Pakistan
was Islamised gradually
but when it reached a
peak in this process in
the 1980s, the country
became vaguely aware of
an extremism that the
West called fundamentalism.
When the international
media began using the
word there was an immediate
reaction against it. The
cleric and the intellectual
both thought it an attack
on Islam and began defending
Islam instead of worrying
about the growing extremism
at home. It appears that
the biggest irritant between
the West and the world
of Islam was the way the
West chose to define the
phenomenon of return to
Islam among Muslim societies.
The West harked back to
Christian fundamentalism,
European and American,
to find the vocabulary
for a brand of Islam that
it feared. On the side
of Muslims, there was
also an inability to understand
what the West really wanted
to say. At the level of
cultural experience all
Muslims were not yet ready
to see why religion must
be separated from the
functioning of the state.
Almost no Muslim, liberal
or conservative, was willing
to concede that secularism
was a valid political
concept. (Confusion prevailed
because a Western secularist
may be rationalist without
believing in religion;
in Muslim societies, all
secularists are believers).
The liberal Muslim was
under pressure from the
fanatic with whom he had
not yet learnt to disagree
at the level of ideas.
He was angry with the
West calling the world
of Islam fundamentalist.1
Pakistan's fundamentalism
was mobilised and made
sectarian by the government
of General Zia. It also
became jihadi and terrorist
with a lot of financial
support from the United
States and Saudi Arabia.
The Americans were concerned
only with winning the
war in Afghanistan and
defeating the Soviet
Union, but the Saudis
had ideological and
sectarian aims. To the
extent that jihad in
Pakistan responded to
the financial stimulus
of Saudi Arabia it became
mercenary and cannot
be discussed as a manifestation
of Islam. It is quite
certain that at the
level of the jihadi
leadership, the jihad
was motivated by financial
gains. Almost all the
jihadi leaders came
into possession of considerable
wealth, which they shared
with the state apparatus
in Pakistan and not
in sufficient measure
with the young recruits
who fought the war.
It is possible that
among the rank and file
of the jihadi youth
there was belief in
the spilling of blood
in the name of Islam
and belief in martyrdom.
The same is true of
sectarianism. The leader
who plans the killings
is working for money
but the man who actually
kills may be moved by
religious passion. There
is evidence that youth
from the crime underworld
also joined the jihad.
One has to concede that
in such cases the rank
and file too were motivated
by financial considerations.
Jihad and the consequent
'weaponisation' of Islam
have inflicted permanent
damage on civil society
and state institutions
in Pakistan.
Pakistan's
Islamic Orientation
The Pakistan Movement
was not clear about
the kind of state it
would culminate in.
The clarity that we
see today is a part
of the nation-building
process that began in
1949 with the adoption
of the Objectives Resolution
by the Constituent Assembly
charged with the task
of framing the country's
first Constitution.
Pakistan became an ideological
state on the basis of
the Muslim experience
in India. Soon after
1947, the religious
parties with strong
grassroots presence
in the cities began
challenging the vague
founding principles
of the state. Scholars
of great standing relied
on the early lineaments
of the state in Islam
in their rejectionist
rhetoric. What helped
in this was the inchoate
theory of the state
in Islamic history.
After 1949, the process
to transform Pakistan
into a religious state
ipso facto made the
clergy the guardian
of the new founding
principle. The civilian
politicians finally
gave in in 1958 and
the army began to rule
directly in Pakistan.
The army as an interest
group was brought down
in 1971 by its compulsion
to operate the state
on the basis of conflict
with India. In the next
phase, the growing power
of the clergy and the
offended post-nationalisation
industrial groups enabled
the army to stage a
comeback. The army under
General Zia combined
three interest groups:
the army, the clergy
and the industrial elite.
The army broke from
the past secular tradition
of professionalism by
adopting ideology as
its strong plank. This
gradually led to the
Islamisation of the
army and the industrial
elite. The democratic
institutions opened
up by him allowed a
fuller Islamisation
of the law followed
by Islamisation of society.
The ideological state
of Pakistan was one
among many in the third
world experiencing gradual
loss of economic viability.
Pakistan army postponed
an economic crisis by
participating in the
decade-long Afghan war
in the 1980s, assisted
financially by the United
States and Saudi Arabia.
The religious groups
gained stature and power
in this period. Islamisation
of law and society had
already given them more
power than any other
interest group. Islamisation
within the army had
dimmed the dividing
line between the clergy
and the military officers
increasingly drawn from
the country's middle
class. It was after
the creation of local
militias under religious
leaders on the pattern
of Afghanistan - for
use in the low-intensity
war in Kashmir after
1989 - that the religious
group became supreme
in Pakistan. At the
cost of internal sovereignty,
the concept of jihad
by non-state actors
was allowed. Leaders
of the jihadi militias
as 'warrior priests'
attained higher profiles
than the elected leaders.
The idea of the state
preached by the powerful
religious leaders was
utopian but it allowed
them to constantly portray
democracy as an alien
system in which only
the corrupt prospered.
Democracy was acceptable
to them only under shariah
but most clerics did
not agree completely
with the shariah enforced
by General Zia. Deprived
of real power and uncertain
of their tenure in government,
the elected leaders
took to embezzling state
funds and taking graft.
The enrichment of the
religious leaders through
even more dubious means
could not be challenged.
The state began to be
called a failing or
failed state that could
default on its debts.
Before 1947, East Pakistan
was in the grip of linguistic
nationalism centred
in West Bengal. West
Pakistan was Low Church
in terms of religion
as its incompletely
settled land was still
dominated by shrines.2
Despite the world's
biggest canal system
established by the British
to circumvent brackish
underground water, the
region had not yet surrendered
to the High Church seminary.
The countryside dominated
West Pakistan as opposed
to Central India where
the Pakistan Movement
had taken birth in the
Muslim-minority provinces.
