He saw how rapidly Egypt was taking the colours of Westernisation. To save Islam, which Qutb thought was in ‘danger’, he joined the Muslim Brotherhood as a political action front that would bring about reformation through Sharia. However, soon Qutb realised that the political action and mobilisation of people was too difficult to achieve — partly because the ‘jahliyya’, he thought, was so widespread that it had infested the people of Egypt in moving away from what they really wanted. People were like sheep that needed direction.
The only way, Qutb thought that these people could be saved was through an act of adventure that would jolt them — a revolution by radicals who would alter the status quo. Likewise, in Pakistan, Qutb’s mentor, Maulana Maududi, the founder of the Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), was going through the same dilemma. The JI, together with other religious groups, was trying hard to enforce Sharia through political action, only realising that people were least interested. This not only made the religious groups hate democracy and the rulers, but also the people whose eyes and ears were “blackened”, according to the them.
When all hopes seemed to be fading away, the religious groups, who accounted for less than five per cent of the vote bank, took to the streets and monopolised their power through the street, coercing different political leaders to bend to their demands. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto became one of the few victims of the street power of religious groups.
General Ziaul Haq, however, came out to be the long awaited messiah, a ray of hope for the religious parties that thought that Zia’s coup might be able to do what they wouldn’t ever accomplish in decades through democracy. And Zia did just that ,giving the religious groups’ agenda a decades’ leap. After his death, the religious parties still had hope in a sudden surge of militants, millions of dollars of funding to madrassas, and systematic armament of religious organisations as a result the Afghan war. A new force was heaping, waiting to strike for the real dream: enforcing Sharia in Pakistan by destabilising the political and military set-up, stripping the country off from everything Western.
But General Musharraf’s coup proved to be a disaster for the religious groups. As much as they thought the general would continue the legacy of Ziaul Haq, Musharraf proved to be progressive. Pushed by the United States, soon there was a crackdown on the militant friends of the religious parties. Militants’ madrassas were shut down and funding ceased. It was the worst of times, and the conservatives developed extreme hate for not just Musharraf but also towards the entire military. Democracy was not the only enemy now. The secular military also became a serious threat to the religious groups’ agenda of enforcing Sharia in Pakistan. And in those worst times, the religious groups found a new hope: enter the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).
The TTP provided the religious parties that cover they needed to begin a push to enforce Sharia. Religious groups, especially the JI, wouldn’t have to get their hands dirty this time; they would only capitalise on the TTP’s lethal war on the Pakistani state and military. The religious groups never criticised the TTP’s brutalities, allowed the state and military to slowly bleed, and for obvious reason: they stood to benefit from it. While religious groups never supported suicide bombings, as long as they could see the political-military establishment collapsing to its knees, it served their agenda well. In post-colonial Muslim states, political Islam failed miserably, but militant Islam won, setting a precedent that political ends could be achieved in countries like Pakistan through violence and extremism. The dream of Qutb and Maududi is yet to come real; the only hindrance is a stable democracy, and a strong military that stands at odds with the religious groups.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 23rd, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (18)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
The errors of the words notwithstanding, the jist of the article about islamization diktat being forced upon the country is a fact that cannot be denied.
Spread of Islam was parasitical. The day it stopped expanding, it mere turned on to itself and started to consume itself.
Dear Nadeem, although I appreciate, and sympathise with, your line of thinking, I think you need to re-consider your use of the expression "secular military". The criticism that you find in some of the comments is not unfounded. However, the most important thing is that what you're writing about is the need of the hour.
@jami:
If Congress if Racist and bigoted in your opinion, where does that leave the Muslim league which called for Direct Action against Hindus, leading to riots killing more than 5000 people in Muslim majority state of Bengal.
A country born through religion will be embedded to it. The expectation and thinking of Maududi and likes will always remain present with varying intensity. implementation/ imposition of Sharia is and continue to remain their goal. Poverty compels /helps/ pushes children's admission and stay in Madarasas which provide an environment (based on hate to democracy, non Muslims and their life style)to dedicate their life and work to achieve Sharia and its ideology and go for Jihad ( with violence). National Patriotism and human values remain on the backseat for them because they develop a mindset like that.
Disagree with this simplistic, and inconsistent, view for a complex problem. Even the anti-religious characterization or actions under Musharraf is misleading.
JI is not much at odds with the military, which does indulge in religious ideological fantasies. The military patronizes them openly, regardless of JI's foreign pro-Al Qaeda sentiments, and even after being insulted publicly for favouring a local anti-state terrorist and can only make mild rebukes.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/630056/ji-chief-should-apologize-for-terming-terrorists-martyrs-ispr/
BruteForce, Jinnah was known as the Ambassador of Hindu Muslim unity. It was the openly bigoted and racist attitude of the Congress Ministries that pushed Jinnah over the edge to campaign for a separate Muslim majority state.
How can a country's military be secular, when its constitution is not ... !!?? ... perhaps only possible in the land of hypocrites, that is Pakistan ... !!
Why does the history of Islamisation start with Zia or ZAB?
Isn't it Jinnah and his Muslim League, note the emphasis on Muslim, proposed a theory that somehow Muslims are very different from Hindus and cannot live together?
I can quote JInnah his praising Sharia and Islam. Direct Action day was against whom? The British? Or, was it against the HIndus?
Pakistan needs a strong leftist force. Feudalism must be eradicated.
Only Sharia can save Pakistan, only then Pakistan can become superpower.
Seriously!!!!
A democracy enforced by military? Obviously the author does not see the fundamental contradiction in his statement. Which Muslim, or for that matter any country, in the world has seen democracy established and protected by military? The Kim il Sung, Col. Nasir, Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Musharraf, Asad ul Bashar, Al Sisi, Hasni Mubarik, the Algerian Generals, Saddam HUssain, Enver Hoxja, Col Qaddafi? Which one?
@Zulfiqar Raheem:
He would still be wrong though. Its this same so-called secular military that has nurtured 'assets' in all times since at least Zia regardless of whether it was Musharraf or Jehangir Karamat or Mirza Aslam Beg who headed it. Musharraf's "enlightened moderation" was a joke always coming into play to keep his American overlords happy. Consider: Not a single military operation against militants during the Musharraf era was a success even though he had billions of dollars of american money at his disposal, yet the PPP - led government with a fraction of that money cleared Swat, using the same military. One of those farcical operations ended with 500 soldiers being kidnapped and then being let go with 1000/2000 (i forget the exact number) rupees each.
@aaaaa: I believe that the author meant 'Secular Military' from the perspective of Islamists political parties.
What is he trying to Say ?
A secular military? in pakistan? are you serious?