The shared intellectual history of Shia and Sunni movements: The case of Iran | Syed Akif Zaidi

"When a world order is collapsing or changing, the final moments are very aggressive."

Explore the profound intellectual history uniting Shia and Sunni movements against Western imperialism. In this episode, we unpack the clash between the West's "anthropocentric" modernity—where colonialism and exploitation are direct side effects—and the "Tawhidi" (God-centric) Islamic worldview.

Tracing an ideological lineage that bridges thinkers like Syed Jamaluddin Afghani and Allama Iqbal to the political philosophy of Syed Ali Khamenei, we reveal how the Islamic Resistance Axis operates not on sectarian lines, but as a unified, anti-imperial front. Dive into the moral hypocrisy of global nuclear authority and Iran's strategic positioning in a rapidly shifting global landscape.

Beyond Geopolitics: Rethinking the Intellectual and Civilizational Dimensions of Resistance in West Asia

Contemporary conflicts in West Asia are often reduced to the language of geopolitics—territory, military capability, alliances, and strategic interests. Yet such a framework, while necessary, is insufficient. It risks flattening a far more complex reality—one shaped not only by power struggles between states, but by competing intellectual traditions, historical memories, and civilizational imaginations.

In a recent in-depth discussion, this broader perspective comes into focus: what is unfolding in the region is not merely a series of conflicts, but part of a deeper contest over how power, morality, and global order are to be understood in the 21st century. To engage seriously with this moment requires moving beyond immediate events and examining the intellectual genealogies that animate them.

The Limits of a Purely Geopolitical Lens

Standard geopolitical analysis tends to interpret conflicts through familiar binaries: state versus state, alliance versus alliance, security versus threat. While this approach explains military movements and diplomatic positioning, it often overlooks the ideological frameworks that shape these decisions.

The current tensions involving Iran, Israel, and the United States, for instance, are not only about deterrence or regional influence. They are also embedded within larger narratives about sovereignty, resistance, modernity, and legitimacy. These narratives draw upon histories that predate contemporary nation-states and extend into philosophical and civilizational debates.

Reducing the situation to strategy alone obscures how different actors understand their own roles—not merely as states pursuing interests, but as carriers of distinct historical and moral visions.

Competing Conceptions of Modernity

At the heart of many contemporary tensions lies a fundamental divergence in how societies conceptualize modernity and authority.

One influential strand of global political thought—often associated with Western modernity—centers human agency as the primary source of legitimacy. Political authority, in this view, emerges from institutions, laws, and collective human decision-making. Over time, this framework has produced powerful systems of governance, rights discourse, and economic organization. At the same time, critics argue that it has also enabled forms of domination—colonial expansion, economic extraction, and military intervention—often justified in universal terms.

In contrast, alternative traditions—particularly within parts of the Islamic intellectual world—emphasize a moral order grounded in transcendence. Here, authority is not solely derived from human consensus but is situated within a broader ethical framework that places limits on power and material ambition. Concepts such as stewardship, justice, and accountability to a higher moral order shape political imagination in ways that differ from purely secular frameworks.

It is important to approach this distinction with care. These are not monolithic or mutually exclusive categories. Rather, they represent tendencies within broader traditions—each internally diverse, contested, and evolving. Yet the tension between them continues to inform how different actors interpret global events.

Historical Memory and the Experience of Disruption

Any attempt to understand present-day resistance movements must also engage with the historical experiences that inform them. For many societies across West Asia and South Asia, encounters with colonialism were not simply political transitions but profound disruptions of social, economic, and intellectual life.

The Battle of Plassey, for instance, marked a turning point in the subcontinent’s history, initiating processes that reshaped governance, economy, and social structures. Similar trajectories unfolded across other regions, where colonial rule reconfigured institutions, extracted resources, and redefined local hierarchies.

These experiences continue to shape contemporary political consciousness. For some, resistance is not only about present injustices but also about reclaiming agency after centuries of external domination. In this sense, historical memory becomes a powerful force—informing both political mobilization and intellectual discourse.

Intellectual Responses and the Question of Unity

By the late 19th century, the cumulative impact of colonial expansion had prompted a range of intellectual responses across the Muslim world. Among the most influential figures was Syed Jamaluddin Afghani, who argued that the crisis facing Muslim societies was not merely political but civilizational.

Afghani’s intervention was significant for several reasons. First, he reframed the challenge as one requiring intellectual engagement rather than only military resistance. Second, he emphasized the importance of unity across sectarian and regional divides, warning that internal fragmentation would weaken any meaningful response to external pressures.

This emphasis on intellectual renewal and collective identity influenced a wide range of thinkers, including Allama Iqbal and Sayyid Qutb, whose ideas—despite their differences—contributed to ongoing debates about modernity, faith, and political order.

Revolution and the Institutionalization of Ideas

A major turning point in translating these intellectual currents into political reality came with the Iranian Revolution, led by Ruhollah Khomeini. Unlike earlier movements, which often remained at the level of critique or reform, this revolution resulted in the creation of a new state structure grounded in a distinct ideological framework.

The revolution demonstrated that alternative political models could not only be imagined but institutionalized. It also reshaped regional dynamics, influencing movements and debates far beyond Iran’s borders.

At the same time, it introduced new complexities—raising questions about governance, pluralism, and the relationship between ideology and state power. These tensions remain central to contemporary discussions about the legacy and implications of revolutionary politics.

Networks, Narratives, and the Idea of Resistance

In recent decades, the notion of a “resistance axis” has emerged in discussions of West Asian geopolitics. This term is often used to describe a network of state and non-state actors aligned around opposition to certain forms of external intervention and regional dominance.

However, to view this network purely through a military lens would be limiting. It also operates as a narrative—one that draws upon shared histories, symbolic language, and ideological references. This narrative seeks to frame resistance not simply as strategic opposition, but as part of a broader struggle for dignity, sovereignty, and moral legitimacy.

Yet, like all narratives, it is contested. Critics question its internal contradictions, the diversity of actors it encompasses, and the implications of its methods. Understanding it therefore requires both analytical distance and contextual sensitivity.

Ethics, Power, and the Question of Limits

One of the most significant dimensions of this debate concerns the relationship between power and ethics. Modern warfare, regardless of the actors involved, raises profound moral questions—particularly regarding civilian harm, proportionality, and accountability.

Different traditions offer different frameworks for addressing these questions. Some emphasize legal norms and international institutions; others draw upon religious or philosophical principles to set boundaries on violence. In practice, however, these frameworks often collide with the realities of conflict, where strategic imperatives can override normative commitments.

The tension between ethical ideals and political practice is not unique to any one region or system. It is a universal challenge—one that becomes especially visible in moments of crisis.

Toward a More Nuanced Understanding

What emerges from this discussion is the need for a more layered approach to understanding global conflicts. Geopolitics remains essential, but it must be complemented by attention to intellectual history, cultural context, and ideological diversity.

Simplistic binaries—whether civilizational or political—risk obscuring more than they reveal. The realities on the ground are shaped by overlapping forces: state interests, historical grievances, economic pressures, and evolving ideas about justice and order.

Conclusion: Between Power and Meaning

The conflicts unfolding in West Asia today are not only about who controls territory or resources. They are also about how the world is to be understood—what constitutes legitimate authority, how justice is defined, and where the limits of power lie.

As the global order continues to shift, these questions will become increasingly central. Whether one views current developments as the decline of an existing system or the emergence of a new one, it is clear that the answers will not be found in strategy alone.

They will also be shaped in the realm of ideas—where history, belief, and imagination converge to define the possibilities of the future.