by Asim Salahuddin
The current crisis of militancy gripping Pakistan is the most serious threat to the integrity of the State since the loss of East Pakistan in the war of 1971. Pakistan today is surrounded by hostile neighbours, is crippled economically and is slowly being crushed under the weight of world public opinion that it is a terrorist State, which is being generated by its supposed ally America. With Balouchistan already rumbling with a separatist insurgency which has not yet thankfully gained popular traction, the armed conflict which is being fought with Taliban forces in Swat, Buner and Dir is threatening to roll back the writ of the Pakistani State to just the provinces of Sindh and Punjab. A solution must urgently be found to prevent further bloodshed on both sides of this conflict. The problem however requires a detailed analysis and also a solution that provides a lasting fix and not just another short term truce or treaty that will be broken.
The roots of the current conflict between the Pakistani armed forces and Taliban fighters can be traced back to the American invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. This conflict is a direct spill over from the fighting in Afghanistan against the Americans and a reaction against the support of the Pakistani State for America’s war and its actions of bombing and killing its own Pakistani citizens at America’s behest. The opponents of the Pakistani armed forces, the Taliban, are not a coherent or unified group. Made up of various factions known collectively as the Taliban you have the CIA Taliban, Afghan Taliban, KGB Taliban, Punjabi Taliban, ISI Taliban, Tehrek-e-Taliban and others. These numerous factions have varying agendas, with some being armed resistance to US occupation, some being armed resistance to Pakistani attacks, others still being those who are funded and equipped by foreign intelligence agencies to create unrest and strife in Pakistan. Varyingly, apart from those foreign sponsored groups using the following reasons as cover, these groups are demanding an end to the bombing of Pakistani territory by American and Pakistani armed forces and an end of Pakistani support for the American occupation in Afghanistan. Some groups, failing this, want an end to interference from a Pakistani State which has proven itself incapable of looking after both the needs and security of its people.
In origin the demands of the Taliban do not constitute a military threat to Pakistan. These groups are not foreign invaders seeking to control land/territory as part of some imperial adventure as America is in the Muslim world. The principle grievances of these groups are political in origin. The challenge to the Pakistani State therefore is from Pakistanis, civilians who have taken up arms against the nature and policies of the State.
This problem is further being driven by America in collusion with the Zardari government of using force to wipe out any resistance to the American occupation of Afghanistan, as it has lost the battle for hearts and minds a long time ago. It is interesting to note that this is actually a complete continuation of the policies of the Musharraf era, and that the popular change which people were expecting with the departure of the military dictator has not materialised. America and the Zardari government are actually instrumental in creating and perpetuating this crisis in order to turn Pakistani public opinion in favour of America’s imperial campaign in Afghanistan and the wider Muslim world by repackaging this conflict from being America’s war to Pakistan’s war, as the people have rejected the colonial ambitions of the US and its ‘War on Terror’. This was one of the key sound bites issued by Zardari as he came to power, which was a pledge for Pakistan to adopt America’s ‘War on Terror’ as Pakistan’s own war.
The fact of the matter is that this is America’s war, not Pakistan’s. Pakistan is being pushed in to a conflict with its own people and neighbours. Pakistan is being directed towards civil unrest and ultimately breaking point, and this is in accordance with the American plan for Pakistan. Lt Col (ret) Ralph Peters, in his article Blood borders: How a better Middle East would look for the US Armed Forces Journal, proposed a new map of the Middle East which showed the break up of country, with only Sindh and Punjab remaining as Pakistan. It is now well established that the both America and the UK are trying to fragment or Balkanise Pakistan for four principle objectives.
- To take control of Balochistan for its immense resources
- To use the port of Gwadar in Balochistan to establish an economically viable energy corridor from the Caspian Sea through Afghanistan and away from the influence of Russia.
- To remove a strong Pakistan as an obstacle for India so it may act as a true counterweight to China.
- To break up Pakistan to remove the potential of an Islamic ideological threat from Pakistan which it brands as the ‘Islamist threat’
With this being the true reality of the problem which is manifesting itself as the conflict with the Taliban, tribal areas and Balochi insurgency, how is the Pakistani State equipped to respond to such crises?
It is clear for all to see that the current government is insincere, incapable and lead by corrupt politicians. The country is now almost openly being run by America. When you have a situation where the military head of a foreign power, Admiral Mike Mullen, is paying regular visits to Pakistan and the fact that the Pakistani armed forces are deployed to Dir when Hillary Clinton criticises the Pakistani government for “basically abdicating to the Taliban and the extremists” in the wake of the Swat deal, it is a no brainer that Pakistan is no longer a sovereign state. This is aside from the regular bombings and killings of Pakistani territory and civilians by US Predator drones. Such a situation is leading to instability in the country as Pakistan participates in America’s colonial war. As the Pakistan follows a foreign agenda, people are beginning to challenge the legitimacy of the State, questioning its purpose and the use it provides to the people. If the Pakistani State is going to kill its own citizens on the orders of a foreign power, it is clearly not serving its people by any stretch of the imagination. What then is the nature of this Pakistani state? If it will not look after its people, what is the source of its strength, and where does it derive its authority from?
The Pakistani State is the manifestation of the contradictions embodied by the political classes and a product of external agendas as defined by foreign powers. The Pakistani State has no organic authority from the people; hence it is constantly challenged by the people. These challenges in the past have manifested themselves in various forms over the course of history, with military coups and the break up in 1971 being some examples. The current problem of militancy is the latest incarnation of this challenge to the authority and legitimacy of the Pakistani State. Currently there is one strata of society ruling Pakistan and implementing a system which the people do not respect. Politically the system has no value as many of the politicians are known to be corrupt, inept or both. Ideologically, the system has little support from the people as it is simply an imported British product and a relic of the colonial era based upon secularism. As democracy loses its façade of providing a mechanism for electing and accounting rulers and reveals itself simply to be a tool for the rich and powerful to change laws as they see fit, the people are shunning the system and apathy is rampant in society. The ideal of Pakistani nationalism, which the system is supposed to represent and protect, has shown itself to be incredibly weak at binding the various peoples in Pakistan together. Pakistani nationalism is founded upon a contradiction, namely that the State of Pakistan was created in response to a popular movement to live according to Islam by the Muslims of India yet what was yielded was secularism. As this Islamic ideal was left by the wayside, the only situation in which the people within the borders of Pakistan would come together and bond as Pakistanis would be when faced with an external threat like India. As such the State, lacking internal domestic support, is propped up by foreign powers that manipulate it for their own ends. The ruling class therefore willingly follows the diktats of those it relies upon to stay in power, namely the colonial nations such as America and the UK.
