The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr

Introduction

The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr is one of the most prominent examples of an attempt to present a social, reformist, and religious reading of politics in the Arab world of the late twentieth century. His presence in Lebanon—a society with a complex sectarian structure—meant that his intellectual and political project took shape in close connection with questions of identity, inequality, and the competition among Islamist movements. This article adopts a critical approach to The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr and seeks to analyze its relationship with broader questions of Islamism, underdevelopment, and political instability in the Islamic world—issues that continue to occupy the center of political science and international relations research.

Lebanon in the 1960s and 1970s was the intersection of three major forces: a deeply rooted sectarian structure, competition among regional powers, and the rise of Islamism as either a response to or a challenge against political inequality. Musa al-Sadr’s presence in such a context created an opportunity for the Shiʿa—who had long been marginalized within the country’s power structure—to move toward organized political engagement. Nonetheless, any scholarly or policy-oriented analysis requires a critical distance from idealized or propagandistic depictions; this is because Islamist projects across many Muslim countries—from Iran to Lebanon and from Sudan to Afghanistan—have been accused of contributing, despite their reformist intentions, to the reproduction of instability or institutional limitations.

In this article, The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr is examined not merely as a set of doctrinal teachings, but as a specific response to social conditions. The main questions therefore include:

1. To what extent did The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr succeed in transcending the confines of Lebanese sectarianism?
2. Did his project, while empowering the social and political participation of the Shiʿa, inadvertently contribute to the strengthening of political Islamism and sect-based structures?
3. What position does his thought occupy in relation to the concept of political development?

The aim of the article is to present a realistic image of the capacities and limitations of his thought—an image that, through scholarly neutrality, enables critique, comparison, and historical analysis. For this reason, the structure of the article proceeds step by step: beginning with the historical context, then analyzing the theoretical foundations of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr, and finally examining its political and social consequences within Lebanon and the broader Islamic world.

1. The Historical and Social Context of Lebanon and the Emergence of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr

Analyzing The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr without an understanding of Lebanon’s historical and social context in the 1960s and 1970s cannot offer an accurate picture. His arrival in Lebanon occurred at a time when the country faced numerous structural knots: power divided along sectarian lines, stark economic inequalities between regions, foreign intervention, and the early formation of Islamist movements in the Middle East. These factors not only shaped al-Sadr’s field of action but also played a fundamental role in defining both the limitations and the possibilities of his political thought.

1.1. The Sectarian Structure and the Constraints of Political Action in Lebanon

The political system of Lebanon after independence was built upon the “National Pact,” an agreement that allocated the main government positions among the Christian, Sunni, and Shiʿa communities. This structure effectively organized society into rigid identity units and reduced political competition from the level of modern program-based parties to the level of sectarian rivalry. Such a situation not only hindered the formation of a modern state but also intertwined religion with politics and paved the way for religious actors to emerge.

Musa al-Sadr’s entry into this sectarian structure created, on the one hand, the potential for significant influence—since religious leaders in such a system possess considerable social mobilization power—but on the other hand, it limited his ability to transcend identity boundaries. Any reformist religious project in such a setting is inevitably exposed to “sectarianization,” even when its main objective is to move beyond sectarianism. This is one of the central challenges in a critical assessment of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr.

1.2. The Social and Economic Position of Lebanese Shiʿa

In the decades preceding al-Sadr’s arrival, the Shiʿa of Lebanon were in a state of “structural marginalization.” Shiʿa-majority regions such as the South and the Beqaa received the least share of national development, and state institutions had a limited presence there. During this period, Shiʿa migration to the outskirts of Beirut increased, forming a mass of impoverished yet mobilizable population.

This social structure had two major implications for the formation of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr:

1. The existence of a social ground for religious reformism and demands for justice
   Al-Sadr was able to base his welfare and institutional programs on these evident inequalities.
2. The unintended strengthening of identity-based politics
   Any social organization among the Shiʿa was inevitably tied to religious identity, carrying the risk of turning into “religious mobilization”—a phenomenon that later influenced Lebanon’s political trajectory.

1.3. Regional Power Rivalries and Their Impact on the Formation of a Religious Discourse

Lebanon in the 1960s and 1970s was an arena for regional rivalry: Egypt and Syria on one side, Israel and some Gulf states on the other. Meanwhile, the Palestinian issue cast its shadow over internal Lebanese tensions. In this environment, the formation of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr was influenced by a context in which religion and politics were inseparable.

