Irfan Husain has written his book Fatal Faultlines: Pakistan, Islam and the West (Harper Collins India 2012) with a balanced view, and it is well written, which you always expect from Irfan who is the son of a rare Urdu stylist mother and an enormously polyglot father, Dr Akhtar Husain Raipuri. He is refreshingly non-partisan in his view of the East-West civilisational debate and hence blameless when he appears dismayed by Muslim bias.
After having surveyed the hate map of the Muslim world, he looks for shades that may save face. He finds that Osama bin Laden was not as popular in the rest of the Islamic world as he was in Pakistan. Will that form some kind of positive interface with the West that fears al Qaeda? He writes: “So does that mean then that the Muslim public is basically with America against al Qaeda? The answer is no. While al Qaeda may not be popular, large majorities said they perceive al Qaeda as seeking to ‘stand up to America and affirm the dignity of the Islamic people’ and equally large majorities agree with this goal” (p.23).
He finds Indonesia least extremist in the survey. Sixty-six per cent had an unfavourable view of the US but a more modest 16 per cent had a very unfavourable view (p.21). But the latest issue of The Economist (June 8, 2012) says: “During an Ascension Day service on May 17, 2012, about 100 Protestants were attacked by a Muslim mob at their church on the outskirts of Jakarta. The mob hurled stones, bags of urine and death threats at the congregation. Since May 2, local government officials in the Muslim province of Aceh, in northern Sumatra, have closed at least 16 Christian churches, citing lack of permits”.
To restore balance, the author states: “The US was never given due credit in the Islamic world for intervening on the side of the Bosnian Muslims and later rescuing the Muslims of Kosovo. In both conflicts, the US overcame the pusillanimity of other Nato members and prevented a possible genocide” (p.68).
He is fair when he examines the injustice of Israel perpetrated through the Balfour Declaration of 1917. And he opposes Israel’s “right to occupy and annex Palestinian land captured in the 1967 war” (p.77).
Irfan is worried by what he calls “The Pakistani Paradox”. He states: “Tension between fundamentalism and moderation lies at the heart of the seemingly endless cycle of violence the country is experiencing. In fact, it is built into Pakistan’s DNA. Conceived as a homeland for the Muslims of the subcontinent, rather than as an Islamic state, by its founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, his dream of a modern, secular nation has been steadily subverted. Indeed, it is hard to reconcile the religious violence that wracks present-day Pakistan with its founding father’s vision” (p.96).
The utopia of Pakistan is presented by ex-ISI boss, Hameed Gul: “Courts will be free: they will be interpreting the Holy Quran, and it will put all anxieties at rest. The education system will be equal, not class-based; public schools accessible only to the rich and mighty will disappear. There will be interest-free banking” (p.171).
The Taliban had their utopia in Afghanistan. We are still coping with the anxieties they left behind.
Published In The Express Tribune, June 17th, 2012.
COMMENTS (20)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
pakistan is already an islamic state,what else you need more The state does not stop you to going to mosues.put no resrictions the. way you perform your islamic obligations such as namaz, ramzan.zakat,and sadaqat etc.pakistan state has already family laws for marriage and divorce based on sharia.inheritary laws are all according to holy quran.pakistan state provide seprate schooles, colleges, wards in hospitals ,seperate compartments in railways, buses for its female citizens in every parts of the country on a huge scale.there is no restrictions on any muslim to propagte the teachings of islam.one would not find any such facilities in any other country to such a scale.liqour,gambling is forbidden.is it not enough?
As usual, Khaled Ahmed provides his excellent insights on a topic that reflects the deep anamoly of the idea of Pakistan. Jinnah had intended a nation for sub-continent Muslims but with a secular outlook where minority thoughts are not supressed. Yet we turned into a fundamentalist nation which is a representation against the very ideals of Jinnah. We definetly don't need a neo-Taliban soceity which is an antonym of basic human values.
Isn't it the irony that our most loathed nation (read USA) is also the most sought after destination for our expatriates?