If we look at the response of the Pakistani State to the current Taliban militancy crisis, we can see that it has been one of almost colonial ruler to a conquered people rather than a State dealing with its citizens. General Ashfaq Kayani declared that “The army will not allow the militants to dictate terms to the government or impose their way of life on the civil society of Pakistan”. Interior Minister Rehman Malik before the latest operation said that “Enough is enough” adding that “a handful of militants cannot challenge the writ of the government”. For the sake of argument, if General Kayani is given the benefit of the doubt for thinking as a military man responding to the threat of violence no such excuse can be made for the Rehman Malik. As the civilian authority and representative of the State Malik’s response epitomises the response of a State that is out of ideas as to how to deal with a population dissatisfied with its performance. By using physical means to put down an uprising which is political in origin is to stoke the flames of internal unrest and civil war.
If the stick of the government is leading to violence, then the carrot being deployed is leading to the voluntary amputation of the State itself. Nizam-e-Adl, the government bill being implemented in Swat as part of a peace deal with the Taliban where Sharia law will allegedly be implemented, is a non-starter as a method of conflict resolution. The fact that the implementation of a few social rules makes a mockery out of Sharia law and a farce of Islamic ruling is only part of the issue at hand. If one goes along with the ridiculous assertion that Sharia law is indeed being implemented in Swat, then what you have is a recipe for disaster as effectively within the borders of one State there are two legal codes in operation. This will serve only to entrench separation and division between a group of people and the State as you begin to have two sets of laws running in parallel, which is impractical and inconceivable for any successful and progressive State. All this is despite the fact that if Sharia law was to be sincerely applied it would not be in the form of a neutered ‘Bill’ but as the source of all laws in a State which then defines the economic policies, judicial system, foreign policy, social system etc. Clearly then this is at best a foolish attempt to remedy a deeper ideological problem or at worst an insincere attempt to show the application of Sharia law.
Both of these responses show a State which is at a loss for ideas as to how to deal with a population which neither respects its authority nor recognises its legitimacy. These actions of the Pakistani State are leading to a tremendous loss of life and civil unrest, whilst revealing the nature of the State and its relationship with the people. It is being driven by foreign instructions and threats by America and is attacking the local population, the very people it should be defending. What is then the way out of this quagmire that Pakistan finds itself sinking in?
The solution is not to deploy an increasing amount of armed forces to the region, let alone allow a foreign colonial power to help with an armed operation. The solution is to strengthen the authority and legitimacy of the State in the eyes of the people. The State must regain the initiative by establishing a sovereign authority which derives its support from the people and not from external forces; otherwise the State shall always be weak, externally dependent, subject to manipulation by foreign forces and fire fighting insurgencies constantly. The core problem that Pakistan faces is that the people are disenfranchised and disillusioned with the State and do not identify with it. The interests of the State now clearly diverge from the interests of the people. Such a situation is not tenable and will sooner rather than later lead to either massive bloodshed or the breakup of the Pakistani State, or both, as was the case in the war of 1971. This is clearly in the interests of the foreign powers like America and part of their plans which are out in the open. The interests of the State must urgently be defined so that the people can be united around these. Nationalism has failed to define the interests and could never succeed in origin. Pakistani nationalism neither has the depth of history to which all the disparate ethnic and tribal groups in Pakistan can lay claim to as being common heritage nor does it have the necessary political depth which can be used to define specific interests. At best it will result in Pakistani colonialism, as it offers nothing to the people except shallow loyalty to a centralised administration, which is what the people in provinces outside of Punjab are feeling.
There must be one basis upon which the interests and all laws of the State are based upon. This basis must be the casus belli of the State and the idea for which the State exists to protect, implement and propagate. This basis must serve as the source of all values and ideals in the society which bind people together. This basis must not be confused with opinion, as even if a basis is agreed there could be multiple opinions as to how best to implement this basis. This is not an issue, rather this is healthy. For example, in the UK you have the Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrats, UKIP and Green Parties whilst in America you have the Republicans and the Democrats. The key is for a State to adopt one coherent and consistent basis. In the UK and America this is Capitalism and secularism applied in tandem within the Democratic ruling system. So whilst all of these parties may differ in their opinions on policy and indeed engage in heated or bitter debates on specific issues at times, no one contends the basis of the State. The discussion only centres on how best to adhere to this basis and which rules will result in the best application of this basis. The result of this is that regardless of what party comes to power, the nature of the State never changes and the people will obey the laws of the new government, even if they do not agree with all the new laws or policies of the new government.
The problem in Pakistan is that there is no coherent basis upon which the State is built. People may form parties and groups and come to power on ideas as varied as secularism, socialism or Islam. In effect, Pakistan has no basis for existence. Laws, regulations and even the constitution change according to the whims and wishes of every new ruler. The identity of the Pakistani citizen is undefined. Indeed, Pakistan and what it stands for is not defined. As of now, the State of Pakistan stands for nothing.
It is clear then that the basis for the State must urgently be established and it should be something which the people identify with and trust. There is only one idea that has the ability to bring together the various ethnicities and tribes in Pakistan as one and at the same time has the political depth to define very clearly both the interests of the individual and the State in perfect unity. This is Islam.
