18 Jun 2011, NewAgeIslam.

Com How Indian Muslims see Pakistan

By Aakar Patel Concerns about growing religious extremism in the neighbouring Islamic republic have been growing since 2001 How is Pakistan seen by India's Muslims? Since 2001, the view has turned increas ingly negative. Let's have a look at such views in three very different Indian p ublications. One is the conservative Urdu daily Inquilab, read almost exclusivel y by Muslims. The second, the liberal online paper New Age Islam, published in U rdu and English. Lastly, the Hindu extremist Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's organ Panchjanya, published in Hindi and read almost exclusively by Hindus. "The nation should have known the consequences of using terror to combat India. The world was not unaware of its breeding of Al Qaeda and the Taliban (sanpolon ko doodh pilaya). Now the snakes are poised to swallow Pakistan (nigalne ke dar pe hain)" In India's biggest Urdu newspaper Inquilab, Khalid Sheikh wrote under the headli ne ' Pakistan ka kya hoga?' He felt Pakistan's current problems were the result of its own doing (" jaisi karni waisi bharni"). The nation should have known the consequences of using terror to combat India, he said. The world was not unawar e of its breeding of Al Qaeda and the Taliban (" sanpolon ko doodh pilaya"). Now the snakes were poised to swallow Pakistan (" nigalne ke dar pe hain"). Pakistan's leaders were unconcerned (" kaanon par joon tak nahin rengi"). But th e world was watching it. The ease with which the Taliban had attacked and destro yed the P3C Orions in Karachi had worried America, Sheikh wrote. It was now conc erned about how safe Pakistan's atom bombs, which numbered between 70 and 120, w ere. In 2001 Pakistan was viewed as a failed state (" nakaam riasat"). After Osama bi n Laden's killing, it won't be long before it is seen as a rogue state (" badmaa sh riasat mein tabdeel hote dair nahin lagegi"). At the time of Partition, it had been predicted by the wise (" sahib-e-baseerat" ) that Pakistan would find it difficult to exist (" apna wajood rakhna dushwar h oga"). Sheikh quoted Maulana Azad as writing in 'India Wins Freedom' that Pakist an would be unable to find its bearings (" Pakistan kabhi paedar aur mustahkam n a reh sakega"). Its foreign policy consisted of hating India (" Hindustan dushma ni") and pleasing America (" Amrika khushnudi"). "A market research company surveyed Pakistanis to ask them what sort of governme nt they wanted. The results were unsurprising. The majority of Pakistanis picked khilafat, for which the Taliban are also agitating. How is it possible, then, t hat anybody could defy the Taliban?" The writer thought Pakistan's insistence that relations with India would improve if the Kashmir issue was settled was untrue (" dhakosla hai"). Pakistan was an unreliable neighbour (" ghair-mu'atbar padosi") which was a master of creating t ension. If Kashmir was resolved, something else would be conjured up. Sheikh praised Nawaz Sharif's statement that Pakistan had to stop hating India i f it had to progress. US President Barack Obama had said the same thing and Amer ica ought to, as France had, terminate military assistance to Pakistan. Answering the question he had first raised, Sheikh said it was difficult to say what would become of Pakistan because it seemed beyond redemption (" aise mulk k e bare mein kya kaha jaye jahan aawe ka aawa hi bigda hua hai"). In New Age Islam, Dr Shabbir Ahmed wrote on the blasphemy law under the headline ' Pakistan mein tauhin-e-Rasul (PBUH) ka wahshiana qanoon'. Ahmed said Pakistan was obsessed by this issue (" hysteria mein jakda hua hai"). Narrow sectarianis m had divided the nation, and every sect thought of others as faithless and hate d them.