Although al-Sadr attempted to play the role of mediator and moderating figure, critical analysis shows that any religious action in such an environment—even if aimed at reducing tensions—can contribute to the strengthening of “identity politics.” This matter later gained significance with the rise of Shiʿa Islamist movements.

1.4. The Rise of Islamism as the Dominant Paradigm in the Middle East

The 1960s and 1970s marked the decline of Arab nationalism and the rise of Islamism. The Arab defeat in the 1967 war, the crisis of legitimacy of secular states, and the expansion of religious networks made religious discourse the primary tool for explaining political problems. In such a context, The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr inevitably assumed an Islamist tone; although compared to many Islamist movements of that era, his approach was more moderate, socially oriented, and less ideological.

Yet from a critical standpoint one must ask:
Does any project formed in such a period, regardless of its original goals, ultimately contribute to the reproduction of “religious politics”?
This is a question that analysis of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr cannot ignore.

Overall, examining Lebanon’s conditions reveals that The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr was shaped against a backdrop of inequality, sectarianism, and regional power rivalries. These conditions turned him into a significant actor of social reform, while simultaneously imposing serious constraints on the outcomes of his project. Understanding this context is essential for the critical analysis of the following sections.

2. The Intellectual and Theoretical Foundations of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr

A study of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr shows that his project in Lebanon was not merely a practical endeavor but was grounded in a set of theoretical foundations drawn from the juristic tradition, the lived experiences of the seminaries, and his engagement with Lebanon’s social issues. These foundations include a social understanding of jurisprudence, an emphasis on human dignity, an ethical view of politics, and attempts to link religion with development. However, critical analysis indicates that the connection between religion and politics—even in a reformist form—can strengthen identity politics and institutional limitations in sect-based contexts.

2.1. Social Jurisprudence and the Effort to Update the Religious Mindset

One of the main elements of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr is his emphasis on “social jurisprudence”—an approach that seeks to interpret religious rulings in ways that respond to the realities of modern societies. Al-Sadr was among the clerics who believed that religion must go beyond individual rulings and address issues of deprivation, social justice, and development.

He repeatedly emphasized in his speeches and writings that jurisprudence must be reinterpreted in response to social realities. This view was novel during his time, as much of the Shiʿa clerical establishment held a conservative stance toward social issues.

Critique

Although this approach is important from an intra-religious reformist perspective, it has two limitations from the standpoint of political science:

1. Reliance on jurisprudence as the main framework of politics
   Even socially oriented jurisprudence, with its normative and religious nature, has limited capacity to respond to structural challenges of the modern state—such as separation of powers, bureaucracy, equal citizenship, and human rights.
2. Ambiguity in defining boundaries between religion and politics
   The notion of “social jurisprudence” can lead to the permanent presence of religion in politics, and in sectarian contexts like Lebanon, such presence easily results in religious mobilization and identity-based competition.

2.2. Human Dignity and Ethical Politics

Musa al-Sadr repeatedly placed the concept of “human dignity” at the center of his worldview. He regarded politics as an ethical arena whose goal is to improve people’s living conditions. From this perspective, social justice, eliminating discrimination, and reducing poverty were key elements of his intellectual project.

This ethical outlook distinguished The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr from certain Islamist currents that were mainly ideological and identity-oriented. He attempted to speak in a human-centered and trans-sectarian language and to shift public attention away from sectarian competition toward social issues.

Critique

Despite its importance, the main problem is that:

• Ethical politics without sustainable institution-building is ineffective in unstable environments.
  Excessive reliance on charisma and the moral personality of the leader can hinder the formation of modern and durable institutions.
• The concept of human dignity, without a clear definition of citizenship rights and state structure, risks becoming abstract and rhetorical.
  For this reason, despite al-Sadr’s efforts, many of Lebanon’s structural problems persisted in the following decades.

2.3. His View of the State and Politics: Between Pragmatism and a Lack of Institutional Definition

The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr viewed the state in largely pragmatic terms. He considered the state an instrument for achieving social justice, not necessarily a secular or legally structured institution with defined boundaries. From this perspective, the presence of clerics in the public sphere was not an exception but part of religion’s social responsibility.

Critique

This view faces major challenges in modern societies:

• The lack of separation between religious and political spheres—even in non-ideological forms—can weaken the structure of the modern state.
• The political role of religious leaders in Lebanon’s sectarian structure leads to the “religification of political competition.”
• The charismatic bond between a religious leader and the masses fosters personalized politics rather than program-based party politics.

