|
|
|
|
Friday January 04, 2002-- Shawaal 19,1422 A.H.
ISSN 1563-9479
|
Editor: Shaheen Sehbai
|
|
|
|
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal
Realities of
our time
The writer is a
freelance journalist
Muzaffar_i@hotmail.com
With the fall
of the Berlin Wall on November 9,1989, the West entered a new phase of its
history. Ten years earlier, the Muslim world had entered its most crucial phase
of the twentieth century with two defining events: the Iranian revolution and
the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
But whereas the fall of the Berlin Wall accelerated the process of integration
of Europe during the nineties, the Muslim world
witnessed further inner disintegration first through the Iran-Iraq war and then
because of the fatal invasion of Kuwait
by Iraq. The
end result of this invasion produced a sea-change in the political realities of
our times through the Gulf War that witnessed several new kinds of weapons and
military techniques.
But the Gulf
War was only a prelude. The real transforming event began on the morning of September 11, 2001, when a commercial
aircraft on a scheduled flight was turned into a deadly weapon. This criminal
act of hyper-terrorism opened the floodgates of violence against innocent
civilians that has since consumed thousands of lives. This iconic act which
attacked the symbols of US economic (the World Trade Centre), military (the
Pentagon) and political (the White House) power triggered the United
States to overturn the status quo of
international politics. In a clear display of power, no choice was given to
other nation states. The world was warned that those who are not with the US,
are against it. President Bush was insistent in his demands for a yes/no
answer; "we would remember anyone who chose to sit on the fence," he
said.
Within a few
days, allegiance had been extracted which encompassed both the United Nations
and Nato and a grand total of 36 other countries, which
included all Western countries as well as Japan along with a handful of Muslim
countries whose support was sought for symbolic or operational reasons. Once
the coalition was set up, the United States
took lead in defining the parameters of the new war; the others silently
watched and rushed to help in whatever measure they were asked. No one knew the
exact strategy. All other partners of the grand coalition, including France,
Germany, Japan,
Italy and even
the UK seemed
Lilliputian by comparison.
The bombing of Afghanistan
began on October 9. By then, thousands of US dollars had already gone into
patching together a small army on the northern border of Afghanistan.
These foot soldiers were employed through local warlords with the going rate of
250,000 US dollars per warlord. During the Gulf War, Iraq
had withstood only three days of carpet-bombing. The US
military commanders had expected a similar time span here but it took much
longer and exasperated everyone involved. But those who knew what was being done, knew that Taliban were being hollowed from within.
When the incessant bombing and the buying power of the US dollars produced
visible results, they were swift. It is important to recall that before the
bombing started, the US
gave warnings to the Taliban: hand over Osama Bin
Laden or face the consequences. Had they accepted the demand, they could have
saved themselves. Perhaps. But they had the courage to
ask the United States
for evidence for meeting the demand of extradition and that proved to be their
fatal mistake.
But a more
important result of this war is the apparent demoralisation
of millions of Muslims. Joking references to the concept of Ummah
are not uncommon these days. The language being used in the media in the Muslim
world is full of characteristic western categories and adjectives. Even the
applicability of Shariah in the twenty-first century
is being questioned. Under innocent questions such as "who represents
Islam?", there is a new crop of self-styled thinkers who are spreading the
gospel of a new, modified version of Islam that would take us away from the
dictates of Madrassa-educated bearded relics of a
previous era. They talk of the touch of enlightenment and the light of
education required to free Muslims from the meaningless mumbo jumbo of rituals
and to recognise the real spirit of Islam.
While this
intellectual northern alliance is spreading its discontent with full force in
the traditional Muslim lands and a new army of Islam-haters is doing a similar
job in the West, millions of Muslims are quietly seeking to redress the
situation. They know that Islam was not sent to become outdated. Their faith in
the Qur'aan, the divine Word, protected forever from
all kinds of corruption, is unshakable. Likewise, the Sunnah
of the Prophet remains a shining example for them. But their voices are drowned
in the clamour of victorious shouts. The stark
reality of a disproportionate power equation has never been so painfully felt.
The two most important questions are: What is to be done? How can the vision of
Islam be translated into reality in the contemporary world?
I do not
pretend to hold the answers to these questions. I also think no single person
has such answers, because they do not exist in any ready-made format. But I do
wish to clarify a few basic precepts.
(1) The human
condition (historical as well as contemporary) can either be viewed through
secular lenses or it can be seen through a faith tradition. In the latter case,
one cannot eliminate God from the equation. Viewed from within Islam, it is
clear that the absence of an existing example does not obliterate divine
decree. The concept of Ummah is a Qur'aanic
concept and no matter how fractured various groups of Muslims become, the
divinely ordained relationship cannot be abrogated by humans.
(2) This
concept does not require the support of the heads of Muslim states; it exists
at a much more fundamental level and hence the policies of contemporary
governments, or some fake institutions such as the OIC,
cannot be a measuring stick for the existence or absence of this relationship.
