Pakistan and Islamic Militancy in South Asia

By Syed Ramsey

This book gives the involvement of Pakistan in spreading Terrorism across South Asia.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Alpha Editions
• Release date: Jan 1, 2017
• ISBN: 9789386834379

Syed Ramsey

The author is a researcher on International Politics and History. He has written a number of articles on History and International Politics.

Book preview

Pakistan

and

Islamic Militancy in South Asia

Pakistan and Islamic Militancy in South Asia

by

Syed Ramsey

Alpha Editions

Copyright © 2017

ISBN : 9789386367433

Design and Setting By

Alpha Editions

email - [e-mail]

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

The views and characters expressed in the book are of the author and his/her imagination and do not represent the views of the Publisher.

Contents

Preface

1.      Pakistan and Islam

2.      Islamic Militancy

3.      Criticism of Islamic Terrorist Ideology

4.      Pakistan’s Military Organizations

5.      Islamic Militancy in Pakistan and South Asia

6.      Islam Movement in South Asia

7.      Islamic Terrorism and Pakistani Intelligence       Agency in South Asia

8.      The Islamic Doctrine of Jihad in South Asia

Bibliography

Index

Preface

Islamic militancy is going on in many parts of the world notable among which are Palestine, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Kashmir and parts of Central Asia. However, what is surprising to many people is that secular institutions and Western countries also produce Islamic militants.

As the nation deemed to be the South Asian homeland for Muslims, Pakistan is the second largest Muslim nation in the world, with 97 percent of its population practicing Islam. Within the Muslim population, around 75 percent are Sunnis and 25 percent are Shi’as. Since independence in 1947, debates surrounding the relationship between Islam and the state remain unresolved; various religious-minded political parties continue to push forcefully for the establishment of a true Islamic state.

The nation’s gradual Islamization since the 1970s has neither been fast enough nor comprehensive enough for many of them. Islamists are themselves deeply divided, however, between those groups that want to continue working through the existing political system and those that reject its legitimacy. Since 2001, radial Islamist politics has increasingly intersected with and grafted itself upon tribal, regional and class grievances against the Pakistani state. All the matter is just compiled and edited in nature.

This book contains the fundamental and basic information of the subject and is useful for teachers, students and researchers.

—Editor

ligations, and financial dealings. It is derived primarily from the Quran and the Sunna—the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed. Precedents and analogy applied by Muslim scholars are used to address new issues. The consensus of the Muslim community also plays a role in defining this theological manual. Sharia developed several hundred years after the Prophet Mohammed’s death in 632 CE as the Islamic empire expanded to the edge of North Africa in the West and to China in the East. Since the Prophet Mohammed was considered the most pious of all believers, his life and ways became a model for all other Muslims and were collected by scholars into what is known as the hadith. As each locality tried to reconcile local customs and Islam, hadith literature grew and developed into distinct schools of Islamic thought: the Sunni schools, Hanbali, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanafi; and the Shiite school, Ja’fari. Named after the scholars that inspired them, they differ in the weight each applies to the sources from which sharia is derived, the Quran, hadith, Islamic scholars, and consensus of the community. The Hanbali school, known for following the most Orthodox form of Islam, is embraced in Saudi Arabia and by the Taliban. The Hanafi school, known for being the most liberal and the most focused on reason and analogy, is dominant among Sunnis in Central Asia, Egypt, Pakistan, India, China, Turkey, the Balkans, and the Caucasus. The Maliki school is dominant in North Africa and the Shafii school in Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam, and Yemen. Shia Muslims follow the Ja’fari school, most notably in Shia-dominant Iran. The distinctions have more impact on the legal systems in each country, however, than on individual Muslims, as many do not adhere to one school in their personal lives.

Controversy: Punishment and Equality under Sharia

Marriage and divorce are the most significant aspects of sharia, but criminal law is the most controversial. In sharia, there are categories of offences: those that are prescribed a specific punishment in the Quran, known as hadd punishments, those that fall under a judge’s discretion, and those resolved through a tit-for-tat measure (i.e., blood money paid to the family of a murder victim). There are five hadd crimes: unlawful sexual intercourse (sex outside of marriage and adultery), false accusation of unlawful sexual intercourse, wine drinking (sometimes extended to include all alcohol drinking), theft, and highway robbery. Punishments for hadd offences—flogging, stoning, amputation, exile, or execution—get a significant amount of media attention when they occur. These sentences are not often prescribed, however. In reality, most Muslim countries do not use traditional classical Islamic punishments, says Ali Mazrui of the Institute of Global Cultural Studies in a Voice of America interview. These punishments remain on the books in some countries but lesser penalties are often considered sufficient.

