Mainstream extremism: Is secularism dying in Pakistan?

[ajtr]

Mainstream extremism: Is secularism dying in Pakistan?​

ISLAMABAD: Secularism has become a dangerous, deadly label in Pakistan as religious extremists slowly strengthen their stranglehold on the country and put its stability at risk.

Punjab governor Salman Taseer was a liberal, secular Muslim who, last week, was shot dead by his own bodyguard for opposing a blasphemy law that many human rights activists say is often used to discriminate against religious minorities.

Taseer’s death shocked many in Pakistan and abroad, but perhaps the widespread lionisation of his assassin, Malik Mumtaz Hussain Qadri, was more worrying for the future of the country.

The governor’s slaying, analysts say, will mean the further silencing of liberal and moderate voices, giving religious parties and their allied militants even more veto power over politics in Pakistan.

“Pakistani society has drifted toward religious militancy over the last 20-25 years,” said Hasan-Askari Rizvi, a political analyst. “Anti-American sentiment is very strong, because that’s the mind-set they’ve been brought up with.”

Rizvi predicts that Pakistan will have a rough decade ahead as the generation born in the 1980s — raised on extremist ideology taught in schools and repeated on television and in the mosques — comes to power.

Qadri shot Taseer 27 times in the parking lot of an upscale market and then gave himself up. Almost immediately, militants who want an Islamic emirate in Pakistan — one that defines itself in opposition to the West and the United States — hailed him as a hero.

Hundreds of lawyers, and a few police officers, showered Qadri with flower petals as he arrived at a courthouse.

Thousands of Facebook pages and Twitter posts from Pakistani youth who are also fans of pop singers Miley Cyrus and Justin Bieber popped up in support of Taseer’s killing.

More than 500 religious scholars from a sect traditionally considered moderate ruled the killing justified and warned against any show of grief for Taseer, lest the mourners meet the same fate.

“We have been concerned about increased extremism in Pakistan for some time,” said US State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Friday, a few days after Taseer’s killing.

“As we’ve made clear, political violence is a threat to the civilian government in Pakistan, and obviously this is just the latest example.”

Many fear Taseer will be the first of many to be slain for speaking out against extremism: former information minister Sherry Rehman, who introduced the bill to change the blasphemy law, has gone into hiding and the country’s interior minister has suggested she leave the country.

“Silent majority”

Political stability in Pakistan is seen as key to the United States’ war against Taliban militants in Afghanistan.

Islamabad’s willingness to take on militants on its own soil is also a key security interest of the United States, given the Times Square bombing and other plots that have Pakistani connections.

Washington has been counting on Pakistan’s “silent majority” for years in its fight against extremism and Taliban militancy allegedly emanating from Pakistan’s tribal areas.

But the celebration of the assassin Qadri has undermined the supposed influence of these moderates, and also shattered the vision liberals had of their country as a tolerant homeland for South Asia’s Muslims, but where others can worship freely.

“The reclamation of God in Pakistan, taking back Allah and taking back the prophet and taking back the mosque is really the project of Pakistan,” journalist Mosharraf Zaidi told Reuters.

“This is the most important challenge facing Pakistan. And I’m really afraid maybe the country might not be up to it.”

Sajjid Anwar, deputy secretary general of Jamaat-i-Islami, Pakistan’s largest and best organised religious party, told Reuters there was “no future” for secularism in Pakistan.

That implies that any national discussion, whether on tax reform or prosecuting the war on terrorism, can be framed in religious — and thus sacred — terms.

Who’s to blame?

Much of Pakistan’s turn towards religious extremism can be traced to president General Mohammad Ziaul Haq, who, in the 1980s, enjoyed enthusiastic support from the United States against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

Haq nurtured religious militants and used American cash to turn a society that had previously been relatively moderate and tolerant towards extremism.

Some blame Pakistan’s weak government for the increase in radicalism, and pine for the “enlightened moderation” of former military ruler General Pervez Musharraf, who was forced to resign in 2008.

The government’s inability to provide basic services, from education, to reliable electricity, to improving the economy, have made it deeply unpopular. Hardline clerics often exploit anger at the government among the largely poor and illiterate population to further their harsh, unforgiving brand of Islam.

The government’s unpopularity often makes it rely on extreme elements to stay in power, and to pander to their politics.

After Taseer came out against the Punjabi Taliban and opposed the blasphemy law, the leadership of the ruling Pakistan People’s Party abandoned him publicly. Calls for his death rang from mosques for months. The government did nothing to stop it.

