The Problems Facing Muslim Nations

I was lured into reading an article by its name, “The Problems Facing Muslim Nations”, published at the Arab News, a leading English Daily in Saudi Arabia. I thought perhaps a person with insight of the Muslim Countries’ affairs would shed light on identifying key factors adversely affecting growth, prosperity, pluralism and good governance within the Muslim land. However, I was disappointed. In fact, disappointment perhaps is an understatement. The author not only failed to grasp the challenges facing the Muslim nations, his analysis of the issues are frankly demeaning, dispiriting and devoid of realism.
In brief, the piece identified five issues – education framework not fit for purpose; our obsessions with the past; like for abstract at the expense of concrete; obsession with angels, demons, God and satan and finally, lame and illogical dislike for arts.
When one read the article and the five factors identified, it becomes apparent that the writer feels that the Islamic faith as it is practiced by the most is responsible for much of the backwardness, irrationality, illogicality and superficiality. He feels that much of our nations’ adherence to the faith is blind, literal and therefore not rational and logical. Of course, he was at pain to stress that Islamic faith need not to be blamed, and no harm can arise from study of faith but it just needs not to be at the expense of others.
For a start, the author fails to understand the Muslim nations even on the basics. While Saudi Arabia, presumably the country of the Author and may be Iran, are the only two exceptions where faith may have some kind of dominance in the governance of the state. Countries such as Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Egypt and Turkey, nations with most Muslim population, enjoy a political culture and class in which faith has very little direct and visible effect. People with real authority and power who has been dominating policy making and state operation are predominantly western educated, secular minded and often with little visible devotion to faith. Why then have they not adopted the curriculum, created the context for recognition of the present as oppose to dwelling in the past? As for the love of arts, we know that many of these governments had almost irrational degree of love for art – music, film, fine art etc. There is also no evidence to suggest that these governments were threatened by the “religiou fanatics” to the extent that they had to compromise in their policy making. Other than in Afghanistan, none of the other nations had much rational fear of being ransomed by religious fanatics.
The argument thus that faith and a blind obsession with it is at the heart of our demise is nothing but an irrational, illogical assertion without factual and evidential basis. Further, it serves to the prevailing global policy to scapegoat faith, and in particular Islam. It also overlooks the reality on the ground.
Now that it is clear I disagree with the piece, what then are the issues with Muslim nations? Well this is too big a question to be answered in one article by a small individual like me. However, I shall seek to briefly identify several factors that I think are important.
Firstly, education curriculum, practice and framework in our countries are a problem and no, not because of their obsession with religion, far from it. The problem at the heart of our educational systems are two fold – firstly the lack of a conceptual basis which does not provide a vision behind our educational strategies and secondly, and perhaps as a consequent of the first, that our education’s emphasis is not on analytical, critical and intellectual development of the students. Curriculum in most Muslim countries seems to emphasise on recollection, memorisation and not on critical evaluation, analysis and problem solving. This is true of the science, arts and religious curriculum. Shockingly, this is true at all level of education – primary to the university level.
The second challenge in the Muslim countries is a lack of culture to debate competing ideas. Muslim countries are notoriously polarised along political and ideological lines - whichever ideology we hold dear, we reject the notion that others are also entitled to hold their own ideology. As a result, the secular minded rejects any notion that faith and those with an ideology inspired by faith has a stake in the affairs of the state and vice versa.
Third and final issue that I would highlight is the lack of patronage of religion by the state. I know some will find it surprising and many may well see that it is the opposite. But that is not so. Yes, there are states that provide huge funds and influence to religious institutions and scholars. But my point is that state should take a pro-active role in creating an environment in which scholars, students and public take an active interest in exploring faith in its totality, engage in debates and open discussions where difference is respected, celebrated and not condemned. That will only happen if states provide patronage to research based on religion which seek to explore finding answers to modern questions that Muslims and non-Muslims alike are facing. This will create a level playing field in which dogmatic, literalist and traditionalist scholars will not dominate exclusively the sphere of religious decision making.
But at the heart of all the above must be a realisation that faith, as a separate, independent and parallel entity to daily life cannot exists and must not exist. From an Islamic perspective, faith is intertwined with a person’s belief, action and though process. Attempt to separate state from religion, Islam from life, is an artificial separation which will only create confusion, chaos and often disunity. The question that ought to be at the top of our mind-set is how we can be true to our faith while embrace the spirit of innovation, creativity, objectivity and pluralism. After all, Islam has championed these values for centuries while the present western civilisation was in darkness.

