Pakistan; the saga continues …. (Sep 27, 2015)
Written by FS
Eight months after the massacre of school children in Peshawar, an incident which shook Pakistan to the core, Capt. Isfandyar Bukhari moves the nation with his fearless and brilliant combat with the militants. The 28-year-old soldier led his troops from the front, received straight bullets in his chest but managed to prevent another major tragedy involving large scale civilian casualties. The story of the soldier with an exceptional profile, which included the highest award ‘Sword of Honor’ from Pakistan Military Academy, adds another chapter to the story of Pakistan struggling to fight back Islamist militancy.
The rationale behind this ongoing war, however, remains as fuzzy as ever. The Islamic state fights the Islamist militancy on seemingly different perceptions about faith and requirements of faith. The military-led National Action Plan (NAP) to counter terrorism is being implemented with full force. The missing link in the National Action Plan, according to a prominent security analyst Amir Rana, is the strategy to counter extremism. Despite widespread popularity of the military operation against militant groups, the atmosphere of religious intolerance prevails in the country. Reactionary Islamist discourse continues to hold its appeal at grassroot level, owing to the absence of an alternative religious discourse. Realizing the need to construct a ‘counter extremism narrative’, the government is reportedly working with international donors to create a viable alternative. Amir Rana reports that certain NGOs in Pakistan are also trying to import Western Counter Violent Extremism (CVE) models (Dawn ; Sep 20, 2015). According to the report, such efforts, which fail to regard the local context and sensibilities, are bound to fail and turn counter productive. Contructing a religious narrative which appeals to the people and is owned by them, remains the key challenge for the proponents of National Action Plan.
Again we need to reconsider the rationale behind this war before contemplating a viable alternative narrative. We need to be clear exactly where our understanding of faith departs from that of our adversary. It seems that the point of departure here is not the difference of sect, or belief, but the desire to impose one’s ideas on others. This is what we need to counter. And hence, imposing a counter narrative from above would never help mitigate extremism– instead it may only add to it. The narratives of extremism can be countered by opening up space for a meaningful dialogue and debate on religious issues. True, there has been no dearth of debate on religion in Pakistan. In fact, the whole history of the country is shaped by such debates. But a review of this persistent debate on ideology, a glimpse of which is offered in the following passage, often reveals tendencies of unwillingness to consider a different view, use of negative stereotyping rather than reason to lead or rebut an argument. Such tendencies led to the polarization of society, stifling space for intellectual debate on religious issues. This space must be restored in order to allow the construction of an indigenous narrative which Pakistanis can identify with.
A glimpse from the past; 1967 ; An excerpt from an article titled ‘Tajaddud Pasandon Ka Muaqaff’ (The Perspective of the Progressives) by Prof. Rafi-ullah, published in the Institute of Islamic Research journal ‘Fikr-o-Nazar’:
‘We have now reached the part of the discussion where we can easily decide who is hampering the implementation of Islamic Law in the country…these people accuse that … (the Westernized class) kept taking the name of Islam during the struggle for independence, but within a few years after independence it became apparent that the slogan of Islam was only a hypocritical tactic, in reality this class’s animosity towards Islam is no less than that of foreign invadors..
This is the main accusation these gentlemen put forward against the “ Westernized class”. But now see who is actually worthy of it. Before independence these gentlemen never spoke a word in favor of Pakistan…. (Later) their biggest contribution to Pakistan was the demand to implement Islam in Pakistan. Now when the Westernized class has taken a few steps towards this goal, … these men began to oppose it (creating controversies about and taking different positions on Muslim family laws)…’
Going back a little further; 1930 ; From ‘Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam’ by Allama Muhammad Iqbal, as quoted by his son Javaid Iqbal:
‘…Despite Iqbal’s criticism of democracy because of its defects as a political system, he understood that there is no other acceptable alternative to it. According to him the Caliphate, Imamate or Sultanate were the outmoded Muslim forms of rulership of the past…. The essence of Tauhid , as a working idea was human equality, human solidarity and human freedom…. The state from Islamic standpoint is an endeavor to transform these ideal principles into space-time forces, an aspiration to realize them in a definite human organization. (Reconstruction, Lectures p 15)’

Boxing champion Amir Khan visits Army Public School Peshawar and meets the injured students , Dec 30, 2014
6 responses to "Pakistan; the saga continues"
October 9, 2015 at 8:25 am -
informative and thought provoking.
