Sunnis and Shiites

The ongoing conflict in Iraq is not based on some historical religious or political differences between Sunnis or Shiites, says Lawrence Davidson, a member of the University’s Middle East Studies program. The reasons behind the continuing violence, as he and others believe, are much more complicated. In a recent interview, Davidson explained the primary distinction between these two Muslim sects and how their religious beliefs affect sectarian life in that country today.

Q. What historically distinguishes Shiites from Sunnis?

A. The primary difference between these two Islamic sects stems from a centuries-old debate over the succession of leadership. This argument dates back to the period following the Prophet Muhammad’s death in 632 A.D.

At that time, some Muslims believed that only members of Muhammad’s family should succeed the prophet, but others – and they were in the majority – believed that Islamic leadership did not need to be preserved through Muhammad’s family. Instead, they supported the notion that the leadership in Mecca should be awarded to a pious individual, who was chosen by the community, and who would follow the traditions of Muhammad.

Those who felt that their leader should come from the prophet’s bloodline supported Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law, Ali ibn Abi Talib, whom many believed had been chosen by Muhammad himself. Followers of Ali became known as “Shi’a,” meaning “supporters” or “helpers of Ali.”

Muslims, who believed their leaders or “caliphs” should be selected from the community based on other criteria flowing from pre-Islamic tribal traditions, came to be known as Sunnis. Sunni comes from the term, “sunna,” meaning the way of the prophet, and essentially denotes an acceptance of evolving tradition based on Muhammad’s example.

Ali was assassinated in 661 A.D. and in a battle against one of the Sunni rulers, Ali’s son, Hussein also died. Over the centuries, Hussein’s death, which was considered a martyrdom by Shiites, has been commemorated every year.

Because the Shiites have been in the minority and generally viewed as opposing the chosen or traditional leader, they have often been considered a potential threat to Sunni leadership. As in the case of Iraq, this perception has sometimes been used as a way of dividing the community.

I think most people living in Iraq when it was under Saddaam Hussein’s control understood that his regime was not religiously based, but a military dictatorship which occasionally used the fact that most of the country was Sunni.

Q. How has the historical development of Sunnis and Shiites affected their political and secular lives?

A. While Shiites constitute a majority in Iraq, as well as in Iran, Yemen and parts of Central and South Asia, in most of the world they are in the minority. There are different Shiite sects, but most Shiite clerical groups tend to be more structured, hierarchical and claim more authority to guide their communities than do clerical Sunnis. This is particularly evident in Iran where there is a theocracy.

In contrast to Shiites, Sunni clerics have tended to be under state control. In Iraq under Saddam Hussein’s regime, for example, Sunni clerics were thoroughly intimidated. Traditionally, they didn’t get involved in politics, and in fact, were often employed by the state and therefore, economically dependent on the government.

Q. How have Shiites and Sunnis interacted in Iraq over time and leading up to the U.S. invasion?

A.  Over time, Sunnis and Shiites tended to solidify. People were born into one group or the other, but the two communities, particularly in Iraq under Saddam Hussein, mingled and really didn’t view themselves as very different. In countries where the two groups living side-by-side, such as in pre-invasion Iraq, Bahrain and Kuwait, what you generally find over time is that they usually don’t harbor any hostility toward one another.

Before America’s invasion, the differences between the two Islamic sects were a matter of intellectual debate. Since the invasion all that has changed.  Now there basically is anarchy, meaning that authority in many neighborhoods, towns and cities have defaulted to radical forces. The moderate elements of the population are disappearing, which is what occurs in most politically chaotic situations.  Presently, control of life in much of Iraq rests with those in charge of armed gangs. They are not ordinary Sunnis or Shiites, but in many cases are local war lords. 

I do believe there is a civil war taking place in Iraq today, but to say it’s based on a conflict between the Sunnis and Shiites is over-simplifying the situation. There are many groups involved.

Davidson is the co-author of A Concise History of the Middle East and author of America’s Palestine: Popular and Official Perceptions from Balfour to Israeli Statehood; Islamic Fundamentalism; and The Alexian Brothers of Chicago: An Evolutionary Look at the Monastery and Modern Health Care.

A member of West Chester University’s history faculty since 1986, he earned his bachelor’s degree from Rutgers University and completed his master’s and Ph.D. degrees from Georgetown University and the University of Alberta in Canada, respectively.