeshi Inoguchi. Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA : Edward Elgar, 2007.

Anthony Reid, “Introduction”, (Ed.) Anthony Reid, Verandah Of Violence -The Background to the Aceh Problem-, Singapore University Press, 2006, (p. 1-22).

Anthony Reid, “The Pre-modern Sultanate’s View of Its Place in the World”, (Ed.) Anthony Reid, Verandah Of Violence -The Background to the Aceh Problem-, Singapore University Press, 2006, (pgs. 52-72).

Anthony Reid, “Colonal Transformation: A Bitter Legacy”, (Ed.) Anthony Reid, Verandah Of Violence -The Background to the Aceh Problem-, Singapore University Press, 2006,(s. 96-108).

Anthony Reid, “Remembering and forgetting war and revolution”, Beginning to remember: the past in the Indonesian present / edited by Mary S. Zurbuchen. Seattle : Singapore University Press in association with University of Washington Press, 2005.

Anthony Reid, “Writing the history on Independent Indonesia”, Nation-building:five Southeast Asian histories (eds), Wang Gungwu, Southeast Asian histories, Singapore : Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2005. 

Anthony Reid, The Ottomans in Southeast Asia, Asia Research Institute (ARI), Working Paper Series, No. 36, National University of Singapore, February, 2005.

Anthony Reid, “Global and Local in Southeast Asian History”, International Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2004.

Anthony Reid, “Aceh’s View of Its Place in the World: 1500-1873”, (Ed.), The Historical Background of the Aceh Problem,  Asia Research Institute National University of Singapore, 28-29 May 2004, Singapore.

Anthony Reid, “Chinese trade and Southeast Asian economic expansion in the later eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries : an overview”, Water Frontier: commerce and the Chinese in the Lower Mekong Region, 1750-1880 / edited by Nola Cooke and Li Tana, Singapore : Singapore University Press ; Lanham, MD : Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.

Anthony Reid, An Indonesian Frontier -Acehnese and Other Histories of Sumatra-, SingaporeUniversity Press, Singapore, 2005.

Anthony Reid, “Economic and Social Change: 1400-1800, (Ed.), Nicholas Tarling, The Cambridge History of Southeast Asia, Vol. II: From 1500-1800, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004.

Anthony Reid, “Technology and Language: Negotiation The Third Revolution in the Use of Language”, In Language Trends in Asia, (ed), Jennifer Lindsay, Tan Ying Ying, Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore, Singapore, 2003.

Anthony Reid, "The VOC and Euro-Chinese Urban Model", In Traders as Historians Studying Southeast Asian History From the Dutch East India Company (VOC) Records, An International Symposium, Presented by Humanities and Social Studies Education Academic Group, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, 6 September, 2002.

Anthony Reid, “Understanding Melayu (Malay) as a Source of Diverse Modern Identities”, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 32 (3), syf 295-313, October 2001, The National University of Singapore, Sinpagore.

Anthony Reid, Charting The Shape of Early Modern Southeast Asia, Cornell University Library, Ithaca, New York, 1999.

Anthony Reid, Witnesses to Sumatra -A Travellers’ Anthology-, Oxford University Press, Kuala Lumpur, 1995.

Anthony Reid, “Islamization and Christianization in Southeast Asia: The Critical Phase, 1550-1650, (Ed.); Anthony Reid, Southeast Asia in the Early Modern Era:Trade, Power and Belief, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1993.

Anthony Reid, “Introduction”, (Ed.), Anthony Reid, The Making of An Islamic Political Discourse in Southeast Asia, Aristoc Press Pty, Centre of Southeast Asian Studies, Monash University, Clayton-Victoria, Australia, 1993, (s. 1-17).
           
Anthony Reid, “Economic and Social Change: 1400-1800”, (Ed.), Nicholas Tarling, The Cambridge History of Southeast Asia, Vol. I, Part I: From early times to 1500, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992.

Anthony Reid, “King, Kadis and Charisma in the Seventeenth Century Archipelago”, (Ed.), Anthony Reid, The Making of An Islamic Political Discourse in Southeast Asia, Aristoc Press Pty, Centre of Southeast Asian Studies, Monash University, Clayton-Victoria, Australia, 1993, (pgs. 83-109).

Anthony Reid, “The System of Trade and Shipping in Maritime South and Southeast Asia, and the Effects of the Development of the Cape Route to Europe” In H. Pohl (eds.), The European Discovery of the World and its Economic Effects on Pre-Industrial Society, 1500-1800, Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 1990 (pp. 73-96).

Anthony Reid, “Elephants and Water in the Feasting of Seventeenth Century Aceh”, JMBRAS, Vol 62, Part 2, No 257, 1989.

Anthony Reid, Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce 1450-1680, Volume One: The Lands below the Winds, Yale University Press, 1988.

Anthony Reid, Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce 1450-1680, Volume Two: The Lands below the Winds, Yale University Press, 1988.

Anthony Reid, “Contests And Festivals In Seventeenth Century Aceh”, Bunga Rampai Temu Budaya Nusantara PKA-3 (Pekan Kebudayaan Aceh) (The Third Aceh Cultural Festival), (Ed.), H. Ismuha, (Ed.), Syiah Kuala University Press, Banda Aceh, 1989, (pgs. 9-33).


Anthony Reid, “The Islamization of Southeast Asia”, In Historia: Essays in Commemoration of the 25th Anniversary of the Department of History University of Malaya, (eds.) Muhammad Abu Bakar, Amarjit Kaur, Abdullah Zakaria Ghazali, Kuala Lumpur: The Malaysian Historical Society, 1984.

Anthony Reid, “The Structure of Cities in Southeas Asia, Fifteenth to Seventeenth Centuries”, JSAS (Journal of Southeast Asian Studies), Vol. XI, No. 2, September 1980.

Anthony Reid, The Blood of the People -Revolution and the End of Traditional Rule in Northern Sumatra, Oxford University Press, Kuala Lumpur, 1979.
           
Anthony Reid, “The Structure of Cities in Southeast Asia: 15th-17thCenturies,  (Ed.), ‘The Indian Ocean in Focus’ International Conference on Indian Ocean Studies, Section III The History of Commercial Exchange&Maritime Transport, Perth Western Australia, People Helping People, 1979.

Anthony Reid, “Trade and State Power in the 16th and 17th Century Southeast Asia”, Seventh IAHA Conference, 22-26 August 1977, Bangkok, Vol. I. Proceedings, (pgs. 391-421).


Anthony Reid&Shiraishi Saya. (1976). Rural Unrest in Sumatra 1942: A Japanese Report” Indonesia, No. 21 (April), Cornell Modern Indonesia Project, (pgs. 115-134).