Ahmad sheikh
October 9, 2015 at 8:50 am -
Well done Fatima! U r very right that we need to be clear exactly where our understanding of faith departs from that of our adversary.
I hope the rationale behind this ongoing war, gets clear someday.
October 9, 2015 at 9:05 am -
Dear Fatima
your statement “The Islamic state fights the Islamist militancy on seemingly different perceptions about faith and requirements of faith. ” is quite fuzzy and confused as well. Because this so called Islamic militancy is against weak and vulnerable Muslims, praying in mosques and shopping in bazars.
I do’nt agrre with your label “Islamic militancy”… there is no concept of militancy in Islam. Jihad is an activity directed by state and you can rebel against state only when it prohibits you to proclaim your faith, pray in mosques or pay zakat or go for Hajj etc. There is no such compulsion from state on the citizens.
People are free to practice the religion even the militants.
There is always a provision in every society to treat and/or uproot its sick elements.
Our army is operating like a surgeon to get rid of sick organ of the society.
October 10, 2015 at 9:47 pm -
I totally agree with the core argument of your post: “We need to be clear exactly where our understanding of faith departs from that of our adversary. It seems that the point of departure here is not the difference of sect, or belief, but the desire to impose one’s ideas on others. This is what we need to counter. And hence, imposing a counter narrative from above would never help mitigate extremism – instead it may only add to it.”
The current half-hearted attempt by the state to pacify non-state militant actors by countering their narrative is at best a knee-jerk reaction without much thought behind it. Instead of micro-managing such sensitive security threats, the state can adopt a facilitative role for fostering genuine dialogue through national television, public sector universities and government funded think tanks. An open conducive environment is the best our state can offer to its battered and confused populace. Most importantly, the segregated and silenced segments of our society need to be given due space in the public sphere. If difference is allowed to result in distance, healing will not come.
October 11, 2015 at 8:54 am -
I think, quite clearly, the author was treading carefully here and not trying to conflate ‘Islamic’ with ‘Islamist’. She used the term ‘Islamist militancy’ which obviously refers to the violent actions of politically ambitious Muslim vigilantes who have mushroomed since the colonial times. Islam was definitely not being implicated for their deviant views and actions or maligned in any other way.
Her argument is logical and I expressed my total agreement with it for the reason that: (1) merely attending to violent manifestations of extremist ideologies is just a cosmetic procedure, nothing more – violent radicalization is preceded by cognitive radicalization and both need to be accorded equal consideration; (2) countering cognitive radicalization involves dialogue and dissemination of ideas for fomenting a non-violent inclusive social ethos – to that end, state can only assume a facilitative role to ensure that all voices are included and intelligentsia and the wider-public arrive at a common and consolidated national narrative.
These arguments do not negate the need for using force against militants who refuse to become non-violent, rather the objective is to assert the importance of deftly dealing with dangerous ideas that make violence possible.
– Sohaib Ali
October 12, 2015 at 4:09 pm -
Thank you all for your comments. Sohaib , I do agree that the term Islamist ( not Islamic) militancy should be replaced with a more appropriate term .Your ideas about Islamic militancy and jihad make perfect sense but this is your interpretation/ understanding/perception of the terms , or they represent the interpretation/ understanding/perception of dominant Sunni tradition . Clearly there are others who interpret these terms differently ( for political gain or whatever reason) , so there is this difference of understanding / interpretation of religion … I suppose you do agree that the militant ideas ( which are propagated in terms of religion) can only be countered in an environment which allows open debate on religious issues , which promotes tolerance for difference of opinion … academic debate on religious matters is a valuable tradition we must revive …….creating an inclusive, open environment in Pakistan is a key to sustaining the gains of the military operation underway . A surgery is successful when it is followed by a long term plan towards full recovery.
Follow Dr. An-Na'im
Contact
Abdullahi A. An-Na'im
Charles Howard Candler Professor of Law
Emory University
1301 Clifton Road Atlanta, Georgia 30322-2770 USA
Email: aannaim [at] emory [dot] edu & futureofsharia [at] gmail [dot] com
Fax: 404-712-8605
Subscribe to the Future of Shari'a Blog
Recent Comments
Featured Publications