Islam is the ideology which has a natural resonance with the people and has a track record of success when applied correctly in its entirety and in its true State form. Once Islam is adopted as the coherent and consistent basis, an ideologically strong State shall emerge as this State will naturally derive its authority from the people. This State shall have a clear direction as defined by the Sharia and the legitimacy to tackle both external threats and internal rebels who seek to implement their own views upon the people. The State will then be seen to represent the people and not foreign interests. The current State apparatus is not equipped to support the implementation of Islam. It does not posses the appropriate departmental bodies, courts, ruling structure or economy. The State will thus need to be revamped and re-established in the form of a Khilafah. Only the Khilafah State would posses the structure needed to implement Islam as a State ideology. This is not an administrative issue where one can swap or rename a few departments in the current Pakistani State and implement a few Sharia rulings on theft or adultery and be declared Islamic. The new Khilafah structure is needed to reflect the transference of sovereignty away from Parliament to the Sharia and the investment of authority in an elected Khaleefah, not a President, Prime Minister or military dictator. If one attempts to implement Islam and Sharia in the current State structure, then you will produce a circus show of the like that is currently going on with Nizam-e-Adl.
Once this new State structure is set up on a clearly defined and coherent basis with support from the people, the issue then will be to assess the claims of any restless groups such as the Taliban via a due process of law through the appropriate organs of the state (councils, courts etc) and then issue a verdict which shall have universal legitimacy. The State will also be able to lead the people the Taliban currently rule to progression. For instance, education for girls will be enforced; Taliban like groups can have no objection to such rulings as the curriculum would teach values which are consistent with Islam and the verdict would be handed down by a legitimate Islamic authority. Issues will not be disputed as the Khaleefah will adopt public laws which everyone must follow. Anything not adopted will be the right of individuals to decide upon, no compulsion. As with any other ideological State, differences of opinions will be allowed and if people want to lobby the Khaleefah for a change in opinion then appropriate channels shall exist. Indeed it shall be the responsibility of the Islamic civil society, such as political parties, to account the Khaleefah to ensure that the Sharia is being followed at all times. The current system does not provide this. It is the lack of such a legal framework which causes frustration amongst the various Islamic groups as there is no official mechanism to address their concerns or consider their opinions. This legal process would be the correct method for not only dealing with the Taliban but also any other movement which seeks to be separate from the State or establish an alternative order.
By establishing the Khilafah State the impracticalities of the Pakistani State shall be swept away and the people shall be united on a shared intellectual basis rather than a shallow idea of nationalism, which is a colonial construct in origin anyway which serves to divide rather than unite people. The Khilafah State shall not only solve the problem of unity and address any issues of militancy within society, but it shall give direction to the whole of society. As the national interests are defined according to Islam, many of the current problems shall be solved. The foreign policy of the State shall be in line with the wishes of the people as the State shall refuse to take part in any colonial adventure with nations such as America. The security and property of its citizens shall be protected, as the State shall exist to serve the people, not the other way around as it is currently. Separatist movements shall lose legitimacy as the basis for the State shall not be divisive nationalism but an inclusive ideology. The economy shall be revived as inflation is brought under control with investment in industry and production, a gold standard backed currency, capital flows freed up as interest is removed and the taxation system simplified. Industrialisation shall occur, leading to a rise in education standards and employment as the State seeks to provide for the people and project the ideological strength and power of Islam globally.
A variety of topics have been addressed briefly in the closing paragraphs, with each topic warranting a lengthy explanation in its own right. However for the current issue at hand the challenge presented to Pakistan by the internal dissenters and foreign powers is one of challenging the ideological soul of the State, and this has been addressed. This challenge must be met with a barrage of ideas, not bullets or missiles. Islam is capable of meeting this challenge and providing a resounding answer. It is then up to the people of influence in civil society, politics and the military to adopt this call and save the people of Pakistan before it is too late.
The writer is a Pakistani analyst and freelance columnist
Till to-date it is not understand-able why not open debate with Taliban is taken place at —Electronic Media— if we do not know what are their real demands and under the pressure of America if we do not negotiate with Taliban then how the dusty picture of opponents to be cleared!?
This is a brilliant article with great analysis and solutions. Kudos to the writer and he has identified the basic problem correctly.
@razakhan
Wait till the nuggets discover it…
gainst the USSR & civil war . They are used to war or victim of war so they need care &cure rather than ignorance & prejudice . we Should help them to accommodate in normal life by providing them employment & education .
@asim
Your analysis of the situation is quite good, but the solution you have offered is too simplistic. If we can have a caliphate that caters for, in your words:
‘As with any other ideological State, differences of opinions will be allowed and if people want to lobby the Khaleefah for a change in opinion then appropriate channels shall exist. Indeed it shall be the responsibility of the Islamic civil society, such as political parties, to account the Khaleefah to ensure that the Sharia is being followed at all times.’
Then what’s wrong with the present system? In your opinion, the present system lacks authority and writ, where will be the source of writ for this new Caliph? Where will we find such a one who will be able to establish his authority on all groups, factions, provinces, sects, civilians, army, USA, India, Taleban and so on. By the way Taleban didnt listen to the group of ‘elders’ from Madrassas back in 2001. How do we expect them to be listening today? And above all, what do you think of world media and other powerful states who have their stakes in this region, do you think they will embrace your idea happily? Or you expect that majority of present day Pakistan deserve tora-bora that wil follow? And while you are at it, could you please nominate someone yourself who this new Caliph can be (and see with you own eyes what happens to him on this very blog)?
What you are saying is basically what Zia had going for himself. Salat committees, censor boards, Majlis-e-Shura and all that.
I think we have a workable system even today. The world is still willing to give us a chance and despite the lack of authority, our govt and establishment can assert their presence. They need to be a bit more open, less corrupt, and stricter with anyone who challenges the writ of the goverment. The simple rule of goevernance has been that a rebel of the state is a traitor and should be dealt with accorrdingly. Be it Taleban or Baloch or Punjabi. Only that can assure the writ of the goverment, otherwise your proposition is one more ‘fitna’, which we have already enough of to deal with.
@nota
@tolstoy
completely agree… decent analysis but the solution can be implemented using the current state apparatus..
i suppose what asim implies is that a ‘khilafa’ system would have legitimacy in the eyes of the people.. but aside from the myriad problems associated with implementing an ideologically driven state apparatus… who does he propose will fill that vaccum?