Anthony Reid, “Habib Abdurrahman Az-Zahir: 1833-1896, Indonesia, No. 13 (April), Cornell Modern Indonesia Project, 1972. (syf. 37-61)

Anthony Reid. (1971). The Birth of the Republic in Sumatra”, Indonesia, No. 12 (October), Cornell Modern Indonesia Project, (pgs. 21-46).

Anthony Reid, The Contest For North Sumatra -Acheh, The Netherlands and Britain (1858-1898)-, Oxford University Press, Kuala Lumpur, 1969.

Anthony Reid, “Indonesian Diplomacy A Documentary Study of Atjehnese Foreign Policy in the Reign of Sultan Mahmud: 1870-4”, JMBRAS, Volume XLII, Part 2, December, 1969. (pgs. 74-115)

Anthony Reid, “Sixteenth Century Turkish Influence in Western Indonesia”,  JMBRAS, Vol. X, No. 3, December, 1969.

Anthony Reid, “Nineteenth Century Pan-Islam in Indonesia and Malaysia”, The Journal of Asian Studies, February 1967, 26, 2.

A. J.S. Reid. (1966). “A Russian in Kelandan?”, Peninjau Sejarah, Journal of the History Teachers’ Association of Malaya, Vol 1. No. 2, December, (pgs.: 42-47).


Minggu, 25 Desember 2011

The Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam As A Constructive Power[1]



Dr. Mehmet Ozay

Abstract

Aceh history has long been mainly taken into consideration in the context of Southeast Asian or Malay archipelago history. However, there is not much attention given to the fact that the Sultanate of Aceh played a very salient role globally in Islamic world. This paper argues a hypothesis that the Sultanate of Aceh had commenced a watershed apparently in its relation with the centre of Islamic world to construct a new political concept of Pan-Islamism in the very early decades of the 16th century and as its succession in the 19th century.

Due to this, Aceh history should be perused concerning the centre-periphery contextual situation of the Islamic world. The significance of the moulding power of the center is admittedly unquestinable. Nevertheless, it is also a fact that the center cannot exist without its periphery. The mutual relationship between the center and its periphery shares substantive responsibility in a manner of being constructive. It means the fact that the latter has some power to mould as well as give a direction to the former. Concerning the inter-relational approach between the centre and its periphery of Islamic world, the relation of the Sultanate of Aceh with the Ottoman State became one of the hallmarks of the development of the idea of Pan-Islamism. The Sultanate aimed to have a relation in almost equal terms so as to exclude the Portuguese ultimately from Southeast Asia in the 16th century, and to protect sovereignty in its homeland from the invasion of the Dutch colonialism in the 19th century. This state policy should be regarded as a triggering intervention for the creation of a new concept in the Islamic history such as Pan-Islamism. Thus this article reexamines the ways in which Acehnese sultans’ promoting Pan-Islamist ideology in relation with the Ottoman State on the basis of common sources and particularly the contemporary news and commentaries in the journal of Basiret which was published for about 60 news commencing before the appalling Dutch war until June 1874 in Constantinople.   

Key Words: Pan-Islamism, Basiret, Ottoman, Indian Ocean, Aceh





Introduction
This paper revisits not only the relationships between the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam and the Ottoman State but also and the conceptual development of the Pan-Islamic world view in the context of the center and the periphery of Islamic world. The writer employs an approach that is an alternative view to the conventional understanding of center-periphery relations in terms of Islamic states, and the relations between the Ottoman State and the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam. The current hypothesis in this article is developed in the light of the historical references regarding the Acehnese sultans’ deliberate political investment to develop and integrate with the Ottoman State in various eras. This is a critical examination of the relationships between the centre and periphery of Islamic world regarding to 16th and 19th centuries. The subjects of this relation are the Ottoman State in the western part and the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam in the eastern part of the Islamic world. Due to the established understandings and perceptions of the prominency and “impotency and excessive absolitism” of the centre has always caused the influences of periphery overlooked.
At the very outset it should be admittedly claimed that the Acehnese sultans’ political attempts to have a relation with the Ottoman State cannot be understood by solely stressing on the military demands. Since below-mentioned explainations clarify that the basis of the correspondence of the Acehnese Sultans was very structured as seen in the very core aspects and principals put forward by Ali Mughayat Syah, the founding father of the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam at the very beginning of the 16th century (Hasjmy 1980: 4). There is no doubt that these objectives to have given a certain determined direction to the future relations of the Sultanate with the Ottoman State. This was actually forcing international political processes to be conducted in an active and constructive manner. And throughout the history of Aceh it is witnessed that the all able rulers followed in some extent the same principals in order to mould the relations with the international circles in the perspective of a new power center in Southeast Asia.
Curiously enough, based on this concretely structured state policy and program the present writer argues that the very intentional approaches of the sultans of Aceh was to create a new paradigm in the relations between the center and the periphery, a challenge to a simply and conventionally patterned suzerain-vasal relations. It should be admittedly claimed that the Acehnese sultans’ efforts to develop relations with the center, the Ottoman State, were to forge a single world system in Islamic world at the beginning of the development of the global colonial expansionism.
What makes the current issue worth of being discussed regarding political establishment in periphery, the role of the Sultanate in the interaction with the centrel power, say, the Ottoman State has been acted historically well-known, but not considered in the content of periphery’s role. The present writer exemplifies this constructive political approach of the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam in relation with the center and the periphery to contribute the development of the term of Pan-Islamism.