Despite official reluctance to use hadd punishments, vigilante justice still takes place. Honour killings, murders committed in retaliation for bringing dishonour on one’s family, are a worldwide problem. While precise statistics are scarce, the UN estimates thousands of women are killed annually in the name of family honour (National Geographic). Other practices that are woven into the sharia debate, such as female genital mutilation, adolescent marriages, polygamy, and gender-biased inheritance rules, elicit as much controversy. There is significant debate over what the Quran sanctions and what practices were pulled from local customs and predate Islam.

Those that seek to eliminate or at least modify these controversial practices cite the religious tenet of tajdid. The concept is one of renewal, where Islamic society must be reformed constantly to keep it in its purest form. With the passage of time and changing circumstances since traditional classical jurisprudence was founded, people’s problems have changed and conversely, there must be new thought to address these changes and events, says Dr. Abdul Fatah Idris, head of the comparative jurisprudence department at Al-Azhar University in Cairo. Though many scholars share this line of thought, there are those who consider the purest form of Islam to be the one practiced in the seventh century.

Sharia vs. Secularism

In a 2007 University of Maryland poll, more than 60 percent of the populations in Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, and Indonesia responded that democracy was a good way to govern their respective countries, while at the same time, an average of 71 percent agreed with requiring strict application of [sharia] law in every Islamic country. Whether democracy and Islam can coexist is a topic of heated debate. Some Islamists argue democracy is a purely Western concept imposed on Muslim countries. Others feel Islam necessitates a democratic system and that democracy has a basis in the Quran since mutual consultation among the people is commended (42:38 Quran). John L. Esposito and John O. Voll explain the debate in a 2001 article in the journal Humanities.

Noah Feldman, a former CFR adjunct senior fellow, writes in a 2008 New York Times Magazine article that the full incorporation of Islamic law is viewed as creating a path to just and legitimate government in much of the Muslim world.

It places duplicitous rulers alongside their constituents under the rule of God. For many Muslims today, living in corrupt autocracies, the call for [sharia] is not a call for sexism, obscurantism or savage punishment but for an Islamic version of what the West considers its most prized principle of political justice: the rule of law, Feldman argues. On the other hand, some Muslim scholars say that secular government is the best way to observe sharia. Enforcing a [sharia] through coercive power of the state negates its religious nature, because Muslims would be observing the law of the state and not freely performing their religious obligation as Muslims, says Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im, a professor of law at Emory University and author of a book on the future of sharia. Opinions on the best balance of Islamic law and secular law vary, but sharia has been incorporated into political systems in three general ways:

Dual Legal System: Many majority Muslim countries have a dual system in which the government is secular but Muslims can choose to bring familial and financial disputes to sharia courts. The exact jurisdiction of these courts varies from country to country, but usually includes marriage, divorce, inheritance, and guardianship. Examples can be seen in Nigeria and Kenya, which have sharia courts that rule on family law for Muslims. A variation exists in Tanzania, where civil courts apply sharia or secular law according to the religious backgrounds of the defendants. Several countries, including Lebanon and Indonesia, have mixed jurisdiction courts based on residual colonial legal systems and supplemented with sharia. Western countries are also exploring the idea of allowing Muslims to apply Islamic law in familial and financial disputes. In late 2008, Britain officially allowed sharia tribunals (NYT) governing marriage, divorce, and inheritance to make legally binding decisions if both parties agreed. The new system is in line with separate mediation allowed for Anglican and Jewish communities in England. Criminal law remains under the gavel of the existing legal system.

There is no reason why principles of sharia law, or any other religious code, should not be the basis for mediation, Britain’s top judge, Lord Nicholas Phillips, said in a July 2008 speech. Supporters of this initiative, such as the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, argue that it would help maintain social cohesion (BBC) in European societies increasingly divided by religion. However, some research suggests the process to be discriminatory toward women (BBC). Other analysts suggest the system has led to grey areas. Britain’s Muslims come from all over the world, Ishtiaq Ahmed, a spokesperson for the Council for Mosques in England, told the BBC, noting that this makes it hard to discern at times where the rulings of the sharia finish and long-held cultural practices start. Sharia has recently become a topic of political concern in the United States. The state of Oklahoma passed a ballot measure in November 2010 to ban the use of sharia law in court cases, which supporters are calling a preemptive strike against Islamic law (ABCNews). Several opponents of new mosques being built around the United States, including one near Ground Zero, have cited fear of the spread of sharia as a reason for opposition. And about a third of Americans in an August 2010 Newsweek poll suspect U.S. President Barack Obama sympathizes with Islamist goals to impose sharia.

Government under God: In those Muslim countries where Islam is the official religion listed in the constitution, sharia is declared to be a source, or the source, of the laws. Examples include Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Yemen, and the United Arab Emirates, where the governments derive their legitimacy from Islam. In Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, and Iraq, among others, it is also forbidden to enact legislation that is antithetical to Islam. Saudi Arabia employs one of the strictest interpretations of sharia. Women are not allowed to drive, are under the guardianship of male relatives at all times, and must be completely covered in public. Elsewhere, governments are much more lenient, as in the United Arab Emirates, where alcohol is tolerated. Non-Muslims are not expected to obey sharia and in most countries, they are the jurisdiction of special committees and adjunct courts under the control of the government.