Also disagree with the conspiracy theory. in my opinion a stable pakistan is in the political and economic interest of the global community. Why go through the effort and on going costs of forcefully dismantling/subjugating a state when one can benefit from helping to stabilise it.
@Tolstoy
“our govt and establishment can assert their presence”
Like you mention, they equate “asserting their presence” only with “using force.” That is not going to work any more. I do agree with the author that “The interests of the State now clearly diverge from the interests of the people” (I am taking “State” here to mean “our govt and establishment”) and unless those two start heading in the same direction, nothing will save the state. And it’s NOT the “interests of the people” that are at fault here….
@gv and tolstoy
so the objection is why caliphate system? Secularism is an ideology, Israel is an ideological state, and so many more i can go on, am just asking whats the objection here is it Khilafah i,e Islamic system of true sharia that u guys dun agree?
@gv
“Why go through the effort and on going costs of forcefully ismantling/subjugating a state when one can benefit from helping to stabilise it.”
Does Iraq ring a bell? Haiti? Cuba? Columbia? El Salvador? Sudan? Yugoslavia? Iran?….
@ gv
Al we need to do is to get ourselves straight.
Exactly. This whole conspiracy theory is too much. India would be the most stupid country to break us apart, the spill-over is going to take their ’shine’ off too. We just like being part of some big scheme
@razabhai
name me one instance in history where the caliphate system was seriously implemented and was successful????
Secondly besides israel and iran there is no other ideological state in the world which appears to have a sustainable system … unless you include the vatican which is not a viable politcal entity..
incidentally according to most modern observers the irani public is becoming more irrreligious by the day(mosques are empty etc etc) and i have a feeling that has something to with the imposed morality implied by an ideological state…
on the commie side
north korea is a basket case, cuba is an economic disaster and china is evolving into a free market economy..
@ razakhan
I am not against caliphate. I just dont know how you plan to implement it in present day Pakistan. I can not support a Utopia Caliphate when all i see is that my country is burning. As an idealogy, its great, but can you give me a few candidates for the role of this Caliph today?
@nota
i think iraq proved the rightwingers wrong and have obviously thrust them into the minority.. in each of the other cases none of the leaders were willing to play ball… and i think you know that already so i don’t need to tell you… modern world order, global village etc etc… choussodovsky, chomsky and co may have the higher moral ground but the fact is that countries like india have proven that one take a non partisan FR stance and still benefit from the market forces of globalisation
@besides i don’t think we represent a serious enough temptation to the resource hawks in the west.. ( i.e. we jus pore innocen country folk mistah ain’t got much more than the shirts on our backs!! )
@nota
Do you really think we are are in the same situation as all these countries? US will play its game, and yes we are on a breaking point, but can we stop it? I think we can. But if we leave it on others, and be happy being part of the new Great Game, yes, add ex-Pakistan to the list you mentioned.
@gv
Somebody already stole my shirt
Even slavery is banished in most places, who needs these 170-odd m load-shedded souls
@gv
we had 4 caliph’s era which worked, but lets for sake of argument stick with abubakar and umar’s. We saw when umar bin abdulaziz brought back the true khilfah after years of having kingdoms it worked. So it does work bro.
Iran is not an islamic state per se, thats the whole point, same as saudi arabia, the author and wat I am talking abt is true sharia, e.g state has no bussineess what i wear in my house i can walk nakeed and dance to my heart’s content. The sharia is not abt hud and cutting off hand but to establish a system where justice and peace rein supreme. Sharia dun stop from free economy as author mentioned its stop from exploitation in the name of profit.
Pakistan was formed on ideology, namely a land for the muslims where they can live according to islamic ways. Thats what resolution of Pak asks, so u can’t say Israel and Iran only one, actually Iran dun even count cuz it always existed from ancient time till today they just changed their constitution thats all, Israel’s existed in ancient times, Pakistan the only country that was created in the ideological basis and that my freind is the whole argument Pakistan nationalism is Islam, without which what compels us to live together?
@nota
“interests of the people” — and what are those? Peace, security, Justice, Education…
I just dont understand the logic of trying to ‘understand’ those who are taking me hostage on gunpoint. The government has both dialogue and power available. But, if someone is bombing a school, shall the govt go and negotiae with them? Which world are we living in? Talk can start when both parties disarm, till then its a fight. And human history is full of the instances of unfair wars.
We need better governance, but that does not mean we shall concede to every whim that has gunpowder available to force the argument.
@Tolstoy
and my friend I 100% agree with u that we have no one we can turn to implement it. How abt we make it a goal, and start with something that we can acheive right away, lets start with 1973 constitution lets get that back and lets start implementing it, lets start making changes according to constitution, lets not start with sharai punishments, I will say defer them for 20 yrs, but we can bring the other sharia rules, justice, noone is above the law, economics, social welfare system, etc, things we can do. I am not advocating 4 chopping hands and huddood laws, I will stand with anyone to oppose them till wee have just society 1st then and only then if it takes 20 yrs 50 yrs but they should come last, but meanwhile we can start implementing the things we can of sharia with goal beeing to make pakistan a true islamic welfare state. If u agree with that we have no debate.
@razakhan
‘Pakistan was formed on ideology, namely a land for the muslims where they can live according to islamic ways.’ Can you today live in Pakistan according to Islamic ways? I can. Dont know about you.
I am still dying to hear the answer to my question. Who is the new Caliph? Mullah Umar perhaps?
@raza
ok it sounds wonderful (not joking) but do you think that it is implementable given man being the greedy, selfish, political animal that he is..
i think any student of history will point out that succesful political entities which have flourished in the long run have been run on a ’secular’ basis… i.e. no imposed moral system… beyond the basic social contract ala john locke… i.e. a protection property rights – (read rule of law)!!!!
the minute you bring in a belief system which has the ability to be interpreted in a myriad ways (like most religions) you end up with strife and confusion and subjugation of the weak…
@raza
Totally agree. And that’s what we have been doing. JI has been working on it for decades. We have an Islamic Republic at least for namesake. I think our problems are political. Let’s help sort them. Let’s see how the Zardaris and Sharifs can take this country further. We are Muslims and will stay Muslims, there is no threat to that.
