Role ulema must play

RELIGIOUS scholars in Pakistan may be guilty of a collective silence but ulema around the world have not hesitated in their denunciation of terrorism. The latest of these edicts came on Monday when Muslim scholars gathered at the venerable Darul Uloom Deoband in India issued a declaration condemning ‘all kinds of oppression, violence and terrorism’. The scholars, some 20,000 in number and representing various sects and schools of Islamic thought, chose to speak as one on what is perhaps the most burning issue of our times. The Indian scholars are not alone in their views. In Dec 2001 the Grand Sheikh of Al Azhar mosque, Sheikh Mohammad Sayyed Tantawi, denounced terrorism in all its forms including suicide attacks against Israeli civilians. Sheikh Tantawi also lent his name to a landmark statement issued at the International Islamic Conference in July 2005. Endorsed among others by Grand Ayatollah Al Sayyid Ali Al Sistani and Grand Mufti of Egypt Ali Jumaa, the Amman declaration condemned terrorism against any person of any faith and made it clear that only qualified religious authorities, not extremist groups and clerics, can issue fatwas. Violence against innocent civilians has also been collectively condemned by leading clerics and religious scholars in Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Egypt (including the Muslim Brotherhood), Britain and a host of other countries.

Only a handful of voices have done so in Pakistan. Maulana Tahirul Qadri was perhaps the first local religious leader to condemn terrorism outright post-9/11 (in Oct 2001), and Mufti Mohammad Naeem of Al Jamia Al Binoria Al Alimia took a similar stand in Feb 2007. Qazi Hussain Ahmed of the Jamaat-i-Islami has also denounced terrorism, but largely in response to allegations that the MMA maintains links with extremist groups. Maulana Fazlur Rehman is meanwhile on record as saying that suicide attacks are not justified — in Pakistan, that is. The only collective declaration came on May 17, 2005 when 58 religious scholars decreed in Lahore that suicide bombings were forbidden in a Muslim country. The fatwa was, however, Pakistan-specific and also lacked credibility. Thought by many to be government-sponsored, it came two days after members of the Wafaqul Madaris Al Arabia had railed against President Musharraf and his ‘pro-West’ policies at a convocation ceremony in Islamabad. In any case, there has been no sustained campaign by religious scholars against the growing menace of terrorism.

Ulema and religio-political leaders in Pakistan must fulfil their moral responsibility to condemn — vociferously and consistently, individually and collectively — all forms of terrorism and extremism, including sectarian bigotry. In a deeply religious country where illiteracy is widespread, it is they and not the intelligentsia that command the widest audience. Terrorism ought to be unacceptable on any grounds but if it can be ingrained in the public psyche that it is un-Islamic, the extremists will begin to lose ground and converts to their unholy cause. Community leaders across the country also have a role to play because potential extremists, like smokers of the future, must be educated before they start. Silence on this issue is tantamount to endorsement.

Obama at it again

IT is scary that a presidential hopeful should exhibit the kind of irresponsibility Barack Obama has shown. As of this moment, he is doing better than Hillary Clinton, and one has to wait some time more to see who gets the Democratic ticket. Given the mess into which a Republican president has landed his country, the Democratic chances are better. For that reason, a potential occupant of the White House should show restraint rather than play to the gallery to win the primaries. What is unfortunate is that Obama has not waited for a new government in Islamabad to take office and has again threatened to attack terrorist bases in Pakistan to show his lack of trust in President Pervez Musharraf’s policies. To be fair to Obama, he has not been the only American to talk in this vein. President George Bush, many Pentagon officials and the media too have spoken in threatening tones. For quite some time, however, the administration had begun to exercise some restraint for two reasons. First, Pakistan has made it clear repeatedly that an attack on terrorist bases in Fata will be considered an attack on this country. Two, since the Lal Masjid affair, there has been a menacing rise in suicide bombings and terrorist attacks, making it clear to all and sundry that the war on terror is not America’s war but is in Pakistan’s interests.

The PPP-PML-N victory in the election has given rise to fears in some western quarters that the new government will change its policy toward the Taliban. This is jumping to conclusions. The leaders of these two parties, Asif Ali Zardari and Mian Nawaz Sharif, have given no such indication. In fact, their victory shows that the people of Pakistan reject extremism and have, for that reason, reposed their trust in the two secular parties. It is, of course, obvious that the new government will see the war on terror from a different perspective and possibly de-link it from America’s personality-oriented approach to the issue. But this is basically speculative, and Obama should do well to wait and let the elected government take charge. With America involved in military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and with Iran constantly being threatened, an attack on Pakistan will strengthen the Taliban-Al Qaeda claim that America is the number one enemy of Islam. Mercifully, Hillary Clinton had the good sense to flay her rival.