The attribution of the initiation of Pan-Islamism with the attempts of Acehnese sultans has meaningful enough pertaining the colonial expansion in Southeast Asia, the diversification of the eastern Muslims, and the development of Indian Ocean faction in the Ottoman ruling elite as seen in the example of mighty Grandvizier, Sokullu Mehmed Pasha.[2] The eastern part of the Islamic periphery has been emphasized in the relation with the Ottoman State in the context of a suzerain and vasal relation in conventional historiography. However, since the periphery seems to have had a power –in some extent- to affect and give a shape the policies of the center it should be underscored the need to rethink the unique characteristics of the relationships between the Ottoman State and the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam. The initiative of the Acehnese founding fathers can be understood by taking into consideration of the colonial attempts of the Western powers, starting from the very early years of the 16th century, which was also a fundamental cause of founding the Sultanate as a sovereign state by the leadership of Ali Mughayat Syah, targetted to construct a territorial hegemony as a federated state in eastern Islamic periphery. Due to all these reasons Acehnese sultans ought to be regarded principal pioneers of the development of the ideology of Pan-Islamism in the dawn of the modern era. The determination of Acehnese sultans ought to be identified as a creation of new pattern in the center and periphery relations. As detailed below the actions of the sultans particularly in regional and international contexts are the issues which exemplify the multiplication of the Islamic states’ authentic contributions in terms of a co-partnership for Islamic entity.
What makes the approach of the rulers of Aceh to the center different from other Muslim states in various geographies such as the Gulf region is that the latter was lack of communal union due to ideological disparities among ahl-i sunnah, Shiah, Khawarji etc. though all were Muslim. Besides the Safavids, renowned as one of the contemporary Muslim states warring with the Ottoman State based on political and ideological opposition intentionally conducted political channels and established an alliance with the Portuguese to drive the Ottomans from the region (Kunt 1984: 133; Anani 1986: 74-5). In addition, Ahmadnagar, Deccan rulers are known to be suspicious of the Ottomans at least until 1560s. This approach of the Deccan rulers did not enable them to develop any political relations which might have caused any Pan-Islamist initiatives (Casale 2010: 118).
The Ottoman State started to concentrate on the involvements in the developments in the Indian Ocean relatively much in the first part of the 16th century. And this interest has drawn attention of some scholars to provide proofs that the Ottoman State had become as a maritime empire. However, the relation of the Ottoman State with the Indian Ocean cannot be understood without the impact of the Aceh Sutanate commencing from the very early period of the aforementioned century until the end of the nineteenth century with some intervals due to international and domestic politics in both Muslim states. As the main thesis of this article the writer is to analyse the reports, as a preliminary work, pertaining the determinative actions of the Acehnese ruling elite during the Dutch War, in Basiret, a newspaper published in both Contanstinople and Cairo during the years of aforementioned war.[3] Even though the reports are worth of being reviewed in detail, the present writer focuses on the issue as an overview. The reports in Basiret seem to have various functions such as creation of a political pressure on the Ottoman court to protect the sovereignty of the Acehnese State, establishing a Pan-Islamic sentimentality in public. In addition, Basiret also functioned as the medium of introduction of Acehnese issues mentioned in a letter written in Arabic and sent by an Acehnese during the same years[4].

Initial Sentiments of Pan-Islamism
Pan-Islamism, as a religio-political concept, seeks to vitalize the political unity under a caliphate who is accepted as both a temporal and religious leader of all Muslim communities. Though this term, in fact, potentially rooted in the understanding of Islamic political philosophy, was borrowed from the contemporaneous Pan-German movement in the 19th century. Constructuring the concept of Pan-Islamism in mainstream understanding is based on the relations between European power circles and the Muslim world which was mainly almost all colonized throughout the 19th century by the former one. However, Islam as a religion and its political aspects in the worldly politics emphasizes much on the unity among the Muslims. In addition to the belief system, the worldly affairs throughout the history have moulded directly or indirectly the relationships among the Muslim states. It basically stands for the understanding of the same universe of expectations among them. Regarding the expansion of the colonial imperialism in almost all Islamic geographies in the second part of the same century, it is admitted that sentiments of Pan-Islamism in almost all Muslim communities occurred and the concept were championed by Muhammad Abduh and Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (Riddell 2001: 207; Siddiqi 2007; 152).
Afghani’s Pan-Islamic movement is based on mainly in the developments in India regarding the British subjugation in 1857 and he initiated to find a common point and understanding between the Iranian and the Afghan nations against the British in the year 1880/1881 (Siddiqi 2007: 152). On the other hand, the mainstream researchers in the domain of socio-politics emphasize that the concept was initiated by Sultan Abdulhamid II to unite the Muslim world under the leadership of the Ottoman State at the end of the 19th century and at the beginning of the twentieth century. These aforementioned samples pertaining the development of Pan-Islamist ideology approximate much, particularly the era and the scope on which we cannot concentrate here. It was not long before Abdulhamit II propagated the Islamic union against the western imperialism in around the nineteenth century.
Verily, in this context the peculiarity of the Aceh Sultanate, as the spearhead of the development of modern Pan-Islamic understanding, should be considered well by revisiting the historical developments. Due to the Western colonial attempts, some rulers such as the founding fathers of the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam favoured to establish a union among the Muslim states, a certain type of political act to mould the relations, a newly constructed way, between the center and the periphery. All attempts of the Acehnese sultans in various periods amplify the expansion of the socio-political borders of the periphery in order to encourage and stimulate the center for the establishment of a Pan-Islamic bloc. This is a kind of incentive in itself to invite the center for expanding its scope and is assumed a break with the indigenous political culture so as to provide a port of destination. In addition, since the founding father’s reign, this had been a type of calculated and instrumental attitude which came into prominence in the Sultanate of Aceh.
The subjects of this relation are the Ottoman State in the western part and the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam in the eastern part. The novel political conditions in the Indian Ocean triggered relations between the eastern and western parts to develop direct correspondences in various aspects. Due to the established understandings and perceptions of the prominency and “impotency and excessive absolitism” of the centre has always caused the influences of periphery overlooked. The present writer argues that the historical foundations of the phenomenon of Pan-Islamism is prominently rooted in the 16th century and then particularly the 19th century due to the encounters of the Western infidels with the regional Islamic powers such as the Sultanate of Aceh in Southeast Asia. It is very rational aspiration of developments in regard of the center and the periphery of the Muslim world in the age(s) of the colonialism. Even though there was a rupture pertaining the 18th century, there are strong proofs that the Acehnese interest to develop relations with the centre kept successivity, especially due to the Dutch War in the 19th century. Whilst the pioneer European colonial powers increased their economic, militarily and in later periods political influences as followed in the changing process from colonialism to imperialism, it did not seem logical the Islamic powers did not react and stimulate relations with the center.
The related argument of this approach is based on the universalisation of the Western thought through discoveries of the world seas. One fundamental significant aspect of this relation is the invasion of the Southeast Asian Muslim states by the Portuguese which known also as conquistadors. The same era should be taken into consideration as the initial initiatives for the core aspects of Pan-Islamic developments as seen the idealist construction of the Aceh Sultanate. Against this “universal west” (Aydın 2007: 15), the contemporary conditions forced –even not the simply developed by the sultans- the Sultans to react by attempting to establish a union among the Islamic states. The political aspirations of Ali Mughayat Syah including political, economic, cultural and religious co-relations between the east and west parts of Islamic world should be understood in the view of establishing a global Islamic union (Hasjmy 1980: 4). The political view of the aforementioned sultan was not an illusion or a pure ideal, instead it was based on the very concrete and material conditions of -at the first hand- the Aceh Sultanate and then the Ottoman State. The criteria of the state fundamentals developed by the first sultan of Aceh Sultanate was a desire on the basis of sound philosophy to improve the religio-political relationships between the center and the periphery. The Aceh Sultanate as emphasized in each relevant work affiliated with the history of Aceh had very unique geo-political position between east and west international trade. Thus this condition made Aceh region would become a well-developed not only international but a political hub of relations with the center. The very unique proof is seen in naming of Aceh as Serambi Mekkah not only in religious context, but also flow of new ideas and developments from the center to the far periphery Aceh functioned as a catalyst. This logical reason enunciates that the Pan-Islamic movement commenced by the Aceh Sultanate’s initiative whereas the Portuguese invasion became inevitable during the very early decades of the 16th century. As the Acehnese regarded the existence of the Portuguese as an evil averse power, the former stressed their concern starting from the very early period.
And then the continuous imperialistic attempts of the Dutch in Southeast Asia in the 19th century is deserved to be recounted as pioneer Pan-Islamic attempt, in a complete vision not only limited to the regional Muslim states’ union but also to have a direct impact on the center, the Ottoman State. For instance, as well-documented in Hikayat Perang Sabil, the Dutch War was regarded as a Holy War against the infidel (Edwin 1998: 303). The invasion of Aceh by the Dutch forces which caused a feeling of union among the Muslim communities in Southeast Asia. In regard this, it is known that some prominent Acehnese living in the Penang Island managed to mobilize an aid movement against the Dutch in all Nusantara (Parkinson 1964: 291).
Due to one of the aforementioned imperialist attempts occurred in Aceh in 1873, the Acehnese authorities took the initiative to establish the political reintegration with the Ottoman State. To enable to understand the Acehnese’ efforts to reactivate the relations through political apparatus the humiliating articles imposed by the Dutch genderal on the Acehnese court at the very outset of the war should be briefly remembered. Among the five articles, the most vital importance ones are as follow: a)Acehnese should surrender to the Dutch; b) The Acehnese government should not enter any political interactions with any European, particularly the Ottoman State; c) Instead of the Ottoman flag, the Dutch one should be unfurled.[5]
The political and moral basis of Pan-Islamic union is seen in the manifestation of Aceh state’s political affiliations with the Ottoman State. Though nowadays some academia differ the phenomena Pan-Islamism and Islamic union, the very early sample of the tendency of this political affiliation has not been much worked on by contemporary academicians, at least, the common political view emphasize much on the Pan-Islamism in the second part of the 19th century. What the founding fathers of the Aceh Sultanate focused on pertaining the ideals of the state leads us to think about the dialogic relationship between eastern and western part of the Muslim world. And this initiative of the Acehnese rulers should be regarded as a watershed between the center and the far periphery.
Dealing much in detail below we are going to emphasize on the status of the Ottoman State as the representative of the centre, and the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam as the representative of the periphery. This attemp should also be seen as a critical approach to the historical relations of both Muslim states from the periphery perspective, not the center as done until today. The religio-political importance of the Aceh Sultanate does not allow anyone to overlook and discount its attempts of moulding the relations with other circles including the Islamic center.