2.4. Social Justice as a Theoretical Framework

Social justice played a pivotal role in The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr. He emphasized the creation of welfare, educational, and health institutions and believed that poverty and inequality were the greatest threats to Lebanon’s stability. This emphasis distinguished him from currents focused solely on culture or identity.

Critique

Despite its significance:

• Emphasizing justice without reforming the political structure often leads to “managing poverty” rather than “eliminating poverty.”
• A welfare approach delivered through religious networks can replace or weaken state institutions and disrupt the balance between the public sector and civil society.
  This pattern has been observed in Lebanon and many Muslim countries.

3. Humanism, Social Justice, and Welfare Politics in The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr

The social dimension occupies a special place in The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr, for unlike many of his contemporary religious leaders—who emphasized identity- and ideology-based issues—he centered the “problem of deprivation” in his political analysis. From his perspective, political development is impossible without social development, and politics must serve the eradication of deprivation. However, a critical examination shows that although al-Sadr’s initiatives revealed and alleviated certain inequalities, they ultimately remained confined within Lebanon’s sectarian structure and turned into institutions dependent on religious networks—networks that could themselves reproduce cycles of sectarianism.

3-1. Humanism as the Ethical Foundation of Politics

In the writings and speeches of Musa al-Sadr, the concept of “human dignity” holds a central position. He believed that politics is legitimate only when it improves human life. At first glance, this outlook brings The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr close to humanist models, yet there is an important difference between his religious humanism and modern humanism.

Critique

• Al-Sadr’s humanism relies more on religious ethics than on modern human rights.
• Because his humanism is tied to religious authority, the dignity and freedom of the individual remain dependent on religious interpretations rather than secular legal frameworks.
• In fragile societies such as Lebanon, individual-based moral humanism cannot substitute for institution-based political frameworks.

Thus, although al-Sadr’s humanist approach offered significant moral potential, it was insufficient for building a modern state.

3-2. Social Justice and the Redefinition of Religion’s Role in the Public Sphere

Social justice was the most important axis in The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr. He was one of the few religious leaders who saw poverty and inequality not as “divinely ordained,” but as the result of political and economic structures. On this basis, he proposed a model of “social religion” whose goal was to satisfy people’s basic needs through service-oriented institutions.

His initiatives included:

• Establishing educational and vocational institutions
• Supporting cooperatives
• Developing relief organizations
• Pressuring the Lebanese state to address the needs of deprived regions

These initiatives distinguished The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr from the merely rhetorical projects of many religious leaders.

Critique
Despite these achievements:

• Welfare institutions dependent on religious authority weaken, rather than strengthen, the public sector.
• Religious social networks often become political power resources and, intentionally or not, reproduce patronage.
• Although service provision is necessary, it typically “fills the void left by the state” rather than reforming the political structures that generate inequality.

This is one of the contradictions in The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr: pursuing social justice through religious institutions without transforming the structural political apparatus that reproduces deprivation.

3-3. Welfare Politics and the Role of Charisma in Social Mobilization

Al-Sadr’s welfare project relied heavily on his charismatic personality. In a society with weak state institutions, the presence of a charismatic religious leader could mobilize people around social programs—and al-Sadr possessed such an ability.

But from a theoretical standpoint, reliance on charisma has consequences:

• Institutions built on charisma face identity and functionality crises after the leader’s departure.
• Charismatic politics hinders the formation of bureaucratic mechanisms.
• The “leader–follower” relationship can replace the “citizen–state” relationship.

Critique
This structural weakness later appeared in organizations that emerged from Shi‘i social and religious networks—organizations that, despite their continued activity, often relied on partisan-sectarian structures and moved less toward modern state-building.

3-4. The Limitations of Welfare Politics in a Sectarian Environment

One of the major findings of a critical reading of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr is that his welfare politics—due to Lebanon’s sectarian system—could never be fully supra-sectarian, even if that was his intention. In practice:

• Welfare services were primarily delivered in Shi‘i areas.
• These services generated networks of social loyalty that contributed to the emergence of later movements.
• In the absence of an inclusive state, these networks became tools of political mobilization.

Thus, the positive social impact of these institutions was accompanied by political complexities that will be discussed in later sections.

In sum, humanism and justice-orientation play a major role in The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr, and much of his social popularity stems from this approach. However, critical analysis shows that:

• Ethical approaches cannot replace institutional structures;
• Religious social networks can reproduce political inequality and sectarian competition;
• Welfare politics tied to religious authority, despite its reformist intention, has a limited capacity to foster sustainable development.

These observations are essential for understanding the identity-based and political implications of al-Sadr’s thought—issues examined in the next chapter.