Guilty of plagiarism

PLAGIARISM, though another name for stealing, is much more than merely taking away somebody’s material possessions. It gnaws at the mind — of both whose work is stolen and those under the plagiarist’s charge. A thief seeks to benefit from the fruits of someone else’s labour but his gain is individual and so is the loss of his victim. A plagiarist, on the other hand, aims at benefiting not just from someone else’s hard work he also endangers the prospects of those whose future depends on what kind of instruction he imparts to them and what role model he offers them through his own behaviour.

So it was the right thing for the Punjab University to do when it forced five teachers at its Centre for High Energy Physics into early retirement after they were proved to have plagiarised. There is some disagreement between the university management and its academic staff on how the teachers’ removal from their jobs should have taken place, but no one is claiming that the crime did not take place. The case, which surfaced about two years ago, has taken rather too long to reach its logical end and was at the centre of the Higher Education Commission’s refusal to give the university Rs139m in annual grant unless the campus were rid of the cheats. The Punjab University is grappling with similar cases of plagiarism in at least one other department. If the Physics department episode is anything to go by, the undue delay and procrastination the university showed in sacking the plagiarists should not be allowed to be repeated. Once a teacher is found guilty of plagiarism, he loses all moral authority to remain in the instructor’s seat, hiding behind ambiguous rules or an indecisive management. Those who seek to thrive on the back of others’ labours and thereby impart stolen knowledge to the future generations deserve no mercy. After their guilt is proven, they should be sent packing without demur and delay.

The concept of state in Islam

THE Quran clearly states that the aim and purpose of an Islamic system is the establishment, maintenance and development of those virtues which the Creator wishes human life to be enriched by and the prevention and eradication of those evils which He finds abhorrent.

An Islamic state is intended neither to become solely an instrument of political administration, nor to fulfil the collective will of any particular group of people.

The individual and the state combine their efforts to achieve the ideal qualities of goodness, virtue, beauty, purity, success, mutual respect and prosperity in accordance with the Divine Revelation. They fight injustice, corruption, falsehood, intolerance, bigotry and extremism of all types.

This progressive system embraces all that is good, promotes the wellbeing of humanity and avoids that which is evil and harmful to humanity at large. The Divinely inspired system of life is fully sustainable and durable.

Man, by nature, is born free and desperately wants to do as he pleases. According to Nietzsche if a child, soon after birth, is left in a jungle without any human supervision and is brought up by animals, he will remain animalistic in his behaviour for the rest of his life.

He will never attain the posture and status of humanity though he would look like any other human. He can only actualise and develop his potential in a social setup with other human beings.

Even today the most dreaded punishment is solitary confinement even if awarded in luxurious surroundings. The fear of the grave is another reflection of a solitary confinement. Islam stands for collective social life and values – a society in which there is harmony, peace and justice.

These conditions enable a man to think beyond his physical existence and thus prepare for the next stage of life in the hereafter. Hajj, Salaat, Zakaat, Jihad etc are all meant to help society and ultimately the state. Individuals become a community only when their hearts unite. In a community of equals, one who contributes the most, excels.

An Islamic state does not seek to restrict human rights and privileges to its boundaries. Islam has laid down universal fundamental rights for humanity which are to be observed in all circumstances. These rights are for Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Prophet Muhammad (SAW) brought the Divine Message that demolished all man-made idols and ideals. The Quran lays down principles for implementing the Divine programme in a country for others to follow. Islam spread through its universal progressive message.

This system was not permitted to be implemented through coercion, intolerance and extremism.

The Quran considers man as the real end of the existence of a country, state or even the entire universe. Everything has been created for man’s benefit. ‘Whosoever is there on this earth, God has created for you. Not only in the earth but whatsoever is there in the earth and the heavenly bodies’ (45:13). The Quran has not used the term ‘state’, but the idea of country and governance is there.

At the outset of the call to prophethood, the exalted Muhammad announced the highest and the noblest possible statement ever, “We will establish a state wherein a beautiful young woman laden with jewellery will be able to travel alone from Yemen to Basra (in Syria, about 2000 miles).

Yet, she will have no fear but the fear of Allah.” (Bukhari). This meant that in an Islamic state the life, honour and property of all citizens would be safe. It promised peace and rule of law in the beginning with discipline in the hearts. The Prophet achieved this lofty mission in his lifetime.

Choosing leaders in an Islamic state ultimately rests with the community, a kind of a representative democracy nurtured in traditional Islamic norms. An Islamic state should be dynamic and encourage creativity, knowledge and scientific inquiry.

The Quranic concept of sovereignty is also different from all other systems and isms. It is a fact that the authority of some men over others has always been in vogue. The Quran considers this concept as humiliating to humanity and thus unacceptable.