Universalisation of the Islamic Periphery: In Aceh Context
Throughout the first one and a half centuries the Sultanate of Aceh managed to establish its control through both military/naval actions and diplomacy. As well-documented Acehnese sultans took the initative and tried to restructure the area’s political environment by sending envoys to various principialities in Middle East, South and Southeast Asia so as to “promote alliances and gain allies against the Catholic Portuguese” (Federspiel 2007: 42, 57). All these attempts should be regarded as an ensurance to establish an Islamic union, say, Pan-Islamic initiative towards the challenges by the Portuguese. 
Developing the phrase “universalisation of the Islamic east” is historically based on some concrete developments. Some very crucial aspects of this issue should be put as follows: a)The Portuguese, after few friendly visits to Pasai and Pidie on the north part of Aceh during 1509 onwards, supposed that they had discovered a wealthy city states in Sumatra. Notwithstanding, the establishment of the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam was a native Islamic circle’s challenge against the infidels in a land historically played a pioneer role in the region. The years 1520 and 1524 were the very extraordinary and in some extent unpredicted developments regarding the whole relations of the Portuguese in Southeast Asia (Takeshi 1984: 12). This was the first step of the Sultanate’s various and successive encounters with the Portuguese until the latter was washed away from the shores of the Malacca Straits by the Dutch in the first part of the 17th century. The symbolic meaning of this success of the Sultanate ought not to be overseen, since the reconquista regime had assumed that “any Asian kingdom –other than those of the Great Turk (The Ottoman Khalif) and the Great Mughal- could be conquered by a small force of European soldiery.” (Boxer 2001: 159).
To realize the importance of the relations between the Aceh-Ottoman states clearly, the other Muslim states and their relations also should be taken into consideration in the centuries particularly between 1500-1700. Based on a classification of some academicians there were three great Islamic states such as the Mughals in India, the Safavids in Iran and the Ottoman (Black 2001: 193). However what the striking is that we cannot talk about constructive relations among these three powers, instead the conflict and disparity, at least as kept in mind that permanent wars and cold wars between Safavid Iran and the Ottomans until the treaty of Kasr-i Sirin in 1639 (Hess 2005: 103). On the other hand, even though the Sultanate of Aceh is not classified by the majority of the world historians as this world-class Islamic empire states, the power of the former was not in doubt. The political praxis of the sultans was very inspiring and it was strikingly different from what had been among the above mentioned Muslim states. For example, whilst the conflict and dispute conducted by the Safavids caused the Ottomans to have lost territorial entity, and wasting its financial and military sources during this power struggle, the attempts of the Acehnese sultans had a direct impact in an opposite way such as increasing the political and economic superiority of the Ottomans.
Whereas the Portuguese commenced the invasions of the regions successively, especially Albuquerque, the renowed leader of the Portuguese, “prophesized the universal Muslim reactions” in various regions in around the Indian Ocean (Anani 1986: 74). In addition, Diogo do Couto, the official historian emphasized the power of the Aceh Sultanate in the region and the concern regarding the military preparations to encompass Malacca among the Portuguese in Malacca (Boxer 2001: 240). Thus the presence of the Portuguese see power around the Indian Ocean caused a relatively strong political and commercial union among the local Muslim states, particularly in the second part of the 16th century (Chaudhuri 1985: 80). In addition, related to the development mentioned above particularly the successive attempts of the Acehnese Sultans reached this eco-political union establishment into another phase which might be called couragely as a pioneer sample of Pan-Islamism. As the rising tide of resentment of the Muslim states to the Portuguese was taken into consideration (Casale 2010: 118), the function and pioneership of the Aceh Sultanate can be appreciated well due to their determined approach since the beginning of the century.
It is safe enough to claim that the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam appeared as the religio-political power to fill a void of Islamic leadership in Southeast Asia after the fall of Malacca Sultanate until the very late era (Lombard 2000: 113). Due to this pattern of Acehnese power relations with the international circles including particularly Islamic power centers we need to phrase this development as “universalisation of the Islamic east periphery”. Forging a mutual alliancy between the center and the periphery seemed to have found a benefitial condition due to the establishment of the Sultanate of Aceh and foremost its religio-political determination against the Western powers. It should be emphasized that the Acehnese initiative, in the sample of al-Qahhar’s attempt, to establish Pan-Islamic movement was not limited to augment cooperation with the center, but some other various regions regarding the periphery such as Java and India (Schrieke 1957: 245). This is very unique political investment to establish a universal Islamic union among the various Islamic states in the center and the periphery so as to link the eastern and western part of the Islamic world in the very early ages of the modern era.
The function of the Sultanate of Aceh in the contemporary global relations was proved by its challenge against the Portuguese not only in terms of successive military/navy attack in Malacca but also revived the international trade route between the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea starting from the 1540s onwards. With regard to Acehnese shipment to the Middle Eastern ports were described as “Náos de Achem” (great ships of/from Aceh). The first attempts pushed the Portuguese to be in defensive position in Malacca, and the second one enabled spice, as an immediate impact of these determination shown by the Acehnese sultans, to be avaliable again in the Mediterrenean ports such as in Alexandrea, Egypt and Venice, Italy (Boxer 1996: 279; Chaudhuri 1985: 75). The preceding sentences should be taken into consideration that the Sultanate regarding the supremacy and moulding its own sovereign land and involving the trade business which had impacts directly to the power relations in European circles became a constructive power. Thus the Sultanate by its own determination gave impetus to the unification of the Muslim states which exemplified the central power and the periphery countries. 
The leading figures of the Sultanate turned their attention to the center as soon as they established and developing ages of of the Sultanate. However this was not the simple suzerain and vassal state relation, which is the one as supposed by many circles including popular and academic ones. The attempts of sultans of Aceh should not be classified under the vassal state’s demands from the superior one. Instead the initiative of the Aceh sultans should be regarded as a novel direction of the western and eastern Islamic spheres, or regarding our argument the centre and periphery. The concrete development of this initiative is seen in the first appearance of the Acehnese envoy in Constantinople. Whereas they reached the headquarter the center they were not recognized but they introduced themselves and the other eastern Muslim existencies as periphery (Hurgronje 1906: 208-9). Of all eastern Muslim periphery societies the Aceh Sultanate by its initiative appeared since the very beginning until the beginning of the 19th century as the most constructivist figure.
Since the well-structured road map pertaining regional and international relations based on the vision of Ali Mughayat Syah had been followed throughout the first century, Aceh reached the apex of its power in the middle of the first half of the 17th century. Thus the Sultanate became arguably an equal partner as a periphery state to the Ottoman State particularly during the reign of Iskandar Muda. As well-storied, the Ottoman’s envoys’ observation and their description of the Aceh palace the condition of the Sultanate of Aceh to the Ottoman Sultan was very striking (Seljuq 1980: 309). During this occasion the sayings of the Ottoman Sultan should be accepted as the universalisation of the Islamic east. In fact, when a careful analysis is conducted it might clearly appear that the Acehnese approach was always based on equal partnership, if we describe this political demands the current international political terminology, it was a very early sample of “strategic partnership” (Casale 2010: 180). During the reign of Iskandar Muda, the history of Southeast Asia witnessed the golden era of the Muslim State. The power of the state was reflected in the titles of Muda such as calling him as “ the crown of the world” (Kennedy 1993:49; Ahmad 1972: 63; Federspiel 2007: 58). The era of Muda is worth of comparing with the one of Sulaiman the Magnificient in the Ottoman State. Like the Lawgiver, Muda, too, established written law in the state and so created a state tradition (Reid 2005: 103; Federspiel 2007: 58).
Thus it is safe to admit that the Acehnese sultans’ attempts to develop relations with the center was far beyond military protection. However it is difficult to say that the response of the Ottomans was the one as expected by the Acehnese Sultans. The interest of the Ottoman Sultans was not regained particularly after the most salient military attempt of the Ottomans in 1538 resulted in a total defeat though the attempt was a great preparation for an easy victory against the Portuguese. As wittnessed by the effectiveness of the Sultanate againts the foreign powers not only as a military but also economic domain, the Sultanate took the role of the center in the context of Southeast Asian Islamic communities. On the other hand, it was received scant attention by the Ottoman State. Thus unfortunately majority of the Acehnese attempts were not responded in an approriate manner from the Ottoman circles (Reid 1967: 268).
Some writers such as Giancarlo Casale’s (2010) touching the letter of al-Qahhar is still significant to analyse it. The wording in this letter has been commented as the Acehnese wanted to be a vassal state of the Ottomans. This aspect of issue can be regarded as true pertaining the Islamic political philosophy which orders to obey the khalifah who is accepted as the Shadow of God in this world. And this aspect is supported in relation of all the respected rulers of the Islamic sultanates with the central power structure throughout the Islamic history. However, the same wording of al-Qahhar allows us to comment as the encouraging attempt to convince the khalifah in Constantinople to take into consideration the Muslim communities in far east of the Muslim world.
The most striking intensification of the Ottoman interests developed when the letter and envoy of al-Qahhar reached Contantinople. Al-Qahhar’s attempt was very stimulative and changed the interest of Contantinople from the western part of the Indian Ocean to Sumatra, Southeast Asia. Particularly, appointment of Sokullu Mehmed Pasha as the grandvizier, who is described as a member of “the Indian Ocean faction” by Giancarlo Cassale (2010), in that year bolstered the military and political involvement with the Aceh Sultanate. The order of the renowned military aid under the commandship of Kurtoglu Hızır Reis was actually a result of Sokullu’s political decision in 1567-8. Though due to the rebellion in Yemen the majority of the relief vessels were used in operation against the rebellions, it seems that the Sokullu’s determination to send galleys to Sumatra was realized by setting off two vessels. The concrete result of the relations between the center and the periphery gave new momentum to the struggles initiated by the Islamic rulers in around the Indian Ocean against the Portuguese whose details need not detain us here (Casale 2010: 131-3).
The political relations between the Ottomans and the Acehnese after the official correspondence between two respected sultans, Sultan Selim II and al-Qahhar, seemed that the excuse of the geographical distance the Ottoman Sultan did not want Acehnese to send yearly tax which was asked from each vasal states during that time (Hurgronje 1906: 209; Reid 1969: 398). This is not just a forgiveness of the central power, but it ought to be peculiarly regarded as a political consideration. This deliberate decision of the Ottoman Sultan might be considered as a political grant to the Aceh Sultanate to equip its autonomous state. In fact, this is a very striking decision of Sultan Selim II since almost all the whole 16th century particularly after 1540s Acehnese trade vessels appeared periodically in various Middle Eastern ports such as Jeddah in the Red Sea or at least they could reach via Gujerat vessels to Middle Eastern ports (Boxer 1996: 281). What the present writer means here that the decision of the Ottoman Sultan could not have been merely a result of geographical distance.
It should also be emphasized that what makes the Aceh-Ottoman relations unique was the long term determination of Aceh sultans. Whilst the Ottoman State was decreasing political and territorial hegemony, the Sultanate of Aceh was expanding its eco-political existence during the 16th century.
The relations relatively decreased between two Muslim states, it did not mean that the Aceh majorly had any dependency on the Ottoman sources and supports. Instead, on the one hand during the 17th century as mentioned somewhere, the Ottomans had been afflicted with some crisis including a palace revolution in terms of deposition of Sultan Ibrahim from the reign (Schöffer 1997: 90; Parker 1997: 2) not to be able to improve or increase the relations either in the Western or Eastern Indian Ocean, of course with Aceh as well, on the other hand Aceh saved itself from the global decreasing political and economic backwardness experienced in 17th century in almost all Southeast Asia. During this era the Sultanate might be very exceptional among the contemporary Muslim states by its prosperity, and ability to conduct “trade with whomever they wished”, beyond its sovereignty (Reid 1997: 223).
The aspect of universalisation of Islamic East was also specifically exposed to the attention of Islamic world in term of the Dutch War. Particularly this war was reported successively in Basiret in particular period such as very beginning of the war in March 1873 and during second biggest invasion attempt in 1874. The report published on 18.03.1874 (29 Muharram 1291) gave a detailed information concerning the continuity of the war. It was mentioned that the Dutch military power was challenged by the Acehnese resistance and lost much military equipment in the war field and additionally more soldiers were lost their lives.
What can be added to the preceding paragraphs as a conclusion is that throughout the eco-political developments in Aceh allowed the Acehnese circles to conduct regular journeys to the Red Sea. The direct impact of political encounters and commercial activity established in almost entire 16th century enabled Aceh Sultanate to become “the leading position among ports not under the control of Western trading companies”(Chaudhuri 1985: 181).