(3) The present
situation is merely a continuity of the larger historical scheme. Islam and
Muslims have weathered far graver situations. Recall the Mongol invasion in the
middle of the thirteenth century, which devastated the whole of the Muslim
world. Recall that at the beginning of the twentieth century, except for Turkey
and Iran, the
whole of Muslim world was under colonial rule.
(4) There is no
easy and quick way back to glory and power. Nations are not built overnight.
Those who understand Islam know that the vision of Islam is not a man-made
ephemeral vision that can be taken away by the next wave of fashion or
politics. They also understand the historical process that produces and
destroys power. Their aims demand long-term, patient planning and they are at
work. The slow but continuous increase in the number of Muslims who understand
this is a sign of the growing power of this movement. (This has nothing to do
with the media hype: Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.)
(5) There is no
doubt that terrible mistakes have been made in this difficult process of
re-emergence of Islam as a vibrant, living entity, guiding the lives of its
adherents. This is not unavoidable. There is no prophet among us; we are all
humans. But what is more important is the fact that lessons learned from these
mistakes have not been lost; Muslims are learning in this process. Those who
lost sight of the long-term goals in Egypt
and Algeria
taught something to their Turkish brothers in faith. The path of Islam is,
indeed, a path that transforms the hearts; this is the path of the Prophet of
Islam, which produced a state within twelve years of his prophetic mission.
(6) There is a
clear lack of trustable leadership among the Muslims but the Qur'aan and the life of the Prophet of Islam are
increasingly becoming the focus of a much deeper reflection in the lives of the
contemporary Muslims. There are early signs of the emergence of a new
generation of Muslim scholars and community leaders who are as much at home
with their laptops as they are with their al-Ghazali
and Ibn Hisham.
These are some
of the fundamental realities of our times. We must also understand that we are
all bound within the universal history of mankind. There is, indeed, an end to
all things, save the face of God, as the Qur'aan so
poignantly attests: "All things [that exist] shall perish, save the Face
of thy Lord, Full of Majesty."
Friday January 18, 2002-- Zeqa'ad 03,1422 A.H.
ISSN 1563-9479
http://jang-group.com/thenews/
Important
Notice: Jang Group of Newspapers web site can be accessed
only by using http://www.jang.com.pk
and http://www.jang-group.com
|
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal
Madaris
reform
The writer is
a freelance
journalist
Muzaffar_i@hotmail.com
Reforming the
madrassa educational system is a long overdue
process. Even though "we are not doing this under advice or pressure
from anyone," as General Pervez Musharraf assured the nation in his recent speech, it is
a step that is already several centuries late. But they say better late than
never and we must submit to this age-old axiom.
However,
before launching this arduous task, let us note that contrary to what the
General told the nation, historically, madrassa
have never taught "every discipline of learning e.g., mathematics,
science, medicine, astronomy and jurisprudence". In fact, this is one of
the most important charges that the non-Muslim scholars of Islamic scientific
tradition have brought against the madras. These waqf
institutions were exclusively set up for teaching religious sciences and
there was a reason for it.
Also, for the
sake of record, let it be known that three "great Muslim
luminaries", the General has mentioned in his speech, Al-Bruini, Ibn-e-Sina (Avicenna)
and Ibn Khaldun" were not the product of these
same madaris; far from it. Born in 980 to the governor of a village near Bukhara, Ibn-e Sina, our very dear Prince of the Physicians, was taught
by private tutors. He himself tells us in his short autobiography that he
learned arithmetic from a vegetable seller until the famous mathematician Abu
Abdullah al-Natili came to Bukhara who was then invited to
stay with his family. Thus it was al-Natili who
taught Ibn-e Sina higher math.
Likewise, Abu
Rayhan al-Beruni, born in
973 in modern Khiva, studied astronomy with one of
the best astronomers of his region, Abu Nasr al-Mansur and not in any madrassa.
And as for Ibn Khaldun, who was born in Tunis
on May 27, 1332, let us
note that he too was from an aristocratic family, which had enjoyed great
prestige for centuries in the political life of his region, and he, too, was
taught by private tutors.
What all
these remarkable men have in common is not the madrassa
education but a common universe of discourse which allowed them to share the
fruits of their scientific investigations within a worldview that permitted
diversity and plurality, now so lacking in the contemporary Muslim world.
Again, for
the sake of historical record, let us also note that General's assertion that
"if we study history, we see that from the 7th to 15th century AD,
transfer of technology took place from the Muslims to the rest of the
world" is incorrect. On the contrary, scientific works, and not
technology, was transferred to the Muslim world from the middle of the eighth
to the middle of the eleventh century. This was a social revolution, which
helped the nascent Islamic scientific tradition to incorporate into its body
almost all extent works of the Persian and Hellenic science through one of
the most startling translation movements in history.
These
corrections are needed because we are about to launch a historic step of
reform under the leadership of our very dear General who tells us: "I
would also like to say that I have projected madaris internationally and with
various heads of states time and again. I think no one else in Pakistan
has done so much for their cause."
