Showing posts with label Muslim. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Muslim. Show all posts

Sunday, September 16, 2012

Violence is not the Answer to the Childish Attempt Against the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)


By Arshi Saleem Hashmi, SAVE’s Chapter Leader in Pakistan

Arshi Saleem Hashmi
The childish attempt by a film maker to humiliate the sanctity of an Abrahamic religion should be condemned. Like many attempts in the past where some people in their own capacity tried to ridicule Islam and particularly the last prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was reflection of their own narrow thinking. This film does not amount to what majority of the people belonging to different faiths in the west think; this particular film is a brain child of an ignorant who tried to capitalize the anti-Muslim feelings.  It is important to understand that just like the obscurantists who do not respect other religions are not the representative of the Muslim all over the world, these people, who have been trying to ridicule the foundation of Muslim faith, are not the representative of the tolerant tradition of the western societies. One of the basic tenets of our religion Islam is to respect all the religions especially Abrahamic religions. It is not widely known in the west that a Muslim is supposed to respect and believe in all the prophets and the books that were sent from the God.  Majority of the Muslim believe in tolerance and understanding. Having said that, any insult to the prophet Muhammad would not be accepted by any Muslim, the extremists might have reacted violently which is wrong, but it did hurt even those who do not considered themselves as strictly practicing Muslims. It is more about faith being targeted then about extremist narrative of present day Islamists. 

Protesters in Tahrir Square carry a poster of Osama Bin Laden, (c) Reuters
In Pakistan, religio-political parties protested against the film, Jamat-e-Islami, Jamaatu Dawa and other groups protested in different cities in Pakistan. The government of Pakistan denounced this and issued a statement against the film. The local provincial assemblies also discussed and issued statements condemning the film. Compared to Libya and other Arab countries, protests here were nonviolent mostly though they did try to reach to US Embassy in Islamabad but due to tight security they were controlled.  The instant reaction in the Arab world was due to the obvious reasons that when it comes to Islamist jihadists, action against them is justified but when attempts to humiliate the most sacred personality of Islam; it is categorized as freedom of expression. 

In Pakistan, the film has generated interesting debates and TV channels are showing many programs where the discourse is whether the hate speech in Muslim countries target or ridicule the sacred personalities of other faiths or they focus more on the policies and politics of the western countries who happened to be belonging to Christian faith.  So the dichotomy here is Muslim antagonism is due to the policies of the West particularly the US while the views that have expressed in film is focused on the most sacred Personality in Islam. A positive sign in Pakistan mainstream media is to initiate debate on this issue and majority of the people though emotionally hurt, are listening to these discussions. Any violent expression would still be a minority act just like the making of the film is a minority expression in the US.  The gist of the debate is that western freedom of expression is not universal and should not be considered as a universal definition. The point is also being raised that despite all the hate speech and violent expressions against western policies, no attempts has ever been done to make a film on ridiculing Jesus Christ (PBUH) or Moses (PBUH, the West should also consider the way freedom of expression is defined in Muslim traditions.

Majority of Pakistanis believe in respect for all the Prophets in Abrahamic religions and they do not support violence but just like anti-Islam  minority views in the US and the West, minority views in the Muslim world will continue to react violently as they would interpret it as an attempt approved by the US in order to provoke extremism. The life of our holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the great example where in his lifetime he ignored harshest critics who tried to humiliate him, ridiculed his message and tried to hurt him physically. We should learn from our beloved prophet, we can raise voice against this act, we can protest with the US officially. Violence is not what Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) taught us. 

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Has the Arab Spring Truly Benefited Women Thus Far?


By Evita Mouawad

Women show the flags of Syria, Tunisia, Yemen, Egypt and Libya painted on their palms
in the southern city of Taiz, December 2011.Credit: Reuters/Mohamed al-Sayaghi


Of all the revolutions witnessed during the Arab Spring, the Tunisian transition was considered to be by far the most promising. Compared to Egypt, which endured harsh military rule for 18 months after the fall of Mubarak, Tunisia’s political change came relatively swiftly, and in October 2011, a new Constituent Assembly was elected and charged with rewriting the constitution. Women also gained an estimated 23 percent of seats in the new assembly, surpassing a great number of neighboring countries in the region.

Tunisia was often described as one of the Arab world’s most liberal countries, but it also has a long history of friction over the role of religion in society. Secular voters were especially alarmed when Ennahda, a formerly-banned Islamic party, won 41% of the total vote in the first free elections in some 25 years since Ben Ali took power by military coup.

