| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Islamic extremism, law and nation-state |
| 2007-02-11 |
| Najam Sethi The Capital Development Authority in Islamabad recently woke up to the fact that nearly 80 mosques have encroached on land or been built without the CDA’s permission, and are therefore “illegal”. Consequently, after eviction notices were blithely ignored, the CDA moved to demolish a couple of these encroachments according to the law of the land. In the event, however, it has only managed to stir a hornets’ nest of Islamic militancy. Most things in Pakland do, don't they? The fanatical mullahs of Lal Masjid and the students of Jamia Hafza Madrassa for women next to the Masjid are at the core of the protest. The Masjid and the Madrassa are led by two brothers who regularly vent venom at President General Pervez Musharraf for being an “agent of America”. On 22rd January, in protest against the CDA’s demolition of one mosque in Islamabad, the mullahs of the Masjid instigated a group of baton wielding female students of the Madrassa to “seize” and “occupy” a children’s library next to the mosque. When the authorities moved to reoccupy the library, the fiery khatib of the mosque publicly vowed to raise a batch of suicide bombers to resist the state. If the administration’s patience runs out, the situation could get messy. One of these days I'm going to write a translator that will take a news article and turn it into plain English. When I do, the word "fiery" will automatically be rendered as "lunatic." This episode raises questions of law, state and religion. It suggests that many extremist mullahs do not accept the notion of the “writ of the nation-state” and the laws of the land promulgated by parliaments and constitutions if, in their view, these are in conflict with their notions of Islamic law and life. Indeed, by their very definition and logic, not just Pakistan but the whole world belongs to Allah and they (the mullahs) have a right to build mosques (houses of Allah) wherever they like, regardless of the laws relating to land and property. Indeed, such thinking may extend to the use of force to claim these “above-the-law-rights”. This approach makes nonsense of the idea of modern constitutional law and challenges the notion of the state as the sole repository of authority to enforce the law. In fact, the tactic of suicide bombing is a devastating device against the notion of deterrence or punishment for breaking the law on which the whole edifice of the modern state is constructed. This situation is complicated by another form of protest by religious extremists against alleged state encroachment on their “democratic” and “human” rights. Those who don’t accept the notion of “peoples democracy” as opposed to “Allah’s democracy” (Islamic state) are ready to clutch at the props of the same peoples democracy (rule of law, due process, judicial accountability and independence, etc) for survival and sustenance that they are committed to overthrowing. In short, the extremist mullahs seek to exploit the freedoms of liberal democracy to overthrow it and replace it by their dictatorship in the name of religion. There is a complex development underway in Pakistan in which Al-Qaeda, Taliban, jihadi and sunni sectarian elements are all being stirred in a red hot crucible. Notions of national state interest have been sacrificed at the altar of global jihad for the greater glory of Islam. That is why General Musharraf has become the “enemy” because he seeks to put a lid on jihad (against “foreign infidels” in general and “Indian and American infidels” in particular) because it undermines the national interest of the Pakistani nation-state. Indeed, the very philosophy that jihad can only be sanctioned by the state in its national interest has been overtaken by the notion that jihad can be sanctioned by the private sector especially when the state is a non-Islamic one and the objective of jihad is a global revival and resurgence of Islam. The fatwas of various Islamic luminaries from Osama bin Laden to the top khatibs in the “holy land” testify to this innovation. Much the same may be said of the latest weapon of suicide bombing. It was Yusuf Qardawi, the leading Islamic jurist of our time living in Qatar, who first issued a fatwa legitimizing suicide-bombing in the cause of Islam against injustice. His objective was to condone and even legitimize the suicide-bombing campaign by young Al-Qaedaists in the West against American and British targets despite the fact that innocent fellow Muslims were also killed in the act. The blowback from such ideas has taken its toll in Pakistan too: a former judge of the Appellate (Islamic) Branch of the Supreme Court of Pakistan who has been attacking President Musharraf on private TV networks is influenced by such new and radical ideas, as is the khatib of Lal Masjid who threatened resistance by suicide bombing if his demands were not met. The Pakistani nation and state is therefore faced with a new and dangerous threat that represents a violent minority which seeks to exploit the values of liberal democracy to undermine majoritarian democracy. This threat cannot be thwarted by military means alone. The nation and the state will have to demonstrate a broad democratic mainstream moderate consensus to tackle their common enemy by political, legal and economic means. This is not just General Musharraf’s war. It is every patriotic Pakistani’s war who wants to protect and defend this nation. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #2 It's Friday Times - a pay site. This is the complete article. |
| Posted by: Fred 2007-02-11 17:52 |
| #1 Link ends up at an error page. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2007-02-11 10:37 |