A ‘Muslim Union’ is the need of the hour

[AUz]

One of those threads again...

More co-operation in trade, economics, health, culture, defense, diplomacy, science and technology, and finance etc b/w 50+ Muslim states is one thing...

But a 'union' is completely another thing...

Islamic World has an area of whooping 30,000,000 sq. km spread over different continents and geographic regions.

It is just too big and diverse to be a 'one country/caliphate' etc..but more corporation for mutual prosperity and respect is always welcomed.

 

[FaujHistorian]

I do not know what is wrong with @FaujHistorian. Whenever someone writes something that can somehow remotely be construed with having something to do with religion, .

you my dear are not clear and thus confuse things in your head and your readers if they are not careful.

On personal level, a Pkkah sucha Muslim is the one who speaks truth, is honest, is good to people around him regardless of other peron's faith and traditions.

On group level, as long as politics is kept out of mosque, as long as sanctity of prayer is maintained. I am OK.


The problem I have with Mullahtics and Islamists is that majority of them abuse Islam for narrow political purposes.

In Pakistan we see this with daily suicide bombings.

Pathetic Islamists in Pakistan cannot say prayer behind someone who is not from their fiqh,

then the same Mullahtics go out in the bazars, on the news, and on the forums

and lecture everyone

that Islamists union is the "final solution",

not too different from Hitler's meinn kampf, Hindutva brigades's policy manual.


So there you have it.


And I hope you understand

And for once consider that building up and uniting Pakistan is much more complex and totally different from eating free meal in Ramzan or playing soccer kirkit or gulli danda on the streets.


Please do not trivilize and cheapen the discussion with personal attacks.

I have seen you doing much better in many of your posts

and I respect you for that.

One of those threads again...

More co-operation in trade, economics, health, culture, defense, diplomacy, science and technology, and finance etc b/w 50+ Muslim states is one thing...

But a 'union' is completely another thing...

Islamic World has an area of whooping 30,000,000 sq. km spread over different continents and geographic regions.

It is just too big and diverse to be a 'one country/caliphate' etc..but more corporation for mutual prosperity and respect is always welcomed.

I get the overall message bro.


But you think Egypt will buy Shirts and cottton from Pakistan.

Or you will import health care from Indonesia. What are the new medicines and hospital tech coming from Malasia. Please let me know.

Defense cooperation happens when you have extra things to offer.


Today Assad is butchering his own people.

How many Pakisanis are talking cooperating for a keeping force?

How many.



And let's not talk about technology condition in pathetic tribal countries unless you want to talk about assembling kits imported from Japan, China etc.


So let's be realistic when we make political statements.


Thank you

 

[JayAtl]

I do not know what is wrong with @FaujHistorian. Whenever someone writes something that can somehow remotely be construed with having something to do with religion, he jumps in and makes it a personal crusade against forces of darkness. You know something like a lone knight in the night. Its just something he has taken upon himself...

Fauj, we two are very different individuals. I have noted your reaction to my post. Answering would accomplish nothing. We could be friends, but your sarcasm seems to be a permanent feature and though I appreciate you calling me yaar, I do not think I could reciprocate sincerely. Our divergent views are a function of who we are as persons. We both have very different backgrounds, mindset, and experience. As I mentioned in my earlier post that I have seen Ummah concept at work.

I will relate just one happening among many that has been a powerful lesson for me:

While at a US university in early 90s. I was active with PSA (Pakistan Student Association) - helping arrange cultural programs (acting, facilitating, helping with script), sports matches, fund raising, representing PSA in official capacity, etc...

I was also active with MSA (Muslim Students Association) - hosting 1 iftar during Ramazan at nearby mosque (where dozens students like me had their fill throughout Ramazan), arranging annual dinner, contacting foreign Muslim students, arranging two picnics a year, helping arrange evening lectures, etc... That is beside activism for Bosnia in the university, metropolis, & Washington.

PSA decided to participate in annual Football / Soccer tournament. The first year we lost 6-0 to a fraternity team. The second year, I suggested that we field an MSA team, since we sucked at Soccer and our 2 or 3 good players were good strikers but could not be effective. Junaid objected and said that we must have our own team. So we lost 8-0. The next year, MSA team made it to the finals. Sub par players like me were happy to watch a pitch full of friends chalk up victories with Pakistani strikers including Junaid and Dr. Saleem sb. doing very well.

So that was a valuable lesson not just for me, but for many others. You may find fault with something here, and I have a feeling that you would, but I hope you understand that on the level of different peoples (Saudi, Pakistani, Morroccan, Malaysian, Egyptian, etc...) the concept of Ummah is strong, makes sense, and delivers results. As far as I am concerned, we just need to translate that at a higher level. Self-flagelation and self-doubt would not get us there, neither would sarcasm stop us.

