Last week, Dawn published an article I wrote about Dr. Tahir ul-Qadri‘s 600-page fatwa against terrorism. The issue in general has generated a lot of debate. Below, Tariq Tufail, who is based in Karachi, presents a different perspective on the topic:
Dr. Tahir ul-Qadri, a Pakistani Sunni scholar has issued a fatwa against terrorism. While there is no doubt that this is an important step to dispel the notion that the clergy has been silent on the issue of terrorism, the fatwa has sparked a debate as to whether it will really have an impact on the vulnerable section of our population: the young impressionable jihadis. Readers have pointed out that being a moderate cleric, Tahir ul-Qadri simply does not have the appeal nor the popularity to influence the Jihadis in any meaningful manner. Kalsoom has pointed out that the fatwa can be used as “the focal point for a strategic communications campaign” to counter terrorism.
I am of the opinion that the discussion about the Fatwa is irrelevant and it addresses the wrong problem.
People who analyze the effectiveness of Dr Tahir ul-Qadri’s fatwa start with the basic assumption:
1. There are poor youth who are susceptible to radicalization by people who interpret religion to suit their own ends
2. The youth then get radicalized and commit terrorism, bombings and killings
3. This phenomenon can be countered by enlightened clergy addressing this wrong interpretation of religion
I am going to counter the basic assumption by pointing out the flaws in this simplistic argument. Let us start with (3):
This phenomenon can be countered by enlightened clergy addressing this wrong interpretation of religion.
While a 600 page erudite opinion by a respected scholar can go a long way into clarifying the role of violence in our religion, this strategy is likely to devolve into arguments and counter arguments about minor points of theology and Islamic jurisprudence with an audience of zero paying any attention. Even if the anti-terrorist faction wins this erudite argument, it will be relegated to a dusty bookshelf of an obscure library. At best, Tahir ul-Qadri’s fatwa can be used as a fig leaf by Muslims to counter the notion that Muslims are pro-terrorism.
Impoverished youth are susceptible to being radicalized by firebrand clerics.
This assumption casts youth as the raw material and firebrand mullahs as the facilitators for terrorism. This assessment is either patently false or is misguided. In my opinion there are three crucial enablers of terrorism. Without addressing these, we will perpetually be victims of terror.
1. Our intelligence agencies are set up to fund, train and shelter proxy groups who advance our political agenda (strategic depth in Afghanistan, Kashmir and other objectives in India). The quest for plausible denial with regards to the activities of these groups mean that our agencies do not exert tight control. This means that beyond a point, the various groups choose their own agenda. It is indisputable that we supported Afghan mujahideen during the Afghan jihad, particularly the Haqqani and Hekmatyar groups. We have funded and trained the Khalistan group and Kashmir groups, as Hamid Gul claimed on several occasions. We have used mujahideen as our proxies in Kashmir – Musharraf admitted this on the record. Our intelligence agencies are aiding LeT, JeM and numerous other Punjabi groups currently.
2. Our politicians tacitly encourage terrorism (mostly as long as it is practiced outside our borders) or feign their helplessness (common refrain being that “Pakistan itself is a victim of terrorism” and “terrorist hands are strengthened if India does not resolve outstanding issues”). This is either because of helplessness against our security agencies, or because they do not want to give up their leverage against India. There was nary a whimper of protest when Jamaat-ud-Dawa held a huge rally last month promising jihad, killings and murder against Indians.
3. Our judiciary is an ineffective instrument against terrorism. The only practiced way of countering terrorism in Pakistan is to kill the terrorists. There has been no record of terrorists being prosecuted fairly and punished in a court of law. Furthermore, there are several cases of our Judiciary playing to the gallery, like when Hafiz Saeed was set free because the court famously found that since India does not honor UN resolutions, Pakistan is not bound to honor UN directives marking Pakistani citizens as terrorists.
4. Our society selectively renounces violence. We hate violence when a bomb goes off in Lahore, but ignore or even support when a few go off in India (or spend inordinate amount of time arguing why it is justified). To those who disagree, I wish to point out two things:
(a) Support for terrorism (as was pointed out by Christine Fair’s study) is higher among the middle class, the upper class and the educated class — in short the informed and “enlightened” class.
(b) Where were the articles or debates when Mumbai was being attacked by our nationals? Or when Mumbai was attacked in 1993 by a spate of 13 serial bombs which killed over 200? Or when the Charar-e-Sharif was burned down in Kashmir by Mast Gul, who subsequently received a hero’s welcome in Pakistan?
We are victims of terrorism because branches of our country and our society either at worst support terrorism or at best ignore terrorism. We simply express anguish for the targets. Any solution that addresses the terrorism problem should therefore avoid analyzing terrorism through an Islamic lens. That is bandaging a finger when the problem is collective insanity.
