Within the circles of Muslim Youth that understands or at least have an awareness of the political system of Islam or the purpose and objectives of the political system of Islam, often we see that there is an on going intellectual debate. One group argues for what is a very innovative term and often projected and argued as contradictory or oxymoron term, known as “Islamic Democracy” and the other group is what I will call “Pro-Caliphate.” Although I don’t want to call the later a Pro-Caliphate group, however, they have left me with no other choice.
The objective of both groups are kinda similar. Both groups want Sharia in their political system, both groups look towards the Rightly Guided Caliphs “Khulafa-e-Rashideen” [Abu Bakar, Umar, Usman, and Ali- R.A] for administrative guidance, after The Holy Quran and the Prophet Muhammad. They also look towards the past great early scholars and their interpretations. However, the “Islamic Democracy” group argues to actively participate in the political atmosphere of their country, and bring a change slowly and gradually through the existing systems in their countries. This “Islamic Democracy Group” [IDG] from here on, is thus divided into fragments, as each country needs at least one Islamic political party to fulfill this objective. Thus each of these IDGs work independently with only a global moral support.
The second group, the “Pro Caliphate Group” [PCG] is the group that strongly opposes the political participation in the existing political process in the Muslim countries, but also forbids people to even vote (which is a form of political participation). These groups are in minority but are global. One of the most organized and prominent one is Hizb ut Tahrir [HT], which is based in UK but has strong grounds in Europe and almost in all the Muslim Nations. Another Pakistani group for this purpose which is more spiritual and intellectual is Tanzeem-e-Islami, although had the same objective but so far is unable to achieve the organizational structure as of Hizb ut Tahrir. HT is often seen as a radical or more hard line at achieving their goal. HT calls itself a political party, even though their own political participation is limited to the protests to the policies of the governments (whether it be European or a Muslim Country). Tanzeem-i-Islami is spiritual and conveys its message through speeches, talks and lectures, thus is not of a subject to discussion in this post.
Coming back to the Islamic Democracy Group [IDG], few organizations are way prominent than others. Jamaat-e-
Islami of Pakistan, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (India), Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Muslim Brotherhood (Egypt), Hamas (Palestine), Hezbollah (Lebanon) and some in Malaysia and Indonesia while ignoring in almost the rest of the Muslim world. Upon noticing these organizations, some are similar while others are different in their mission statements. That is due to the political atmosphere each party is living in. Jamaat-e-Islami Hind is very spiritually politically active, on the other hand, Hamas in Palestine is aggressively active.
Besides these differences, all this is mentioned just to show the popularity of the participation in the existing political processes in the Muslim world. Despite of many Western “experts” who want to depict Muslims as against West’s “Freedom, Equality, Political Representation, Independent Judicial system and Balance of Power” just to mention few, their arguments become folly when we put their arguments against the realities in the Muslim World. Point to be noted is that although many Muslims eagerly engage or at least support engaging in the political process of their countries and demand democratic process, they envision Islamic characteristics in the system. The basic study of the Islamic Political system, can explain how Democracy is so close to the Islamic Political system. That is the prime reason, Islamic Movements have taken up the charge of changing their societies through their democratic, semi-democratic, and even dictorial democratic (Egypt) systems.
The problem lies in the fact that when these Islamic Political parties actively participate in the democratic process of their Muslim countries, these parties and its activities are mostly repressed out of the fear of “taking over” the government, which are always “friends” of United States. The examples for this are numerous, and I am trying to imply nothing over here. The fact is that the US government poses all the Islamic political parties as de facto opponents. Whatever reason might be, but it cannot be said that it is because US wants to spread “democracy” and “freedom” because that is contradictory to the realities in Muslim World in general.
As the title says that Pakistanis want larger role for both Islam and Democracy, it should not come as a surprise unless if you have been unaware of the realities of the Muslim World, espacially of Pakistan.
According to the Poll by WorldPublicOpinion.com (Jan 04, 2008), Pakistanis wanted greater role of Islam in their government along with free judiciary and a democratic government. As Reuters reported it,
“It shows there is no major Western-oriented secular sub-group in Pakistan. People want more Islam. They don’t think Pakistan is pious enough or that Islamic values are adequately expressed in daily life,” said Steven Kull, director of WorldPublicOpinion.org, a non-profit group affiliated with the University of Maryland that conducted the poll for USIP.
While moving the Objectives Resolution in the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, Liaqat Ali Khan said:
Pakistan was founded because the Muslims of this sub-continent wanted to build up their lives in accordance with the teachings and traditions of Islam, because they warned to demonstrate to the world that Islam provides a panacea to the many deseases which have crept into the life of humanity today.
Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, Debates, Vol. V, p.3, March 7, 1949.
As written by UmerSultan @ The Key To Power