Completely Secular: Muslim countries where the government is declared to be secular in the constitution include Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Chad, Somalia, and Senegal. Islamist parties run for office occasionally in these countries and sharia often influences local customs. Popular Islamist groups are often viewed as a threat by existing governments. As in Azerbaijan in the 1990s, secularism is sometimes upheld by severe government crackdowns on Islamist groups and political parties. Similar clashes have occurred in Turkey. Under the suspicion that the majority party, the Islamist Justice and Development Party, was trying to establish sharia, Turkey’s chief prosecutor petitioned the constitutional court (Economist) in March 2008 to bar the party from politics altogether. One of the politicians indicted, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, told Newsweek, Turkey has achieved what people said could never be achieved—a balance between Islam, democracy, secularism and modernity. Secular Muslim countries are a minority, however, and the popularity of Islamist political parties are narrowing the gap between religion and state.

Modern Economies and Sharia

Growing at an estimated 15 percent annually, Islamic banking and finance is a worldwide industry that modifies modern business practices to conform to the rules of sharia. Central to this field is riba, the charging or payment of interest, banned under Islamic law. Clever twists on standard financial products like credit cards, savings accounts, mortgages, loans, and even trust funds bypass the interest business model. A 2008 report by the General Council for Islamic Banks and Financial Institutions estimates the Islamic banking industry to stand at $442 billion. Even big name banks such as Citigroup, HSBC, and Deutsche Bank are developing Islamic banking sectors to cater to the demand. The industry is small in comparison to the global market, but may grow as some non-Muslims are turning to sharia-compliant services. Some of the ethically minded are also switching over to sharia-compliant investments.

Businesses are required to avoid transactions related to forbidden things, such as weapons, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, pornography and pork, and investors are guaranteed that their money won’t end up financing those industries. Governments are also looking to get a piece of the pie: Malaysia is the largest issuer of sharia-compliant bonds and Indonesia launched its own in January 2009.

known to all. But India is particularly intolerant towards her neighbouring Muslim countries, Bangladesh and Pakistan, as they were curved out of British India. India, after 58 years of the partition of the subcontinent, unfortunately failed to forget the spirit of two-nation theory. She applies this theory in dealing with the Muslims inside her own territory and beyond.

The recent bomb attacks on some NGO installations and cultural soirees and the subsequent arrest of some terrorists under the guise of so-called Islamic militants and their gangleaders unveiled India’s involvement. A number of Bangladeshi dailies on February 25, 2005, quoting the interrogation of the arrested informed, that the recently banned so-called Muslim outfits-JMTB (Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh) and Jamaatul Mujahiden-were the brainchildren of Indian intelligence agency-RAW. The outward and instant aim of floating these outfits was to justify Indian allegation that Bangladesh is a haven of the Islamic terrors and provoke the government to take stern action against the madrashas, their teachers and students. Such step will make the government unpopular among the people that will deter the possibility of returning to power of the alliance government and pave the way to install a puppet government in Dhaka. The long-term design is to invite American-led anti-terror invasion or get American permission to invade Bangladesh so that either the invaders or their puppets in Dhaka gradually can close down the madrashas and crush the Islamic scholars, intellectuals, and even the pro-nationalist forces and ultimately make Bangladesh a vassal state of India.

Now the question arises why India is inimical to madarasha education in Bangladesh. Historically, India believes in the unification of the pre-1947 map of the British India, which means destruction of independent Bangladesh. Indian policy makers believe that madrashas and madrasha education are main sources of inspiration of pro-nationalist forces. So long these institutions exist in Bangladesh, it will not be possible to control and keep Bangladesh under her occupation if she invades and captures it eve in remote future. Indians are aware that the maulanas, mulllahs, imams, pirs, darvishs, in brief the Muslim religious leaders, organised and led all the anti-British movements and struggles in the subcontinent when the Hindus extended their unconditional support to British occupation and exploitation.

So the real resistance in Bangladesh will come from the madashas, whenever India bids to capture it. On the other hand, this education keeps the candle of Muslim identity alive in Bangladesh, which is the main bar of the reunification of the British India. For this reason madrasha as well as madrasha education has become the prime target of India. After the emergence of Bangladesh in 1971, India tried its best to ban madrasha and Islamic education in Bangladesh alleging that all the teachers and students of madrashas were collaborators and they should be tried and given exemplary punishment.

