|
An
Attack on
Pakistan
is an Attack on Islam
Shiv Shankar Sastry
The
image of
Pakistan
, as evinced by global
media reports, throws up a large number of contradictions that
seem irreconcilable. On the one hand there is the
often-presented romanticized picture of a tolerant Islamic
state, conjuring up images of a nation worthy of inspiring the
Arabian Nights. A “responsible” nation wronged by
India
and by the
United states
, a misunderstood nation
that symbolizes peace and equality of Islam. A forward looking
nation led by a latter-day Ataturk, who speaks of “enlightened
moderation” as the cure to Pakistan’s problems caused by
rampant religious fundamentalism.
On the other hand there is the less flattering picture of
Pakistan
, one of a nation that
maintains training schools for Islamic terrorists who operate
from
India
to
Indonesia
and from the
Philippines
to
Russia
. The nation housing the
headquarters of international terrorist groups such as the
Lashkar-e-Tayyeba (Army of the Pure) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad
(Army of the Prophet Mohammad). The nation that harbors the Al
Qaeda and gave rise to the Taliban, under whose bigoted rule,
millennia old statues of the Buddha, apostle of peace, were
destroyed as statues were “anti-Islamic”[i].
A nation that holds and protects, without punishment or censure,
and with state sanction, international criminals like Abdul
Qadeer Khan, a nuclear weapons proliferator [ii],
Dawood Ibrahim, a millionaire thug, leader of an international
crime syndicate, and mass murderer responsible for one of the
most heinous terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India in 1992 [iii],
and Omar Saeed Sheikh, a kidnapper and murderer, the mastermind
behind the beheading of the Wall Street Journalist Daniel Pearl.
A nation in which women are possessions who can be raped and
then punished for adultery [iv],
and where female toddlers can be betrothed to adults as
punishment for a crime by a third party [v].
A nation of poverty and illiteracy, led by a fantastically
wealthy military elite leadership, who simultaneously claim the
ability to control their nation, as well as inability to control
parts of their nation [vi].
Is there any way in which these divergent and at times
contradictory views of
Pakistan
can be reconciled?
It turns out that it is possible to reconcile these views,
provided one is able to consciously give up the notion that
religion has no role to play in affairs of the Pakistani state.
The separation of religion from state, to produce a secular
government is a construct that seems to work in Western and some
non-western democracies. In such systems, the national laws and
government do not interfere with the religious beliefs of the
citizens because they view religion as a private, personal
issue. Religious leaders in turn do not have the power or the
authority to interfere with government policy. Religion and
national policies form separate “compartments”, either of
which cannot dictate terms to the other, and it is assumed that
state policies on international relations with other countries
are not motivated by religious concerns. However, this
deliberate separation of religious affairs and affairs of the
state has never existed in Pakistan, where religion is used with
state sanction to whatever extent necessary, and without
following any firm rules about the extent to which religion can
control the government, or vice versa.
The role of Islam in
Pakistan
should not be
underestimated. Ignoring this or sidelining the role of Islam in
Pakistan
can only lead to a
failure to understand Pakistani compulsions and actions.
The Islamic
republic
of
Pakistan
was born as a nation
for Muslims.
Pakistan
watcher and recognized
friend of
Pakistan
, Stephen Cohen, chose
to describe
Pakistan
as follows: “
Pakistan
was to be an
extraordinary state--a homeland for Indian Muslims and an
ideological and political leader of the Islamic world. Providing
a homeland to protect Muslims--a minority community in British
India--from the bigotry and intolerance of India's Hindu
majority was important”[vii]
“Bigotry and intolerance” of hundreds of millions of Hindus,
who had been under Muslim or British rule for several centuries,
is mentioned casually as a truism for which Muslims needed
protection in a separate nation, Pakistan. This ideology had no
place for the protection of Christians, Sikhs and Buddhists,
also religious minorities and presumably at equal risk from
Hindu bigotry. The new state was formed for Muslims. With the
word “Paki” meaning pure,
Pakistan
was to be a state of
pure Islam, purely for Muslims, despite the early rhetoric of a
soon-to-die Jinnah.[viii]
One of the rallying cries of this new Islamic state was “What
is the meaning of
Pakistan
? There is no God but
Allah” (“
Pakistan
ka matlab kya? La illah
ilallah”)
In keeping with this pure Islamic ideology, the percentage of
non-Islamic minorities in the Pakistani population has dropped
from over 15% shortly around the time of Pakistan's creation in
1947 to about 3% today [ix]
[x].
Until recently Pakistanis had to swear by their Islamic identity
before they could obtain a passport, and Pakistani passport
holders are unique in the world in having their religion, Islam,
mentioned on their passport [xi].