But how are
we going to bring about this reform? Shall we look at the history of the
establishment of the prototypes of our present-day madaris in the eleventh
century Baghdad where they were
set up in response to the arrival of a huge amount of scientific and
philosophical data from non-Islamic sources that challenged the fundamental
tenants of Islam? Shall we look at that wonderful process of naturalisation of Greek science at the hands of madrassa-taught scholars who were rooted in their
religion? Shall we look at the intellectual reservoirs, which had given birth
to the sciences of the Qur'aan and Hadith, which were taught in the madaris in such a manner
that generations of scholars could draw nourishment from these sources?
No. There is
no need for any such grand efforts. The agenda for reform, a new strategy for
madaris, we are told, has already been formulated: "We have developed a new syllabi for them providing for teaching of Pakistan
studies, mathematics, science and English along with religious
subjects."
So, here is
the grand solution: bring natural sciences, English and mathematics to the
poor children who are stuck within the confines of mud walls, say Presto and we have it. The madaris have finally found
their Luther! Hail the grand General. Something that could not be done for
centuries, has been tackled in a matter of one speech. Now, the outlaws of
the religious schools can look forward to be "brought in to the
mainstream of society and what's more, and if anyone of them opts to join
college or university, he would have the option being equipped with the
modern education."
What a quick
fix! Even our grand schemer who instantaneously brought thousands of yellow
cabs on our roads could not have thought of such a quick fix. Now, "any
child studying at a madrassa, who does not wish to
be a prayer leader and wants to be a bank official or seek employment
elsewhere", can do so; he has been facilitated. "This is the crux
of the madrassa strategy," the General
concluded. All of this is being done with a noble aim. The General's
"only aim is to help these institutions in overcoming their weaknesses
and providing them with better facilities and more avenues to the poor
children at these institutions."
But what
would be the difference between these madaris and the state-run schools that
are producing thousands of half-literate graduates every year? After all, the
state-run institutions teach religious studies as well as mathematics,
English and natural sciences. And what about those high class private
institutions which, ironically, mushroomed all over the land during the reign
of another General who held the custodians of Islam in his two little fingers?
Aren't they producing high-class graduates who have mastered all there is to
master in modern science and don't they speak English in an accent that would
put the Brits to shame? Is this crop not enough to bring about the grand
revolution that our Ataturk is dreaming?
The reform we
have been promised is, indeed, needed. But it is needed from an entirely
different angle and for an entirely different purpose. And it is needed for
the whole educational system, not just the madaris system. At present, there
are three different worldviews being taught in three different kinds of
educational systems: the madaris, the state-run schools and the private
schools. All of these are producing future adults who would have to live in
the same country but who would not understand each other's language. This is
the greatest danger that Pakistan
faces. And this is the danger that needs to be addressed immediately.
But such
long-term reforms can only be undertaken by a representative government that
has been duly elected by the free expression of people's will and that is
answerable to the electorate. These reforms are not a magical wand that can
be waved in the air to produce results; they require years of patient
cultivation and nurturing. Above all, they require stable institutional
support that can only come from legitimate authorities which hold office in
compliance with the Constitution of the land, not through its abeyance.
|
Friday February 01, 2002-- Zeqa'ad 17,1422 A.H.
ISSN 1563-9479
The old script
The writer is a
freelance columnist
Muzaffar_i@hotmail.com
It would seem
absurd, even outrageous, to claim that the fundamental drift of history has not
changed after September 11. But a sober reflection proves just that. Nothing
has changed in the essential nature of the post Second World War era; only the
pace of unfolding of events has accelerated and that, too, seems to be in
accordance with the nature of things.
The new world
order that emerged after World War II was geared towards a rapid expansion of
the Western civilisation. The enormous resources
spent on the reconstruction of Europe, a quick recovery
of Japan and
the emergence of a powerful institutional base for this expansion were all
meant to move the world towards globalisation.
Moreover, this globalisation was the one in which the
most powerful and dominant process was the westernisation
of all cultures and societies.
The nation
states, which were carved out of the traditional Muslim lands, were inherently
weak and structurally unstable. Even an elementary knowledge of statistics and
economics is enough to realize that they were "structured" to keep
them in a constant state of dependence on the former colonial masters. For
hundreds of years, they had been part of a larger entity, which made it
possible for them to exist without any reliance on the West. They were mutually
linked, as constituting units of a larger entity. They had never existed as
independent states. They could not. The resources of these states, the level
and nature of their skilled manpower, their social and economic structures were
all built on mutual reliance.
For example,
the region from which the colonial powers carved out the contemporary states of
Jordan, Lebanon,
Syria and the
occupied Palestine was, for
centuries, one unified region, called al-Shaam. Even
now, there are thousands of families in this region who live across these
artificial borders, which were established in the most arbitrary manner by the
colonial powers.
Likewise, Central
Asia, which was colonised by Russia,
and which is now witnessing a reign of terror under the rule of former
communists-turned Muslims, was always a distinct unity within the larger
Islamic system of communities. This vast region, with its fabled seats of
learning at Marv, Samarqand, and Bukhara, prospered because it
could draw upon the resources of lands further east, just as those eastern
lands could complement their needs from this arid region. Similarly, what are
now the Gulf states
used to be one single region which was part of a much larger entity?