@raza
also you just contradicted yourself re : many other ideological states
@gv
I have already answered the qts in response to toltsoy.
Plz correct me if am wrong but if am reading it right u seems to be saying that sharia law, or religious law will be use to subjugate the weak or minorities. I fail to see this, a solution has already been privided for that but the basics are very simple, all personal laws of each faith and sect should be avaiilable to them, all common law i.e public law should be of the majority, as per democratic rules. What could be fairer than this?
@Tolstoy
“US will play its game, and yes we are on a breaking point, but can we stop it? I think we can.”
Of course we can. But will we? Take for example Baluchistan. Here’s the latest pronouncements from the Governor:
Magsi warned on Wednesday that the situation in the province would get out of control if the federal government did not take immediate corrective measures
(More from the story: ‘Although I am a representative of the centre, I was never taken into confidence by Islamabad on the Balochistan issue,’ Mr Magsi said, adding that his suggestions for resolving the issue were always ignored…Mr Magsi said that problems being faced by the province were not because of Nawabs and Sardars or the Baloch tribal system. These problems were because of issues between the province and the centre and the federal government should act to resolve them.)
But will they (and by that I mean action NOT of the military kind)? Doubt it. They will continue to blame the “Nawabs and Sardars or the Baloch tribal system” only and ignore that a big cause of trouble is legitimate “issues between the province and the centre”
@gv
but bro thats exactly my point, be it capitalism, secularism or coommunism they all re religions in a sense, and the states becomes ideological states. Consider democrates and republicans in usa both are ideology with fixed ideas and fixed social views as examplified by abortion.
@nota
I agree with you. And this is what is lacking. We have an impotent government since 1948… and we are running out of time. The only reason i am discussing this here is to say, lets run after, criticize and cajole our government, and support them if they ever do sth right. As it is, they still remain our only chance of survival.
@Tolstoy
and why JI has not been able to succeed? Cuz JI and maulana maududi himself abandoned the policy that he so thoughtfully presented, i,e 4 change to come 1st we should have a disciplined well trained and totally committed populace. Who has been educating the populace? noone JI has to go back and start educating the masses, when we have majority of population who are educated engaged then it will automatically become a good state. I keep saying Turkey;s justice party is a shinning example for all of us to follow, no guns, no violence no rhetoric and social upheavel, slow and steady, address things that concern everyone 1st jobs, social justice peace then will talk more when we achieve this.
@raza
i have no objection to shariah law being implemented provided:
a) there is a robust system of ijtehad being constantly applied to rulings
b) there is a rigorous selection and educational process/infrastructure for all legal practioners..
@gv
“do you think that it is implementable ”
It is curious that when we talk of any “islamic” system be it Nizam-e-Adl or Sharia or whatever, we want it to be implemented “perfectly” and anything less than “utopian ideal” becomes unacceptable (which by its mere definition as such becomes impossible). On the other hand, any other system we are willing to give a shot no matter how imperfect to begin with and are patient enough to wait decades only in the hope of improving it, slowly.
“the minute you bring in a belief system which has the ability to be interpreted in a myriad ways (like most religions) you end up with strife and confusion and subjugation of the weak…”
I sure hope you are not suggesting we have “no strife and confusion” and that there is “no subjugation of the weak”?
@gv
without both points u mentioned it wont be a ttrue islamic state. I was lsitening to dr, israr who was explaning the calipha and islamic state in today’sworld, he also added a point that mullah will not be in the parliment, i,e ulema role is to advise the parliment, they can give all thier different fiqh ruling it will be upto the parliment to pick which one they wana go with as the parliment will represent ppl will.
razakhan said: …………..I was listening to dr, israr who was explaining the caliph a and islamic state in today’s world……………………. DULY STAMPED on your article as I listened & watch the same which is available on you-tube also.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_query=dr+israr+ahmed&aq=0&oq=dr+isra
@nota
No! i think our system is deeply flawed and the sole reason for our current predicament.
However i am of the opinion that is will be easier to improve and build upon the existing system than try to build an ideological one when there is a long history of past failures in front of us.. .
i think we could implement a jeffersonian model of checks and balances which can be tailored to incorporate an modern/forward looking islamic worldview i.e. No laws/legislation is passed which is contrary to islamic jurispundence.
(Provided that the islamic aspect is governed by educated worldly scholars and not open to being hijacked by uneducated insular tribals…
if i ask myself what our country needs: its socioeconomic development of the masses – i.e. education, health, security, business infrastructure etc..
i do not think that can be achieved by living in illogical obscurantist fear of the post modern global set up..
We need to engage (as equals) with the outside world not shut them out…
@gv
I would love to see jeffresonian model which i think explains pefectly the caliph system (i could be wrong). But problem arise again that we would have to change the constitution to do so, thats why I say we have one agreed upon constituion and lets start with that i.e original constitution of Pakistan without all the amendments done to it.
@raza
enjoyed our chat.. have to run now.. but i think of the constitution as a living document.. if change is for the better it is good… i agree we should stick to our system but it can be tailormade to our current needs and a lot of colonial baggage can be done away with
@gv
pleaseur talking, good to have debate instead of just scoring points, ofcoz we can change constitution and should be evolved is not quran lol, reason I was stressing to sticking with it as a starting point, as we evolve we can evolve the constitution. take care n hope to chat with u soon.
@All
READ-
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KE01Df01.html
Dare I say it is primarily that of justice? namely: a profound lack of social, political, legal and economic justice?
Social and economic injustices have created a situation for fertile ground where a supposedly alternative ‘ideology’ even as grotesque, gruesome and Un-Islamic like the one talibs espouse makes sense to at least some of the people.
But that is just the starting point. Talib forces/mercenaries/criminals/’mujahideen’ whatever one wants to call them, are leveraging that intial fertile ground created by these injustices to cultivate and pose an existential military challenge to Pakistan under the guise of providing “an alternative ideology”.
