Based on the example of Zayd? Yemen, I present a new concept of perceiving the dhimma relationship called Dhimma Space. This concept understands the dhimma relationship as an integral part of Islamic statehood and sharia governance in general. It involves society as a whole and is influenced by factors such as domestic and foreign politics, the struggle for religious-legal authority and political power, as well as by pragmatic considerations and the individual aims of the actors concerned. Conceptualizing the protection relationship as a socio-political ‘space’ produced (Lefebvre) by the actions of the players (Jews and Muslims) involved and as a ‘field’ that reproduces itself with a ‘structuring structure’ (Bourdieu) helps to detect aspects hidden in a bilateral vision of this relationship, which focuses on the ‘good’ or ‘bad’ treatment of the protected minority by the ruler. Aimed at gaining an unbiased insight, the Dhimma Space concept takes the flexibility of Islamic law into account, as well as the possibilities of ‘protected people’ for action. This allows for exploring the interplay between legal theory and practice as well as between the (claimed) socio-political order and (asymmetric) control. Following the presentation of the idea of Dhimma Space, I focus on the theoretical legal aspect and its political dimensions. This section is based on the analysis of both Zayd? and neo-Sunn?/Salaf? jurisprudential literature from Yemen, some of which is unpublished and handwritten. Although composed in the sixteenth and eighteenth to nineteenth centuries, these texts have up to the present day been treated in Yemen as authoritative sources. The practical dimensions of Dhimma policy in twentieth-century Yemen now take centre stage. I focus on the reign of Im?m Ya?y? ?am?d al-D?n (1869-1948), examine day to day practice and shed light on the socio-political game rules applied and embodied by both Muslims and Jews to successfully navigate this space. For this purpose, I draw on documents from sharia courts and the reminiscences of Yemeni Jews. In a last step, I address the overall picture and suggest how the Dhimma Space concept can be applied rewardingly to contexts beyond Zayd? Yemen. In my conclusion I suggest that the socio-political and legal construct in which Dhimmis were expected to take a subordinate albeit legally secure position was steadily reproduced/disturbed by the actors concerned in an effort to affirm/challenge the postulated political order, the legitimacy of the Imam and with that to negotiate their own position in society.

The past four decades have witnessed the rise of political Islam across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Islamist regimes have emerged in Iran and Sudan, Islamist governments were voted into power in Turkey and Tunisia, and political Islamist parties have strengthened in Jordan and Morocco (Milton-Edwards, 2004; Mandaville, 2007; Ayoob, 2008). Consequently, much interest has been taken on the impact of Islamism on a number of domestic and international issues including minority group treatment (Esposito and Piscatori, 1991; Appleby, 2000; Stepan and Robinson, 2003). This project focuses on the intersection between Islamism and minority treatment. The question on the juncture of political Islam and ethnic and religious pluralism has been at the center of academic and policy spheres since the inception of Islamist movements in the region. Marina Ottaway and Amr Hamzawy stated that minority treatment remained a "grey zone" for Islamists highlighting the ambiguity surrounding the issue (2009). To illuminate the phenomenon, this study employs a comparative methodology analyzing minority groups under three Islamist governments: Turkey's Justice and Development Party (2002-2014), Al-Bashir's Sudan (1989-2014), and post-revolutionary Iran (1979-2014). The cases are selected on the bases of the Most Different System Design in which different variables lead to a similar outcome. While the three states are culturally, institutionally, and economically distinct, they all share a non-static and changing approach in minority treatment. Document analysis and field research in Sudan and Turkey have shown that governments influenced by Islamist ideology do not follow a fixed approach towards their ethnic and religious minorities. The question that arises is why do Islamist regimes at times pursue accommodative strategies marked by greater toleration and recognition towards their minorities, while at other times practice repressive strategies. The contention presented here is that the Islamists' approach towards minorities is guided by strategic calculus contingent on first, domestic coalition and alliance building, and second, regional and international dynamics (De Mesquita, Smith, Siverson and Morrow, 2003; Magaloni, 2009; Mehler, 2009).

Alevis are the largest religious minority in Turkey. “Alevi revival” which emerged in late 1980s resulted in reconstruction and realization of Alevi identity, culture and ritual. It also paved the way to a number of academic works. But most importantly a lot of Alevi organizations, associations, foundations and federations flourished in the upcoming years. Today, there are more than three hundred Alevi associations and foundations in Turkey and almost each of them has a different understanding of what Alevism means. While some Alevi civil society organizations define Alevism as a unique belief and a way of life, others claim that Alevism is a part of Islam. The aim of the article is to discover Alevi organizations’ definition of Alevism in relation to Islam within the discourse. Hence, the paper asks how Alevis construct inter-group boundaries vis-à-vis Sunnis in Turkey. I argue that Alevis construct and maintain inter-group boundaries with Sunnis to differentiate themselves from the majority community and organizations in Turkey. In other words, Alevis tend to define Alevism based on similarities and differences to Islam which leads to various numbers of Alevi identifications rather than a unified entity. In doing so, they also come up with various identifications of Alevism in relation to Islam. The study aims to contribute to the literature on Alevi organizations in Turkey by presenting a novel frame for understanding the ways in which Alevis differentiate themselves from Sunnis. In addition, the study seeks to contribute to the emerging field of boundary making approach by presenting diverse perspectives and strategies of boundary making on Alevism by focusing on Alevi associations and foundations. The study uses qualitative data based on elite interviews from five major Alevi associations and foundations in Turkey namely Pir Sultan Abdal Kültür Derne?i, Hac? Bekta? Veli Anadolu Kültür Vakf?, Alevi Kültür Dernekleri, CEM Vakf? and Dünya Ehl-i Beyt Vakf?. In addition, this study utilizes textual analysis of the aforementioned organizations’ journals and printed materials which were published since their foundation.