In the Northwest, Afghanistan
was High Church, strongly
aligned with the seminary
whose graduates had
trained at Deoband in
India 3and were traditionally
aligned with the languishing
Ahle Hadith (Wahabi)
movement which had retreated
from Delhi after 1857
to Bhopal. The Pakistan
movement grew out of
its leaders' rejection
of the Khilafat Movement
literally run by the
Congress leadership.
This led to the rejection
of the Pakistan Movement
by the strong city-based
seminarian clergy. However,
because of their rivalry
with the more puritanical
Deobandis and Ahle Hadith,
the Brelvi clergy favoured
the Pakistan Movement.
In West Pakistan, the
cities had opened up
to the seminaries but
the countryside was
predominantly shrine-oriented
where mystical saints
were celebrated as a
part of the folk song
tradition.4
Since Muslim-majority
West Pakistan had not
responded enthusiastically
to the Pakistan Movement,
Muslims and Hindus celebrated
the same saints. The
Deobandis opposed the
mysticism of the shrine,
the Brelvis accepted
it. Ironically, a High
Islam non-clerical Pakistan
Movement was rejected
by the High Islam clergy
of India and accepted
by the Low Church and
was forced to govern
a predominantly Low
Church territory.
The Conversion
to High Church
After 1949, the state
started moving in the
direction of Islamisation
as a nation-building
tool. It began to realise
quite early that Islamic
law-making could not
be achieved under Low
Church conditions. The
seminary had to be taken
on board for giving
legitimacy to state
institutions. A Council
of Islamic Ideology
was soon set up which
was deliberately High
Church, dominated by
the Deobandi minority
among the clergy. Mysticism
could not be the foundation
of the ideological state.
Islamic scholars like
Dr Fazlur Rehman were
not tolerated for long
in the Council; and
the highwater mark of
the High Church dominance
came when General Zia
appointed Maulana Yusuf
Banuri the founder of
the Banuri Mosque of
Karachi as head of the
Council.5
The NWFP was traditionally
High Church because
of its cultural proximity
with Afghanistan. After
1947, the seminary there
aligned itself with
the pro-Congress National
Awami Party (NAP). It
should be interesting
to investigate how the
two parties, one secular-socialist
and the other orthodox-puritanical,
interacted in their
pro-India orientations.
The lessening of the
aggressive politics
of High Church was owed
to its adoption by the
state of Pakistan. When
the war in Afghanistan
began in 1979, the linkage
of the mujahideen with
the seminarian tradition
increased the charisma
of the seminary. The
rise of the Taliban
and the induction of
jihad by Pakistan into
its Kashmir policy,
drove the Brelvis out.
No Brelvi could go to
Afghanistan for training
because he would be
considered an infidel.
Many boys from the Brelvi
institutions had to
change over to a Deobandi
or Ahle Hadith seminary
before going to Afghanistan.
Shah Waliullah, the
18th century Muslim
thinker seems to have
inspired both liberal
and orthodox ways of
thinking in South Asia.6
His most remarkable
contribution was the
linkage he formed between
Deobandi Islam and the
Hanbali Islam of Saudi
Arabia during his sojourn
in Hijaz. The rise of
Saudi influence in Pakistan
during the Afghan jihad
against the Soviets
cemented the old nexus
further. Saudi gift
of the seed money for
General Zia's Zakat
Fund was conditional:
a significant bequest
had to be made to the
Ahle Hadith seminary
headquarters in Faisalabad,
the city from where
Al Qaeda's Abu Zubaidah
was to be arrested in
2002. Army chief Aslam
Beg was the first to
allow Deobandi seminaries
in Bahawalpur and Rahimyar
Khan so that their armed
youth could be used
as ‘second line
of defence' against
a possible Indian attack
from Rajasthan.7
The Arab sheikhs, who
enjoyed extra-territorial
rights, came to the
area for hunting rare
birds and began to fund
the seminaries, thus
allowing the rise of
the Sipah Sahaba under
an intensely anti-Shia
and anti-Iran leader,
Maulana Haq Nawaz Jhangvi.8
The Deobandi-Ahle Hadith
tradition in India had
always been coloured
with strong sectarianism.
Jihad in Pakistan brought
to the fore the dominance
of a Deobandi consensus
together with a strong
anti-Shia trend among
the main jihadi groups.
Birth of Religious
Extremism
Religious extremism
began in earnest during
the second jihad which
was the extension of
the Afghan jihad against
the Soviets to Kashmir
as a low-intensity conflict
with India after 1989.
The first jihad had
empowered the Jamaat
Islami and its Pushtun
leader, Qazi Hussain
Ahmad. The sojourn of
the Afghan jihadi leaders
in Peshawar had begun
a crucible process with
the help of Saudi money.
The High Church Afghans
mixed with the local
Deobandi consensus and
tacitly agreed to oppose
the Low Church trends
in Pakistan. It was
a 'hard' Islam Pakistanis
knew nothing about.
It came mixed with the
even tougher tribal
code called Pushtunwali
that the 'settled' Pushtuns
of Pakistan had gradually
forgotten even in the
Tribal Areas. The presence
of the Arabs - especially
the Egyptian runaways
like Al Zawahiri acted
to further radicalise
local Islam with salafi
ideals overlaid with
Qutbite concept of the
jahiliyya violence.9
The Deobandi seminaries
became powerful on receiving
their share of Zakat
from the government
of General Zia. After
1989, the empowerment
of the Deobandis took
up momentum as the jihad
in Kashmir was restricted
to Deobandis and Ahle
Hadith. The surrender
of internal sovereignty
to these militias happened
first in the NWFP and
the Tribal Areas; it
later extended to a
number of cities in
Punjab and, in particular
Karachi, where the centre
of the Deobandi consensus
emerged at the Banuri
Complex of seminaries.