4. The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr and the Question of Shi‘i Identity in Lebanon

The question of Shi‘i identity in Lebanon has been an inseparable part of the country’s political transformations since the 1960s. The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr played a foundational role in shaping this identity—empowering the Shi‘i community on the one hand, while producing complex consequences for Lebanon’s sectarian structure and political development on the other. This section critically examines the various dimensions of the relationship between The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr and the redefinition of Shi‘i identity in Lebanon.

4-1. Shi‘i Identity Before Musa al-Sadr: Marginalization and Absence from Power

To understand al-Sadr’s impact, one must first outline the condition of the Shi‘a prior to his arrival. Until the mid-20th century:

• The Shi‘a were geographically concentrated in deprived regions in the South and the Beqaa;
• Their share in the political-administrative structure was less than their demographic weight;
• Shi‘i religious institutions were scattered and lacked modern organization;
• Shi‘i religious-political leadership was weaker than that of the Maronites or Sunnis.

This situation had turned Shi‘i identity into a “peripheral identity”—one grounded primarily in suffering, deprivation, and lack of political representation.

4-2. Musa al-Sadr and the Redefinition of Shi‘i Identity: From a Marginal Community to Collective Agency

In its initial phase, The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr attempted to shift the image of the Shi‘a from a “deprived sect” to a “community with political rights.” This transformation can be observed on three levels:

a) Institutionalizing Identity

Through the creation of the Higher Islamic Shi‘i Council and later the Movement of the Deprived, al-Sadr founded institutions that:

• Organized Shi‘i identity;
• Enabled political representation;
• Elevated the role of the Shi‘i clergy from a traditional institution to a public one.

This institution-building transformed Shi‘i identity from a scattered, reactive identity into a structured and demands-based one.

b) Politicizing the Meaning of Shi‘i Identity

Al-Sadr transformed “deprivation” from a social condition into a political identity. He sought to present the Shi‘a not merely as a religious sect but as a “community whose rights have been neglected.” This approach:

• Strengthened the possibility of social mobilization;
• Brought the Shi‘a into political competition;
• Gave new political meaning to the role of the clergy.

However, critics argue that—despite al-Sadr’s national emphasis—this reframing contributed to structuring Lebanese politics around a new paradigm of “deprived vs. privileged sects,” thus unintentionally reinforcing the sectarian system.

c) Linking Shi‘i Identity with the Discourse of Social Justice

Al-Sadr insisted that social justice is not a sectarian demand but a human right. Nevertheless, because of the Shi‘a’s social position, his discourse was mostly absorbed by them and became part of their collective identity:

“Shi‘i = deprived = claimant of justice.”

This “identity code” persisted in the following decades, and even after al-Sadr’s disappearance, movements like Amal and Hezbollah continued to reproduce it.

4-3. Consequences of Identity Formation: Empowerment or Sectarianism?

The effects—positive and negative—of this identity-formation, shaped by The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr, include:

Positive Outcomes

1. Increased political participation:
   For the first time, the Shi‘a became active political agents within the state and society.
2. Expansion of social and educational services:
   Institution-building paved the way for schools, clinics, and welfare organizations.
3. Strengthening of collective self-confidence:
   The new identity cultivated dignity and agency within the community.

Negative Outcomes and Challenges

1. Reinforcement of structural sectarianism:
   Even if al-Sadr’s goals were national, the strongest effects of his activism were sectarian.
2. Politicization of Shi‘i identity:
   After his disappearance, the discourse of deprivation became a political resource for armed and semi-military groups.
3. Weakening of citizenship:
   In a sectarian Lebanon, strengthening one identity inevitably provokes others, hindering supra-sectarian national identity building.
4. Linking Shi‘i identity with regional Islamist movements:
   After the Iranian Revolution, parts of the Shi‘i identity in Lebanon shifted from al-Sadr’s social justice framework toward the “Axis of Resistance” and political Islam—a development some see as continuity and others as divergence from his thought.

4-4. The Relationship Between The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr and Later Shi‘i Islamism

One of the crucial questions is whether The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr has continuity or rupture with later Shi‘i Islamism—particularly Hezbollah.

Analytically:

• Continuity exists in institution-building and identity formation:
  The institutions al-Sadr created provided the identity infrastructure for later movements.
• Significant differences exist in ideology and strategy:
  Al-Sadr embraced reformism, anti-violence, and state-centered politics,
  while Hezbollah adopted armed resistance and regional alignment.

