|
|
تنہائیوں کا سیل ِرواں پھیل رہا ہے
بربادیاں ہیں خوفِ زیاں پھیل رہا ہے
ہر سُو نظر آتے ہیں ہجوم ِبشر تشنہ
ہر سُو سرابِ آبِ رواں پھیل رہا ہے
وہ نیلگوں سے آسمانی رنگ کیا ہوئے
یہ سرمئی سا کیسا دُھواں پھیل رہا ہے
ہر سمت گونجتی ہے صدائے طبل مرے
ہر آن کشت و خوں کا سماں پھیل رہا ہے
ملک عدم ہوئے کیا حقائق کے نامہ بر!
جو شہر شہر وہم و گماں پھیل رہا ہے
اقباؔل کیا درختوں سے طائر اُڑا دئے
گلشن میں جو یہ شور ِسگاں پھیل رہا ہے
I realize that the small group sitting here represents the best Pakistan has to offer
as a typical sampling of the educated, upper middle class (from Pakistani standards), living in the west, who understand clearly what Secularism is, its pros and cons, and how it enforces equality of rights and obligations, distribution of opportunities, and rewards of hard work on a level playing field, regardless of religion, ethnicity, gender and race. The objective of our collective exercise is to get every Pakistani to have the same clarity of concept and thus pick Secularism as their preferred choice. It goes without saying that it is a tall order. Once the whole nation is at least semi-educated, the concept will get auto-corrected by evaporation of prevalent ignorance and abundance of knowledge. However that might take many more generations. As the poet said
“Kon jeeta hae teri zulf ke sar honay tak”.
All of us participating in the discussion that follows my reading of these few pages, fully understand the concept of Secularism. But we are not a typical sample of the poor rural population of Pakistan. There, the vast majority consists of illiterate, semi-literate automatons who live in the countryside and cannot think or decide for themselves; they simply follow orders, being the lowest base of the pyramid of social hierarchy. A product of many generations ruled by feudal system. They are the great majority of Pakistan’s unquestioning and completely docile order takers. How Secularism is perceived in the developed western countries is not in the purview of this discussion. For example, in USA, secularists tend to prefer and are bound by law of the land, that their legislators and politicians make decisions for secular rather than religious reasons. In this respect, policy decisions pertaining to topics like Abortion, Contraception, Embryonic Stem Cell research, Same-Sex marriage, and Sex Education are prominently focused upon by American secularist organizations such as the Center for Inquiry. What we intend to explore is whether Pakistanis back home can be primed and persuaded to think and formulate public policies on similar lines as Secularist Americans.
The purpose of this presentation is to elicit ideas, advice and suggestions from all of you, a great sample of Pakistan’s best although a tiny minority living in the West, on how to spread the true meanings of Secularism among Pakistanis back home and to dispel the anti Secularism propaganda spread by vested interests. Those vested interests employ doctored history, misleading text books, faulty education, to strike the fear that Secularism will hurt Islam and so on. Those vested interests hide behind religious platforms of madaris, pulpit of mosques, Islamist media and religious political parties, simply to perpetuate their own domination.
Later in this paper I will try to present how Secularism is currently viewed in Pakistan, why it is so described, and what needs to be done to rectify the problem.
Being a madarsa alumnus, class of ’57 of Madarsa Islamia in Chittagong, I am deficient in English diction and composition and may need to lapse into Urdu to convey my thoughts whenever I fail, which I often do, to find the right word in English. I seek your indulgence. So here goes my presentation.
Secularism Is
Secularism is broadly defined as the separation between Religion and State, such that the ideologies of religious groups do not feature in, or interfere with the functions of the government. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan was originally formed with the intention of functioning as a purely secular State.
Secularism is premised on the belief that within a democracy, all citizens are, and must be treated as equal before both the law and parliament, with the same rights and obligations as one another. No religious or political affiliation, or lack thereof, is to be afforded any advantages or disadvantages. These aims of secularism are executed through establishing laws and policies of such a state, that provide equal protection for all citizens, regardless of the particular religion or philosophical beliefs of any particular citizen.
Secularism Is Not
Secularism is not the denouncement, disavowal, or devaluing of religion, or religious ideas. It is not atheism, nor does it challenge the tenets of any particular religion or belief, nor seeks to curtail or restrict religious freedoms. Secularism not only recognizes the existence of (multiple) religion(s), it also hedges on the principle, that (each) religion has its own unique space, which must not overlap with the functions of government affairs. In doing so, secularism does not endorse or promote any one religion, by refraining from assigning differing values to one over others.
