HELD in Bangladesh, at Dhaka, on June 1 and 2 was the South Asian Conference on Fundamentalism & Communalism: Role of Civil Society. Two participants from Pakistan were Air Marshal Asghar Khan and Educationist Hamza Alavi, both of whom delivered strongly worded papers on how this malaise affects Pakistan.

The Air Marshal's theme was universalism and the inability of the Muslim countries to come to grips with the modern world, adapt to it, and learn to live in and with it. The ideas of human liberty, equality and fraternity, the democratic belief that all men are equal in rights and obligations, and the promotion of rationalism and scientific thinking do not sit easily with adherents to the Muslim faith.

As said Asghar: "The simple idea of human liberty and settling issues by rational means, employing scientific modes of thinking has escaped Muslims. Unless this deficiency is removed there can be no hope for their progress." As is so amply illustrated by the examples of Pakistan and its unfortunate creation, the Taliban: "Orthodox ulema preach against rationalism and liberalism. They represent today forces and tendencies that have kept Muslims weak, divided and backward. They actually operate as a priestly class that demands special privileges."

He touched upon the modern phenomenon of the establishment of Islamic states, a concept that came into existence in the 20th century, brought on by some form of insecurity. For in earlier years, Islamic scholars of all sects were at ease with the various political systems and rulers of their countries. Islam was not proclaimed to be in conflict with kings, presidents, dictators, heads of government. It existed in tranquillity, at peace with the world.

The Khomeini revolution and the Taliban have established the rule of the clergy, a concept foreign to the basic tenets of pure Islam. Religion has evolved into a weapon in the hands of unscrupulous corrupt men hungry for absolute power. As said the Air Marshal: "Unless Muslims learn the simple principle of not allowing individuals, whether mullahs or generals, to use religion for their own benefit, troubles will continue". This, we here in Pakistan, have learnt to our cost.

The strife between the Muslim world and the rest of the world is a no-win situation. The Air Marshal's final summation: "There is a lot of learned discussion of what are western values and what are eastern norms. Europe and the West have no proprietary rights over ideas such as equality, liberty and fraternity or social justice. They belong to the whole world and underpin modern civilization... they belong to all of us. Human values and rights are universal. An idea is not a geographical entity. No matter where it was born, it belongs to all mankind."

Hamza Alavi's concentration in his paper, The rise of fundamentalism in Pakistan, was on how this bogey has overtaken Pakistan's society and politics, slowly and surely. Uneducated bigots in the form of mullahs and maulanas, who wave a gun in one hand and the Quran in the other, have been pandered to by our unscrupulous politicians who have used these fanatics to promote their own aims and intents.

Ziaul Haq is of course the bete noire who really knew how to manipulate religion and its dangerous unstable leaders. He was the one who brought them to the fore, into prominence, and gave them an importance which has so damaged this country, its economy, its law and order and its image.

However, Alavi dates the misuse, abuse and exploitation of religion for political ends back to the days of the country's first prime minister.

When Liaquat Ali Khan moved his Objectives Resolution in the Constituent Assembly in 1949, nowhere in it was contained the word 'Sharia', nor did it advocate the imposition of an Islamic rule. It merely stated "Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives, in the individual and collective spheres, in accord with the teachings and requirements of Islam...". It also provided for non-Muslims to "freely profess and practice their religions". Liaquat maintained the traditional secularism of the Muslim League, and of its true leader, sadly by then dead, Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

But he shortly afterwards changed his position, putting away the traditional secular stance as his political base became threatened by splits in the Punjab League, the true base of power. Daultana and Mamdot were in conflict; Mamdot quit the League and formed his own party. Liaquat panicked. He further panicked at the situations in East Bengal, Sindh and Balochistan, where powerful movements had arisen against what was felt to be Punjabi domination. Regional autonomy and fairer shares were demanded. Unrest was rampant.

So, according to Alavi, he grabbed at the straw of Islamic rhetoric ; he was the first to wave the banner 'Islam in danger', a banner that has been waved down the years whenever one of our tinpot despots in or out of uniform have wished to consolidate themselves or attempt to hang on to waning power.

Liaquat abandoned Jinnah's stand, and his own former stand, against any form of pandering to the religious right. He laid the path. In a way he institutionalised the abhorrent practice. He gave the mullahs "a visible public role, but without any real share in power". He established a Board of Talimaat-i-Islam to provide jobs for the senior ranking mullahs, the ulema. "But the Board was to be no more than a facade for the new found religious rhetoric of politicians". Thus it came about over 50 years ago, and has been with us ever since.

The next manifestation of the cynical exploitation of religion through its blind zealots was the anti-Ahmadi riots in Punjab, engineered by Chief Minister Mumtaz Daultana for reasons which Alavi declared were too complicated and far too lengthy to be related at the conference.

Then we come to General Yahya Khan's years, when surprisingly religiosity and religious rhetoric again reared its ugly head. "General Sher Ali redefined 'Pakistan ideology' as 'Islamic ideology'", the Yahya government's primary concern being to delegitimize the growing, threatening Bengali nationalism. We all know where that led.

Along came Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who "misguidedly decided to exploit religious ideology" and whose "foolish populist rhetoric" stirred the mullahs into action. As said Alavi, therein lay the seeds of his own self-destruction and the coming to power of Ziaul Haq, the subsequent 'Islamization', "the crude and cruel distortions of Islamic teachings", Shariat courts (the equivalent of which exist in no other Muslim country), and many other perversions.

Zia, of course, claimed to have a direct line to the Almighty by whom he declared he had been appointed. He was helped along by the Afghanistan situation and the consequent proliferation of militant mind-numbing deeni madaris, wherein lay the seeds of the Taliban menace which now hangs over us like the legendary sword of Damocles. Pakistan was totally transformed, openly in thrall to the mad mullahs.

Alavi dwelt on the matter of the most damaging decision so far taken by the Shariat courts, "manned by persons who hold rigid religious views" - the abolition of interest in all its forms to be achieved by the end of this month. "No enemy of Pakistan could have devised a more potent weapon to destroy the country," he said, with reason. Now, on Thursday, UBL filed an application in the Supreme Court seeking a stay on the Shariat Court order and all we can hope is that law, justice and, above all, sanity will prevail.

Hopefully, General Pervez Musharraf having spoken as he spoke at the Seerat conference on June 5, Alavi's statement that "the present government seems paralysed in the face of the diehard religious lobby" no longer holds true.

It may be that at last the generals, in their combined wisdom, have realised that the Republic of Pakistan and its people can no longer be held hostage, as Musharraf put it, by a minority of obscurantists intent on dragging them backwards into the dark ages.Musharraf has declared his willingness to meet the Indian premier, Atal Behari Vajpayee, at any time, at any place. Wise Vajpayee has extended a hand of friendship which Musharraf has gracefully accepted. Much cannot be expected from the first meeting but even if it ends with each saying to the other, 'Glad to have met you and hope we meet again soon', it will be an achievement. The general should not take with him any of those misguided beings with fixed, set, unbendable minds.

And as for his foreign minister, what can one say about him other than to quote from a news item of June 9? Reportedly, on June 8, Abdul Sattar, foreign affairs expert, sent a congratulatory message to Robin Cook, the former British foreign secretary: " ... I look forward to working with you for improvement of our bilateral ties in all fields."

Jack Straw was appointed British Foreign Secretary on June 8.