The government has backed off from its campaign to change the blasphemy law and the Pakistan People’s Party tried to blame shadowy political conspiracies for Taseer’s murder rather than ascribe a religious motive.

Some Pakistanis say things would be better under a truly democratic system, but others think it is less about the system of government and more about basic competency.

“It’s not (about) democracy, it’s how the country’s been politically managed for 30-40 years,” said a British Pakistani who declined to be identified. “The solution is to start managing the country properly. There’s no good government. They can’t do anything.”

 

[Ignited Mind]

Pakistan is an islamic repiblic and not a secular republic. When the people themseleves don't want their country to be secular, how can secularism survive then?

 

[graphican]

Pakistan was never secular the first place.

 

[Sinnerman108]

What is on death bed , is west's futile effort to some how turn Pakistan into a sterile, dumb, banana state
which will only obey their business and not provide any challenge to their
money making machines in any form.

---------- Post added at 05:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:14 PM ----------

What is on death bed , is west's futile effort to some how turn Pakistan into a sterile, dumb, banana state
which will only obey their business and not provide any challenge to their
money making machines in any form.

 

[rameez ahmed]

Pakistan was never a Secular Country.... Pakistan will Insha Allah NEVER be a Secular country.....

 

[Karachiite]

Before 1973 Pakistan was secular. It had no state religion and all laws were very much secular. In that era Pakistan was growing at a rapidly fast pace.

 

[metro]

are why everyone is creating these same threads on same topic everywhere all the time.
haath dho k hee pad gaye bechare pakistan k peeche.

 

[ajtr]

are why everyone is creating these same threads on same topic everywhere all the time.
haath dho k hee pad gaye bechare pakistan k peeche.

when u are center of the world then all eyes will be on u.

 

[Kompromat]

Before 1973 Pakistan was secular. It had no state religion and all laws were very much secular. In that era Pakistan was growing at a rapidly fast pace.

Educate yourself & stop spreading BS.

 

[Frankenstein]

Do you know who has the most strongest hold in Pakistani Government??

USA

If they want, it will be a matter of second for Zardari to pack his bag, Mullahs are nothing in front of them

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Pakistan has had secular leaders and secular governments (at least on paper) but I dont think if you look on an aggegate level that it was what you could call ''secular'' country

the closest we were to secular society was under Field Marshal Ayub Khan, I would say...

our parents and grandparents have stories about how extremist mullah types were actually frowned upon people in the society......today, it is hard NOT to see why


the reality we are seeing is 2 extremes......(misguided) religious extremism on one side, and hyper-secular liberal fascism on the other

it is my belief and understanding that Islam teaches a middle path in life. Not too much to left, not too much to the right. Middle path is always key to success and well-being.

I think due to language reasons, the word ''secular'' in Pakistan is attributed with ''atheist'' or ''Godlessness''....I see flaws in that thinking, though I do agree that a country which was founded on the basis of a Muslim homeland for Muslims of subcontinent --it would be difficult to have a purely/administratively ''secular'' government


what we can be however is a moderate Islamist, pro-development, nationalist, pro-business and non-isolationist approach....best model of that is the current Turkish government, upon whose leader we bestowed Nishan-e-Pakistan when he addressed our parliament recently

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

by the way -- it was under ''secular'' --- NOT military -- governments that the civilian politicians bent over to the demands and pressure of the religious right


Ahmedy laws, blasphemy laws, banning of bars/alcohol sales to Muslims, etc. ---all created and done under civilian ''secular'' administrations which wanted to enhance their vote banks and influence

 

[kidwaibhai]

Death of Pakistani Secularism Much Exaggerated | Informed Comment


this is a great article from Juan Cole who is an expert on Pakistan and has lived in Pakistan for a while

There has been a lot of hand-wringing about religious extremism in Pakistan in the wake of the assassination of Punjab governor Salman Taseer. On Sunday the fundamentalist religious parties held a rally some 40,000 strong in the southern port city of Karachi against repealing Pakistan’s blasphemy law, as the Pakistan People’s Party MP Sherry Rahman proposes.

It would be foolish to deny that Pakistan has a problem with religious extremism. But outsiders do not actually understand the country very well and have no sense of scale, so it is hard for them to judge the significance of these events. Here I want to offer five ironies of religious extremism in that country, in an attempt to signal that the story is more complicated and requires more nuance than you find at typical American anti-Muslim hate blogs. Let me just signal the important difference between religious traditionalism and religious fundamentalism. Many Pakistanis are traditionalists– they attend at saints’ shrines, pray, sing religious songs (qawali), etc. Fundamentalists reject the idea of saints, of shrines, and of spiritual music. So on to the ironies:

1. The Pakistani parliament never passed a blasphemy law. It was promulgated in the 1980s by fiat by military dictator Gen. Zia ul-Haq. Gen. Zia made a coup in 1977 against the populist and left-leaning Pakistan People’s Party, and received the warm support of the United States, especially after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Gen. Zia was a fundamentalist who sought support in civil society for his illegitimate regime among small fundamentalist parties such as the Jama’at al-Islami. The US raised no objections.

