What we need to learn from Egypt

Challenge for Egyptian Islamists is to match actions to words. Their Pakistani counterparts still have long way to go.

Egypt and Pakistan have had long experiences with authoritarian rule, and both exhibit signs of deep ideological polarisation — largely as a result of domestic and foreign policy decisions taken by a non-representative leadership. In both countries, we can now see a gaping split between the religious and secular-liberal extremes over ideology, identity, and worldview.

Ruling over a populace so diverse in terms of religious affiliation, Mohamed Morsi faces huge challenges when it comes to fulfilling the Brotherhood’s dream. The opposition against the attempt to increase presidential powers and the eventual success of the referendum approving the draft constitution by an Islamic-dominated council, resonates with vital lessons for Pakistan’s religio-political parties.

Religious political groups in Pakistan and abroad have made the mistake of making political ascendancy their primary goal, while ignoring the social project that must accompany it. Groups calling for Khilafah believe the establishment of an Islamic government and Shariah will create a utopia. This runs contrary to the precedent of the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) whose epic spiritual and social mission preceded the establishment of Shariah.

Both law and political policy are means to greater ends, but religio-political groups make the mistake of seeing them as ends in themselves. Religious parties need to embark upon the social project of moderating between dangerously polarised extremes and addressing social injustice. The mere talk of Shariah and the dream of Khilafah cannot be sold to a public writhing in poverty, ignorance, oppression and disease.

So far, an intellectually robust discourse mediating between ideological polarities has not emerged from Islamic scholars in Pakistan. A comprehensive strategy to address the real problems has not been presented. As long as polarisation between the religious and the secularised exists and grows, any religious group winning power will have to deal with stiff opposition unless it widens its appeal or else, its hands will remain tied.

That is the lesson from the Egyptian experience. The draft constitution referring to the centrality of the Shariah managed to scrape through, but the fears of the secular segments and religious minorities have yet to be fully allayed.

Egyptians protesting in Tahrir Square, whether against Hosni Mubarak or Morsi, are more interested in liberty, equality and basic rights than in Shariah or the lack of it. Those calling for or against Shariah, will always be at the fringes. The masses, at the end of the day, are concerned with bread and jobs: matters more tangible than legislation. As long as religious parties fail to take on social ills, they will remain an unattractive proposition to the man in the street.

The experiment with the Hudood laws in Pakistan in the 80s allowed Islamic law to fail by not creating the necessary conditions for it to work. Such disasters are likely to be committed by those seeking to win legitimacy by appealing to religious sentiment.

Islamic groups must also be conversant with modernity. Both freedom and democracy are part of the inevitable modernising process and the anger in Egypt is directed at what is perceived as Morsi’s attempt to curtail these hard-earned gifts.

The challenge for Egyptian Islamists is to match their actions to their words. Their Pakistani counterparts, while in awe of their victory, still have a long way to go — with a good deal to be unlearnt and a good deal to be learnt.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 13^th, 2013.