Wary of the world’s skepticism towards Islamists at the time, the party presented itself as a modern and democratic Muslim party and looked toward the Turkish political system as a possible model to follow. Even though Ennahda has expressed support for women's rights and gender equality, the party only appointed two women in top positions. Their most famous female member, Souad Abdel Rahim, often portrayed by the media as a modern Muslim woman, has repeatedly stated that Ennahda will never suppress women’s rights by legalizing polygamy or rendering the headscarf mandatory.

Nonetheless, recent developments in Tunisia have sparked angry demonstrations. Thousands of women took to the streets of Tunis last week to protest an article from the draft of the new constitution. The proposed legislation describes women as complementary to men in the family and associates to men in the development of the country. Activists fear this new wording could lead to a decline in women’s rights in the future, some of them are even demanding that the language from the 1956 constitution be used instead, as it holds men and women equal.

Tunisian women demonstrating against gender inequality article
from draft of new constitution, August 2012


As for the other emerging Arab Spring democracies, Libya and Egypt are also facing challenges when it comes to women’s rights and their integration in the new political systems. Last month in Libya, women gained an estimated 33 seats out of 80 party seats. This awarded them with approximately 17 percent of the National Assembly, which is far more promising than the mere 2 percent of seats that women are currently holding in Egypt’s new parliament. Nonetheless, the Libyan women’s victory was largely due to quotas that were set during the elections. Some analysts have even argued that women would have never gotten this much representation if election regulations favoring them were not introduced.

It remains to be seen whether the women who have stepped foot into these transitional governments will truly have decision-making power, especially when it comes to advancing women’s status in their countries. However, the most important result of the Arab revolutions remains that the women who led them have realized the influence they can have on their governments and societies, and are henceforth prepared to make their strident voices heard when their rights are at risk.

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Muslims, not Arabs - By Arshi Saleem Hashmi

Since the 1970s, many factors have combined to make Pakistan a fertile ground for the Wahhabi creed exported by Saudi Arabia. How might the next generation of Pakistanis change this? By Arshi Saleem Hashmi (Published in the Friday Times, Pakistan's weekly Independent Newspaper)

SAVE Sister Arshi Saleem Hashmi


C. G. Jung beautifully describes the synthesizing Indo-Persian culture that historically shaped Muslim identity in the subcontinent in these words:
"The Taj symbolized an incredible flowering of the "delicate secret of the rose gardens of Shiraz and the silent patios of Arabian palaces... in the rich Indian earth"

- (Civilization in Transition, the Collective Works of C.G.Jung Vol. 10. P. 519-520)

The confusion over the Arabist shift with the Islamization process has led to the monolithic world view derived from Islamic orthodoxy and has become the guiding principle for many radical young minds in Pakistan. In Pakistan, our dilemma has been that domestic and international politics as well as societal issues are articulated in a purely religious idiom. Such Islamic indoctrination emphasizes that political and social developments are shaped primarily by the conflict-based interaction between Islam and other religions, especially Hinduism, Judaism and Christianity. Instead of emphasizing the notion of Pakistan as a nation state based on cultural and religious pluralism, ideas like Islamic universalism, militancy and "Islam versus the rest" are highlighted by radical religious groups which have affected the psyche of the whole nation.

The Zia regime linked Arabism with Islam, not realizing or deliberately ignoring the fact that Islam is a religion, while "Arabism" is more of a cultural notion. "Islamization" of the society through "Arabization" was considered the right policy by the regime at that time. To ensure that the next generation of young Pakistanis was full of Islamic zeal and "well informed" of their glorious past, education was made the first casualty of this experiment.

Though the secular leadership of the Pakistan Movement emphasized the Muslim community, it never intended to create a theocratic Sunni state. The early death of Mohammad Ali Jinnah left the question of Islam's role in society unresolved. Pakistani leaders have frequently used religion to define state ideology. Historian Ayesha Jalal argues that this has led to Islam actually becoming a "divisive force in so far as it is being utilized by the state to deny people's rights or even to deny diversity."

Pakistan's constant socio-political upheavals have led to disillusionment among the masses. The youth is unable to see a promising future, and hence tries to attain solace in religion; and that is where radical religious organizations exploit them. It is historically true that a strong sense of grievance has reinforced Islam's role as a medium for asserting identity by its followers.

During the Cold War, while the state was defining religion for us, educational institutions under the guideline provided by the authorities were endorsing a false perception that Islam was spread through the sword (waging Jihad against infidels). Further, public opinion was made to reflect the idea that Arabism and Islam are complementary and mutually reinforcing. In their drive towards homogeneity and authenticity of Islam, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries and the recipients of their money (non-Arab Islamic societies) equally emphasized 'Arabization' as the norm, the pure and ideal form of Islam to be followed by Muslims.