The Description of the Sultanate of Aceh in Basiret: The Dutch War
The Aceh War, due to not only in the history of Islam, but also in the whole colonial history regarded as the most prolonged conflict nearly for fourty years, when the Sultan Muhammad Daud surrendered to the Dutch, or seventy years until the year of the Japanese invasion, based on the Acehnese perception of the struggle, was the struggle against the imperialism (Morris 1983: 54). It’s worth enough to analyse how the Ottomans perceived this war.
Basiret, the national newspaper, which was published in both Contanstinople and Cairo during the years of the Dutch War in the second part of the 19th century, is a very authentic reference to understand the perceptions of Turkish intelligentsia, their imposition on establishing an authoritarian voice of the Ottoman government and introduced a salient Southeast Asian independence movement conducted against the infidel to the Ottoman readers. In addition, not only these reports but also the editorial commentaries were the media to propagandize and develop the concept of Islamic union among the Ottoman society and caused political awareness among political elites by critizising the invasion of the Ducth as an infringment of international laws and the arguments of the Dutch did not reflect the reality.[6] The Dutch War, started 26 March 1873, was considered much at least at the very beginning first a few years. The sources of these reports in Basiret were based on the contemporary London (such as Times) and Hague media received the news about the war through Batavia, Calcuta and Penang as mentioned in some various news.[7] In the later period Ottoman embassy in Batavia became the sources of news regarding the war. The writer determined that the news about the war started to be published on 3 Muharrem 1290 (1873) until 21 Rebiulahir 1290 (6 June 1874).
It is seen that the Turkish readers were informed by a letter written in Arabic originally in Aceh and sent to an Acehnese religious scholar living in Mekkah for around twenty years. Based on this information, the Dutch commenced the war on 26th March 1873 (1288) with eight war filotilla and four thousand soldiers including various ethnicities from its colony. From the first day of the war until the 6th April the Dutch navy successively bombed Bandar Aceh.[8] 
To show the seriousness of the Sultanate to convince the Ottoman court about the political and militarily aid Abdurrahman az-Zahir Shah (1833-1879) who was the Prime Minister in Aceh and Abbas Effendi paid visits to Contantinople (Veer 1977: 128). The envoy found an opportunity to meet not only with Mithad Pasha, the Prime Minister of the Ottoman government and Rashid Pasha, the Foreign Minister in Babiali, but also the one of the supervisors to the Ottoman Sultan.[9] During the before-mentioned meeting the Acehnese envoy submitted a letter written in Arabic which emphasized some crucial issues regarding the condition in Aceh. It is mentioned in the letter that Aceh was a vassal state of the Ottomans; Aceh had been an Islamic land (Dar’ul Islam) successively starting from 1st Ramadhan 601 by Sultan Johan Syah and the Acehnese people (rakyat) followed the Syafii denomination and obeyed their rulers who conducted Syariah Law.[10]
These meetings are considered as some occasions to solve the problem in Aceh. As mentioned in various reports, the Ottoman authorities tried to find a peaceful way by prominent European powers to be able to give a response the Acehnese envoy’s demands. Another news proves that there were some more envoys from Aceh. For instance, Said Effendi, an envoy from Aceh demanded from the Ottoman authorities that the Sultanate of Aceh ought to be included into territorial entity of the Ottoman State.[11]
During and after the envoy’s visit, Basiret successively continued the reports about the status of the Sultanate of Aceh, since there were some rumours and references in some Western journals and newspapers that Aceh did not have any political affiliation. This issue was repeteadly mentioned by the editors of Basiret. There is no doubt that these publications did aim to create a political determination reminding the sultanate’s affiliation with the Ottomans commencing from the reign of Sultan Selim II.[12]
The reports, successively published throughout the first fierce years of the Dutch War (1873-74), prove that the Ottoman intelligentsia gave importance to the developments in the eastern part of the Islamic world. In addition, the reports were regarded as the establishing an awareness among the Muslim people on the one hand, and were also, without doubt, an affective mechanism to create a political pressure on current governments in Constantinople on the other. As it is seen in the news on 2nd Rabi’ al-Akhir, 1290, it was emphasized that the Acehnese had been under the protection of the Ottoman State for a long time, and the Ottoman court would not be lenient with enmity involvements in Aceh. This matter, at the same time, became a current issue as seen in various the reports.
Açelileri herkes biliyor ki, devlet-i âliye tebası olup idare-i ahalilerine istiklâlleri vardır. Bir devlet kendi teb’ası üzerine vuku bulan tecavüzü men’inde iktiza (lazım gelme) maslahata göre hareket edeceğinden devlet-i âliyyenin dahi tecavüzat-ı vak’aya nazar-ı müsamaha ile bakamayacağı müsellemdir. “[13]
The determination of the Acehnese fighters against the Dutch invasion was respected as seen in the reports in Basiret. It is mentioned that even though the Acehnese could have saved their lives and properties in condition that they had accepted the peace agreement offered by the Dutch, the former preferred to conduct war until the end of their lives to save their freedom and sovereignty.[14] A similar expression which shows the resolution/determination can be found in another report. A letter, somewhere mentioned in this article, written by an Acehnese individual emphasizes the determination of the Acehnese not to become slave of the Dutch. If the Acehnese assumed that they would be defeated by the Dutch, first they would sacrifice their children and women in front of the pioneer front, then they would fight till the end of single Acehnese to become martyr.[15]
The news on 20.01.1874 (1 Dhu al-Hijja 1290) focused on the correspondences between the Aceh Sultanate and the Dutch forces. Based on the explanation, the Dutch commander sent an envoy with a letter asking the Sultan to surrender immediately. Notwithstanding, the Acehnese Sultan not only reject this humiliating approach but also to show his determination he did tear the letter and prisoned the Dutch envoy. The same news, at the same time, referred the contradictory approaches of the Aceh government. On the one hand, some groups did not agree on the struggle against the Dutch, but especially Abdurrahman Zahir Syah, the Prime Minister at that time, tried to encourage the Acehnese circles either governmental bodies or the people to continue the massive resistance. Even though there was not a formal military organization in Aceh at the time of the war, the insistence of the fierce resistance by of common Acehnese threatened the existence and of the Dutch military force.[16]
The Dutch War in Aceh land caused a very complicated relations in Europe. Historically, the colonialist powers’ existencies cannot be taken into consideration without the affect and relations with the developments in the Continental Europe. This fact was realized once more due to the Dutch War. As Basiret report on the date 17.01.1874 (27 Dhu al-Qa’da 1290) claimed that the political developments among Germany, England and the Netherlands in Europe had direct impact on the Southeast Asian issues. It is regarded inevitably that the Ottoman government could not give any reactions whilst the European powers involved in politically and militarily in Muslim world such as Malay world. As mentioned in Basiret, some political figures –without mentioning any specific names- in Istanbul insisted on the Ottoman government ought to involve the Southeast Asian crisis related to Aceh. And the editors commented on this issue by talking about the developments in Aceh would cause an international dividents.[17]
The connection between the Acehnese and the Ottomans seems clearly to be based on the religious identity as mentioned in follow: “...The Acehnese who have been living independently for some hundreds of years in Sumatra Island, is a vassal state of the Ottoman State and bond to khalifa due to the religious reasons...”.[18] This type of descriptions gave a continium of consciousness of being a part of an entity and the awareness of the religio-political struggle of Southeast Asian Muslims  in the sample of the Acehnese challenge during the Dutch War.
Based on the reminding relations in the old times between the two states during the official visits of Abdurrahman Zahir Shah, the Ottoman State revealed implicitly the Pan-Islamic sensitivity by taking the Dutch and Aceh confrontations into the international politics with the European powers, including America as a newly developing country in international politics (Wieringa 1998: 298). Though the ability of being a political super-power was decreasing, the Ottoman bureucrats raised their objection to the imperialist vision of the Dutch. Thus even the former offered to converse an internatinoal conference either in Contantinople or somewhere else to deal this sensitive issue nearly reaching a war condition in Sumatra Island.[19] Since there had not been any developments the Acehnese envoys were dissappointed by almost aloofness of the Ottoman government (Veer 1977: 131).
In addition, the war in Aceh gained the interest of the Muslim communities in Southeast Asia such as in Singaporean and Javanese Muslims. In regard of this, the support caused military clashes between the Dutch army and Javanese Muslims.[20] As a unique example of building Islamic union in Southeast Asia, which frustrated the Ducth administration, Acehnese active involvement of propaganda ought to be considered significantly.
The reports also emphasized on the strength of the Acehnese struggle. For instance during the days when the Sultan of Aceh passed away the Acehnese fighters did not renounce their resistance against the Dutch invasion and showed their determination to save their country until the end.[21] This determination of the Muslim people in the periphery demonstrates that they had a socio-religious consciousness regarding “vatan”, including religious patriotism which is given a special importance in Islamic political philosophy (Maksudoğlu 1999: 134).