Before I end, here is some food for thought: How many Pakistani readers of this blog wholeheartedly support the idea that Pakistani blood, treasure and effort should be spent killing, arresting and convicting Pakistani citizens and other terrorists who operate from our soil and who target Iran, Afghanistan and India?
- If not, are you truly against terrorism or just against your loved ones getting killed by terrorists?
- If not, will a fatwa change your world view?
The contribution is the sole opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the opinion of CHUP. If you would like to contribute a piece to CHUP, please email Kalsoom at changinguppakistan[at]gmail[dot]com. Pieces should be no longer than 800 words please. For past contributions, click here.
[...] Pakistani Sunni scholar has issued a fatwa against terrorism. While […] Read more at: CHUP! – Changing Up Pakistan basic assumption, bombings, clergy, cleric, communications campaign, different perspective, dr [...]
tariq:
this is not the first nor will it be the last fatwa…
whether it will become a fig leaf or will have some mild effect is hard to tell at this moment
the takfiris doctrine has to be countered
the suicide bombers who kill and maim civilians in the name of the same god, prophet and book have to be ‘de-programmed’
that said, how can that be done?
a really excellent article. The question really is what, if anything, can force the Pakistani establishment to re-assess its policy of supporting terrorism abroad.
Unless the silent majority does not wake up, what is the point in issuing fatwas. This is certainly not the first and not the last fatwa issued for terrorists. Due to these actions every 8th minute there is some sort of violence in the province of Punjab. We can not become immune to violence but have to defeat it.
Perhaps this fatwa will serve a different purpose. There is so much pseudo scholarship in the name of Islam. For me, as a Muslim, it was important for my own peace to read a scholarly doctrinal negation of terrorism.
Tilsim,
That was the point in the article I wrote – that it’s not so much that it’s another fatwa, but how it can be implemented to serve a different purpose (see a few posts down).
The important aspect of this fatwa is that it can be used as a focal point to curb the terrorism. If we get into the itsy-bitsy details of everything, I am sure anyone can find something wrong with the sanest of things. The simple fact is that suicide attacks are illegal religiously, morally and ethical and that should sum up the debate.
Tariq I couldn’t have agreed more but taking rabia’s point forward what measures can be taken to control military establishment’s misguided adventurism. We are talking about decades of blunders, proxy wars, harbouring of militancy, using religion when required, maintaining exclusive military-industrial nexus with USA etc. I understand a relatively less corrupt political government with a strong mandate can ideally check military excesses but a political party with a clean sheet is still a far fetched proposition.
Also Military establishment remains highly suspicious towards India resulting in all their policies, strategies (usually blunders) remaining strictly india-centric which I feel is not out of genuine security concerns. It has more to do with creating the essential need of having a powerful enemy, building and promoting delusions about sinister indian-israel nexus, fabricating myths about Pak army being the last and most powerful fortress of Islam (demented ranting of Zaid Hamid) and the need for countering this enemy at the expense of economic social development of Pakistan. No Indian threat, minimal defence concerns and less military spending. An opposite scenario ideally serves to our military concerns.
My question remains what we do to change this mentality. These are not genuine fears but created fears. Lets just if in next 10 to 15 years we are lucky enough to elect a credible political party with public backing, what can they possibly do to keep military establishment in check?
From my viewpoint the issuance of Fatwa alone won’t do much good, as many clerics have in the past issued such decrees, what is needed that the crux of such fatwa’s are made public through our media and radio so that the masses should know that Islam does not endorse violence in any form. We have to use technology for our benefit as clearly the militants have use radio, cd’s and all forms of technology for their propagation of ideas
…and another minor quibble
why do we need a ‘fatwa’ to stir from our slumber?…is the unabashed killing of civilians and the ensuing mayhem not enough?
Incisive..awesome points. Agast at why everybody/anybody need a fatwa for a clearly logical:
Anyways, always good to remember that Western countries began to make real progress after they separated religion from state.
“Love thy neighbour as thyself”. Not a very complicated thingy.Nature gave us holy books and brain..when in doubt use brain..
Very good post. Please present this as an op-ed for the National newspapers in Pakistan or even in the US.
I did have one small quibble with your analysis. I don’t think the Middle Class/Enlightened class support/justification for terrorism is a sufficient or even an important condition for creating a climate where terrorism prospers.
You raised the interesting example of the Bombay blast (I refuse to call it Mumbai) I was in India during the Bombay blast and the Muslim middle class/educated class in India was actually pretty supportive of the blast as it was seen as revenge for the Bombay riots where a lot of Muslims were massacred by the Shiv Sena with tacit support of the status apparatus. My point is that crude ‘blood for blood’ tribal blood lusting is not uncommon for much of the third world where the value of human life is cheap. However, support for Dawood Ibrahim (I remember countless aunties and uncles praising him openly albeit with no Hindus around) did not translate into Indian Muslim terrorists setting up bombs all over India.