Good day.

Hmm.. your example of the mini union is not exactly conducive to the " union" here. In your scenario- There was a single goal based on- once selected as a part of the playing team members, you had equal opportunity on the field.

There is no equality in global economics. The timelines are for the longest. Nobody is going sacrifice for the muslim country that cannot carry its weight. nobody is going to tolerate the union suffering because one or many among them have distractions that gives it a bad name.

There is a union right now for you " muslims only nations" to take up . It is called trade associations.

You are applying a very small social experiment as grounds to accept a global union based on religion.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Hmm.. your example of the mini union is not exactly conducive to the " union" here. In your scenario- There was a single goal based on- once selected as a part of the playing team members, you had equal opportunity on the field.

There is no equality in global economics. The timelines are for the longest. Nobody is going sacrifice for the muslim country that cannot carry its weight. nobody is going to tolerate the union suffering because one or many among them have distractions that gives it a bad name.

There is a union right now for you " muslims only nations" take up . It called is trade associations.

You applying a very small social experiment as grounds to accept a global union based on religion.

I know it is a limited example. But it speaks on a number of levels. As far as I am concerned your sophistry is wasted. There are hardly any surprises that could derail a project once its features are considered and decided. Like I said, there is EU to look at, and others. It is not exactly like re-inventing the wheel.

But really the objectives determine the form. Kind of like "Form follows function". If the objective is to create one country then I have little hope for it. If on the other hand, the objective is to bring a number of countries on one page to share vision and practices that best suit our time, then of course it is another matter.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Hmm.. your example of the mini union is not exactly conducive to the " union" here. In your scenario- There was a single goal based on- once selected as a part of the playing team members, you had equal opportunity on the field.

There is no equality in global economics. The timelines are for the longest. Nobody is going sacrifice for the muslim country that cannot carry its weight. nobody is going to tolerate the union suffering because one or many among them have distractions that gives it a bad name.

There is a union right now for you " muslims only nations" take up . It called is trade associations.

You applying a very small social experiment as grounds to accept a global union based on religion.

Please do not get dragged into Pakistani-Pakistani discussion. You will be adding yet another source of accusations, constipated conspiracy theories slamists' style.


If I come to you and say Jatyl Yaar,

You are building this 10 story building, let me design it for you.


What should be your first question (sorry if I am putting words in your mouth)

that if I have built a 10 story before?

even an 8 story or fork it, just a 5 story building.


And If I tell you that I have never built even a one room house, you will surely kick me out of your office.



People like Chuck Bamu though sincere are in reality ignorant to the nth degee.


These people have no formula to unite Mohajirs (my community), Sindhis etc.

Heck they cannot even unit Punjabis to work on singular development and progress mission.

like they can't build 1 room house.

Then they come here and say

We are going to unit everyone from Nile's banks to Kashghar

like building a 100 story building.

So all this is just big time Mullahtic f@rting.

The only thing Pakistan got out of this pathetic union is that terrorists like Bin fing Laden and Aiman fing Zawahiri became "naturalized citizens" of Pakistan and thus brought so much respect and so much good name to Pakistani nation.

And these dimwits slaves of Laden and zawahiri will continue bringing good name to Pakistan for long long long long time to come. fear NOT!


Hope you understand.

 

[bandit]

Only weak states will ask for a union above national interests.

One won't see a union call coming out of Saudis, or turks, or bangladeshis or iranians for that matter.

So grow some balls and quit depending on one daddy after the other.

You guys are making the whole subcontinent look weak.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Only weak states will ask for a union above national interests.

One won't see a union call coming out of Saudis, or turks, or bangladeshis or iranians for that matter.

So grow some balls and quit depending on one daddy after the other.

You guys are making the whole subcontinent look weak.

Minor correction sir! (if I may)

Only weak minded people will ask for a union above national interests.

.... If on the other hand, the objective is to bring a number of countries on one page to share vision and practices that best suit our time, then of course it is another matter.

This is like bringing together all the failing students in a class and forming a union of dimwits. hahahaahah.


Yeah. you may think they need a vision.

But they already got a vision.

Vision of utter depravity, intolerance, lack of work ethics etc. etc.


There was a time when parents would teach their sons to be friends with smartest kids in the class

and stay the forking away from na-laiq and Bhuddu aka $tupid students.



But now thanks to Islamism,

The direction is totally reversed.

Mr. BAmu is suggesting to leave the company of smart countries, nay abhor and hate the smart countries

and

go enjoy the company of the most dumb and most idiotic intolerant countries.

