Search results

The majority of economic crises impact the wealth of people which in turn affect their financial capacity to purchase residential properties. However, the home financing method may also have an impact on the behaviour of house prices. This chapter intends to test argued resilience of Islamic finance to situations of financial crisis by using an Islamic home financing product called Enhanced Musharakah Mutanaqisah (EMM) which was proposed by Asadov and Ibrahim (2018) as an example and compare its performance to conventional mortgage. Two different models of home financing, conventional and EMM based ones are developed with the former reflecting basic features of conventional mortgage and the latter using rental rates and house price indices for product pricing. Both models are compared using aggregate data for the US housing market for the past 30 years in order to demonstrate the resilience of the EMM model. The findings of the study show that EMM is more flexible in terms of reflecting real situations in both the housing market and aggregate economy as compared to the conventional model. Its pricing is more accommodating particularly during times of economic downturns, and it can potentially provide the solution to numerous mortgage defaults arising from such conditions. Despite the proposed models being tested using data only from the United States, the analysis can be generalized for other countries as well. The implementation of the EMM model, as an example of Shariah-based Islamic financial product, is expected to bring fairness and justice in the relationship between financial institutions and its clients. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt of simulating a Musharakah Mutanaqisah based home financing using both actual rental rates and house prices for product pricing.

Pakistan's present war against extremists has many folds and sheds. The country's initial participation in the Afghan War in 1979 later gave birth to different extremist trends in the country. State patronage of the extremist Wahabi Islamists during the Afghan jihad opened another conflict in Pakistan, and things became more complicated. The combination of external and internal factors gave birth to the worst kind of conflict, which now has not only become dangerous for the country's own existence but also a major threat for global peace. The Afghan jihad initially started as a war against Soviet occupation and later became the hub of global jihad-war against infidels.

This chapter analyzes how external factors promoted internal contradictions in Pakistan due to which the country became not only an exporter of jihadis for the world but also the worst kind of sectarian conflicts, including. Shia–Sunni, Deobandi–Wahabi clashes, entered into in the past two decades. Such a strong link exists with Pakistan's official support to global jihad. Draft sectarian groups now head to head with their opponents have killed thousands of members of rival sectors, have strong support from external sympathizers, and have spread in the country. The well planned terrorist activities of these groups reflect the fact that support to these groups in the past is now leading to a severe crisis in Pakistan. The nexuses of these indigenous extremists like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen with external terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan of Tahir Yuldasher Chechen Guerilla War has led to several bloody clashes in the country and outside.

This article addresses the way in which perceptions about the globalized nature of the world in which we live are beginning to have an impact within sociology such that sociology has to engage not just with the changing conceptual architecture of globalization, but also with recognition of the epistemological value and agency of the world beyond the West. I address three main developments within sociology that focus on these concerns: first, the shift to a multiple modernities paradigm; second, a call for a multicultural global sociology; and third, an argument in favor of a global cosmopolitan approach. While the three approaches under discussion are based on a consideration of the “rest of the world,” their terms, I suggest, are not adequate to the avowed intentions. None of these responses is sufficient in their address of earlier omissions and each falls back into the problems of the mainstream position that is otherwise being criticized. In contrast, I argue that it is only by acknowledging the significance of the “colonial global” in the constitution of sociology that it is possible to understand and address the necessarily postcolonial (and decolonial) present of “global sociology.”