Even people who live as Muslims in other parts of the world,
such as Ahmedis and Shias do not meet the exacting requirements
of the purity of Islam in
Pakistan
. Ahmedis are
non-Islamic by law in
Pakistan
– a law that enjoys
widespread public support in
Pakistan
. Such is the
requirement in
Pakistan
for maintaining a
particular pristine Islamic ideology capable of resisting all
attempts at change or reform.
With religion dictating the fundamental question of the nature
of Pakistani citizenship, it is little wonder that Islam crops
up in every aspect of life in
Pakistan
. Since the inception of
Pakistan
in 1947, Pakistani
leaders have sought to use military force to occupy the Indian
state of
Jammu and Kashmir
, merely because the
majority population in that state are Muslims. When all out war
failed,
Pakistan
trained and armed
terrorists who continue to wage a bloody campaign of religious
ethnocide in
India
. Pakistani governments
have denied this. That these denials were lies is well known,
but what is significant is that Pakistani leaders have described
even the act of telling a lie as an Islamic right. Late
Pakistani supremo General Zia ul Haq told President Reagan that
Pakistan
would deny involvement
in
Afghanistan
and added the words
“Muslims have the right to lie in a good cause” [xii]
. And so the tradition of lying for what is considered a good
Islamic cause continues to this day. While
Pakistan
officially denied
having been involved in the Kargil operation with
India
, alleging that the
battle was fought between Indian forces and “freedom
fighters”, - the recently launched website of the Pakistani
President General Musharraf carries a photograph of General
Musharraf with Pakistani troops during the Kargil operation.
The fact that Islam is the state religion of
Pakistan
, and that
Pakistan
has sought to follow
the “sharia”, or Islamic law, is perhaps an internal matter
of the Pakistani state. But the internal effects of the sharia
in
Pakistan
has a bearing on the
overall development of
Pakistan
, and the rising
incidence of poverty, illiteracy, and the burgeoning population
of
Pakistan
. Education in
Pakistan
(where it is available)
is primarily from privately funded Islamic schools called
“madrassas” that impart an education in Koranic studies
which does not include the “3 R's”. Such an education is
considered all that is necessary in Islamic Pakistan, and girls
are not admitted to madrassas, leading to lower literacy among
women. Islamic laws have been enacted that can be misused for
lopsided justice in which a rapist is let off and the raped
woman accused of adultery [xiii].
A huge population of illiterate women with no access to birth
spacing methods have resulted in a high birth rate and a
population “bulge” of young people with little education and
no jobs, ripe for induction into some madrassas that double up
as schools for Islamic extremists.
By identifying itself as synonymous with
Islam
,
Pakistan
presents the world with
a fait accompli.
Any effort to reform education in madrassas is considered
anti-Islamic, so the education system cannot be changed. Efforts
to change the status of women again is countered by the
“anti-Islamic” clause. As recently as March 2005, the
Pakistani government rejected efforts to remove a law that
allows “honor killing” of women saying that efforts at
repeal were anti-Islamic [xiv].
The recognition of Pakistani trained Islamic militia as
terrorists leads to reactions from Pakistani governmental and
non-governmental entities that “anti-Islamic nations”, - a
euphemism for
India
, the US, and
Israel
- are seeking to
destroy Islam. Abdul Qadeer Khan proliferated nuclear technology
only to Islamic states barring
North Korea
. Any effort to
implicate him is considered an effort to malign the father of
the Islamic bomb. An urge for nuclear restraint by
Pakistan
is considered an effort
to de-nuclearise the Islamic world. Criminals such as Dawood
Ibrahim and Omar Sheikh are considered in
Pakistan
to have served the
cause of Islam by committing terrorist acts against
India
and the
US
and are thereby liable
for protection by the Pakistani state.
In
Pakistan
, everything done by
Pakistanis and their government is deemed Islamic, and any
effort at change can invite the accusation that such an effort
is anti-Islamic, and therefore inappropriate and ill advised for
Pakistan
. This has served as an
effective deterrent against change in
Pakistan
, and has allowed
successive Pakistani governments to get away with acts that
amount to international crimes [xv].
One question that stems from Pakistani actions is whether much
of what is done is really Islamic or not. This is a question
that should be answered by Islamic scholars from other Islamic
nations. In the absence of widespread Islamic condemnation that
Pakistan
has been misusing or
misinterpreting Islam, it can only be assumed that Pakistani
claims to ownership of Islam are genuine and legitimate, and
that claims of such ownership are tacitly acknowledged and
supported by other Islamic nations, who are clearly aware of
Pakistan
’s claim to Islam.