2. The murderer of Taseer, Mumtaz Qadri, is not a fundamentalist. He had a long affair with a lover in Karachi before marrying about a year ago. He is no puritan. He sometimes trimmed back his beard, something Pakistani religious conservatives usually avoid. He sometimes went to saints’ shrines, which fundamentalists would denounce. He has no connection to any known terrorist group, and says he acted alone. He belongs to a moderate school of Islam. Many press reports have said that Taseer’s murder points to the rise of Pakistani fundamentalism, but you could not prove it by Qadri’s profile. He seems to represent no one but himself.

3. The rally of 40,000 in favor of the blasphemy law just isn’t that big in Karachi, a city of over 15 million people. The 9/11 Commission estimated that there are some 200,000 students in the religious academies or madrasahs in Karachi, so the rally did not even attract very many of them, much less a significant number of the religiously committed persons in the megalopolis.

4. The people of Karachi vote for the militantly secular if rather thuggish MQM (Muttahidah Qaumi Movement) party, which runs their municipal government and represents them in the national parliament. The MQM vehemently denounced the killing of Taseer. Fundamentalists are not important in Karachi politics, except insofar as they are violent infiltrators.

5. The MQM not only controls Karachi, it has become a swing party in parliament, the ruling Pakistan People’s Party needs the MQM secularists to stay in power. That is, the story-line of the Western press about Pakistan’s descent into fundamentalist barbarism has to be tempered with a narrative of how an unabashedly secular party is the pillar of the political establishment.

Pakistani fundamentalist parties do not typically do well in elections, and don’t appear to have that much support in a country of 170 million. The issue of the blasphemy law is a godsend to them because even Pakistani traditionalists have strong feelings about public insult to the Prophet Muhammad. It isn’t that fundamentalists are necessarily about to take over anything, but rather that the Pakistani religious Right found a momentary wedge issue. It remains to be seen whether they can parlay that issue into any significant increase of popularity at the polls when there are next parliamentary elections (now scheduled for 2013).

 

[Mughal1]

It is of vital importance for all pakistanis to knwo what pakistan stands for.

Islam and humanity make pakistan. If either of these is taken out of picture pakistan becomes just another state like many others.

Islam is islam and it is found in the quran and the authentic ahadith.

It can only be understood by those who also know what the world is and how it works.

The scriptures are like a user manual and the world is like a machine. One needs to know both of them to see how they fit together.

Or the scriptures are like a street map of a city and to benefit of the them one needs to know the city streets as well to see how the map fits with reality on the ground.

People who only know scriptures and have no idea as to how the world works cannot guide even themselves never mind anyone else. This is why mawlanas are confused about islam and that is why they cannot guide us and as a result we are all fighting each other.

FOR MORE SEE HERE

 

[Kambojaric]

Pakistan has had secular leaders and secular governments (at least on paper) but I dont think if you look on an aggegate level that it was what you could call ''secular'' country

the closest we were to secular society was under Field Marshal Ayub Khan, I would say...

our parents and grandparents have stories about how extremist mullah types were actually frowned upon people in the society......today, it is hard NOT to see why


the reality we are seeing is 2 extremes......(misguided) religious extremism on one side, and hyper-secular liberal fascism on the other

it is my belief and understanding that Islam teaches a middle path in life. Not too much to left, not too much to the right. Middle path is always key to success and well-being.

I think due to language reasons, the word ''secular'' in Pakistan is attributed with ''atheist'' or ''Godlessness''....I see flaws in that thinking, though I do agree that a country which was founded on the basis of a Muslim homeland for Muslims of subcontinent --it would be difficult to have a purely/administratively ''secular'' government


what we can be however is a moderate Islamist, pro-development, nationalist, pro-business and non-isolationist approach....best model of that is the current Turkish government, upon whose leader we bestowed Nishan-e-Pakistan when he addressed our parliament recently

Coudnt agree more with the bolded part, dont at all agree with the religious extremists but also on the other side the arrogance of the so called "liberals" towards anything traditional, conservative is beyond me. They in their attempt to become western and "cool" forget their own identity. This trend is growing in the larger cities especially.