These regions
had evolved as cohesive units in the larger framework of a concept that has now
become the scorn of cynics: Ummah. But let us note
that this is not a man-made concept; it is a bond among the believers that the Qur'aan has established, and the Sunnah
has sanctified. "All believers are brothers [unto each other]",
declares the Qur'aan in an unequivocal way. The
aberration produced by human follies cannot abrogate this divine rule.
The social,
political and cultural patterns that had emerged in these Muslim lands over
centuries were violently disrupted by colonisation.
And they were eventually replaced with new patterns that had no sanctity in the
civilisation upon which they were imposed with
violent force. Embedded within the post-World War II world order was the scheme
through which all of this order and natural growth of the Islamic polity was
disrupted.
The new nation
states, that appeared on the world map, were cut on a model which ensured their
continuous dependence on the West. The mechanism was simple enough. The
government of the new nations states was passed on to a small elite, consisting
of Westernised military and civil "rulers"
who served as proxies. These were the first "northern alliance"
founded by the colonising powers. To be sure, there
were many versions of these proxy rulers so that they could be rotated once in
a while. This was the most effective way of creating an impression of choice.
While, in actual fact, there was no difference between one and the other ruler,
they fought with each other to allure masses and to hide the real agenda.
In time, the
personal interests of these rulers were deeply wedded with the Western civilisation. They amassed wealth and stacked it in Western
banks, their children studied in the Western universities and their personal
fortunes grew in New York and London
stock exchanges. In order to enjoy a Western lifestyle, they created western
enclaves in their own countries: Islamabad, Dubai, Istanbul, Tehran, Kabul,
Amman and many other such cities were created on the Western models to allow a
small segment of population to enjoy the benefits of western civilisation while almost one billion other human beings
lived under degrading conditions, without the most basic civic necessities.
What is common
to all these rulers is that they have no allegiance to the religious, cultural
and intellectual traditions of these lands. In a handful of oil-rich countries,
the rulers live a despicable life of debauchery. Their faces turned westward,
their hands extended to snatch the most vile aspects of the western civilisation, they aspire for nothing but their own luxury
and survival. The rest is a sorry lot, which continuously look toward the
coffers of IMF and World Bank for their monthly
rations. But these bounties do not come free. Those who dole out millions to
their chosen proxy rulers, know very well where the money lands, how it is used
and by whom. They also know that their millions are not going to make any
substantial difference in the lives of the people of these lands. These modern
instruments of colonisation are not interested in any
development.
The proof of
the failure of IMF-enslaved states is obvious: there
is not a single country in the world where all the collective wisdom and genius
of IMF and the World Bank has produced a successful
and sustainable economy. It should be clear by now that these institutions only
dole out millions for a reason. Their interest is only in "buying"
rights for their clients: rights for drilling oil wells, for use air space, and
for band widths.
This mechanism,
that came into existence after the Second World War, has only needed minor fine
tuning during the last half century. The collapse of the Soviet
Union has made no difference to the unfolding of this scheme,
except to consolidate it in fewer hands. The United
States of America remains the major player
and with the former colonisers, England
and France, standing behind, ready to come to help, whenever needed. The proxy
rulers also continue to read the script handed to them.
Many
commentators in the Muslim world as well as in the West,
have garnered a great deal of ingenuity since September 11 to explain the
current events as if a new historical situation has arisen. In fact, nothing
has changed except the pace of events.
On the other
hand, those who have resisted this old script and who strive to establish a
society according to the teachings of the twin sources of Islam, the Qur'aan and the Sunnah, are also
not fault. Their failures and follies provide reasons to their detractor for
scorning the very idea behind these efforts. For example, there is no lack of
"Muslim intellectuals" who make fun of the idea of an Islamic state
because of what the Taliban did. They fall into two errors.
Their first
error is to assume that there is a readymade model of an Islamic state that can
be taken out of a box and imposed on a society. They think of Islam as some
kind of a magic formula that should automatically produce a society where they
can see Islam's social justice, moral values as well as great material
progress. Their second error manifests when they do not see this happening.
This error leads them to scorn the very idea of such a society where the hearts
and minds of individuals and the collective will of the people are imbued with
an unearthly spirit based on the precepts of Islam.
The old script
had found Jafar of Bengal and Sadiqs
of Deccan, its new incarnation has "northern
alliance". The price in both cases is paid by innocent victims of this
grand drama which is churning out violence, poverty and terror in the Muslim
lands. But in spite of this, the scenario is not completely bleak. Those who
have remained steadfast in opposing this war, which is now entering its third
century, are learning and maturing. The real task for such people is to clearly
realize the stages through which such struggles have always gone before
victory. They should not fall prey to the temptation of quick fix solutions. An
Islamic society cannot come into existence unless there are enough individuals
who have realized the ideals of Islam in their own lives. Islam cannot be
enforced by promulgations by governments; it grows organically, in a single
heart at a time. Then these hearts multiply, slowly and almost imperceptibly.
And one day, the whole society becomes Islamic
The COMSTECH Saga
Dr. Muzaffar
Iqbal
The Writer is a
freelance columnist.