Thus, the relationship can best be described as:

“Identity continuity + ideological rupture.”

In conclusion:

• The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr played a fundamental role in bringing the Shi‘a out of marginalization and shaping their collective identity;
• This transformation enabled new opportunities for political and social participation;
• Yet within Lebanon’s sectarian system, this identity formation inevitably intensified sectarian competition and hindered state-building;
• A structured Shi‘i identity is one of al-Sadr’s most significant legacies—both socially and politically;
• But this legacy is dual in nature: it is both empowering and limiting.

5. Musa al-Sadr, the Lebanese State, and the Problem of Political Effectiveness

The problem of political effectiveness in Lebanon has been one of the country’s chronic challenges since the 1950s. Due to its sectarian structure, fragile balance of power, regional dependencies, and the weakness of its executive institutions, the Lebanese state has been unable to fully assume the essential functions of a modern state—providing services, managing conflicts, and establishing legitimate authority. Although The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr was formed within the social context of the Shi‘a community, it was continuously engaged with the question of the relationship between religion, society, and the state. This section examines the image of the state that emerges from The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr and how it is shaped by the realities of Lebanon’s ineffective state.

5-1. A Weak State and a Strong Society: The Starting Point of Analysis

Before examining Sadr’s thought, one must note a critical structural reality: Lebanon is a classic example of a weak state and a strong society. The sects—Maronite, Sunni, Shi‘a, and Druze—each possess their own social, economic, and security networks, networks that fulfill functions which in a modern state should lie within the authority of public institutions.

In such an environment:

• The state cannot implement national policies;
• Public institutions become highly politicized and sectarian;
• Every reformist initiative is inevitably absorbed into sectarian competition.

The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr is formed precisely within this context, and this context dictates both the possibilities and limitations of Sadr’s project.

5-2. The Ideal State in Sadr’s Thought: Effectiveness Grounded in Justice

In The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr, the state is an ethical-civic institution, not a religious one. Three core elements define his conception of the state:

a) Executive Effectiveness

Sadr believed that the state must:

• Provide public services equitably;
• Bring marginalized regions out of the periphery;
• Reduce structural inequalities.

These expectations show that Sadr envisioned a high degree of “state functionalism,” something that was practically unattainable in Lebanon.

b) Justice as the Foundation of Legitimacy

He argued that the legitimacy of the state derives not from sectarianism but from social justice and broad participation. This view transforms the role of the state from “a manager of sectarian balances” into “a representative of the public good.”

c) Coexistence of Sects within a Legal Framework

Sadr did not support exclusive models of power and emphasized the necessity of coexistence and equal participation. The ideal state he envisioned was one that:

• Is impartial,
• Possesses authority,
• And manages sectarian competition rather than reproducing it.

The fundamental problem, however, is that such a state neither existed nor was built in Lebanon.

5-3. The Gap Between Theory and Reality: Lebanon’s Structural Limitations

Placing the Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr within the context of the actual Lebanese state reveals three major gaps:

First: Weaknesses of the Central State

Lebanon lacks a unified bureaucracy and civic authority. This weakness:

• Makes the implementation of social justice impossible;
• Reduces the political arena to sectarian competition;
• Turns religious and local leaders into primary political actors.

Consequently, Sadr was compelled to assume the role of “social leader,” and in the absence of the state became the “representative of the Shi‘a sect”—even if his intention was to transcend sectarianism.

Second: Sectarian Political Economy

Lebanon’s economy—from banks to universities—is structured along sectarian lines. Thus, Sadr’s programs for social justice faced structural resistance because the distribution of resources was directly tied to the sectarian system of power.

Third: Foreign Interventions

Lebanon has long been a field of regional power struggles. Sadr’s reformist project was constantly influenced by:

• Syrian policies,
• Palestinian developments,
• Arab rivalries,
• And later, the Iranian Revolution.

In such an environment, any project—even one with a civic character—quickly acquires regional and security implications.

5-4. Sadr’s Role in Strengthening or Weakening the Lebanese State: A Critical View

Given the above structural gaps, one can pose a difficult question: Did The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr help strengthen the Lebanese state, or did it unintentionally reproduce some of its weaknesses?

a) Strengthening Factors

• Increasing the political participation of the Shi‘a
  Shi‘a participation could have contributed to a more balanced distribution of political power.
• Emphasis on reforming the state rather than replacing it
  Sadr, unlike many Islamists, did not seek to dismantle the system.
• Transforming deprivation into a national demand
  This could generate pressure for state reforms

b) Unintentional Weakening Factors

• Strengthening social institutions independent of the state
  The educational and relief institutions Sadr established became functional competitors to the state due to its weakness.
• Strengthening sectarian mobilization
  Although Sadr sought national justice, his actions in Lebanon’s environment inevitably increased the “capacity for sectarian mobilization.”
• Expansion of the political role of religious leaders
  This development contradicts the logic of the modern state, which depends on the professionalization of politics.