This question of whether Pakistani behavior is truly Islamic has
even greater impact on
Pakistan
itself, and the
so-called “Islamic world” at large. Pakistani leaders can
hardly claim that the actions of their nation are not Islamic
because doing so would mean giving up their claim on Islam and
also losing the freedom the “Islam card” gives
Pakistan
, so that it can
continue to break all norms of international behavior without
fear of condemnation or retribution.
But while
Pakistan
lays claim on Islam,
the picture of Islam that is emerging from
Pakistan
is not one of an
egalitarian religion of peace, but that of an intolerant faith
at war with everyone else. This is the new “Pakistan-sponsored
image” of Islam, which can only be changed by the community of
Islamic nations, who surely must have the concern and interest
to do this. Cleaning up the image of a “Violent and vengeful
Islam” that has been effectively promoted by
Pakistan
cannot come from
non-Islamic states. It shows no signs of coming from within
Pakistan
. That responsibility
lies with Islamic states. The non-Islamic world can only stand
by and watch.
References and Footnotes
[i]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1222776.stm
Bamiyan Statues destroyed,
[ii]Pakistan:
Khan Gave Iran Machines Usable for A-Bomb, Yahoo News , Thu, Mar
10,2005, http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=2&u=/nm/20050310/ts_nm/nuclear_pakistan_iran_dc
[iii]http://www.kashmirherald.com/nov03/top20.html
Dawood Ibrahim, an Indian underworld don, man behind the
planning and financing 13 explosions in Mumbai in 1993 in which
almost 300 people died. Ibrahim is wanted in connection with
cases of arms supply, counterfeiting, drugs trade, funding
alleged criminals, murder and smuggling. He lives in and
operates from
Karachi
,
Pakistan
.
[iv]
http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=6614
In Pakistan, if a woman reports a rape, four Muslim men
must generally act as witnesses before she can prove her case.
Otherwise, she risks being charged with fornication or
adultery-and punished with public whipping.
[v]
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/02/21/international/i111333S65.DTL
A tribal council in
Pakistan
has ordered the
betrothal of a 2-year-old girl to a man 40 years older to punish
her uncle for an alleged affair with the man's wife, police said
Monday.
[vi]
http://www.thefridaytimes.com/_news5.shtml
Balochistan-seething under Sardars and Subversion "
Our predicament is that only about 5 percent of the province
falls within the police jurisdiction and that means the writ of
the government remains very weak, says a senior police official.
"
[vii]"The
Nation and State of Pakistan" Stephen P Cohen http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/cohens/20020701.htm
[viii]
http://ghazali.net/book1/body_chapter_1.htm
"In any case Pakistan is not going to be a
theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission.
We have many non-Muslims-Hindus, Christians and Parsis -- but
they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and
privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful
part in the affairs of
Pakistan
." Quaid-i-Azam,
Feb. 1948
[ix]
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE6-2/sridhar.html
[x]
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/pk.html
[xi]
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1061923.cms
Religion column back in Pakistan passports: Pakistan's
government approved the controversial restoration of a section
identifying people's religion in the country's new passports on
Thursday, in a move seen as surrender to Islamic radicals.
[xii]PERCEPTIONS
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS December 2000 -February 2001
Volume V - Number 4 (a publication of the Foreign Ministry of
Turkey) "Several hours later, President Zia, the truly
authoritative figure in Pakistan, called President Reagan I
heard the President ask Zia how he would handle the fact that
they would be violating their agreement. Zia replied that they
would just lie about it. 'We've been denying our activities
there for eight years.' Then, the president recounted, Zia told
him that, 'Muslims have the right to lie in a good cause'."
[xiii]
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Parliament/3251/spring99/pakistan.html
"..specifically the "zina" or adultery law
under the Hudood Ordinance has legally blurred the distinction
between rape and extramarital sex, resulting in the imprisonment
and/or physical punishment of numerous women who have come
forward with charges of rape without witnesses. Consequently,
many rape victims are deemed criminals in a Pakistani court of
law.
[xiv]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4311055.stm
The Pakistan government has allied with Islamists to reject a
bill which sought to strengthen the law against the practice of
"honour killing". The parliament rejected the bill by
a majority vote on Tuesday, declaring it to be un-Islamic.
[xv]
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/10469/
Major military changes in Pakistan by A. H. Amin
"What major powers do not understand is that the Muslim
elite uses the slogan "Islam is in danger" once their
personal class interests are threatened as in 1940-47 or when US
imposed sanctions on Pakistan from 1989 till 2001. This elite
uses the slogan of Jihad once they hope to get US aid as in the
Afghan War or once they have no hope of getting
US
aid and need cannon
fodder for dying in
Kashmir
,
Afghanistan
or elsewhere."
|