Quite a few Pakistani’s buy into the legitimacy of this so called ‘alternative ideology’ because it is couched in ‘religious terms’, but to me, the use of Islam and Islamic rhetoric is just a ruse to dupe people into supporting — or into being morally and psychologically paralyzed by the implication of ‘opposing Islamic system’ — a patenly obvious military aggression on Pakistan.
Whether this insurgency is being carried out by “locals” or “foreigners” should be moot at this point. The fact is that whatever is happening, is AGAINST Pakistan! and it is NOT GOOD for Pakistan (regardless of the complete assmonkeys that we have ‘in power’ or in our ‘kleptablishment’ or ‘ruling elite’) …
In a desire to lash out at the corrupt and degenerate Pakistani elite (which includes high ranking Military, Naval and Airforce officers btw, not to mention the rest of the detached bureaucrats and feudals (new and old) , one should not support actions which will be existentially detrimental to Pakistan and the Pakistani state. Because once we lose the Pakistani State as an legal, international entity, all bets will be off.
So, in a way, the problem is a military one as well at the core of it. The way these forces are moving around and capturing areas, it seems part of a bigger strategy. An emotional call to Islamic ideology — to which our people are naturally and rightfully so inclined — is being used to further a geopolitical agenda of foreign powers (in my opinion).
Or at least it is being furthered un-wittingly by the likes of Talib Fasadi’s and their (mostly) un-critical supporters (hidden or otherwise).
In any case whatsoever, this phenomenon is detrimental to the long term survival of Pakistan and therefore must be defeated (and by that I dont mean lobbing 500 pound howitzer high-explosive shells into densly populated areas where talibs are “rumored” to be hiding..) … What approach should be adopted is another rant …
@shimatoree
“Now there’s a US$5 million price on Baitullah’s head. The Predators have duly hit the Mehsud family’s South Waziristan bases. But – curioser and curioser – not once but twice, the ISI forwarded a detailed dossier of Baitullah’s location directly to its cousin, the Central Intelligence Agency. But there was no drone hit. ”
sums it up nicely.
@Ghost Of TK
untle agay bhi to bolo solution na :p
@shimatoree
“Apocalypse Now. Run for cover. The turbans are coming.”
Where have I heard that before?
“But unlike St Petersburg in 1917 or Tehran in late 1978, Islamabad won’t fall tomorrow to a turban revolution….To believe this rag-tag band could rout the well-equipped, very professional 550,000-strong Pakistani army…is a ludicrous proposition. ”
Indeed! As ludicrous as “Apocalypse Now!”
@razakhan:
Interesting observation. I think this is totally the way to go for any ideological party, in Pakistan, whether on left or right, but especially for JI. JUI is too far gone in a totally different direction IMO.
The short term thinking and short-circuiting of the process through ‘guns and violence’ never serves the long term objectives of any ideological party (left or right).
The ultimate failure of the Bolsheviks in the soviet union is a glaring example of this. They were the minority faction and they grabbed power by violence, and brought in a system which could never get out of that mould despite espousing high sound principles like social justice, socialism etcetera.
Rest is history as they say.
There really should be more papers written on the work of justice party in Turkey, but one hardly ever sees any papers or essays on their history, social work, techniques in Pakistan Urdu press (maybe JI has done some work in this regard? a comparative study perhaps?)
On this subject, I liked I. A. Rehmans’s thoughts very much:
http://epaper.dawn.com/ArticleText.aspx?article=30_04_2009_007_004
Bismillah,
We are missing big point which author is trying to make … This country can’t be saved unless we have some thing which bounds us as people together. It can’t be nationalism, language or whatever imported system you bring from west. We have too many nationalities, too many languages, even in some places we have different cultural norms.
Only thing which is shared by more than 85% of people is ISLAM, and that’s the only thing which can bound us together as a nation and one entity.
Whenever, someone suggest us the solution based on Islam which is basically the only solution I believe, we jump to its mechanism. That’s the biggest discussion stopper. First of all, we need to agree on if that the system we want to go with and take out secularim/or whatever system we have in mind from our mind. When we have only one aim to follow, only then we can bring that change. If we are sincere to ourselves and most of all with Allah… Allah will make things easy for us, and join us with Leaders who are sincere to Allah.
In conclusion, First make our minds on solution, sincerely focus ourselves to it, make dua and repent for our previous shortcommings, and then jump to HOW our goals can be met…
@ nota
“It is curious that when we talk of any “islamic” system be it Nizam-e-Adl or Sharia or whatever, we want it to be implemented “perfectly” and anything less than “utopian ideal” becomes unacceptable (which by its mere definition as such becomes impossible). On the other hand, any other system we are willing to give a shot no matter how imperfect to begin with and are patient enough to wait decades only in the hope of improving it, slowly. ”
that is exactly what they do. talk about an Islamic system and they will start rants about who will be the leader? whose islam will be implemented(like we have different holy books or something)? and other useless questions. they dont mind having THE most corrupt person(zardari) as their leader in this most corrupt system, but if you talk about Islamic system they want it to be “perfect” otherwise they will fight to oppose it. the hypocrisy of this “certain” class has no limits. and the political parties(pmln ji etc) who have suddenly “waken up” to the threat of taleban are just fearful that their own vested interests and position in this corrupt system that they thrive in is under threat, and are only defending those interests.
@anti_democratic
After reading the article I doubt anyone will disagree, but then lot of farzana bari and prof lifebuoy’s in world so may be wrong :p.
Even the most secular party of Pak, ANP even recognize that Islam is the only binding force and the nationalism of Pakistan is Islam.
pakistan can never be modren state untill we sepperate religion from politics.just give me one example of modren religous state.u cannt run ur business in islamic way how u can run a state islamic way.if islamic system is paracticeable then why there isnt single islamic state.you people will keep walking in circles.
@anti_democratic: would be interested to hear your thoughts on BanglaDesh and its separation despite the fact that it was Majority Muslim Province, was Part of a Pakistan (a Muslim nation) and in fact the concept of Pakistan or a separate homeland was actually floated by and first approved by the Bengali Muslims of India themselves.