Conclusion
The Acehnese Sultans pioneered by taking the initative for the establisment of the relations between the center and periphery. The article argues that the Ottoman’s interest to the Indian Ocean and beyond was stimulated mainly by the demands of the Acehnese Sultans starting in the 16th century and reappeared in the second part of the 19th century. The Ottoman State augmented her interest gradually, even though her attempts were unsuccessful as experienced in the biggest navy attack in the year 1538 in Diu. 
The initiatieves of the Acehnese rulers to be able to cooperate with the center targetted to prevent the expansion of the colonial powers in the Islamic periphery. Regarding unintentional developments in and around the Indian Ocean, the Ottoman influence could not be materialized as it should have been. The sigificance of the Acehnese attempts might have been understood better when the colonial circles started to extend increasingly their territorial jurisdiction in particularly the second part of the 19th cetury. Thus, emphasizing on the efforts of the Sultanate of Aceh Darussalam in an overall analysis of the relations between the center and the periphery, the core issue of this article might be regarded as an alteration of the conventional understanding the relations between the center and the periphery in Islamic world regarding the Ottoman State and the Aceh Sultanate interactions successively continued in some extent.
The deliberate stimulation of Aceh Sultans caused the Ottomans, though not a holistic change in their determination of geographical expansion such as seen always towards the Balkania and mid of Europe, at least, had to renew its political approach to the eastern part of the Islamic world. This process is also considered as a contribution to develop a sound political culture and strategy among the Muslim states. As a conclusion, the premise of this article is that the enduring relationship between the Aceh Sultanate and the Ottoman State was one of the inevitable factors to promote Pan-Islamic ideology which was put on the global agenda at the end of the nineteenth century. In addition, the status of the Ottomans as not only a dominant state in the Middle East and Europe but also a sea power due to its involvement in the developments in the Indian Ocean was based on the continuous efforts of the Acehnese Sultans to establish a sound relationship with the center. It is a must to conduct some more complex and extensive examinations relevant to dialogic relations between the center and the periphery.