Yeah

that's the "smartest advice" from top level intellectuals in Pakistan.

Wah ji Wah

 

[AUz]

I get the overall message bro.


But you think Egypt will buy Shirts and cottton from Pakistan.

Or you will import health care from Indonesia. What are the new medicines and hospital tech coming from Malasia. Please let me know.

Defense cooperation happens when you have extra things to offer.


Today Assad is butchering his own people.

How many Pakisanis are talking cooperating for a keeping force?

How many.



And let's not talk about technology condition in pathetic tribal countries unless you want to talk about assembling kits imported from Japan, China etc.


So let's be realistic when we make political statements.


Thank you

Well, trade in any good and service is better.

There are many goods and services that Muslim countries can trade in.

And lets not be the opposite side of the coin. Just like indians rant, "india shupa powa shinning india" bs..while in reality their country is a third world dump, we should not go to opposite extreme when talking about Islamic World.

Lets talk on factual basis.

Islamic World, as a whole, is a "middle-income" world. Offcourse, alot of disparity exists..From richest Oil Sheikhdoms to poorest Sudan...but over-all, majority of Muslim countries are middle-income countries.

The total GDP of Islamic World, in PPP, is ~ $10 trillion (and before you or anyone else brings it, whether believe it or not, oil plays a SMALL part in this $10 trillion economic output)...In nominal terms, the GDP of Islamic World is ~ $7 trillion ....

And if we go by latest demographic estimates, there are 1.7 billion Muslims in the world..and out of those, 1.35 billion live in OIC (Islamic World)...Rest live in non-Muslim majority countries (India, China, Russia, Europe etc)...

Now, you can clearly see, average Muslim is a 'middle-income' man of 21st century...Average Muslim earns about 3x to 5x more than some other residents of a 'super power' country...

All of this is far, far from being a 'tribal society' (not that there aren't any in Islamic World..but those are exceptions, not the norm).

Now come to trade, the value of trade among Muslim states is more than $630 billion+ and increasing fast...

There are alot of goods and specially services that Muslim World can trade in. Electronics, medical equipment, health services, chemicals, cheap medicines (everyday medicines), fertilizers, textiles, agriculture, and so on.

Having said that, it is nothing but truth that Islamic World is MASSIVELY under-performing due to poor, corrupt, and inefficient governments, disastrous illiteracy rates, and do I even need to mention that magnificent political instability that Muslims lead the world in (other than Africans, offcourse)?

Just imagine if Muslim World makes major reforms in the above mentioned areas, how quickly we can reach to the healthy situation where average global Muslim has a GDP per capita of $15,000 to $20,000 on PPP basis?

But while working and urging for people/Muslims to perform better, and telling them their shortcomings, we must be accurate and should not be overly pessimistic.

And remember, Muslim World is just "starting" now... In 19th century, we weren't even in the same universe as the rest of the world (colonized, illiterate, and not global connectivity etc)...

 

[FaujHistorian]

Well, trade in any good and service is better.

There are many goods and services that Muslim countries can trade in.

And lets not be the opposite side of the coin. Just like indians rant, "india shupa powa shinning india" bs..while in reality their country is a third world dump, we should not go to opposite extreme when talking about Islamic World.

Lets talk on factual basis.

Islamic World, as a whole, is a "middle-income" world. Offcourse, alot of disparity exists..From richest Oil Sheikhdoms to poorest Sudan...but over-all, majority of Muslim countries are middle-income countries.

The total GDP of Islamic World, in PPP, is ~ $10 trillion (and before you or anyone else brings it, whether believe it or not, oil plays a SMALL part in this $10 trillion economic output)...In nominal terms, the GDP of Islamic World is ~ $7 trillion ....

And if we go by latest demographic estimates, there are 1.7 billion Muslims in the world..and out of those, 1.35 billion live in OIC (Islamic World)...Rest live in non-Muslim majority countries (India, China, Russia, Europe etc)...

Now, you can clearly see, average Muslim is a 'middle-income' man of 21st century...Average Muslim earns about 3x to 5x more than some other residents of a 'super power' country...

All of this is far, far from being a 'tribal society' (not that there aren't any in Islamic World..but those are exceptions, not the norm).

Now come to trade, the value of trade among Muslim states is more than $630 billion+ and increasing fast...

There are alot of goods and specially services that Muslim World can trade in. Electronics, medical equipment, health services, chemicals, cheap medicines (everyday medicines), fertilizers, textiles, agriculture, and so on.