If your theory of Islam alone as binding force stands, then why did Bengal leave the federation of Pakistan (Big Bad India? even if so, why couldn’t Islam keep us together as one nation in the face of Indian conspiracy to break us?)
@Gul: Great article! thanks for sharing. I think the group he calls “neo-taliban” suffers from a serious legitimacy crisis, in terms of their “patriotic” credentials and in terms of their “religious” credentials.
For example, the word is that “Molvi” Fazlullah is actually a drop-out from the seminary of his father in law (and he’s the most educated one — religiously speaking — in the lot of the so called “talib” commanders.)
Most of these commanders, as evidenced by Talat’s recent show on the religious credentials of the talib leadership, are illiterate both in the conventional sense AND the religious sense.
Naming them “taliban” is a branding exercise, and I can only wonder who is behind this branding exercise. They sure have managed to confuse a lot of well meaning Pakistani people who sincerely want a system of government based on Islam (right or wrong or whether this group is in majority is a different discussion.)
I’d like to quote these paras from I.A. Rehman’s piece :
Those apologists within Pakistan who think that they can bring in “Islamic Khilafah” or “Islami Nizam” on the wings of these “vultures” are seriously mistaken IMO.
These talibs will immediately proceed to eliminate ALL OPPOSITION including mainstream religious parties like JI and JUI and implement a heinous and repressive system of government which they will merely call Islamic and no-one will be allowed to disagree. Just like Saudi Arabia is an “Islamic State” … I think the model the talib have is Saudi Arabia, but repression dialed up to about a 100 times that of Saudi Arabia.
Because the price for dissent — if the current events in Swat and other areas ‘benefiting’ from this Un-Islamic Menace are any indication — can be very high under such a criminal and patently Un-Islamic regime.
@Ghost Of TK
U just answered the qts with BD example urself, since the promise of Pakistan didn’t realize we had nothing to bind us. In vaccum comes nationalism and result is Bangladesh.
@Traffic
“…that is exactly what they do. talk about an Islamic system and they will start rants about who will be the leader? whose islam will be implemented(like we have different holy books or something)? and other useless questions.”
but still can anyone guide me how it will be implemented anyway. All the arguments up to this point are about implementation. If we are not able to implement a constitution on which 99% of people agree upon how will be we implement an obscure model of shariah when almost similar majority is unaware of how will it be implemented. The matter that who will be khalifah will come latter on ie. if he is supposed to be elected based on voting then how is this different from today. Enlighten me please!!
btw no more crap from @revivalist on this issue. we want some meaningful discussion over here.
@ bechari-awam
You said 99% of people agree with the current system. I don’t think that’s true, infact the majority of the people despise this rotten and corrupt outdated colonial leftover system. There is no justice in any sense of the word for anyone in this country. Army politicians buearacracy judiciary police lawyers every institution in this system is rotten and corrupt to the core. I am not knowledgable enough on the subject to give you an explanation of how an Islamic system will be implemented, there are knowledgable ulema for that, all I know is that an Islamic state will have the legitimacy of the people, the people will have something to call their own, this will strengthen the federation and give the state the legitimacy in the eyes of the people to deal with miscreants in the country. Right now the government and army are seen as tools of the west in subjugating our people, mercenaries fighting a war against Islam for the kuffar. Why you want to hang onto this rotten system is beyond me. I understand when nawaz sharif or zardari ask for protecting this system that these corrupt worms thrive in, but it gives NOTHING to the people.
This is a very good debate between Ghamidi sahib and Dr. Israr Ahmed. I urge everyone who really want to understand Islamic state principles to listen to this and try to understand. For me the crux was that both agreed on principled and differed in interpretation yet the main course they both suggested was
1 – Parliment and only parliment will make the law.
2 – Constitutional court are the only place to challenge these laws and every citizen will have right to challenge them.
It was heartening to see two different school of thoughts agreeing on basic core principals of Islamic state.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbn2FBIkAOk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XStWd5wfi30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihWvyjAcZMo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DF2ck93dxqg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_z30c9hZtU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHbA4OkM7BM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ND1cOn4pFG8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Uz3mP9kZRs
@Traffic
“…I am not knowledgable enough on the subject to give you an explanation of how an Islamic system will be implemented, there are knowledgable ulema for that, all I know is that an Islamic state will have the legitimacy of the people, the people will have something to call their own, this will strengthen the federation and give the state the legitimacy in the eyes of the people to deal with miscreants in the country…”
believe me you are not alone and there are no knowledgeable ulema out there who can solve this riddle. My belief is that our problems can only be solved through a true Islamic system but we cannot start from the end i.e. implementing islamic punishments is the top most step of the ladder not the first one.
@traffic
Grow up kiddo! States are not fantasy land . We are making progress anyway despite the hurdles of enemies from inside and outside. Our system needs to be improvised to make good things happen fast. We are heading toward an independent media, independent judiciary and army away from politics. As far as politicians side, i see a change for the good within few years. Let there be some elections, let there be masses judging the misdeeds of their political characters and this country will cruise smoothly. State should not give anyone raise the gun in the name of ideology, fascism, sectarian issues or territorial issues.
Ideology? clash of ideology? well i cant find myself agreeing with the article. totally bullshit. Talibans are simply MQM of northern area, eager to occupy lands, dimes and other ECONOMICAL activities. No ideology is behind there awful actions except the greed of money and power. They have fallen to the utter point to disgrace that they are ousting the minorities for not giving them bhatta.
http://www.dunyanews.tv/newsite/main_category.php?nid=1890&catid=2&flag=d
Pakistan army is doing the very right thing. No state with in the state should be tolerated at any cost. Pakistan army should cleanse urban fags [read MQM] after cleanse these fags from swat and fata.
http://pkdemocrat.wordpress.com/2008/04/17/a-prostitute-called-husain-haqqanian-agent-of-the-jews/
@pak.nukes
“http://pkdemocrat.wordpress.com/2008/04/17/a-prostitute-called-husain-haqqanian-agent-of-the-jews/”
Did you catch this one by Shaheen Sehbai?
Obama throws a ton of bricks on Zardari
“And for all those on whom Zardari depends for his US policy, either in Washington or in Islamabad, it is time to pack up and go home”
guys how abt focusing the debate on the article?