Email: Muzaffar_i@hotmail.com.
They have come once again and have been lodged
at the best hotels available in the Capital. They are being hosted by the
Ministry of Science and Technology whose coffers have been filled by the
benevolent General. They are all honorable ministers and high officials of the
ministries of science and technology. The occasion is the tenth General
Assembly meeting of COMSTECH, the committee on
scientific and technological cooperation, Organization of Islamic Conference.
COMSTECH originated in the sacred city of Makkah in 1983, through a resolution passed by all the
heads of states, kings and prime ministers who had gathered at the OIC gathering, as the body par excellence for jumpstarting
science in the Muslim world. It was the brain child of a few old and retired
scientists who had gathered around exceedingly cheerful Muslim rulers of the
1970’s whose pockets were swelling with oil money. These scientists organized
conferences on the scientific miracles of the Qur’aan
and Sunnah and sought explanation of the Prophet’s
ascension to heaven in Einstein’s theory of relativity.
Just a few days
before his fatal crash over Bahawalpur, General Zia
ul-Haq, who was also the Chairman of COMSTECH, signed
a piece of paper, drafted by his advisor for science and technology, the late
Dr. M. A. Kazi, which made Dr. Kazi
the Coordinator General of COMSTECH for four years
for a paltry sum of two thousand American dollars per month. But there was only
one minor irritant in these first beginnings. Dr. Kazi
lived in Karachi whereas the office
of COMSTECH was established in Islamabad.
But such trifles could never stand in the way of those who are well-versed in
these games. COMSTECH rules of procedure, once again
drafted by Dr. Kazi, allowed the Coordinator General
to travel by first class air and obtain a handsome TA/DA for his travels. Thus,
he lived in Karachi and coordinated
the activities of this Ummah-level organization
through remote control and a monthly visits to Islamabad.
By the time the
COMSTECH office was established in a forsaken
building on the Constitution Avenue,
around three million dollars had been collected. A clerk was hired on
deputation from the Ministry of Science, a retired ex-official of PCSIR was appointed as Advisor (technical), and the white
washed building of the Pakistan Academy of Sciences, which had not seen much
activity for years, was bejeweled with a blue sign that read: COMSTECH
By 1991, the
office had acquired two telephone lines, a computer, a fax machine, and a
printer. It had already held five meetings of the ministers of science and
technology. These meetings were of the same kind as the one now being held. The
rented clerk from the Ministry of Science and Technology had become extremely
adept at jump starting the grand dream of science all over the Muslim world.
The office bustled with life whenever the Coordinator General arrived in Islamabad
from Karachi. After his departure,
it will blend in with the stale air of the building which was populated with
people who lived in another era.
In 1992, Dr. Kazi’s contract was renewed for a second four year term by Ghulam Hussein Khan, who had known him through their common
benefactor, General Zia. Thus COMSTECH lived happily,
urging the Muslim Ummah to wake up to the reality of
science. Every two years, it would gather all the ministers of science and
technology and do exactly what its mother organization does: pass resolutions.
These resolutions always started with “Whereas the member states of COMSTECH call upon Muslim men and women to acquire and
assimilate scientific knowledge to re-kindle the flame of inquiry and
innovation in the Muslim Ummah” and always ended with
“therefore we urge all Muslims to work for the transformation of the Ummah into an enlightened, scientifically creative and
innovative society”. The final word was, of course, an appeal to donate
generously for COMSTECH.
After the grand
affair, the ministers would return to their countries, the Ministry of Science
and Technology would recoil into its own folds for another two years and the COMSTECH office would go back to its old slumber, only to
awaken two years later for another “august gathering”, which renewed calls for
innovation, creativity and donations.
All of this
changed in 1996. Having spent four agonizing years with the organization, I
approached Farooq Ahmad Khan Leghari,
the then President of Pakistan and the Chairman of COMSTECH
with a plan to restructure the organization. I believed that, in spite of its
infertile mother (the OIC), COMSTECH
could still play a vital role in many aspects of contemporary Muslim world. My
plan called for a full-time, fully committed and dedicated Coordinator General
who could lead a team of visionary and energetic scientists, thinkers and
scholars from all over the Muslim world. This team was to include expatriate
Muslim scientists and concentrate on some small but practical and real problems
of the Muslim world that could be solved through available expertise in science
and technology. These problems ranged from crop failures to water logging. The
new plan envisioned direct economic gains for COMSTECH
through these services.
I was naively encouraged in my vision for the
re-organization by Leghari’s consistent emphasis on
science and technology. When I presented the plan, he heard me out patiently
and with concern and then said, “Please write down your plan and we will revamp
the whole organization in June 1996.” This was when the second four year term of
Dr. Kazi was ending.
During the next
five months of that fateful year, I contacted scientists in various parts of
the world, collected data and wrote a plan which I gave to Leghari
in April with the suggestion that he constitute a search committee for finding
the next Coordinator General. When he asked who should be included in the
Search Committee, I was hard pressed to find those who would not sabotage the
plan but then suggested two names. The notification for the constitution of the
Search Committee was, however, delayed until May 31, 1996 for reasons that I still do not know.