Having said that, it is nothing but truth that Islamic World is MASSIVELY under-performing due to poor, corrupt, and inefficient governments, disastrous illiteracy rates, and do I even need to mention that magnificent political instability that Muslims lead the world in (other than Africans, offcourse)?

Just imagine if Muslim World makes major reforms in the above mentioned areas, how quickly we can reach to the healthy situation where average global Muslim has a GDP per capita of $15,000 to $20,000 on PPP basis?

But while working and urging for people/Muslims to perform better, and telling them their shortcomings, we must be accurate and should not be overly pessimistic.

And remember, Muslim World is just "starting" now... In 19th century, we weren't even in the same universe as the rest of the world (colonized, illiterate, and not global connectivity etc)...

GDP and she-DP are old ploys Dr. Sahib.

Really old professorial shebang.


Believe you me, we have tried to export to other Islamic countries, volume and margin is non-existent.

Chinese will still be poorest of the poor Mao Jannat if they had said,

let's export the GDP she-DP Islamist countries.


The only margin and reliable income for Pakistani exporters is based on exports to US and EU.

There is no corporation like metro, walmart, target etc. in any GDP and She-DP Islamist countries that can give Pakistani/INdian/Chinese exporters 1/1000th of the equivalent exports.

Any place is just pathetic.


And Oh

Dr. Sahib

Please do not bring manogs in this discussion.

We will be on very slippery skin then.

Thank you

 

[bandit]

Minor correction sir! (if I may)

Only weak minded people will ask for a union above national interests.

I do hope such kind of people aren't in the majority in a country, or they will represent the state by default.

Thanks

 

[M. Sarmad]

I had a feeling that a Pakistani opened this thread. Do you see any Arabs desperate for a so called "Muslim Union"??? NO!!!!
Only brainwashed Pakistanis under the delusion of "Ummah brotherhood" open such threads and believe in such fantasies!

It is a very "Wishful" article written by world famous "Turkish" Muslim scholar Harun Yahya (The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science.)
Harun Yahya

Printed by a leading "Arab" Newspaper
and being discussed on a "Pakistani" Forum ....

This itself shows that concept of "Ummah" is not limited to "brainwashed" Pakistanis only!!
The comments in the comments section of newspaper show a "positive" response from the readers in general . Only here on PDF nationalists have the "courage" to call it "Ummah Crap" , whereas the writer says "We must not forget that Islam orders Muslims to forge unity among their ranks. And Allah has ordered Muslims to strive together if they are wronged."

Sorry but even if yes, count Turkey outta the list

.

Shiaism in Iran resulted from genocide and ethnic cleansing of Sunnis in Iran.
Please read history a bit

Islam in the world resulted from Genocide and ethnic cleansing of Pagans in Arabia

Sunni Islam in "Ummayad" and "Abbasid" kingdoms resulted from Genocide and ethnic cleansing of "descendants and close relatives of Muhammad(pbuh)"

The Ummayads , Abbasids , Ottomans and Saffavids all believed that "Ummah unity" is crap

They were wrong , so are you

 

[JayAtl]

I know it is a limited example. But it speaks on a number of levels. As far as I am concerned your sophistry is wasted. There are hardly any surprises that could derail a project once its features are considered and decided. Like I said, there is EU to look at, and others. It is not exactly like re-inventing the wheel.

But really the objectives determine the form. Kind of like "Form follows function". If the objective is to create one country then I have little hope for it. If on the other hand, the objective is to bring a number of countries on one page to share vision and practices that best suit our time, then of course it is another matter.

Your last paragraph is the issue at hand. i.e. you have to decide whether this is a Muslim union ( as it is being discussed) or an EU type economic union . You cannot be an economic union and be a Muslim union, you cannot be a Muslim union and an economic union.

EU is very bad example. EU is based on some fundamentals you don't have here i.e. EU is first and foremost all democracies together, then sharing borders and a single currency deal in place - all under the EU consortium's constitution. The consortium( EU courts) also has final jurisdiction over civil matters and human rights!

BUT your laws among Muslim nations are not ubiquitous rather vastly different. women in your country can fly aircrafts BUT in KSA they can't drive. In iran there is religious police , none in Turkey etc. etc.

Then you have some that are secular ( Turkey and Egypt to some extent), some that are dictatorship ( Syria), others that are monarchies ( KSA and rest) and then there is Iran where the ayatollah is the last word above the constitution.. You don't have porous borders and then some are near developed countries while most are underdeveloped.

Lastly , you have no peace time status among many of them, unlike the EU, which has been peaceful for decades now.

I hope you are getting the picture.

Finally a muslim union by itself is a weird notion in a global economy. You need developed nations to sell your products! 99% of them being " christian / secular make up" . You cannot sustain your economy just doing business among the ' muslim'.

