It should be known that there are two groups of Mu’tazila’s: one group’s view and opinion are the same as that of “Ahl as-Sunnah wa Jama’ah,” and the second group’s view is opposite to the view and opinion of Ahl as-Sunnah.
A group of Mu’tazila and Khawarij say, “It is permissible for the Imam to be a non-Qureshi.”
The Mu’tazila’s argument is that it is not necessary for the Imam or Caliph to be from Quraysh; rather, it is permissible to be other than them.
The Mu’tazila said: Whoever implements the rules of the Book and the Sunnah is allowed to become an Imam. If a Qurayshi and a Nabataean (i.e., a non-Arab who has become Arabic-speaking) volunteer for the Imamate, we will make the Qurayshi the Imam, and the Imamate will not be concluded except with the consensus of the Ummah and election and voting.
Zarrar bin Amro [from the Mu’tazila] said: If a Qureshi and a Nabataean volunteer for Imamate, we will make the Nabataean Imam and leave the Qureshi. Because Nabati, his tribe is less and his companions are less, and if he disobeys Allah and we want to remove him, he is powerless.
Ibrahim Nizam [of the Mu’tazila] and his fellow thinkers said: Whoever implements the rules of the Qur’an, and the Sunnah is worthy of Imamate; Because Allah, the Exalted, says: “Indeed, I am honored in the sight of Allah.” Translation: “The most honorable of you in the sight of Allah is the most pious of you.”
Mu’tazila reasons
The reason for a group of Mu’tazila and those who believe that Quraysh being an imam is not a condition is that it is stated in another hadith: You listen to your Amir and obey him, even though he was an Abyssinian slave. They say: This hadith indicates that the Imam is sometimes not from Quraysh.
Another reason they mention for a non-Qureshi imam is that in the event of a problem or the ineligibility of the person designated as an imam, a non-Qureshi can be dismissed from his position very easily. because he does not have a nation or a tribe to defend him and to fight for him to maintain the Imamate; Therefore, there is no problem with his dismissal.
The answer of the Mu’tazila reason
Their argument is based on the hadiths in which the command to obey the emir, even if he is an Abyssinian slave, [is not complete because] what is meant by this imam is that imam who has conquered by force, that is, he has won the country by force of sword and spear, and Either it means minor Imamate over some provinces, or it is because of the exaggeration of obedience, which has been stated as an example.
In response to this argument, Imam Razi says: “Each Imam is a Sultan; But every sultan is not an imam; Therefore, the fact that this hadith indicates that the Abyssinian slave is a sultan, and a king does not mean that he is an imam and a caliph.
Khattab says: “The goal is to obey whoever the Imam appoints for you as the Amir; The meaning here is not that the Abyssinian slave of the imam is placed.”
By 