Increasingly the youth
joining the jihad were
made conscious of the
fact that somehow Pakistan
had not enforced true
Islam and that Pakistanis
were living like infidels.
More animus was shown
towards the Shia community
and to some extent the
Ismailis.10
According to a report
by Islamabad's Institute
of Policy Studies, Pakistan
has 6,761 religious
seminaries where over
a million young men
are taking religious
training. The Ministry
of Religious Affairs
has given out similar
numbers in its report.
But Herald (November
2001) says: 'According
to the Interior Ministry,
there are some 20,000
madrasas in the country
with nearly 3 million
students'. In 1947,
West Pakistan had only
245 seminaries. In 1988,
they increased to 2,861.
Between 1988 and 2000,
this increase comes
out to be 136 percent.
The largest number of
seminaries are Deobandi,
at 64 percent, followed
by Brelvi, at 25 percent.
Only 6 percent are Ahle
Hadith. But the increase
in the number of Ahle
Hadith seminaries or
madrasas has been phenomenal,
at 131 percent, going
up from 134 in 1988
to 310 in 2000. Out
of the total number
of youth taking religious
training in the seminaries,
15 per cent are foreigners.
Among the Ahle Hadith,
there are 17 organisations
active in Pakistan,
looking after their
own seminaries. Out
of them, six actually
take part in politics,
three take part in jihad,
and three are busy spreading
their mazhab or school
of thought. They are
all puritans who do
not follow the state
fiqh and are also called
wahabi. Most of them
follow the lead of the
ulema of Saudi Arabia
and receive assistance
from rich Saudi citizens.11
The grand Deobandi
alliance is probably
the biggest force in
Pakistan after the state's
armed forces.12
Based in Karachi, the
Banuri Complex housed
leaders that sat in
the shuras of the various
Deobandi jihadi militias.
Its religious scholars
sat in the shura of
Sipah Sahaba as well
as the shura of the
two militias, Harkatul
Mujahideen and Jaish-e-Muhammad.
The Deobandi leaders
think nothing of issuing
fatwas of death against
foreigners coming to
Pakistan on business.
It is these fatwas in
part that caused the
embassies in Islamabad
to issue advisories
to their nationals not
to visit Pakistan.
The Harkatul Mujahideen
was once Harkatul Ansar
which was banned by
America because of its
terrorist character.
In 2000, it was split
between two leaders,
Fazlur Rehman Khaleel
and Masood Azhar. Their
organisations were trained
in Afghanistan and were
payrolled by Osama bin
Laden. Both the commanders
were close to Osama
and had accompanied
him to Sudan for some
time in early 1990s.
When Masood Azhar was
arrested in India, Osama
financed the hijack
of an Indian airliner
to spring him from jail.
Along with him was sprung
another man close to
Osama bin Laden, Sheikh
Umar. Umar had opened
the office of Al Qaeda
in Lahore in 2000 for
a brief period before
going underground once
again.13
After his release in
1999 Masood Azhar no
longer wanted to work
under the Harkat leadership
of Fazlur Rehman Khaleel.
He founded Jaish-i-Muhammad,
helped by his Banuri
Mosque elders. True
to Deobandi tradition,
he began shooting off
his mouth against General
Musharraf which embarrassed
his handlers among the
intelligence agencies.
The Harkat was split
and its assets divided
between the two leaders.
But when the double-cabin
vehicles were returned
by Jaish to Fazlur Rehman
Khaleel in bad repair,
the two factions began
to fight each other.
Osama bin Laden ended
the dispute by sending
a dozen brand new double-cabin
vehicles to Khaleel
from Afghanistan.14
Maulana Azam Tariq
of Sipah Sahaba had
built up his power outside
Jhang where he was the
virtual ruler. A French
lady scholar writing
his biography says he
gave administrative
orders for the area
of Jhang from his house.15
His sectarian party
has produced a violent
offshoot, Lashkar-i-Jhangvi,
whose killings Azam
Tariq disavowed by saying
that the Lashkar has
been removed from the
umbrella of his party.
Yet when Lashkar activist
Haq Nawaz was about
to be hanged he tried
all means at his disposal,
including threats to
the state, to get him
absolved from the crime
of killing an Iranian
diplomat. Sipah is not
only very powerful in
Karachi it is also influential
in Kurram Agency and
in Gilgit, both areas
being concentrations
of Shia population.
Azam Tariq announced
in 2001 that he would
select 20 cities in
Pakistan and enforce
his Deobandi shariah
there, mainly in the
shape of compulsory
business shut-down during
namaz and the compulsory
attendance at namaz
of all Muslims. In addition,
he promised to impose
hijab (veil) on all
women venturing out
of the house. Hardline
injunctions against
women are also issued
by his Deobandi colleague
Maulana Samiul Haq who
vows to treat the women
with the same severity
as the Taliban.
The Salafi
Connection
There are 17 Ahle Hadith
organisations in Pakistan,
out of whom six take
part in politics and
three also took part
in jihad. Differences
of ritual exist among
them, as also differences
of strategy. At times
these differences become
very intense and give
rise to mutual vilification,
as in the case of Markazi
Ahle Hadith of Allama
Sajid Mir and the former
Lashkar-i-Tayba (Now
Jamaat al-Dawa) of Hafiz
Muhammad Saeed. Jamaat
Ghuraba Ahle Hadith
holds that its supporters
should quietly reject
the political system
till the majority of
the population becomes
Ahle Hadith, after which
Pakistan will automatically
become Islamic. Jamaat
al-Mujahideen thinks
that the political system
is batil (false) and
as long as a caliphate
does not come into being,
it will not take part
in politics but will
struggle to establish
an Islamic government.
Hafiz Saeed's organisation
holds the same position.
The Ahle Hadith monthly
journal Sahifa Ahle
Hadith (Karachi) wrote
in January 2000: 'We
believe that General
Musharraf does not represent
Islam or Pakistan but
America and its allies.