As Fauj says, you have not even a consensus about a foundation, and your thinking a 10 story building is possible based on your social experiment.

 

[PoKeMon]

FYI

Shiaism in Iran resulted from genocide and ethnic cleansing of Sunnis in Iran.


Please read history a bit.


Thank you

What are you speaking?

First of all shiaism doesn't start as a consequence of genocide of sunnis, but shiaism was there which led to genocide(if at all) of sunnis.

Secondly, how come it vindicate the now genocide of shia community? Does it fall in line with Quran?

I dont need to read history, geography or anything. Just a sense of humanity is enough.

 

[AUz]

GDP and she-DP are old ploys Dr. Sahib.

Really old professorial shebang.


Believe you me, we have tried to export to other Islamic countries, volume and margin is non-existent.

Chinese will still be poorest of the poor Mao Jannat if they had said,

let's export the GDP she-DP Islamist countries.


The only margin and reliable income for Pakistani exporters is based on exports to US and EU.

There is no corporation like metro, walmart, target etc. in any GDP and She-DP Islamist countries that can give Pakistani/INdian/Chinese exporters 1/1000th of the equivalent exports.

Any place is just pathetic.


And Oh

Dr. Sahib

Please do not bring manogs in this discussion.

We will be on very slippery skin then.

Thank you

Haha, yar why so pessimistic?

Islamic World, as a whole, is 50 years, if not 100 years, behind the most advance markets of human history (European Union and North America)...Don't expect to have any Walmart or Boeing in Muslim World anytime soon. But atleast something is happening and appreciate that.

Offcouse trade with West is farrrrr more important/profitable than trading with other Muslim countries..No one denied that.

But more regional trade and intra-Islamic World trade is always welcomed and should be encouraged alot.

Corporate culture demands fair laws, transparency, and political stability to thrive..and I already stated how Islamic World needs massive reforms and improvements in this regard.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Noted with interest various POVs.

@FaujHistorian is doing what he does best, ie. spread pessimism and confusion. He does not 'get it', he does not want to 'get it', and he be damned if someone else makes an effort to 'get it'.

@JayAtl is showing his concern about an what seems to him to be an unworkable idea. I wold suggest that you re-read my first post. I have already addressed your concerns in a very succinct and abreviated form. BTW establishment of a supra-national entity among *some* Muslim countries would certainly have an economic agenda, but that would not actually be the main point of any such endeavor. The issue is internal stability and mutual protection from external threats.

A number of people have raised issue about terrorists. Now let me make an assertion:
If there were indeed a supra-national institution with some teeth, there would be no US troops in Saudi Arabia, the Bosnian war would have been much shorter, Gulf War I would likely not have happened, Chechens, Uzbeks, Tajiks would have been effectively managed by engaging with respective governments.

As an aside, Does any one know how many Tajiks were chased out of their homes only to find refuge in Afghanistan in 1994-5? As the refugees (families with children) crossed the river to get to Afghanistan, they Tajikistan governments trooped still fired upon them until Afghans retaliated and provided cover for these refugees to cross. Knowing how bad things were in Afghanistan, one has to wonder as to why on Earth would anyone think of putting up a refugee camp in Afghanistan. Things were that bad! Now all of you who make a show of supporting Humanism need to ask if indeed charity starts from home, or from close to home. I know that some Pakistanis did relief work in the Tajik camps established in Afghanistan. There was an agreement allowing the refugees to return to their burnt-out homes with dignity, though their abducted women were probably never to be seen again, having been taken to Uzbekistan by its military that came to support the Tajik dictator. Had there been a supra-national institution, a lot of $hit would have been avoided in the first place.

Some of you nationalists who fail to see a point in having an effective institution need to realize that a lot of crap that happens in our countries happens precisely because there is no one to check it. Countries are concerned with themselves and have no time to deal with issues that create desperation and militancy among people who then turn to violence and terrorism. I have yet to come across anyone on this forum who understands the despondency and desperation of Arabs, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Chechen, etc... who are the most hard core and anti-peace people in AfPak region. These people have only death to look forward to, and so they deal in death as a result. These very people are the leading cause of instability and apt to be used by outside forces. There needs to be some entity that addresses problems before these same problems become malignant tumors. Muslims today are reactionary precisely because they find themselves unable to address many of their problems.

I could go on, but I have not the time. I just want to stress that such a supra-national institution has a lot of support on the level of different people, precisely because there is a need to have such an institution. Unless we do something about it, the likes of AQ, HuT, and other nuts would continue to fill the vacuum.