Pakistan as a society has an obligation to be an Islamic role model for all other societies. Otherwise non-Muslims will laugh at us when we keep telling them that Islam is the last and the final religion. So, let's implement Islam fully in Pakistan and show to the rest of the world what a beautiful thing it really is for people. Time for talking about the greatness of Islam is over. It's time now to implement it and prove to the world that it really works - not in Turkey or Indonesia, but in Pakistan where Islam is the most important and undisputed social fact.
@Zalim Singh: Yes....just like US they should stop bombing the cities, killing innocent peoples for its ego and that too on false basis...like WMDs in Iraq, meddling in other peoples affairs etc. These actions will elevate them to the class of CIVILIZED
First Prime meinister of India, Mr Jawaharlal Nehru, was a hardcore secularist. He himself was a publicly declared atheist/agnostic. He is at the core of the history of subcontinent from 1930 thru 1960. This is what he had to say about pakistan and the ideology that framed Pakistan..
"..As far as Pakistan is concerned, she agreed to a cultural and human approach as the basis of Partition but such an approach does not follow from the policy of a State which is Islamic in conception."
Just one line from Nehru, explains the contradiction in the idea of Pakistan that a "cultural and human policty" cannot flow from a state that's conceived in a specific and exclutionary religious terms.
@Ashiq Hussain:
All arguments for and against religion is waste of time and the time spend only results in corrupting the mind, period.
It is not about liberal or conservative it is all stupid humans who allow it happen. Seriously, if you really think about the modern day religious shenanigans, where is the spirituality, empathy, helping the poor, old and the sick come to play.
Fundamentally, religion has become tool of the greedy and lazy to live lavishly by stealing from the poor since they are the least educated, more ritualistic hoping god will come to their rescue!
Ahmed adnan bitar... There is nothing wrong with being an Islamic theocracy with sharia. Just because the liberal media say it is bad it isn’t bad. that is a lame argument...tell us how sharia is good...as author pointed out, Taliban imposed Sharia in afghanistan, did it make Afghanistan any better???
Excellent article! Sadly many will not understand who have closed minds.
@Spud:
There is an inherent contradiction hidden in your statement. You agree that India is not a Hindu state, then the rationale for Pakistan evaporates.
You, I think based on me observing other liberals in Pakistan, want to have the best of both World. India is a secular state, yes; but Muslims were not safe in India. Pakistan is created in the name of a set of people divided from others based on the concept of a Religion, yet it is not to be called a Religious state.
Pick a side. Either agree that Pakistan was created in the name of Religion and was a communal demand, or agree that Pakistan was not a Religious demand and hence the whole idea is standing on loose foundations.
Islamic countries have a lot of work to do, before they can be called civilised.
India is a homeland for Hindus is not a Hindu state. Therefore India supported many religions to settle and grow there. In the same way a home land for Muslims can also support other religions. It is the intolerance of Muslims residing in Muslim countries that is the root cause of trouble for other religions that one reads in the newspapers.
@Ahmed adnan bitar, There was a gem hidden in your observation and it was "Otherwise what is the reason for separating from India which has always been secular, long before the word secular was invented. " So true. India is home of so many religions, sects for so many thousands years with each having the freedom to define God as he or she pleases.
Conceived as a homeland for the Muslims of the subcontinent, rather than as an Islamic state...
What does the above mean? A homeland of Muslims is not a secular state. It is ...ahem... an Islamic state. This kind of word play and sophistry is common in the liberal media. Pakistan was always conceived as a state by Muslims for Muslims. Otherwise what is the reason for separating from India which has always been secular, long before the word secular was invented. There is nothing wrong with being an Islamic theocracy with sharia. Just because the liberal media say it is bad it isn't bad.
Dear author, it has been my sixth year reading your diagnosis of problem - radicalism. Identification of the problem has been done and now it is time to move to counter it, which lies in democracy as history tells us. it is democracy which allows competing narratives to vie for hegemony. there is probably no single group in our country which doesn't wield and employ violence to neuteralize the violence of others. one who will give up arms may see a premature deah. External help to couterpoise the balance is quick to be seen as treason. what to do now???
Taliban , Shariah and violence is Pakistan's destiny built in the violence unleashed in the day of direct action.