We condemn General Musharraf's
decision and demand
that he should not sow
the seeds of hatred
between the people and
the army simply to extend
his personal rule. He
should stop giving statements
against mujahideen Muslims
because America and
its allies listen only
to the language of violence
and will not negotiate
till the Muslim ummah
decides to break America
into pieces through
guerrilla war, as it
did in the case of Russia'.16
The salafi influence
in Pakistan has also
come in from the United
Kingdom where a violent
cleric, Sheikh Umar
Bakri propagates the
subversion of all Islamic
states in order to impose
khilafat there. The
Lahore High Court recently
ruled that the activities
of Hizb al-Tahrir came
within the ambit of
preaching of Islam and
could not be designated
as anti-state. The government
had gone to the court
complaining that the
Hizb was spreading sedition
against the government.
Hizb al-Tahrir being
against democracy, it
advocated the establishment
of khilafat in Pakistan.
It made no bones about
the government of General
Musharraf being in violation
of the tenets of Islam
and openly called for
its removal. When the
Hizb entered Pakistan
in 2000 from the United
Kingdom together with
its companion, al-Muhajirun,17
it had called for the
removal of the Musharraf
government. The Punjab
government which had
rented the Alhamra Hall
to the two organisations
regretted the decision.
(One nazim of the Hizb
doing time in a Peshawar
jail for distributing
abusive pamphlets against
General Musharraf is
a medical student who
took over from the earlier
nazim after he went
to the United States
to study electrical
engineering at Chicago
University.) The government
had no idea who these
organisations were and
what their objectives
were in Pakistan.18
Some of the Hizb youth
were English-speaking
with cockney accents
and therefore impressive-looking;
the bureaucracy or the
intelligence services
had no idea of the origin
of Hizb al-Tahrir. Now
of course Uzbekistan
and Tajikistan are complaining
that the Hizb is busy
undermining their governments.
In Uzbekistan, international
human rights organisations
have sided with the
Hizb against the Uzbek
government. Writes Farouk
Turaev (Daily Times
20 August 2002): 'The
Independent Organisation
for Human Rights in
Uzbekistan (IOHRU),
and the Interior Ministry
agree that approximately
4,200 suspected Hizb
al-Tahrir activists
are now in prison. Most
are serving long sentences
of up to 20 years for
crimes, such as violating
the country's constitution,
running prohibited organisations,
and distributing rebellious
pamphlets.' Activists
of the Hizb have also
been arrested in Kyrgyzstan,
and in Egypt where the
party is banned.
Origin of Sectarian
Violence
After coming to power,
General Zia took over
the populist slogan
of Nizam-e-Mustafa and
imposed shariah on Pakistan.
It really meant the
imposition of the Sunni
Hanafi fiqh or jurisprudence
followed by the majority
population from which
the Shias were excluded.
Two early laws under
shariah enforced by
him, failed miserably:
the first, abolition
of riba (interest),
failed because of the
inability of the Islamic
scholars to reinterpret
Islam for modern conditions;
the second, zakat, failed
because the Shia jurisprudence,
called Fiqh-i-Jaafaria,
had a conflicting interpretation
of zakat. In 1980, an
unprecedented procession
of Shias, led by Mufti
Jaafar Hussain, laid
siege to Islamabad and
forced General Zia to
exempt the Shia community
from the deduction of
zakat. The concept of
Sunni ushr (poor-due
on land) is also rejected
by Shia jurisprudence.
It appears that, when
the anti-Shia movement
started in Jhang in
the 1980s, General Zia
not only ignored it
but saw it as his balancing
act against the rebellious
Shia community. This
was worsened by Imam
Khomeini's criticism
of General Zia.
The rise of Maulana
Haq Nawaz Jhangvi in
the stronghold of big
Shia landlords in Punjab
changed the sectarian
scene in Pakistan. There
is evidence that General
Zia was warned of Jhangvi's
anti-Shia and anti-Iran
movement, but he ignored
the warning and allowed
it to blossom into a
full-fledged religious
party called Anjuman-i-Sipah-i-Sahaba
of Pakistan (ASSP).
In small towns, the
old Shia-Sunni debate
restarted with the fury
that had become dampened
in the past. The tracts
which carried this debate
were scurrilous in the
extreme and helped the
clerics to whip up passions.
Meanwhile, in 1986,
General Zia allowed
a 'purge' of Turi Shias
in the divided city
of Parachinar (capital
of Kurram Agency on
the border with Afghanistan)
at the hands of the
Sunni Afghan mujahideen
in conjunction with
the local Sunni population.
Parachinar was the
launching-pad of the
Mujahideen attacks into
Afghanistan and the
Turis were not cooperative.
Tehrike-i-Nifaz-i-Fiqha-i-Jaafaria
had come into being
during the dispute over
zakat in 1980. When
the Parachinar massacre
occurred, the party
was led by a Turi leader,
Allama Arif-ul-Hussaini,
a companion of Imam
Khomeini during his
exile in Najaf. (He
is celebrated as a martyr
in Iran with a postage-stamp
portrait.) Allama Hussaini
was murdered in Peshawar
in August 1988, for
which the Turis held
General Zia responsible.
That was also the year
of General Zia's death
(within a fortnight
of Hussaini's murder)
in an air-crash in Bahawalpur,
and for a time there
was rumour of Shia involvement
in his assassination
although no solid evidence
supporting this speculation
was ever uncovered.
The NWFP governor, General
Fazle Haq, whom the
Turis accused of complicity
in the murder of Allama
Hussaini, was ambushed
and killed in 1991.