Sovereignty belongs to Allah and not to any individual or group. This leads to another misunderstood system in which a handful of religious leaders assume sovereignty in the name of religion. The Quran negates theocracy.

The sovereign is absolute, but unseen. God does not come down on the earth to guide us. His message is delivered by His messengers. That is why the Quran points out that obeying the Messenger is obeying God.

The Divine rules practically mean following His laws. No one has the authority to make any changes in the Divine Code, not even the Messengers. ‘Judge the matters of these people according to the Book of Allah’ (5:48) declare openly that it is not for me to make any changes therein according to my wishes’ (10:15).

The Messengers were the first to submit to the Divine code. In such a system there would neither be a ruler nor any ruled. We must remember that Muhammad (SAW) never called himself a ruler, king or monarch, although he had authority over a million square miles. After him, the system remained operative through the Caliphs and obedience to them meant obedience to the Divine Code. In an Islamic system of governance the scales of justice have to be established in light of the Divine laws.

A person who, when violating the law, thinks that no one is watching or thinks that he can bribe his way out or use influence to sway judgment and escape punishment, does not believe in God When monarchy creeped into Muslims, the Divine system no longer remained operative. The relationship of the state and the individual changed. The rulers became autocratic and the citizens had no choice except to obey them.

Gradually the Muslim domination of the world declined. Even today the Muslims are confused about the true Islamic system.

Islam does not authorise kingship, monarchy or autocratic rule. Today Islam is followed as a religion of restrictions, while the purpose of God-imposed rules is to further broaden and develop the human personality. This can only be achieved in a society where there is total protection of life, property and honour and where there is no anxiety or lack of shelter and food. Above all such a society should be just and fair.

OTHER VOICES - Pushto Press

Coalition of ANP and PPP

Hewad, Peshawar

“Awami National Party and Pakistan Peoples Party would form a coalition government in the NWFP,” announced Afrasiab Khatak, the provincial president of ANP, in an interview with a private channel.

Different people interpret the process from different angles but the good news is that these two parties will join the coalition in the centre also. Pleasant relations between the central and provincial governments will certainly be a good omen for the newly formed provincial government. Moreover, the coalition government in the province may bring about stability as the PPP has always been in favour of provincial autonomy.

The ANP is better placed to push for the autonomy of the resources and bring them to use for hapless Pushtuns.

Most importantly, the ANP must be able to resolve the issues of hydel power and Kalabagh dam once and for all.

The people of the province are eager to see their language make progress in the domain of official and governmental correspondence besides making it the medium of instruction and curriculum in the elementary levels of education in areas where Pushto is largely spoken.

It is high time that Pushto got its due place

in education, commerce and governmental sectors as per the demands of the people of the province.

Another major issue is the renaming of the province that has lingered on for the last 60 years. This is now upto the ANP leadership to adopt ways and means to resolve the basic issue of Pushtun identity…. The ANP had helped pass a bill for the renaming of the province…in the late nineties.

But the central government of the time had opposed the bill and the matter remained unresolved. The situation in the country has changed now and the matter, it seems, will be resolved without any problems. — (Feb 24)

Afghanistan’s helplessness

Wahdat, Peshawar

The misery of the Afghans is not hidden from anyone around the globe. Besides remaining under the shadow of war for almost three decades, Afghanistan has also endured many natural disasters. Therefore, Afghans are unable to earn a respectable living on their own soil. Moreover, continuous wars on different pretexts have destroyed Afghanistan’s industrial base and agricultural productivity and this has left its people bereft of employment in their own homeland, making the prospects of an honourable and comfortable existence almost unattainable. With very few choices to live by, the Afghans inevitably turn to poppy cultivation or become mercenaries in different militias. It must be remembered that the world has witnessed dangerous consequences whenever the Afghans have taken to the gun to feed their children.

If the international community wishes that wars, the Kalashnikov culture and narcotics trafficking come to an end in Afghanistan, it has to take notice and address the miseries of the Afghan people. Besides spending huge sums of money to crush the insurgency of the Taliban and Al Qaeda, the international community has to channel at least some amount of aid towards the reconstruction of Afghanistan. Differences of perceptions among NATO forces on fundamental issues related to the beleaguered country, have kept the international forces from bringing about any reasonable amount of reconstruction or change.

The lack of will on the part of the international community to rebuild Afghanistan has certainly increased the intensity of insurgency in this war- torn country. Afghanistan needs schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, markets and banks to have a strong base for its state building. The Afghans have to be given a chance to stand on equal footing in the comity of nations. Poverty, hunger and disease in Afghanistan have to come to an end. The Afghans must be able to earn a living in their own country. — (Feb 24)

— Selected and translated by Khadim Hussain