References:
Ahmad, Zakaria, Keradjaan Atjeh 1520-1675, Penerbit Monora, Medan, 1972.
Anani, Ahmad, “Gulf Relations With the West: An Historical Survey”, Islamic Culture: An English Quarterly, Vol LX, No. 4, October 1986.
Boxer, Charles Ralph, “Portuguese and Spanish Projects For the Conquest of Southeast Asia, 1580-1600”, In The Propagation of Islam in the Indonesian-Malay Archipelago, (eds.) Alijah Gordon, Malaysian Sociological Research Institute, Kuala Lumpur, 2001.
Boxer, Charles Ralph, “A Note on Portuguese Reactions to the Revival of the Red Sea Spice Trade and the Rise of Atjeh, 1540-1600”, In Spices in the Indian Ocean World, (eds.), Pearson, M. N., Variorum 1996.
Casale, Giancarlo (2010), The Ottoman Age of Exploration, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2010.
Chaudhuri, K. N., Trade and Civilization in the Indian Ocean: An Economic History from the Rise of Islam to 1750, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.
Federspiel, M. Howard, Sultans, Shamans and Saints: Islam and Muslims in Southeast Asia, University of Hawai’i Press, Honolulu, 2007.
Hasjmy, Ali, “Banda Aceh Darussalam Pusat Kegiatan Ilmu dan Kebudayaan”, Aceh Timur 25-30 September, 1980.  
Hess C. Andrew, “The Evolution of the Ottoman Seaborne Empire in the Age of the Oceanic Discovires, 1453-1525”, In Jan Glete, (eds.), Naval History 1500-1680, Ashgate, Aldershot, 2005.
Hurgronje, Snouck, Di Mata Kolonialis, Tr.: Ng. Singarimbun, S. Maimoen, Kustiniyati Mochtar, Vol. 1, Yayasan Soko Guru, 1985.
Hurgronje, Snouck, The Acehnese, Tr.: A.W. S. O’Sullivan, Vol. I, E. J. Brill, Leiden, 1906.
Kennedy, J., A History of Malaya, 3rd Edition, Percetakan Sooriya, Kuala Lumpur, 1993.
Kunt, Metin, “The Later Muslim Empires: Ottomans, Safavids, Mughals”, In, Islam: The Religious and Political Life of a World Community, (eds), Marjorie Kelly, Praeger, New York, 1984.
Lombard, Denys, “The Malay Sultanate as a Socio-Economic Model”, In Asian Merchants and Businessmen in the Indian Ocean and the China Sea, (eds.), Denys Lombard; Jean Aubin, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000.
Maksudoğlu, Mehmet, Osmanlı History 1289-1922: Based on Osmanli Sources, International Islamic University Malaysia, 1999.
Morris, Eric Eugene, Islam and Politics in Aceh: A Study of Center Periphery Relations in Indonesia, PhD Dissertation, Cornell University, 1983.
Parker, Geoffrey, “Introduction”, In The General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century, (eds.), Geoffrey Parker and Lesley M. Smith, Second Edition, Routledge, London, 1997.
Parkinson, C. Northcote, British Intervention in Malaya: 1867-1877, University of Malaya Press, Kuala Lumpur, 1964.
Reid, Anthony, An Indonesian Frontier: Acehnese and Other Histories of Sumatra, Singapore University Press, Singapore, 2005.
Reid, Anthony, “The Crisis of the Seventeenth Century in Southeast Asia”, In The General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century, (eds.), Geoffrey Parker and Lesley M. Smith, Second Edition, Routledge, London, 1997.
Reid, Anthony, “Sixteenth Century Turkish Influence in Western Indonesia”, JMBRAS, Vol. X, No. 3, December, 1969.
Reid, Anthohy, “Nineteenth Century Pan-Islam in Indonesia and Malaysia”, The Journal of Asian Studies, February, 1967, 26, 2, p. 268.
Riddell G, Peter, Islam and the Malay-Indonesian World: Transmission and Responses, Horizon Books, Singapore, 2001.
Schöffer Ivo, “Did Holland’s Golden Age Coincide With A Period of Crisis?”, In The General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century, (eds.), Geoffrey Parker and Lesley M. Smith, Second Edition, Routledge, London, 1997.
Schrieke, B., Indonesian Sociological Studies, Part 2, W. Van Hoeve Ltd-The Hague and Bandung, 1957.
Seljuq, Affan, “Relations between the Ottoman Empire and the Muslim Kingdoms in the Malay-Indonesian Archipelago”, Der Islam, 1980.
Siddiqi, Mazheruddin, Modern Reformist Thought in The Muslim World, Adam Publishers, New Delhi, India, 2007.
Takeshi, Ito, The World of the Adat Aceh: A Historical Study of the Sultanate of Aceh, PhD Dissertation, Australian National University, 1984.
Wieringa, Edwin, “The Dream of the King and the Holy War Against the Dutch: The Koteubah of the Acehnese Epic, Hikayat Prang Gompeuni”, In Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 61, No. 2, 1998.