In 1989, the Afghan
mujahideen government-in-exile
came into being in Peshawar
after the Soviet retreat
from Afghanistan. At
the behest of Saudi
Arabia, the exiled Shia
mujahideen of Iran were
not included in this
government. The Saudis
paid over 23 million
dollars a week during
the 519-member session
of the Mujahideen shura
as bribe for it.19
In 1990, Maulana Jhangvi
was murdered at the
climax of his anti-Iran
and anti-Shia campaign
of extreme insult and
denigration.20
The same year, as if
in retaliation, an activist
of Sipah-i-Sahaba shot
the Iranian consul Sadiq
Ganji dead in Lahore.
The tit-for-tat killings
were thus started. Maulana
Isar-ul-Qasimi, chief
of the Sipah, was gunned
down in 1991.
Since then, the state
of Pakistan has had
to answer for the killing
of more Iranians in
Pakistan. Another consular
officer was gunned down
in Multan and a number
of Iranian air force
trainees were ambushed
in Rawalpindi on inside
information received
by the killers, thus
implying involvement
from sectarian officers
from within the army.
Most commentators in
Pakistan are scared
of telling the truth.
Most inter-sectarian
dialogue is fake since
its great facade of
speech-making is nothing
but divine-sounding
rationalisation. Almost
all Muslim clerics lie
when it comes to sectarian
deaths. General Zia
allowed the Deobandi
lashkars to attack Gilgit
and put under challenge
the historical domination
there of Ismaili and
Shia communities.21
In 2003, the anti-Shia
violence was extended
to Balochistan where
the Hazara Shia community
was targeted in two
incidents killing over
50 men. The Pakistan
government, speaking
through prime minister
Mir Zafrullah Jamali
and interior minister
Faisal Saleh Hayat,
claimed that the act
of terrorism could have
been planned and executed
by India through its
freshly opened consulates
in Afghanistan. It later
came to light that the
action was coordinated
by the banned sectarian
organisations, Jaish-e-Muhammad,
Sipah Sahaba and Lashkar-i-Jhangvi.22
Jaish-i-Muhammad, as
an offshoot of Sipah
Sahaba, had carried
out the murders of Shia
doctors in Karachi in
1998. Its Al Qaeda-backed
activist Sheikh Umar
executed the kidnapping
of Daniel Pearl in 2002.
Pakistan's jihad in
Kashmir has created
an alternative state
apparatus in the outfits
that fight there as
surrogate warriors.
The price that civil
society pays for this
deniable covert war
has been climbing over
the years and has now
become almost intolerable.
During the latest round
of war in Afghanistan
most of these outfits
have opposed General
Musharraf's policy of
joining the world coalition
against terrorism. All
religious leaders of
these jihadi outfits
know their activity
can easily fall in the
category of terrorism
and therefore try to
scare the common citizen
by predicting that the
next American target
will be Pakistan. They
see hazily the possibility
of a takeover, not by
themselves, as that
would be impossible
given their internecine
nature, but by someone
else from within the
establishment, that
will give them a new
lease of life an earlier
lease having seen foreclosure
the day Osama bin Laden
decided to attack New
York and Washington.
In 2001 the state of
Pakistan had to effect
a volte face in its
jihadi policy after
the UN Security Council
resolution 1373 which
banned the jihadi militias
in Pakistan and took
action against the Taliban
in Afghanistan. Local
politics earlier aligned
to the pro-Taliban policy
has been severely disrupted
as a result.23
The reaction of the
Pakistani people and
intellectuals against
the United States for
what ensued in Afghanistan
and later in Iraq, has
given fresh legitimacy
to the militias dubbed
terrorist by the UN
resolution. The Pakistan
army's policy of 'strategic
depth' in Afghanistan
against India, Iran,
Uzbekistan and the Northern
Alliance, deliberately
sacrificed the earlier
doctrine of the Durand
Line that had divided
the Pushtun nation in
1893, as a result of
which the map of Pakistan
was legitimised in 1947.
After 2001, as a reaction
to the defeat of the
'strategic depth' policy,
the Pushtun vote in
Pakistan brought a government
of a predominantly Deobandi
consensus in the NWFP.
It is the vote of a
nation that wants to
be reunited at the cost
of the integrity of
Pakistan. The public
opinion in Pakistan
is close to the thinking
of this consensus as
demonstrated by the
'million marches' in
favour of the clergy.
(Khaled
Ahmed is Consulting
Editor of the Friday
Times).
References
1.
Bobby
S. Sayyid, A Fundamental
Fear: Eurocentrism
and the Emergence
of Islamism, (Zed
Books London,
1995). The book
discusses the
problem from the
Muslim point of
view but with
the tools of Western
scholarship.
2.
Daily
Times Lahore (11
September 2003)
quoted Ernest
Gellner from his
book Post-modernism,
Reason and Religion:
'High Islam stresses
the severely monotheistic
and nomocratic
nature of Islam,
it is mindful
of the prohibition
of claims to mediation
between God and
man, and it is
generally oriented
towards puritanism
and scripturalism.
Low Islam, or
Folk Islam, is
different. If
it knows literacy,
it does so mainly
in the use of
writing for magical
purposes, rather
than as a tool
of scholarship.
It stresses magic
more than learning,
ecstasy more than
rule-observance.
Rustics, you might
say, encounter
writing mainly
in the form of
amulets, manipulative
magic and false
land deeds. Far
from avoiding
mediation, this
form of Islam
is centred on
it: its most characteristic
institution is
the saint cult,
where the saint
is more often
than not a living
rather than a
dead personage
(and where sanctity
is transmitted
from father to
son).' Gellner
was an outstanding
theorist of modernity
and a rare breed
among late twentieth
century scholars.
He made major
contributions
in very diverse
fields, notably
philosophy and
social anthropology.
He is known for
his path-breaking
analyses of ethnicity
and nationalism
(Thought and Change,
1964; Nations
and Nationalism,
1983), among other
works.
3.