5-5. The Place of the State in Post-Sadrist Legacy

After Sadr’s disappearance in 1978, his legacy followed diverging paths. Two major groups—Amal and Hezbollah—each continued parts of his thought but developed different approaches toward the Lebanese state:

Amal Movement:

• State-oriented and participatory;
• Fully integrated into the official structure of Lebanon;
• Continued the socio-political dimension of Sadr’s legacy.

Hezbollah:

• Possesses a quasi-state structure;
• Relies on security, resistance, and regional Islamist ideology;
• Has a complex relationship with the state: both its partner and its rival.

In this sense, The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr regarding the state survives in a dual manner:

• A social-reformist continuation in Amal,
• And an identity-security-oriented continuation in Hezbollah.

Yet neither succeeded in bringing Lebanon closer to Sadr’s ideal of an “effective and just state.”

Overall Analysis

Examining The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr in relation to the question of state effectiveness in Lebanon shows:

• Sadr believed in a modern, effective, and impartial state;
• But Lebanon’s structural reality contradicted this ideal;
• Sadr was caught between the need to reform the state and the practical needs of Shi‘a mobilization;
• This contradiction gave his efforts a dual character:
  strengthening Shi‘a participation on the one hand and reinforcing sectarian dynamics on the other;
• In theory, The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr leaned toward modern state-building, but in practice it moved within the severe constraints of Lebanon’s sectarian structure.

6. Conclusion and Final Assessment of The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr

The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr represents a rare reformist effort within a deeply sectarian and fragile society such as Lebanon. Examining his theoretical foundations, political practices, and social outcomes shows that Sadr’s project rested on three pillars: the social revival of the Shi‘a, the modernization of the religion–politics relationship, and the attempt to establish a just and effective state. Nevertheless, his successes at the level of society exceeded the results he achieved at the level of the state.

6-1. Summary of the Main Themes in Sadr’s Thought

Sadr defined politics in relation to human dignity, social justice, and moral responsibility. Unlike ideological models of Islamism, he pursued a model of “social–ethical Islam”—a model that sought to introduce religious values into the public sphere within a civic and participatory framework.

In practice, through extensive institution-building—from educational institutions to social services—Sadr transformed Shi‘a identity from historical marginalization into collective agency. This institution-building became his primary tool for empowerment and formed the link between his social activism and his political philosophy.

6-2. Strengths and Limitations of Sadr’s Project

6-2-1. Strengths

• Turning social justice into the core of politics;
• Ability to create lasting institutions and strengthen civil society;
• Establishing dialogue with diverse sects and offering a model of coexistence;
• Proposing a flexible interpretation of the relationship between religion and the state that led neither to rigid secularism nor to a religious state.

6-2-2. Limitations

• Lebanon’s sectarian structure severely restricted the possibility of state reform;
• His social leadership of the Shi‘a inadvertently strengthened sectarian boundaries;
• The discourse of justice—despite its universal intent—took on a sectarian character in practice;
• Regional pressures and the state’s structural weakness prevented the formation of a long-term reform plan.

6-3. Theoretical and Political Implications

Sadr’s project demonstrates that in multi-sectarian societies:

• Ethical reform without state reform remains incomplete;
• Social Islamism can serve as an alternative between radical Islamism and rigid secularism;
• Sectarian identity-building—even with the intention of justice—can reproduce sectarian competition.

Politically, Sadr’s legacy in Lebanon is dual:
on the one hand, empowering the Shi‘a community and generating new capacities for participation;
on the other hand, preserving the sectarian structure and the state’s inability to turn justice into public policy.

6-4. Final Conclusion

The Political Thought of Musa al-Sadr can be understood as an effort to connect ethics, religion, and politics in a deeply divided society. He succeeded in bringing the Shi‘a community from the margins to the center and in offering a new model of ethical political action. However, Lebanon’s sectarian structure and the weakness of its state prevented this model from turning into sustainable state reform. Thus, Sadr’s project became less a blueprint for rebuilding the state and more a plan for social empowerment—a plan that succeeded in transforming a fragmented community into political actors, but could not reshape the foundations of the Lebanese state.