This frenzy was plunging Pakistan into a state of barbarism (" jahiliyat mein gh ota zan hai"). Ahmed feared Pakistan might succumb to civil war (" aisa na ho ke Pakistan khana jangi mein gharq ho jae"). He said Pakistanis had divided Islam (" deen ko tukdon mein baant diya hai"), an d quoted verses from the Holy Quran on the Romans (30:32) to support his argumen t. It was unfortunate that the majority of Pakistanis, including the educated, w ere in agreement with disagreeable mullahs. Even intellectuals and lawyers had s igned on (" scholars aur wukla ne tauhin-e-Rasul (PBUH) qanoon ki puri himayat k i hai"). People believed that punishing blasphemy with death was law in five out of 54 Is lamic states, but when asked, only two could be named: Pakistan and Saudi Arabia . It was difficult to name other states with such harsh laws, though Afghanistan , Sudan and Iran came to mind. Ahmed wrote that the Holy Quran prescribed no punishment for blasphemy. No one c ould be ignorant of the clarity of the ayat la ikraha fi ad-deen" (there is no comp ulsion in religion) because Allah had sent this message to all humanity. This pr inciple was independent and absolute (" is usool mein kisi tarah ki ki riayyat b hi nahin hai"). With many examples, Ahmed pointed to the pardoning and gentle na ture of Islam and of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), which he felt was being distorted by Pakistan's law. In Panchjanya, the RSS Hindi weekly, Muzaffar Hussain wrote on May 22 under the headline Adhikansh Pakistani Islami khilafat ke paksh mein" (A majority of Pakistan is favours khilafat). He reported the findings of an opinion poll. The market research company MEMRB h ad surveyed Pakistanis to ask them what sort of government they wanted. Did they want khilafat as prescribed by Islam? They were also offered the option of tyra nny (" anya vikalpon mein janta se poocha hai ke kya woh tanashahi pasand kareng e?"). Hussain wrote that by this was meant martial law, and it was related to so mething found commonly in Muslim nations. This was the presence of sheikhs and k ings (" Islami deshon mein aaj bhi raja aur sheikh hain") who ruled through line age for generations. The last option offered was democracy "as the world knew it ". The results were unsurprising to Hussain. The majority of Pakistanis picked khil afat, for which the Taliban were also agitating. How was it possible, then, that anybody could defy the Taliban? Neutral Pakistanis (" Tattastha log") were merely being realistic in staying sil ent against extremism. Why should anyone endanger their life by opposing khilafa t? (" Islami khilafat ka virodh karne ki himmat kaun kar sakta hai?") The survey was conducted in 30 cities and 60 villages. Those in favour of khilaf at were 56%. These people said that Pakistan's creation was rooted in religion a nd the state should therefore be Islamic. Those favouring dictatorship were 22%. They felt Pakistan had progressed only under military strongmen (" jo pragati h ui hai woh keval sainik tanashahon ke karan hui hai"). Only 11% of Pakistanis pr eferred secular democracy. These figures did not vary significantly between urba n respondents and those in villages, those who conducted the survey said. There was some difference however with respect to the residents of Karachi, Lahore, Ra walpindi and Islamabad. In these cities, 40% preferred martial law and 39% prefe rred khilafat. In Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, those who wanted khilafat were 60%. In Balochistan and Sindh, about 35% preferred martial law. The survey did not vary much by age. Those between 16 and 60 preferred khilafat by 66%. Surprisingly, both the illiterate and the very literate approved of khil afat. Hussain felt that the collapse of the Turkish caliphate had left Muslim nations in disarray (" Islami jagat titar-bitar ho gaya hai"). Both Bhutto and Gen Zia h ad wanted Saudi Arabia's king to be crowned caliph of all Muslims. Aakar Patel is a director with Hill Road Media, Mumbai Source: The Friday Times, Lahore URL: http://newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamRadicalIslamismAndJihad_1.aspx?ArticleID= 4857

Forward to a friend

Print

COMMENTS 6/21/2011 10:40:21 AM Mike Ghouse Until the people of Pakistan start speaking for themselves, change is a forlorn hope. An appeal for the release of Asia Bibi was placed for signature, very few signat ures have come through.... The reason was in their arrogance that if you remove the apology to Christians, we will sign... even if it were done, they would not have signed. Truth stands on its own. The support for the killing of Salman Taseer was disgusting Appeal for Justice http://www.petitiononline.com/Asiabibi/petition.html

Salman Taseer

6/19/2011 1:37:14 AM esar01@aol.com At least Mullahs have learned to do one thing right to achieve their goal. Instead of using sword they used indoctrination which is more powerful and more everlasting than sword. Syed Rizvi

6/18/2011 10:07:38 PM satwa gunam Logic of mullah is very simple. First educate the new generation with only the m edieval Islamic views and the remaining will be done by the new generation. Exac tly that is what is done in Pakistan. It will take long time for the secular e ducation to seep inside the personalities of this generation to think liberal an d outside the diktat of the mullah extremism.

6/18/2011 1:41:37 PM Ghulam Mohiyuddin Distancing ourselves from Pakistani mullahism is not enough. We Indian Muslims m ust openly and eloquently denounce their extremism and their blasphemy laws. We must strongly advocate secularism and the true subcontinental version of Islam, which says, "Live and let live."