The Dominant Perception of Secularism in Pakistan, among the Illiterate and Semi-literate Socioeconomic Classes (Godlessness, Atheism, Anti-Islam, pro-Indian Sentiment)
The current sociopolitical environment, educational system, and (news) media industry portrays a very grim and wholly inaccurate picture of how the majority of Pakistan (i.e. mainly the illiterate and semi-literate socioeconomic portions of the population) perceive secularism. Secularism is often confused with Godlessness, Atheism, anti-Islamic, and even as pro-Indian sentiment. Many view the concept of secularism as a blatant rejection of religion (specifically Islam), under the mistaken belief that discouraging Islamic-privilege in government and law, is akin to outright blasphemy.
Roots of Misperception of Secularism in Pakistan
The misperception of secularism in the context of Pakistan, can largely be attributed to the supporters of Islamization. The beginnings of Islamization can be seen as far back as 1971, when East Pakistan and West Pakistan parted ways. In the same decade, elected Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, was seen bowing before pressure imposed by Islamic parties in Pakistan, which was evidenced through the ban of alcohol, gambling, and nightclubs in the early 1970s, as well as the government’s declaration of Ahmadis as non-Muslims. But the overwhelming force of Islamization was felt with the military coup of 1977, led by General Zia-Ul-Haq (“Haq”).
Islamization sought to present itself as a direct opposition of secularism, declaring it as the enemy of, rather than an alternative to the same. In doing so, particularly during Haq’s 11 year reign, it influenced the young nation’s populace, to view secularism and any resulting separation of Church and State, as a direct attack on Islamic principles and way of life. Shariah law was brought into force and enacted in place of the common law in the arenas of family and marriage laws, evidentiary procedures, inheritance laws, banking laws, and criminal laws, amongst others. This (d)evolved into a justice system that was heavily reliant on Islamic principles, and greatly rewarded those citizens that were proponents of the same. Some key examples of this include establishment of a separate Shariat Court system, the Hudood Ordinance, the introduction of criminal offences of adultery, fornication, and blasphemy, and declaring interest-income to be illegal for being un-Islamic. To further this aim, marshall law sought to control and restrict the free flow of information, opportunities, and ideas to the citizens of Pakistan, allowing only those that helped Haq to reinforce his narrowly-tailored, and utterly false definition of secularism. School text books were altered to remove that which was perceived (by Haq’s unilateral interpretation and discretion) objectionable or repugnant to the principles of Islam, the ulama was given a boost of importance and involvement to comment and influence the matters of the State, and Islamic programming was given top priority on television airtime.
But perhaps the most influential factor was the rise in the number and attendance of madarsas during this time. This gave Haq the opportunity to shape not only young minds from the outset, but also the overall mind of the young nation when it was most impressionable, to shape and influence such nation’s (mis)perception of and attitude towards secularism.
What was Jinnah’s perception of secularism and which elements wanted to defeat it (Jinnah’s address to constituent assembly on August 11 1947- entire text available on google)
In his landmark speech before the Constituent Assembly on August 11, 1947, founder of Pakistan and first Governor-General, Muhammad Ali Jinnah (“Jinnah”), touched upon various goals and visions for Pakistan, on the eve of its birth. He asserted that, “if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous, we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and especially of the masses and the poor… If you change your past and work together in a spirit that every one of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste, or creed, is first, second, and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges, and obligations, there will be no end to the progress you will make.” At the outset, it is apparent that Jinnah is a proponent of total equality amongst the citizens of Pakistan, with no distinctions to be made on the basis of religion, colour, or creed – a fundamental tenement of secularism.
He goes on to state, “in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities, the Hindu community and the Muslim community … will vanish. Indeed if you ask me, this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain the freedom and independence, and but for this we would have been free people long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls, in subjection; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time, but for this. Therefore, we must learn a lesson from this. You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed — that has nothing to do with the business of the State.” In this part of the speech it becomes abundantly clear that Jinnah has a secular vision for Pakistan, and not only insists that religious affairs, groups, and beliefs must have no involvement in the business of the State, but also vehemently believes that separation of Church and State, if established earlier, would have become India’s biggest strength, rendering it invincible towards any nation attempting to conquer and divide it.
Finally, Jinnah says, “We are starting with this fundamental principle: that we are all citizens, and equal citizens, of one State… Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal, and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus, and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.” Here, he envisages a Pakistan, which possesses a government and legal and justice system that is blind to the religious proclivities of its citizens, and keeps all who pledge their allegiance to such State on a level playing field. The word “secularism” may not have been uttered even once throughout his speech, but its principles resonate loudly throughout, and are undeniable.
