This is a section about contradictions of the
last, 20th century Central Asia, as one geographical area. From one
hand it was a time of really revolutionary changes in the regional system
of knowledge, creation of regional intercultural infrastructure and
liberalization of women. From the other, however, it was a time of the
framed knowledge and bolshevization of national/regional culture, which
turned off international, intercultural, multilinguistic national/regional
identity of Central Asia from integration into the modern world. Although
Central Asia along with Afghanistan and Turkey significantly contributed
Mediterranean civilization of Middle Ages, that contribution is totally
marginalized in its inner dynamic and global significance. As a result
there is a gap in the world system of knowledge of our own days. To
bridge that gap means to legalize centrality of Central Asia for both
Eastern and Western system of knowledge, a project of Bukharian reformats
of the middle 19-beginning of 20th cc. which could not been realized
at soviet period. The point of departure for its actualization now,
at post-soviet period, is re-thinking and re-evaluating classical heritage
of Central Asia known in the names of Farabi, Ibn Sina/Avicenna, Biruni,
al-Khorazmi, Omar Khayam, Mavlana Jalaliddin Rumi, Jami, Navoi, Abdulgadir
Bedil, Behzad, Fitrat, Ayni, Lohuti in their original regional/global
dynamic.
Observation of the world publications of the
last decade, regarding Central Asian potential to integrate modern world,
outlines a slight shift toward more objective perception of Tajikistan
as a key-player in reformation of the region. Legalizing Tajikistan’s
policy as a continuation of its ‘shifting empires’ mission
(Lena Jonson. Tajikistan in the New Central Asia. I.B. Tauris &Co.Ltd,
2006) opens perspectives for discussion of existence of ‘another’
non-imperialistic style of thinking, formed and survived in Central
Asia during the last millennium. To initiate that discussion on international
level within the coming INST conference in December, 2007, is the goal
of that section.
The system of knowledge in Tajikistan, as well
as in other countries of Central Asia, has been based on modern Russian-European
educational system, but restricted by ideological system of soviet regime,
could not provide a real transformation of it’s own national/regional
cultural values of pre-soviet times into modern intercultural, international
reality. Although intention to transform Bukharian society through the
reform of education was basic, fundamental challenge of reformat movement,
jadidism of the middle 19c.-beginning of 20th c., contradiction of traditionalists
and innovators was oppressed by the communist regime of the last century.
Inter-Tajik civil war of 1992-1997 was the consequences of that oppression.
Although Peace Agreement of June, 27, 97 brought to an end an open military
contradiction of the society, that was a product of national/international
political goodwill rather, then an evidence of transformation of the
totalitarian society into civil society of the new world.
Formation of national/regional identity of Tajiks
goes in its roots to interconnection of the Greek system of knowledge
and Islam, which improving Aristotelian fundamental idea ‘I and
the world’, into the formula ‘I in the world’, made
crucial change for transition of societies under umbrella of the common
Mediterranean civilization of Middle Ages. But marginalization of Central
Asia from the history of Mediterranean civilization, bringing back contradicting
idea of the ‘first teacher’ to both Arab world and the West,
created a ‘new’ wave of contradiction, in which weak powers
were and still are playing a role of intermediates. The generators of
that role are NGOs, providing transition of the societies, improving
knowledge via new technology and re-thinking Islam as civilization.
Re-vitalizing civilization core of Islam has
to start from awareness that the prayer asks from God to increase his/her
knowledge (Qur’an, 20: 114), because this is the only way to understand
‘the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of night and day’
(Qur’an, 3:190-191). Awareness was expressed in diversity of literary
sources forming Avicennian regional tradition of consequence of knowledge,
in which discussion of morality and ethics of knowledge is a base of
creativity: who has the moral rights to be the man of understanding?
What is the measure of knowledge and creativity in diversity of societies
and the world society as a whole? What are the main trends and tendencies
of creativity in classical, modern and contemporary arts of Islamic
world: Arab countries, Iran, Turkey, and Central Asia? How they affect
the art of thinking as a global phenomenon? Is there any difference
of transformation of civil societies in Central Asia and Middle East,
as a whole, from the societies of the West? Are there really international,
intercultural policies in our own, globalizing world?
Formation of the new culture of integration of
the Islam world into the new world is a phenomenon of our own days.
How to promote legalization of intercultural, international identity
as a conflict resolution phenomenon of our own days?
The section will organize conditions for
discussions of these ideas, promoting the results of discussion for
publications and records of INST in Austria (organizer of KCTOS) with
the further presentation of these publications in Tajikistan and other
countries of Central Asia, Parliament of Cultures (Ankara, Turkey)
and World Congress of Middle East Studies (Germany-Jordan).