@nota
Thanks for sharing the link. I didn’t read The News today. I always Shaheen Sehbai a tragic journalist but his reports are as authentic as Kamran Khan’s “presumptions” .
Zardaro will make more compromises in order to save his kursi for sometime.
@razakhan
Anything that is or will happen to Zardari government is 101% linked with the topic of this forum.
@pak.nukes
“I always Shaheen Sehbai a tragic journalist but his reports are as authentic as Kamran Khan’s “presumptions” .”
Sure. And it is more of Sehbai’s hope that “all those on whom Zardari depends for his US policy, either in Washington or in Islamabad, it is time to pack up and go home”. But that would be too ‘reasonable’ for Zardari to do, now won’t it? But keeping the messenger aside, there is no question Obama has thrown a ton of bricks on Zardari. Certainly more $$$ and toys are headed Kiyani’s way, but at what cost, I wonder….
@nota
please read …..I always ‘find’……..
Check your mail.
bismillah,
Sir… Your question has my answers in it.
First, We failed because we were building a state, which had huge ethinic and language gaps based on principles borrowed from West. Had we established it on Islam, I bet there wouldn’t have these problems.
To further push my point forward, I would like to ask everyone Why after 1971, Pakistan saw a need to “Islamicalize” their constitution… why not before??? They saw very closely, this secularism/nationalism based systems/thinking failed to bound people together … (even in 1973 constitution, I personally see huge lapses, which are causing us problems now — Mixture of ideals taken from west and Islam— nice try, but is bound to fail — it is something to be discussed later on) —
Secondly, It is never a solution to use military force on your own people … They did that in Bengladesh, we have already seen the result. They tried that in Baluchistan, we can see now how baluchi perception is changing about pakistan. Same in NWFP … We just don’t learn from our mistakes.
Running a state needs some planning, some fundamental priciples which don’t change with time. We have in pakistan none of above. We have no planning, our scholars have shown no direction in last 62 years (Completely Failed-) — And our principles/aims changes with phone calls, Is this a country or what — that’s why, i think we are not heading in right direction —
To be honest, I don’t blame India for 1971. Even today, I don’t transfer blame for our shortcomings on US/India/Israel. People who do that, they are not recognizing their own problems… How can you blame them, they are doing what they are expected to be doing… We collectively as a nation failed to do what we supposed to be doing…
It is amazed to me & get wonder why the term Talibanisation is losing its value. What happened to good old fashioned racism or may say so classicism? Do Anti-Talibans people hate other unlawful acts which are often done by these political parties or corrupt Fauji Generals as well or just those of Pathans or Punjabis’ Taliban descent?
It seems someone sick with racism would hate Pathans and before that in late 70s Bengalis now this hate-ness is turned into Pathans & Baluchis and quite possibly with an equal passion.
It is not enough to label this Talibanisation Logo as is obnoxious and detrimental to freedom of thought, expression, and the need for mankind to continue to question at our beloved country, whether controversial or not?
We should focus on what our religion might say and what looks sensible in modern times. Only way to impose Taliban/Wahabi version of Islam is to crush everything that is new and emerged in last 1300 years. These conservative Mullahs cannot adapt to new ways, only way they can bring their Islam is by dragging the society to 1400 years back.
We have same Quran, same Hadith and same Namaz. Can we become ‘Sahabi’?? NO! It means having a long tradition of teacher and passing down the knowledge/experience/practice with changing times is necessary. After gaps of hundreds of years, how can we have a puritan Islamic society? Impossible!
If someone is interesting in developing society according to soul of Islam, they should start building Madrassahs that are pioneers for science and technology and a place where Ijtihad flourishes. Only a scientist can interpret accurately what Islam says about Universe. Only a medical doctor can interpret what Islam says about human body. Only a soldier can understand what Quran says about warfare. This way, we might have capable people in 50 years time who could introduce an Islamic society. Jahil Mullah doesn’t even understand what Biology is, how can he interpret Quranic suras on these complicated issues.
There is no short cut. Any short cut will push Islam another 100 years away and world will equate it to barbarity (and it will be very close to barbarism). Not something that the world will be attracted to embrace.
Question with All…
check this two statment then decide;
1. Pakistan is helping Americans and his Allies against Terrorism on the price of boost up his economy, solution of Kashmir issue, relief his Debit from World bank and now 1.5 Billiion per anum. So just think we are helping against a nation (leave it to religion) which boarder alocate over 2600 km with us and allow Americans and his allies to bombed them and till now they killed more then 100 thousand Civilians in all over afghaninstan on our behalf so this is shameless act we did against a nation to gain money….!
2. Today we are crying with our own blood, we are weaping and sounds like a ciron that Taliban and other Millitants are killing our Army and Civillians with the Help of out side hands (IF out side hands are ) … so what is the best judgment on ground is……
When we (Pakistan) getting money to destabalize a nation and allow others to use our sapce and all facility to kill other nation so WHY WE ARE CRYING IF TALIBAN ARE DOING THE SAME WITH US AS A “REVENGE “…..???? WHY TODAY WE ARE BARKING LIKE A DOG HAVING NO TEETH ??…….MAN…!! YOU DID A ACT AGAINST A NATION SO THEY ARE DOING THE SAME WITH US….!! So Don’t CRY.!! its Pay Back TIME………….!!!
don’t dive in same way of water with all…see with Birds eye view to situation
“Its easy to balme but hard to justify ” so we should see in our Necks first…!
Wasalam
Leave your response!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Recent Comments
Discuss Topics
Blog Comments
@ataraxis6, I will add MP4 download option on main site by coming weekend. @MARINAKHAN, The login bu. […]
Hello, i was wondering if it will work on my HTC HD2. Thanks
If for some reason, you are not able to fix the issue, you can at least provide a link to download m. […]
@Admin I am not able to play any videos on my BlackBerry Storm 9530. I get the following error when. […]
iam member of pkpolitics and i have nokia n82 i want to see pkpolitics on my mobile. the web site is. […]
Search