But the then government paid no heed to pressure of Indian government, though madrahas remained closed for certain period of time. But India did not lose heart; rather worked vigorously over the years to defame the madrahas and their teachers and students branding them anti-liberation forces. Madrassas were termed as the producers of ‘rajakars’ and anti-liberation forces. Demand was raised from the pro-India elements to close down madrashs and madrasha education. During the immediate past AL rule, madrasha teachers and students passed hard days and many of them were the victims of harassment and persecution and thrown into jail under fake allegations. Pro-lndian print media branded the madrashas as Taliban training centres. Same of the madrashas were closed down during the AL regime (1996-2001). Moreover, all the governments were directly and indirectly influenced to change the curriculum and syllabus of the madrasha education in the name of modernisation and reformation, so that the students and teachers are gradually diverted to secularism, which is the road to the unification of dreamy ‘Akhand Bharat.’ Above all, the debacle of AL in the general election of 2001 scared India of and it came to this conclusion that religious parties played the vital role in installing a nationalist government in Bangladesh.

Indian intelligence are confirmed that the ruling alliance will come out victorious in the coming election scheduled to be held in 2006. Though the government adopts soft policy in dealing with India, it does not respond positively in allowing transit or port facilities to India or allow her forces to use Bangladesh territory to fight against the militants of her northeastern states. Moreover, the relatively independent foreign policy of the alliance government, its internal success stories, above all its ‘look east’ policy scared Indians strategists that Bangladesh would get out of Indian fold if the alliance is allowed to form government again. For all these reason, India took hard line against the alliance government. Other than disturbing the government in hundreds of ways, Indian agencies clandestinely recruited agents from those who are outwardly seen and known as religious and have relations with madrashas. This is how India now uses the card of the presence of the Islamic militancy in Bangladesh in order to crush religious education and brand Bangladesh a terror-infested country and isolate it from the international community and install a puppet government to turn it into a secular vassal state and annex it to India in course of time when Muslim identity will be replaced by secular spirit.

Quoting intelligence agencies a number of Bangladeshi dailies said, both the recently banned outfits were floated, financed and guided by RAW to carryout disruptive and subversive activities. ‘The Inqilab, The Manbjamin, The Amar Desh,’ ‘The Naya Diganta,’ other dailies of Dhaka on February 25, 2005, unearthed how RAW floated a number of socalled Islamic militant outfits, JMJB (Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh), Jamaatul Mujahideens, etc., to implement Indian design and controlled and guided their activities from across the border. Police recovered some vouchers from the house of Mantazar Rahman, which show that some unnamed persons used to come from and go to India through the Hilly Border. The arrested cadres confessed that an assembly of learning the holy Quran used to hold at Jaypurhat residence of Jamaatul Mujahideen Commander Mantazar Rahman and others on every Sunday and Tuesday. In those gatherings vegetables were served instead of beef during dinner or launch, but in Bangladesh, beef is the main item of such occasion. The intelligence agencies believe that the avoidance of beef indicates that some Hindus used to attend in those outwardly Islamic gatherings to brief the leaders and cadres of the outfits.

Other than briefing on subversive activities, other major task of these outfits, were to award erroneous ‘fatwa’ (Islamic Judicial decree). The main task of these RAW-financed organisations is to derail and crush the real pro-nationalist Islamic movement in Bangladesh. Indian RAW pours huge amount of money to expand these outfits and keeps them active. No worker of Jamaatul Mujahideen knows who was the real leader of the outfit and from which source money comes.

It is learnt that a group of Rajshahi-based lawyers belonging to Awami League (AL) and a section of anti-government dailies assisted these groups in earning prominence and spreading activities of Shahadat-e-AI Hikma, another outfit. Its Amir, Syed Kaowsar Houssain was a half-educated Maulana. He was admitted into Rajshahi College in 1999, but could no sit for HSC examination due to financial crisis. Kaowsar does not have the financial or educational ability to run such a militant organisation. So the question arises, how he could gain financial ability to run the outfit. One pro-AL lawyer, Rashidul Islam of Rajshahi Bar assisted and financed Kaowsar in drafting the constitution and leaflets, posters and other publications of his outfit. Rashidul Islam also provided him legal assistance when he was arrested along with his party worker. Sanjib Roy, the President of Hindu-Buddhist-Christian Okkiya Parishad, accompanied Kaowsar on a tour to India. Kaowsar was introduced in India with an Indian citizen Ashim Kumar who later took him to a hotel and arranged his appointment with such a person who claimed himself that he was Mafia godfather Daud Ibrahim. It is suspected that he was high-ranking RAW official.

On the other hand, Jamaatul Mujahideen headed by Dr. Ghalib Rajshahi University (RU) was floated in 1998 during Awami League rule. Most the leaders and workers of this organisation are the followers of Ahale Hadith. Abdur Rahman, who once acted as the Amir of Jammatul Mujahideen, is the husband of the sister of Mirja Azam MP of Jamalpur-3 constituency belonging to AL. