Bang Galore
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 10,685
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
JuD’s ideology
During the past fortnight or so, Minar-e-Pakistan has served twice as a site for forces that cloak themselves in the mantle of ‘custodians of the Pakistan ideology’ but in actual fact have always been complicit with non-state actors and internationally proclaimed terrorist organisations. At first it was Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) and now Jamaat-ud-Dawah (JuD) that hosted a congregation under the shadow of Minar-e-Pakistan. The latter conference called for a complete implementation of Shariah. All the leading lights of major fundamentalist camps got together and vowed to protect the ideology of Pakistan. It is when people like Hafiz Saeed — the Amir and founder of JuD, which is nothing but Lashkar-i-Taiba (a banned terrorist group) by another name — utter words like ‘protecting the ideology of Pakistan’, one is compelled to revisit the circumstances in which Pakistan came into existence. History is flooded with facts that demonstrate that the mullahs and pan-Islamists discarded the very idea of a separate Muslim state in the Indian subcontinent on the grounds of an indivisible Muslim Ummah that spans across borders and trumps all modern discourse, including the idea of territoriality within the confines of a nation state. However, soon after the creation of Pakistan, these very forces have been attempting — and have succeeded to a large extent — to gain legitimacy by appropriating the tenets of the founding fathers according to their own interpretation. Iqbal and the Quaid, without question, never wanted a theocratic state as claimed by these groups. Sadly, the state keeps on patronising them, ostensibly to keep India at bay, as groups like JuD provide jihadists who fight in Indian-held Kashmir and have been widely considered to have been behind the November 2008 Mumbai attacks.
JuD chief Hafiz Saeed has been accused of masterminding several attacks in India, which has caused major snags in Pakistan-India relations. Allowing such people to hold public rallies right in the heart of Lahore smacks of complicity on the government’s behalf or hypocrisy at the very least. On the one hand the government claims to be willing to have friendly relations with its neighbours, while on the other it provides this generous space for non-state actors that keep sabotaging this stated foreign policy. The government therefore needs to clarify its position. Others too, like the JI for instance, owe an explanation to the public since the party is part of the country’s democratic system and claims to respect it. Why then is it always found on the platform of terrorists like JuD? Nothing is more painful than to see these groups being given carte blanche, which will inevitably deepen suspicions amongst our neighbours as to our real, as opposed to stated, intent.
JuD’s ideology
During the past fortnight or so, Minar-e-Pakistan has served twice as a site for forces that cloak themselves in the mantle of ‘custodians of the Pakistan ideology’ but in actual fact have always been complicit with non-state actors and internationally proclaimed terrorist organisations. At first it was Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) and now Jamaat-ud-Dawah (JuD) that hosted a congregation under the shadow of Minar-e-Pakistan. The latter conference called for a complete implementation of Shariah. All the leading lights of major fundamentalist camps got together and vowed to protect the ideology of Pakistan. It is when people like Hafiz Saeed — the Amir and founder of JuD, which is nothing but Lashkar-i-Taiba (a banned terrorist group) by another name — utter words like ‘protecting the ideology of Pakistan’, one is compelled to revisit the circumstances in which Pakistan came into existence. History is flooded with facts that demonstrate that the mullahs and pan-Islamists discarded the very idea of a separate Muslim state in the Indian subcontinent on the grounds of an indivisible Muslim Ummah that spans across borders and trumps all modern discourse, including the idea of territoriality within the confines of a nation state. However, soon after the creation of Pakistan, these very forces have been attempting — and have succeeded to a large extent — to gain legitimacy by appropriating the tenets of the founding fathers according to their own interpretation. Iqbal and the Quaid, without question, never wanted a theocratic state as claimed by these groups. Sadly, the state keeps on patronising them, ostensibly to keep India at bay, as groups like JuD provide jihadists who fight in Indian-held Kashmir and have been widely considered to have been behind the November 2008 Mumbai attacks.
JuD chief Hafiz Saeed has been accused of masterminding several attacks in India, which has caused major snags in Pakistan-India relations. Allowing such people to hold public rallies right in the heart of Lahore smacks of complicity on the government’s behalf or hypocrisy at the very least. On the one hand the government claims to be willing to have friendly relations with its neighbours, while on the other it provides this generous space for non-state actors that keep sabotaging this stated foreign policy. The government therefore needs to clarify its position. Others too, like the JI for instance, owe an explanation to the public since the party is part of the country’s democratic system and claims to respect it. Why then is it always found on the platform of terrorists like JuD? Nothing is more painful than to see these groups being given carte blanche, which will inevitably deepen suspicions amongst our neighbours as to our real, as opposed to stated, intent.
JuD’s ideology
