The Islamic fundamentalist doctrine on riba states that the rate of interest is zero, a doctrine based upon the Quranic injunctions against it. The word ‘riba’ means ‘increase’ as interpreted by Imam Razi, which corresponds to the word ‘interest’ as defined by Webster's New World Dictionary. In both cases the increase refers to the amount beyond what is owed. Thus, the strictest interpretation that can be given to the word riba is that it means interest—an amount, or rate, due above the principal of a loan. The word riba, however, is commonly translated as usury which is defined by Webster's Dictionary as “an excessive or unlawfully high rate or amount of interest.” Thus, the fundamental aspect of the controversy about the doctrine of interest in Islam is whether the rate of interest is zero, in which case riba is interpreted to mean interest per se, or whether a positive rate of interest is permissible, in which case nba is interpreted to mean usury.

In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries there were a number of armed attempts by people in the Arab world, and particularly in the Maghrib countries, to resist European penetration and colonialism. Historians have made considerable efforts to categorize these attempts as being either examples of ‘primary’ resistance or of ‘modern nationalist’ resistance, a distinction based largely on the presence or absence in the movement concerned of an ideological content making reference to the various Islamic reform movements or to European-style nationalism. Thus Edmund Burke can write of the rebellion in the Moroccan countryside around Fez in 1911, which finally ushered in the French and Spanish Protectorates: “One looks in vain, for example, for evidence of the influence of reformism, Pan-Islam or Islamic modernism upon the movement.”

The Arab region is generally thought of as wealthy, being the recipient of a large income from oil. In reality, oil wealth is confined to a small minority of states and peoples; most of the region's population are poor.

This paper discusses the employment pattern and future problems of the six poorest countries of the Arab region: Syria, Jordan, Sudan, South Yemen (Peoples' Democratic Republic of Yemen), Egypt, and North Yemen (Yemen Arab Republic).

The “Upheaval” (mahapach) of May 1977 brought to an end forty-four years of Labor hegemony in the international institutions of the Zionist movement and twenty-nine years of Labor dominance in the political institutions of the State of Israel. In the wake of the 1977 election, the Israel Labor Party found itself forced into the unfamiliar role of opposition–and with it the rural settlement movements associated with the party.

The archival material in Istanbul, which presents a unique picture of the mechanism of patronage in Islamic architecture, has evoked only sporadic attention from the time of Ahmet Refik's valuable publications of pertinent Ottoman documents. Indisputably, however, the greatest contribution has been that of the late Ömer Lutfi Barkan, whose direction of a team of researchers on the surviving account books for the construction of the mosque of Süleymaniye and its associated complex/külliye (foundation inscription dated 964'1556–1557, though the works almost certainly continued beyond this date) has resulted in the apperarance of a remarkable work, Süleymaniye Camii ve Inşaati, Vols. I, II (Ankara 1972–1979). The documentation covers a period of roughly seven years and gives virtually a day-to-day picture of the sequence of construction and the constitution of the labour force. This is not the only story the documents have to tell, as Barkan first pointed out almost twenty years ago.

Egypt is a less developed country that made use of foreign capital to accelerate its rate of economic development and growth.

In 1960 Egypt embarked on long-term economic development planning. A Five-Year plan (1960–1965) was followed by a Seven-Year plan (1965–1972). In planning for economic development, Egyptian authorities relied heavily on foreign capital.