Suggestions for Changing the Perception of Secularism among Pakistanis
Changing the perception of secularism in Pakistan is a tall order that requires long-term planning and investment. The two keys areas that will be instrumental in this, are the same areas used by Haq to spread Islamization in Pakistan, i.e. legislation and education. Legislatures will have to take on the task of repealing those laws, which are (1) overly burdensome; (2) promote any type of inequality of rights, liabilities, opportunities, advantages and/or disadvantages amongst citizens; and (3) promote or demote the agenda of any religion over another, or lack thereof. This starts with Constitutional amendments, that do away with any constitutional provisions that have been found to be contradicting other constitutional provisions, removing the ones which violate the principles of equality, fair play, and justice. Justice cannot be blind, and citizens cannot be equal, unless the laws of the land are first blind.
Finally, an educational system, that allows for a free flow and exchange of information, and mandates critical thinking is crucial. An entire generation must go through and complete the requisite education under such a system, to cleanse the polluted political palate of Pakistan. Critical thinking is particularly important because it is key for any individual or citizen to make a meaningful and informed choice, whether with respect to religion, or otherwise. And the choice to meaningfully believe and practice is at the heart of all religions, as well as secularism
Islamic or Secular Pakistan
An important topic to discuss!!
http://m.dw.com/en/an-islamic-or-secular-pakistan/a-17325395
America to Rethink of its Role in Global Affairs
Mahboob A Khawaja, Ph.D.
America under President Trump continues to foster an agenda of extreme perplexity, triviality and confusion in dealing with urgent global affairs. If the administration were to learn from the history, it must be candid, focused and redirect its strengths and weaknesses from the past and usher a new strategic direction of change and adaptability to the present and futuristic challenges of collaborative understanding with all the global powers. This should include the conflict in Syria, Iran nuclear deal, agreement on climate change and pursuing a balanced approach to Israel-Palestine issues.
How to Comprehend the Contradictions of the US Policy Behavior?
Lacking the visionary leadership, President Obama lost precious time and opportunities to deliver “Yes, We Can.” Now, President Trump is making headlines with inherent stagnation of inner look on the current global affairs. Every day is becoming a strange new media theater of absurdity, not distinguishing between the problems and solutions. American politics endured wide range of human, intellectual, political and material losses because of the wrong thinking, wrong actions and dubious performance of the former Obama and Bush administrations. The war agenda destroyed America’s capacity and credibility as an influential global power. The perpetrators of prolonged war agenda floating above the normal mindset must be abnormal – insane – irresponsible, utterly individualistic paranoid to make such move on behalf of the people who elected them for change and peacemaking.
World affairs are a complex discipline and often require serious and impartial mindset to see the issues objectively, rationally and dispassionately. The US Trump administration is uncertain and lacks imagination and repeating the blunders of the Bush era – acting like immature kids who get mad while playing with toys – behaving like the sadistic Razor King we read in European history who broiled his enemies and enjoyed witnessing the live killings. Strangely, Obama lied about prospective change and opening up a dialogue with the Muslim world. This was a fiction, not a fact of policy shift to get elected. Often change bring hopes and optimism for something different – an escape from the cruel obsession of the few to something more conducive to the human nature. But you can only expect this from rational beings having fullest sense of moral, intellectual and professional accountability to the society that bestows legitimacy to their role and official standing, certainly not from those who appear to have lost all basic norms of morality and civilization. Julia Dalton (“Is Obama the Trojan Horse, A Psychopath, A Bad Boyfriend or all Three?” OpenEdNews: 1/07/2012), a strong former supporter of Obama notes that President Obama was more of a psychopath and a Trojan horse than being an author of Audacity of Hope, and imaginative manipulator of “Yes We Can” to win the elections.
“Now, the United States Constitution provides for impeachment. The intrinsic basis for impeachment, is not conviction for some crime. That is not sufficient basis for impeachment, because the question of the Presidency of the United States is the question of an institution, not of a person. But, if the person who occupies that institution is clinically insane, or is otherwise incompetent to serve, that is sufficient grounds for a charge of impeachment and for his removal from office. On the other hand, we have a Vice President, who is not necessarily a psychopath, but is a sociopath. The man must be removed from office. What we have now, as a result of the actions and continuing actions in the Senate, we have a bloc, being exerted by the U.S. Senate, against the dangers intrinsic in the incumbency of these two creatures, and the people who control them. And therefore, if the world is to be saved, these two creatures must be kept under control and removed from office—not four years or three years from now, but in the immediate future.”