But I was happy
that finally, the plan was being put in place. Leghari
had included me in the Search Committee, as I was, by then, the senior most
professional in COMSTECH. When the Search Committee
met, its member from Karachi said
that the work of this committee should be so transparent that it sets an
example for the country. The three of us drafted an advertisement which was to
be placed in international science journals and sent our recommendation to Leghari who accepted them on June 26, 1996, four days before the expiry of the term of
the outgoing Coordinator General. The recommendation called for an interim
arrangement for ninety days during which the charge of COMSTECH
would be in my hands.
Four days
later, Dr. Kazi packed his belongings and left. But
there was no word from the Presidency. On the fifth day, I received a phone
call from Karachi: “Muzaffar Bhai, I have been asked to take over COMSTECH.
I am coming tomorrow!” I was stunned. This man from Karachi
had raised the loudest voice for a transparent process of selection. But the
worse was still to come. When he came to Islamabad
to take charge, the only thing in his briefcase was a document that was not a
plan for COMSTECH; but a document that had a bold
heading, in upper case: Achievements of Dr. Ata ur-Rahman.
He ordered the secretary to fax those twelve pages to all the Muslim countries,
signed a paper that allowed him to draw a salary of 3500 US dollars a month,
and left after a few hours. But worse of all, he still retained his position as
the head of HEJ Institute of Chemistry at Karachi.
He was to come to Islamabad once a
week, stay in a hotel, of course at COMSTECH’s expense, and jump start science in the fifty-seven Muslim
countries that are now members of COMSTECH.
After this coup
de grace, the next four weeks saw a lot of secret moves, a new appointment was made, once again a retired and old man was found who
would be the Advisor to the new Coordinator General. The old structure was thus
re-established. There was a lot of hyper talk and many cowardly actions. I knew
my time had come. I wrote a letter to Leghari,
expressing my dismay at his betrayal and resigned on a Thursday, then the last
working day of the week, at 4:25 pm,
five minutes before the end of office time. On Friday, when I went to office
for some private errand, the new Coordinator General had left for Karachi.
The stale air filled the building. On my desk was a short note, stating that
the Coordinator General has been pleased to accept my resignation.
A Note: Since
May 1998, when the first “Quantum Note” appeared in The News, I have never
written a column with personal content; this one is forced by the circumstances
and is meant to stand as my testimony to the rotten game being played with the Ummah.
Defining the
Islamic State
Dr. Muzaffar
Iqbal
The Writer is a
freelance columnist.
Email: Muzaffar_i@hotmial.com
How would a
contemporary Islamic state differ from non-Islamic states? Who would rule this
state and how? What would it be like to live in such a state? What would such a
state do with the enormous gap between the economic, scientific and
technological status of Muslims and non-Muslims? These are some of the
questions that need clear answers before any such state can come into
existence. These are also the questions which should have been answered by Pakistan’s
Islamic parties in this election year, if they are serious.
Muslims believe
that the Qur’aan and the Sunnah
of the Prophet of Islam are two living sources that are as relevant today as
they were fourteen hundred years ago when they were first revealed. They also
believe that these twin sources contain all the guiding principles that are
needed by them now. At least this is the position of the normative Islamic
tradition and it is held by all Muslims who have their spiritual and
intellectual roots in the Islamic tradition.
The real
question, then, is how to translate the guiding principles found in these two
sources into a practical model that will work in our times. This is the task
and challenge that Muslims have been actively pursuing for more than a century.
When they woke up from their slumber and found themselves colonized, they
realized that something has to be done. The most immediate challenge was to get
rid of the colonizing powers. But in the very struggle for independence, there
was something fundamentally wrong: no where in the Muslim world did people
realize that this struggle for independence has to be based on Islam and not on
nationalism.
This wrong
footing was exactly what the French and the British colonizers had hoped for.
They had actively sought to create an intellectual northern alliance which
would call for a western-style government and demand independence on the model
of Britain and France.
And when the native resources had been drenched and the cost of maintaining
direct control on the colonies was becoming more than what they were willing to
pay, the colonizers departed, leaving behind the firm grip of an
administrative, educational and ruling structure that was so deeply entrenched
that it could be governed through remote control.
Thus, Muslims
in their own traditional lands were randomly divided into contemporary states,
each governed by a system which ensured their continuous enslavement. For
centuries, these people had lived in mutual reliance, though not always in
harmony. Between Hijaz and the great steppes of Central
Asia, there was a vast territory that was and still remains the
home of Muslims. But then it was linked together through a chain of great
cities which were also centers of learning. And while certain rulers at certain
times brought huge armies against other Muslim rulers, the Hajj and trade
caravans traversed the Silk Road and continued to serve
as the most important vehicle for the flow of ideas and goods.
All of this was
shattered with the occupation of Muslim lands by Europeans. And none of this
was restored after their departure. This is a fundamental point that needs to
be understood in no uncertain terms. The nation states that have emerged in the
post World War II era are inherently incapable of independent existence; this
is also an economic impossibility. Thus no amount of reform would make it
possible for these countries to be self-sufficient, truly independent states
with enough human and material resources to be free of IMF
bondage. One cannot make a circle out of a square, no matter how one bangs it
around.