It is interesting that initially, the Sunni Bralevi groups were encouraged against progressive, liberal parties in order to create the "Islamic character" of the nation that was "lost "due to Bhutto's social democracy. But as they say, no one can survive without money for long, and neither did these groups.

The government needed money, and Saudi Arabia provided wealth with only one caveat: to encourage Wahhabi ideology in the Pakistan/Afghanistan region. One reason for this was to "serve" the religion whereas the other was purely geo-political, as Saudi Arabia wanted to have its influence in the region to counter Shiite Iran. The Arabi versus Ajami war was fought on our grounds. The US administration was satisfied as the Soviets were contained through Saudi Arabia without the need of a single US soldier on ground.

Historically, Wahhabism had never taken root in the region because it prohibited a lot of practices that were common to South Asian life. Wahhabism was largely confined to the Arabian Peninsula until the 1960s, when the Saudi monarchy gave refuge to radical members of the Muslim Brotherhood fleeing persecution in Nasser's Egypt. The isolated Wahhabi creed of the Saudi religious establishment and the Salafi jihadist teachings of Sayyid Qutb, who denounced secular Arab rulers as unbelievers and legitimate targets of holy war (jihad), were coordinated and co-opted. Thus it was the synthesis of Wahhabi social and cultural conservatism, and Qutbist political radicalism, that produced the militant variety of Wahhabist political Islam that eventually produced al-Qaeda.

During the 1970s, Wahhabi clerics encouraged the spread of their ideology into Saudi universities and mosques, because it was seen as a barrier to the threat of cultural Westernization and the spread of the corruption that accompanied the 1970s oil boom. The diversion that the royal family seized upon was the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Wahhabism gained considerable influence in the Muslim world following a tripling in the price of oil in the mid-1970s.

The new Islamic identity was then the steady process of transformation from a secular, inclusive and an adaptive form of Islam to a more textual, ritualistic and exclusive one guided by exogenous forces, as ideas, practices and finances flowed in from the Arab world. The transformation brought about conflicts - not only within Islam with regard to its correct interpretation and desirable way of life, but also among Muslims and other countries.

Pakistan continued to grapple with the question of its identity - whether to be a secular democratic country for Muslims and other religious minorities or an Islamic state. Even now most Pakistanis remain vague about their faith. To most, Islam is intermixed with folk practices and Sufism.

Moderate non-Arab Muslims all over the world and Pakistanis in particular need to work towards reinventing a true synthesis of culture and religion rather than being influenced by Arabization to prove their true Islamic credentials. De-Arabization can help Pakistan ease relations with its immediate South and Central Asian neighbors with whom relations have been severely affected due to the deliberate association with Saudi Arabia.

Interestingly, the more Pakistan tries to associate itself with the Arab world, the more it is reminded of its non-Arab credentials and its South Asian roots. The crisis in Pakistan has exposed the Arab lack of empathy vis-a-vis violent conflicts, natural disasters and health issues. Pakistan's position as a non-Arab, non Middle Eastern country that is not connected with Arab politics and culture is very clear among the Arabs. As columnist Rafia Zakaria has written: "This point, emphasized repeatedly in the coverage of Obama's speech by Al Jazeera, Al Arabiyya and other networks, should be worthy of note to Pakistanis. Not only did several Arab anchors refuse to acknowledge the refugee crisis and civil war in Pakistan as a pressing issue facing the Muslim world, they quite indifferently discarded it as something inconsequential to the Arab world."

Despite this attitude, Pakistani political-religious parties as well as radical militant groups are all praise for the "Brother Arab" countries, whose only display of brotherly attitude is showering these organizations and political parties with millions of dollars of zakat money. This should be enough to remind the so-called "Arabist" proponents that for Arabs, South Asian Muslims are just another underdeveloped community, which needs to be purified by an Arabist shift in their culture.

The long-term solution to the problem of identity would require massive changes in the fundamental agents of socialization of Pakistan's polity. Pakistan at present faces the challenge of reinventing itself both at the state level as well as the societal level. More so, it needs to adopt a top-down approach to reform and reconstruct the conceptual and ideological orientation to undo the state's enforcement of a particular sect of Islam.

If society appears indifferent about the nature of religiosity, it is not because people want it that way, but because there is a great deal of confusion that can only be removed if the state starts to patronize a pluralist society. This can be done through reforming of education syllabi, media programs and free intellectual discourse on religion and culture in the Pakistani context.

The key question is this: how far will the new generation differ from the one that was lost to orthodoxy and militancy?

Click on the following Link to view the original articlehttp://www.thefridaytimes.com/beta2/tft/article.php?issue=20120413&page=28



Flash Points: Edit Schlaffer presents SAVE on CBS