Dr
Rashid Ahmad Jullundheri,
Journal Al Ma'aref
Quarterly, (January-March
1998) Idara Saqafat
Islamia Lahore.
The issue contains
a long survey of
the Deoband seminary's
birth and activities
under British Raj.
4.
K.K.
Aziz, Religion,
Land and Politics
in Pakistan: A
Study of Piri-Muridi;
(Vanguard Books
Lahore, 2002):
Historian Khursheed
Kamal Aziz has
taken in hand
an interesting
but difficult
theme from Pakistan's
history: the relationship
between ownership
of land and the
custodianship
of grassroots
spirituality as
a power base for
national politics.
He was surprised
to find that not
much research
work had been
done on the subject.
The most significant
angle he provides
to the understanding
of the Brelvi
dominance in Pakistan
on the eve of
1947 is in his
narrative of the
participation
of the Chishti
order of sufi
saints in the
politics of a
land that was
dominated by Suhrawardi
saints and Deobandi
ulema. It was
the Chishti success
that brought in
the Brelvi influence
from Central India
and converted
what became known
as Pakistan into
a Low Church territory.
This also makes
known the Chishti
support to the
Pakistan Movement
as opposed to
the Deobandi ulema
who opposed it.
5.
Daily
Jang, Lahore (14
June 2003), wrote
that the founder
of the Banuri
Mosque complex,
which is the centre
of the powerful
Deobandi movement
in Pakistan, was
Maulana Yusuf
Banuri (1908-1977)
who was born in
Basti Mahabatabad
near Peshawar,
son of Maulana
Syed Muhammad
Zakariya who was
in turn the son
of a khalifa of
Mujaddid Alf-e-Sani.
He was educated
in Peshawar and
Kabul before being
sent to Deoband
where he was the
pupil of Shabbir
Ahmad Usmani.
He returned to
join the seminary
of Dabheel. In
1920 he passed
the Maulvi Fazil
exam from Punjab
University. In
1928, he went
to attend the
Islamic conference
in Cairo. He migrated
to Pakistan in
1951 and started
teaching at Tando
Allahyar. He founded
the Jamia Arabiya
Islamiya in Karachi
in 1953 while
he led the attack
against Pakistani
Islamic scholar
Dr Fazlur Rehman.
He was involved
in the aggressive
movement of Khatm-i-Nabuwwat
from 1973 onwards
and was made member
of the Council
of Islamic Ideology
(CII) by General
Zia on coming
to power.
6.
Dr
Javid Iqbal, Islam
and Pakistan's
Identity, (Vanguard
Books Lahore,
2003). The Mughal
rule in India
and the rise of
the puritan wahabi
Islam in the Mughal
twilight is discussed
in the book as
a process of constant
adjustment to
reality; so is
the 'enigmatic'
and fantasy-ridden
Khilafat Movement.
But the highlight
of the discussion
is the consideration
by the author
of the role of
Shah Waliullah
who continues
to inspire both
the fundamentalists
and the liberals
in Pakistan. The
followers of Deoband
who link up with
the Ahle Hadith
or wahabis and
subliminally apostatise
the Shiites revere
him because he
was in the tough
Naqshbandi tradition.
The liberals love
him because he
translated the
Quran into Persian.
The author links
Iqbal's 'liberal'
interpretation
in his Lectures
of the Islamic
hudood to Shibli's
reading of Shah
Waliullah.
7.
This
came up at a seminar
in Islamabad. The
information was
given to the writer
by a retired general
of the Pakistan
army.
8.
There
were secular beneficiaries
too. A number
of Sindhi families
profited from
the hospitality
they offered to
the Arabs who
would spend an
average of $1.5
million on each
visit. The Mahr
family of chief
minister of Sindh
in 2003 is said
to be one such
beneficiary.
9.
Khaled
M. Abou El Fadl,
The Conference
of the Books:
The Search for
Beauty in Islam,
(University Press
of America, 2003).
The author traces
intolerance to
the anti-intellectual
and anti-book
nature of the
salafist and wahabi
Islam. He describes
his argument with
an Egyptian salafist
priest who, when
finding it difficult
to answer some
of the questions
Khaled put to
him, condemned
him as a philosopher
and a follower
of traditions
apart from the
Quran and Sunna.
Khaled's main
objection to the
prevalent salafist
trend is its total
rejection of classical
Islamic thinkers
of the fiqh.
10.
Daily
Khabrain Lahore
(22 March 2003)
published a brief
biographical note
on late Allama
Ehsan Elahi Zaheer
of Jamiat Ahle
Hadith who was
killed by a bomb
on 23 March 1987
in Lahore near
Qila Lachchman
Singh. Along with
him four other
Ahle Hadith scholars
had also died.
He had published
a number of virulently
sectarian monographs
in Arabic and
was known to receive
direct financial
assistance from
Saudi Arabia.
Allama Zaheer
was a great orator
and an equally
great author who
was born in Sialkot
in 1940 in the
home of the Sethi
branch of the
Sheikh community.
His father did
not send him to
school but got
him trained on
Quran and then
sent him for more
religious education
to Jamiya Islamiya
in Gujranwala.
In 1963, after
qualifying, he
was sent by the
seminary to its
headquarters in
Madina University
from he acquired
the highest degree.
Back home in 1967
he passed many
exams: MA in English,
MA in political
science, MA in
Persian, MA in
Urdu and Law.
He was made leader
of prayers at
the wahabi mosque
Chinianwali. As
a speaker he was
in the mould of
Ataullah Shah
Bukhari and took
part in agitations
against Bhutto.
He wrote hard-hitting
books on Shiism,
Ismailism and
other sects, in
Arabic, and wrote
equally hard-hitting
books in Urdu.
After he was blown
up by a bomb he
was taken to a
local hospital
from where he
was taken to Saudi
Arabia on orders
of King Fahd of
Saudi Arabia who
sent his personal
plane for him.