Given this
fact, what is the route to real independence and an honorable existence? How
can Muslims regain control of their destinies? How can they live a life that is
not defined and dictated by the new Great Axis of Evil: the United
States of America, Britain
and Israel?
This is the question on which all Muslim intellectuals and thinkers need to
focus. Post-September 11 world events have hijacked all efforts from this most
important task faced by Muslims; it is time to return to it.
Those who think
that they can achieve this by forming some kind of underground network that
kidnaps reporters and kills them are clearly working against this cause.
Likewise, those who wish to take up arms against their own rulers, create
nothing but chaos. Similarly, those who are busy in propagating a made in America
version of Islam are also playing with fire. Islam,
let us reiterate, is not merely a private affair that takes up public face on
Fridays; Islam is a living tradition, defined by an all-encompassing code.
Indeed, Allah has called Himself, al-Muheet, the all
encompassing.
So, the task
before Muslims is not really very clear. They need to devise a practical
strategy to regain control of their destiny as a community of believers. The
defining factor for their existence is neither sectarian, nor tribal or
national identity, but an identity based on the Qur’aan.
This is the unambiguous position of the Qur’aan
itself. It declares in no uncertain terms that Allah has made different
communities and the best of communities is the one which holds on to the rope
of Allah. This is the community of believers: “You are the best community that
has been sent forth to mankind [in that] you enjoin right and forbid wrong and
have faith in Allah” (Q. 3:110).
In this task of
regaining freedom, the very first thing to be understood is that Islam cannot
be imposed by somehow gaining hold of the government and bringing out bands of
militia. This is not the way of Islam. The struggle of so-called Islamic
political parties to win elections and form governments to implement Islam is
doomed. And so are those who demand imposition of Islam by state decrees. True,
there are some injections of Islamic Law (the Shariah)
that require state legislation. But most of Islam does not require state laws
for its implementation.
An Islamic
state emerges; it is not established. An Islamic state comes into existence
through the most natural of ways, it is not a state that is established by
decrees. An Islamic state is the end result of a long process of education,
cultivation of Islamic ethos in private as well as public life. An Islamic
state is like a beautiful tree that comes into existence because someone once
planted a seed. An Islamic state is defined by the character of its
inhabitants, not by the writ of law.
The character
of the inhabitants of an Islamic state is the defining factor for the Islamic
state. Given the current conditions of the Muslim world, the greatest missing
element in the emergence of an Islamic state is none other than this defining
factor. And this is what requires the greatest attention of all those who wish
to establish an Islamic state.
In the simplest
of terms, an Islamic state is a state in which the prime goal of the
inhabitants of the land is to be a model of the Qur’aanic
teachings. These are the people with whom Allah is pleased and who are pleased
with Allah, as the Qur’aan tells us. This is the only
route to an Islamic state. Its most important constituent is none other than
the men, women and children who live in it.
Thus, any
organization, political or non-political, which wants to contribute toward the
emergence of an Islamic state, need to concentrate on its most important
building block: individual human beings. But how? What are the ways to do so?
The answer must be sought in another question: How did the Prophet of Islam do
it? And that is the topic for the next column.
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal
Establishing a
theocracy
The writer is a
freelance columnist
muzaffar_i@hotmial.com
I had barely
started to write this column when a bearded man walked into my office, greeted
me with the Islamic greetings and said: "We are working to establish an
Islamic government. Would you like to join us?"
"What kind
of government is an Islamic government?" I asked, "and why do you
want to establish it? How would you do it?"
"An
Islamic government is a government that is based on the message of the Qur'aan and the practices of the Prophet of Islam, may
Allah's peace and blessings be upon him," he said sincerely.
"But,"
I protested, "as far as I know, neither the Qur'aan
nor the Sunnah contain instructions for establishing
governments in the twenty-first century."
"You are
right," he said eagerly, "there only general guidelines in the Qur'aan and the Sunnah, not
specific instructions. But that is just how these two primary sources are. That
is their beauty and excellence. They provide general principles. Even in
matters of religion, most of the instructions are general. For example, the Qur'aan does not tell us how to pray the obligatory
prayers; it just say, `establish Salah'. It is Sunnah that tells us how to establish Salah.
But there are matters in which even the Sunnah does
not give precise instructions and the Islamic government in the twenty-first
century is one of such things. But I have just come to ask whether or not you
wish to be part of an effort to establish an Islamic government. How would we
actually do so is the next question. But before we get to that stage, you need
to confirm that you want to join an effort that aims at establishing an Islamic
government. Only then we can proceed further."
I was intrigued
by him. I invited him to sit down and asked: "What do you mean by an
Islamic government? A theocracy?"
He looked at me
with his thoughtful eyes and then said, "yes, a theocracy, if you
will."
"A
theocracy in this age of science and technology!" I exclaimed, "Are
you serious"?
"Yes, we
are very serious. In fact, there is no other way."