The Pakistani middle class qualified support for the terrorist attacks (for example, stating that they only attack the state machinery which has declared war on them anyway) will not amount to much in the absence of the much more important recent historic events and institutional factors that you have pointed to in this piece.
I think another disturbing trend which is little larger than Pakistan is the spread of a pernicious cultural meme in the larger Muslim world where suicide bombings have become an acceptable way for resisting/fighting whatever cause which has any remote connection to the US/West. Since 9-11, suicide bombings have entered the consciousness of the Muslim masses around the World in such a way that whereas before 9-11, they were used only sparingly in Chechnya and mostly by the LTTE, now they have become the number one choice for Jihadists around the world. Every report of a suicide bombing anywhere in the Muslim world for whatever unrelated cause makes it that much more acceptable and the meme becomes bigger and bigger as it feeds on itself.
Just a small and probably irrelevant opinion on this issue. The people who are likely to support religious extremism can neither be categorized in one particular economic class nor be labeled according to their educational backgrounds, a point that was crucially raised by the author of this post. However, what is very important to understand is that each person who supports or participates in the perpetuation of these acts does hold a certain religious opinion, an opinion that enables him to come up with whatever hodge-podge rationalization that works as his/her justification for violence in a sense.
In my own estimate, a lot of the people who are openly militant (and not just the taliban but also sectarian outfits or what shapiro and fair label as askari tanzeems) tend to come from a particular brand of Sunni Islam (not to say that Shias dont indulge in violence) which is either the Ahl-e-Sunnah or the Deobandi factions. those lying on the extreme ends of these somewhat overlapping theological schools, dont even consider Shias or Barelvis muslims. They would even go as far as justifying the bombing of civilians because these civilians are paying taxes to a government that is working against the cause of Islam (by supporting America in Afghanistan and Waziristan). Hence Tahir-ul-Qadris fatwa is like preaching to a choir in a sense…hes a barelvi scholar…whos support is limited within the barelvi school in pakistan. A lot of urbanite Punjabis or Karachiites normally consider Barelvis as lesser Muslims. In short his fatwa is not going to work in convincing either the overt supporters or those that participate in these attacks.
Good points re: militants endorsing a similar ideology even if they come from different backgrounds. That’s why I was proposing a communications campaign that dealt with these different nuances, whether it be local mullahs to messaging in internet forums. Ahem, just making my point. Tariq’s post was great though.
Jaydev, is 100% right.
Tariq’s post is good in that it highlights the causes of our troubles. However, it does not point to ways to resolve the suicide bombing issue in the Pakistani context.
This fatwa is not the whole answer in fighting terrorism (I don’t think it ever claimed that for itself). However it’s part of the drip drip drip fight back against the daily mass brainwashing that continues to occur in the madrassas and in our schools in the name of Islam. The sad situation is that our public and politicians these days respond mostly to arguments based around religion. So it is religious arguments that need to be used to counter the influence of extremist forces in the first instance. Many Pakistanis won’t internalise non-religious arguments because in their narrow world view secular, common sense or moral arguments without reference to Islam are associated with kufr. This is the ground reality.
Over time the opinions of our agencies, politicians, judiciary and society will respond to an ideological fight back. The terrorists know this and that is why they are now murdering both religious leaders as well as the more secularly minded figures that push back. I accept that pertinent questions remain around the most effective methods to fight what is first and foremost an ideological war within Islam. However the intellectual and moral foundation of the fight back has to be laid first through Fatwas such as these.
Tahir ul Qadri is from the Barelvi school of thought which is pretty much as tame as a rabbit. Thus, as Umair pointed out, his fatwa has pretty much no merit. No fatwa will unless it comes from Deobanda ulema or Ahl-e-Hadees ulema, who are often seen as ideologically closer to Saudi Arabia or the Taliban-style Islam. Interesting, the Darul-Uloom-e-Deoband (the main Deobandi madrassa) in India did give out a fatwa on this topic but received little attention here. It will be a more impactful tool than Qadri’s fatwa if only Deobandi madrassas and ulemas in Pakistan pick it up and use it.
Its funny how the followers of other sects continue to hide the filth of their own beliefs and ready to condemn others in cyber world. Who says Shia,Agha Khani and other sects Mullahs and their followers are not extremists? I came across the following post about the filth and extremism promoted by Agha Khanis,Shias and Barelvis. Specially the womanizer Peer of Ismailies.
kadnan.com/blog/2009/07/05/mrnadeemfparacha-what-about-these-religious-exhbitionist/