He died in Madina
in 1987, his funeral
prayer was headed
by the grand mufti
of Saudi Arabia
Sheikh Bin Baz,
after which he
was buried next
to Imam Malik's
grave.
11.
Muhammad
Amir Rana, Jihad
Kashmir wa Afghanistan:
Jihadi Tanzimun
aur Mazhabi Jamaton
ka aik Jaeza,
(Mashal Books
Lahore, 2002).
The book is the
only authentic
and factual account
of the jihadi
militias based
on their in-house
publications,
and has been translated
into English in
India, which has
put its young
author at risk
from the militias
and the intelligence
agencies in Pakistan.
12.
John
K. Cooley, Unholy
Wars: Afghanistan,
America and International
Terrorism, (Pluto
Press London,
1998). As noted
by Cooley, during
the 1980s, Osama's
Karachi connections
included the Banuri
mosque, later
recognised as
one of the JUI-Taliban
strongholds in
Pakistan. It is
here that he met
another veteran
of the Afghan
war, Mullah Muhammad
Umar. In 1994,
Mullah Umar was
to emerge as the
ruler of three-fourths
of Afghanistan
as leader of the
Taliban. In 1996,
Osama returned
to Afghanistan
from Sudan with
his wives and
children. In 1998,
he was interviewed
in Afghanistan
by an American
TV news network.
From a mountain
hideout in Jalalabad,
Osama threatened
to kill 'terrorist'
Americans and
praised the 1993
bombing of the
Trade Center in
New York and the
1993-94 debacle
of the American
troops in Somalia,
'implying' his
complicity in
the two incidents.
13.
The
writer succeeded
in arranging for
a meeting with
him through a
third party but
Umar Sheikh had
to leave Lahore
urgently for an
unknown place
on the appointed
day.
14.
Muhammad
Amir Rana, Jihad
Kashmir wa Afghanistan:
Jihadi Tanzimun
aur Mazhabi Jamaton
ka aik Jaeza, (Mashal
Books Lahore, 2002).
15.
Maryam
Zahab researches
the Shiite faith
in Pakistan and
lives in Paris.
The Arab name
is probably a
pen-name. She
met the writer
in 1999 after
her latest series
of interviews
with Azam Tariq
in Jhang.
16.
Muhammad
Amir Rana, Jihad
Kashmir wa Afghanistan
(Mashal Books, Lahore,
2002)
17.
The
Economist (September
13-19, 2003) in
its survey Islam
and the West:
'A movement in
Britain, al-Muhajirun,
pumps out jihadi
propaganda and
has said on its
website that it
wants to become
“a fifth
column”
to prepare ‘the
world-wide Islamic
revolution’.
18.
Akbar
S. Ahmed, Islam
under Siege: Living
Dangerously in post-Honour
World (Polity Press,
2003): 'In Britain,
Sheikh Umar Bakri's
Khilafah, the journal
of Hizb al-Tahrir,
attacked Jinnah
as a kafir, an insult
for a Muslim. Moreover
it accused Jinnah
of being an enemy
of God and the holy
Prophet because
Jinnah supported
women, Christians
and Hindus and advocated
democracy. Why I
asked myself did
they pick on Jinnah?
Because I concluded
Bakri saw him as
a major ideological
opponent. Significantly
after the American
strikes in Sudan
and Afghanistan
in 1998, Bakri emerged
in the media to
claim that he represented
bin Laden in Europe'
(p113). Later, when
Akbar started visiting
Christian and Jewish
gatherings to present
the Islamic view
he was attacked
by Hizb al-Tahrir
in the press. 'I
was walking perilously
close to the fatwa
territory', he writes.
19.
Barnett
R. Rubin, The
Search for Peace
in Afghanistan:
from a Buffer
State to Failed
State, (Yale University
Press, 1995).
The book discusses
the formation
of the 'interim
government' in
Peshawar and its
inability to allow
representation
to the eight-party
Shia alliance
based in Iran.
The interim government
was sought to
be set up in 1989
as the last of
the Soviet troops
vacated Afghanistan.
Circles close
to director general
ISI Gen. Hamid
Gul said that
the Shia were
ousted from the
government at
the behest of
the CIA because
of Washington's
opposition to
Iran. Rubin's
version says that
while the mujahideen
groups conferred
in Peshawar, Soviet
foreign minister
Shevardnadze arrived
in Islamabad with
the proposal that
some lower-echelon
non-controversial
elements of the
PDPA be included
in the government.
The proposal was
rejected. The
Iranian shura
was kept out because
Saudi Arabia was
against it. Saudi
intelligence spent
$25 million per
week during the
discussions in
Peshawar, and
each delegate
was paid $25,000
to keep the Shias
out. The seven
parties in Peshawar
appointed all
the 519 members
of the assembly
who were mostly
Pukhtun from eastern
Afghanistan. Director
ISI Hamid Gul
promised the presidency
to Mujaddidi to
keep him from
walking out. 'Sayyaf
became prime minister
in deference to
the Saudis who
had promised to
fund the Islamic
army if their
wahabi sect was
adequately represented'.
Hekmatyar could
not be accommodated
as defence minister
because of the
ensuing squabbling
in the shura.
According to Rubin,
this manipulation
by Saudi and Pakistani
bureaucrats fanned
nationalist passions
among the commanders
who became increasingly
autonomous after
this incident.
20.
For
an idea of the
kind of orator
Jhangvi was, one
has to listen
to a cassette
of his speeches
distributed by
Sipah Sahaba in
Lahore in 1993.
Jhangvi got his
audience to chant
Khomeini 'kutta'
(dog) and sought
to prove from
orthodox religious
tracts that the
Shia were not
Muslims.
21.
K.M.
Ahmed in daily
Dawn (21 December,
2002): 'In April
1988, armed rioters
from outside entered
the Gilgit environs.