[1]This article was presented at International Conference on Aceh and Indian Ocean Studies III “New Beginnings Transformations in Post-Disaster and Post-Conflict Regions”, ICAIOS, Banda Aceh, Indonesia, 25-26 May 2011.
[2]Sokullu Mehmed Pasha (d. 1579) spent 15 years as grandvizier until his death.

[3]See: Basiret, 29 Rabi’ al-Akhir 1290, p. 2.
[4]Basiret, 8 Rabi’ al-Akhir 1290, Document (Belge) No. 1433, p. 1. (All references to Basiret in this paper based on the archive research at Bayezıd State Library in Istanbul). 
[5]Basiret, 8 Rabi’ al-Akhir 1290, Belge No 1433, p. 1.
[6]Basiret, 10 Rabi’ alAkhir 1290, Document No. 1435, p. 1.
[7]For instance, the reports on some various dates 2 Rabi’ alAkhir 1290, 8 Rabi’ al-Akhir 1290, 29 Muharram 1291, (18.03.1874), 3 Muharram 1291 (20.02.1874), 1 Dhu al-Hijja 1290 (20.01.1874), told about the Indian and British media as the news source.  (See: Basiret, Document No. 1412, 1430, 1433, 4113, 4117,).
[8]Basiret, 13 Shaval 1290, Document No 1587, p. 1, 5 Rabi’ al-Akhir, p. 2. 
[9]Basiret, 12 and 19 Rabi’ al-Awwal 1290, Document No 1456, p. 1; 9 Rabi’ al-Akhir 1290, Document No 1434, p. 1; 17 Rabi’ al-Akhir 1290, p. 1; 12 Jumada al-Ula 1290, Document No, 1443, p. 1.
[10]Basiret, 20 Rabi’ al-Awwal 1290, p. 1
[11]Basiret, 13 Rabi’ al-Awwal 1290, p. 1.
[12]Basiret, 8 Rabi’ al-Awwal 1290/1291, p. 1. 
[13]Basiret, 2 Rabi’ al-Akhir 1290, Document No. 1430, p. 1; 5 Rabi’ al-Akhir 1290, Document No 1432, p. 1.
[14]Basiret, 6 Safar 1291.
[15]Basiret, 13 Shawwal 1290, Document No 1587, p. 1. 
[16]Basiret, 20.01.1874 (1 Dhu al-Hijja 1290), Document No 4117, p. 2.
[17]Basiret, 17.01.1874 (27 Dhu al-Qa’da 1290), Document No 4118, p. 2.
[18]Basiret, 8 Rabi’ al-Awwal 1291, p. 1.
[19]Basiret, 8 Rabi’ al-Awwal 1291, p. 1.
[20]Basiret, 7 Jumada al-Ula, Document No. 1441, p. 1.
[21]Basiret, 22 Dhu al-Hijja 1290 (10.02.1874), Document No 4126, p. 1.