Why did Obama not take action to bring all these culprits to justice? Did Obama have similar characteristics and features of insanity like Bush, Blair and Cheney? If so, should the Norwegian Nobel Committee have revoked the Peace Prize given to Obama without performance and accountability? Julia Dalton finds it a fact of life that Obama is a wrong guy to occupy the post of president of the US:
“I know it’s hard to admit you made a mistake. I get it. You really believed this guy was “the one” and he is the one for the 1%: Wall Street, the too big to fail banks, the military industrial complex, the prison industrial complex, big oil, big pharma, i.e. the corporate fascist state he’s so gingerly locking into place…………And, therefore, I feel it’s my duty to do an intervention. For those of you still deluding yourselves, who still can’t face reality I suggest therapy or better yet maybe pick up a copy of “He’s just Not That into You.”
Nothing is going to last unto eternity for sure; Obama faced many limitations and overburden too, the pinch of self-exalted individualistic opportunism, so common amongst all the political contenders of public goodness, civility and humanity. They all pretend like the puppets do, politicians are no different a specie but the same kind. Julia Dalton thinks so:
“The Obama brand is collapsing just as the Bush brand before him became so craven even the most deluded had to recognize the fraud that had been perpetrated upon the American people”
Could America Make a Navigational Change for a Peaceful Future?
Paul Craig Roberts (“the Next War on Washington’s Agenda.” OpenEdnews: 01/12/2012), spells out the ingrained political cynicism governing the Washington’s based military-industrial complex of which Mr. Obama was the latest willing participatory leader.
You wonder, what is this all fuss about? President Trump as of October 14, 2017 is revisiting the traditional belligerent strategy against Iran by refusal to testify the Iranian compliance on the international nuclear agreement. It opens up new suspicious weakness in US policy behavior who could trust the American behavior even in situation of solid global agreement? Paul Craig Roberts (“the Next War on Washington’s Agenda.”), noted three major reasons for the US policy pursuit against Iran:
“One is the neoconservative ideology, adopted by the US government that calls for the US to use its superior military and economic position to achieve world hegemony. This goal appeals to American hubris and to the power and profit that it serves….A second factor is Israel’s desire to eliminate all support for the Palestinians and for Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Israel’s goal is to seize all of Palestine and the water resources of southern Lebanon. Eliminating Iran removes all obstacles to Israel’s expansion…..
It is unthinkable and irrational stance that if Iran develops the nuclear know-how and capacity and that it could threaten anyone in the region or beyond. We live in an age of actions-reactions and nuclear reprisals – no one would like to be candidate for the first strike to ensure self-destruction, and those who possess the nuclear capability know it well, understand its disastrous consequences to use the nuclear weapons. The North Korean nuclear crisis is a current example in global affairs. American leadership knows it well too. Imagine, if the Shah Reza Pahlavi, the absolute king of Iran was alive and buying the weapons from the US, would America move to strangle Iran? No, certainly NO. Isn’t this another myth of the continued bogus War on Terrorism raged on the false pretext of the WMD in Iraq?
Mankind looks for Hope for peace and co-existence amongst the divergent cultures and nations of the world. Global politics is not a system of moral principles or intellectual and political values but often a game – a cruel drama – a puppet show often staged to appease the few Dracula – a psychopath puzzle of few insane people who had nothing useful to contribute to the mankind except drudgery, deceit, lies and inborn deceptions – the previous net outcome of this thinking was the continuing bogus War on Terrorism. Wars are planned, conspired and are the outcome of few cruel monsters – egomaniac mindsets, not of the electoral consensus of the rational beings dreaming of life as a gift from God, progressive in civility and nobility of thoughts and behaviors and being accountable to the rest of the humanity. The Europeans have come to realize these harsh facts after centuries of wide-ranging insanity and Two World Wars and killing of millions and millions of fellow Europeans just to maintain racial superiority, national borders, rule of the few obsessed with individualistic power. Should the Americans not learn from the annals of the darkest chapters of the modern European history? Paul Craig Roberts attempts to reflect on this much needed historical Essence of Learning and the Urgent need for a Navigational Change:
“We, as Americans, need to ask ourselves what all this is about? Why is our government so provocative toward Islam, Russia, China, Iran? What purpose, whose purpose is being served? Certainly not ours…………Where do we go from here? If not to nuclear destruction, Americans must wake up. Football games, porn, and shopping malls are one thing. Survival of human life is another. Washington, that is, “representative government,” consists only of a few powerful vested interests. These private interests, not the American people, control the US government. That is why nothing that the US government does benefits the American people.”
(Dr. Mahboob A. Khawaja specializes in global security, peace and conflict resolution-international affairs with keen interests in Islamic-Western comparative cultures and civilizations, and author of several publications including Global Peace and Conflict Management: Man and Humanity in Search of New Thinking. Germany, May 2012. His forthcoming publications are entitled: One Humanity and the Remaking of Global Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution; and Global Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution: Approaches to Understand the Current Issues and Future-Making, Germany, 2017).