"What
about democracy?"
"It has
been rendered dysfunctional even in its place of birth," he said, "what
to talk about its relevance to us. For a democratic system to function in the
spirit in which it is of any worth, it is essential that the maximum number of
people should have access to unbiased, free and objective sources of
information from which they can deduce their own opinions. No such society
exists in the contemporary world. In the West, all sources of information are
highly controlled. But I am not interested in the West. I have come to seek
your support for an Islamic government here in our own land. Do you or do not
wish to establish a government that functions on the basis of the rules
established by God?
"As a
Muslim," I said, "I do wish to live in a country in which the rule of
God exists, but where is such a country?"
"Join
us," he said emphatically, "and together we will establish such a
state. I know theocracy is the most dreaded word for the West, but for us,
there is no other way. They dread it because for them, the word has an
evocative power beyond its real meaning; it reminds them of 1979 when a man had
emerged from his exile to overthrow their trusted ally, the self-appointed king
of Iran. The
memory of the Iranian revolution is also linked to the humiliation Americans
felt in the hostage crisis. But beyond these recent images, theocracy is
threatening for the West because it is diametrically opposed to their secular
ideals. It reminds them of their medieval ages, which are indelibly linked to
darkness, despondency, Church authority, lack of personal freedom, witchcraft,
and a thousand and one other negative images. This weight of history is so
heavy that even a well-educated Westerner is more likely to respond with an
emphatic no to the idea of theocracy."
"But even
a Westerner who is willing to look into the concept without preconceived fears
may find some riches. As a start, let us note that European history is not
universal history and the European experience of medieval ages is precisely
what it is: a European experience. Thus to speak of the medieval era as a dark
period is to universalise European history, which is
absurd."
"Secondly,
let us also note that the notions of democracy and personal freedom, as
understood in the Western, have also evolved out of Western history and
philosophy; they are not universal axioms."
"Third, know
that a theocracy is a system based on eternal principles given by none other
than the Creator Himself, may He be exalted. It is a system that is geared
toward maximum benefits for the maximum number of people, not only in this
world but also in the hereafter."
"Fourth,
an Islamic government serves Muslims and non-Muslims through laws which are not
manmade. The government is established and run through a process of
consultation. The specific methodology of this process of consultation has not
been given in the Qur'aan or the Sunnah
but the general principles and the practice of the Prophet, may Allah be
pleased with him, and of his companions are enough resources for us to cull a
specified program of action which will work in the twenty-first century. And that
is exactly what our group is doing."
"But
how?" I asked.
"We follow
the practice of the Prophet of Islam, our greatest leader, may Allah shower His
mercy on him." He said in an animated manner. "He is our leader in
the true sense of the word. His example is the noblest, the most perfect. He
has taught us the middle way. We avoid extremes."
"Our goal
is clear. We wish to gather together enough like-minded people who believe in
the message of the Qur'aan and who practice in their
everyday life the way of the Messenger of Islam, may Allah be pleased with him.
Our Islam is not just prayers, fasting and worship; it is total Islam. It
covers all aspects: social, political, economic, cultural, moral, ethical. We
do not make decisions on the basis of majority but on the basis of truth."
"But how
would you establish an Islamic government?" I asked, "Are you going
to take part in the coming elections? Will you start a new party? Or join an
existing party?"
"No,
no," he said, "that is not how the Prophet of Islam established an
Islamic government," he said, "as I said earlier, we follow his
example. We do not make our own decisions where his example suffices."
"But he
lived so long ago, times have changed."
"That is
exactly the thing," he said, "that is exactly the objection they
raise about Islam. It came so long ago. Times have changed. I have heard it
from Muslims too. Can you imagine Muslims who think that Islam is something
that becomes dated? Goes out of fashion! Can you imagine that? Did not Allah
Himself say in the Qur'aan "today I have
completed your religion for you and have it has been My pleasure to choose
Islam as your religion?" Did not our Prophet, may Allah be pleased with
him, say that he is leaving behind the Book of Allah and his example for us and
if we followed it, we will never go astray? And now we say it came so long
ago!"
"I did not
mean in that sense," I protested, "I meant the conditions in which
the Prophet established the state were very different from our present
conditions."
"There are
some fundamental constants in human affairs," he said, "they never
change. They may appear to be different but in their essential nature, they
remain the same. The way of the Prophet, may Allah's blessings be upon him, points
to these fundamentals. He was not only dealing with the objective social and
political conditions of his times, he was also addressing these fundamental
constants. And what is more important is the fact that his way was not
different from the ways of the previous prophets, may Allah's blessings be upon
all of them. They all used one simple method, which was to call men and women
of their times to join hands in establishing a just society based on the laws
of God. Some succeeded, others did not. But success and failure are of no
consequence in this affair. What is important is this: Do you or do you not
want to play your role in this process. Are you or are you not willing to
actively participate in this effort? Societies evolve, change, come into existence
and disappear. But at the personal level, you should be at least conscious of
the fact that if you are not actively working to establish an Islamic society,
you are a passive accomplice of those who oppose an Islamic government."