Tackling Extremism

An International Conference is being held in Dhaka to discuss strategies to address ‘extremism’ attended by experts from the South Asian region as well as Singapore and Norway.

From the outset, I respect and appreciate such initiative and, with sincerity and goodwill, such initiative may bring much needed coherence in the strategies of governments in the South Asia and the wider world in dealing with Terrorism. But this optimism I find difficult to hold for practical reasons.

Terrorism now is a global phenomenon and the Western powers have taken much interest on the matter. It is only to be commended that the powerful nations are putting together huge amount of resources to deal with an issue of such importance. However, a closer look and careful analysis of the strategies, actions and outcomes of work by these nations to counter terrorism reveals little to have confidence. In fact, what analysis of most known counter-terrorism reveals is at best ignorance or at worst, prejudice towards a certain belief.

Terrorism, when resulting from sheer greed and criminal mindset, is a simple and straightforward issue which needs to be dealt with harshly. Such terrorism exists in many countries, especially the underdeveloped countries like Bangladesh. We are not, however, talking of such terrorism. The kind of terrorism that global community now a day talks about often, if not always, relates to resentment and reaction of people who for one reason or another feel aggrieved. Grievances caused by injustice, prejudice and hatred may result in a kind of resentment leading to terrorist activities which cannot be defeated through guns and bullets. Such terrorism requires pragmatism and sophisticated understanding of the issues backed by sincere desire to eradicate injustice. Only when the rights of all people can be restored, dignity and respect for individuals enshrined in the social fabric and rule of law established will the sense of resentment eventually disappear and the ‘good hearted’ individuals will return to normal life. Those that remain committed to the paths of violence and destruction may continue but will loose munitions for recruitment and retention which will ensure the end of such thugs and criminals.

On the backdrop of this understanding let us focus on the issue of terrorism in the context of Bangladesh. The current government pledged to form a South Asian task force to coordinate response of the governments in the region regarding the issue of counter-terrorism. But such initiative is only at its primary stage and lacks in details as admitted by the Foreign Minister of Bangladesh at the Terrorism conference. Further more, the actions of the government seems to be half hearted, if not dubious. In one hand they seem to claim to be genuinely committed to eradicate extremism on the other, they are pursuing a path of violence and political harassment of opposition. Mass scale attacks on the political activists of the opposition parties will create anarchy and give rise to resentment, just the kind of environment where terrorism flourishes.
The issue of ‘war crime’ during the Bangladesh’s Independence struggle is also relevant here. It is an issue resolved many years ago by the founding fathers of our nation. The present government itself made no serious attempt in the past. It seems to be clear to everyone except the diehard supporters of the government that the move to try the so called war criminals is politically motivated and is orchestrated to ensure political advantage for the ruling party and their allies. It is reasonable to conclude for this reason that any move to try the ‘war criminals’ will only act to divide our nation, exactly the kind of things that aid the growth of terrorist network. Besides, the present government has only been in power for just over a month and has already failed to impress the right minded citizens of their genuine desire to play by the rules.

To deal with terrorism must be a priority. But any strategies and action must be proportionate to the threat and realistic. It must also be free from political motives and must genuinely be aimed at building a respectful society where citizens are brought together by a common sense of identity and values. No action of divisive nature can ever bring peace. Violating core values of human dignity, individuals’ right and political suppression can never be good strategies for countering terrorism.