Eleven villages
around town were
torched, their
wooden structures
burnt to ashes
and valuable goods
looted. Around
40 persons were
killed. The civil
administration
did its best with
the limited police
force in Gilgit
(which at least
managed to save
the town) and
when it sought
the help under
aid to civil power
provisions of
the law (as the
raiders started
to move to the
outlying villages),
this help was
denied on various
pretexts. It was
clear to the Gilgit
civil administration
that the raiders,
who were tribals
and mujahedin
elements, could
not have reached
this remote place
from Peshawar
without someone's
blessing. The
Frontier Constabulary,
whose checkposts
dot the Swat-Besham
road and the Besham-Gilgit
highway, did not
act to intercept
the raiders. (The
writer is former
Commissioner,
Gilgit Agency.)
See also: F.M.
Khan, The story
of Gilgit, Baltistan
and Chitral: A
Short History
of Two Milleniums
(Ejaz Literary
Agents). 'General
Zia was a Satan
under whom the
devil from Hazara,
Qasim Shah, got
Pakhtun-Sunni
lashkars to invade
the region in
1988 with General
Ayaz Mehmud, a
relative of General
Zia, looking on
approvingly.'
(p134). The religious
map of the Northern
Areas given by
the author is
as follows: Gilgit
is 60% Shia, 40%
Sunni: Hunza 100%
Ismaili; Nagar
100% Shia; Punial
100% Ismaili;
Yasin 100% Ismaili;
Ishkoman 100%
Ismaili; Gupis
100% Ismaili;
Chilas 100% Sunni;
Darel/Tangir 100%
Sunni; Astor 90%
Sunni, 10% Shia;
Baltistan 96%
Shia; 2% Nurbakhti;
2% Sunni.
22.
GEO
TV (12 September,
2003) had host
Hamid Mir interviewing
the imam of the
Hazara Imam Bargah
at Quetta where
the Shiite community
was blown up by
suicide bombers.
The imam said
the attack was
carried out by
Sipah Sahaba,
Jaish-i-Muhammad
and Lashkar-i-Jhangvi
and this information
had been given
to the administration
in Quetta. Qazi
Hussain Ahmad
was present at
his side when
he stated this.
He added that
Qazi Hussain Ahmad
was a member of
the MMA and should
take measures
against people
in the MMA who
were also involved.
Qazi Hussain Ahmad
instead said that
it was the responsibility
of the government
to end terrorism.
IG police Balochistan
said that the
mastermind of
the Hazara killings
in Quetta was
related to Ramzi
Yusuf now in prison
in the United
States after being
caught in Pakistan
in 1995. He said
that the mastermind
of the killings
was a brother-in-law
of Ramzi and thus
the killings could
be related to
Al Qaeda. When
asked if RAW was
involved he said
he was looking
for proof after
coming to know
that the killers
keep coming and
going to Afghanistan
where the Indians
had consulates
in Kandahar and
Jalalabad and
Herat. A Shia
website had earlier
carried scanned
posters by Deobandi
scholars, including
MMA's Maulana
Samiul Haq, declaring
the Shia non-believers.
These posters
had appeared in
Quetta days before
the massacre of
the Hazaras.
23.
Geo
TV (12 September
2003) Hamid Mir
investigated the
well known mystery
of the perfumed
soil of Kohat
after Al Qaeda
mujahideen were
gunned down there.
The champion of
the mujahideen
cause was ex-MNA
Javed Ibrahim
Paracha who narrated
the incident.
After 9/11, Bulgarian
and Chechnyan
mujahideen fled
from Afghanistan
and came down
to the Tribal
Areas from where
they came to Kohat
where already
27 Arab mujahideen
were in jail.
They were the
offspring of the
Sahaba (Companions
of the Prophet
PBUH) and were
Ahle Bait (from
the family of
the Prophet PUBUH).
They were met
by an ISI officer
(hassaas idaray
ka afsar) who
assured them safe
passage to Bannu,
but when they
approached the
town they saw
troops. Upon this,
they shot the
ISI officer. After
that the Flying
Coach was subjected
to a barrage of
bullets and all
of them were killed.
The last beautiful
youth who died
said that he was
going to paradise.
The entire surroundings
smelled sweet
with the perfume
of the blood of
the martyrs. The
people of Kohat
were moved by
the perfume of
the blood and
gathered around
the dead bodies.
They picked them
up and took them
to the CMH, planning
to bury them in
Kohat after medical
care. But the
administration
took the dead
bodies to Peshawar.
A jirga was held
which decided
to bury the mujahideen
in Kohat. When
the graves were
dug the soil started
smelling sweet.
After which Javed
Ibrahim Paracha
went to Peshawar
to demand the
dead bodies. Paracha
was arrested and
taken to face
the FBI where
he said he did
not know Osama
but he thought
him a soldier
of God. He said
he had named his
own son Osama
bin Laden. He
then organised
the construction
of Shuhada-i-Islam
Chowk in Kohat.
People had taken
the perfumed soil
soaked with the
blood of the Al
Qaeda soldiers
and were keeping
it in their homes.
Javed Ibrahim
Paracha belongs
to the strong
Punjabi Paracha
clan of Kohat
who are Hindko-speaking
traders. He was
a member of JUI
but had a tiff
with Maulana Fazlur
Rehman. In 1997
he fought election
on a PML(N) ticket
and was returned
as MNA. He has
led a strong sectarian
reaction to around
ten families of
the Shia community
in Kohat and protested
at their taking
out tazia during
Muharram. His
sectarian outreach
extends to Hangu
and Tal where
he has been responsible
for sectarian
violence. The
Parachas of Kohat
are known for
their financial
support to Al
Qaeda. Javed Ibrahim
Paracha fought
the 2002 election
for PML(N) but
was supported
by Sipah Sahaba.
He lost the election.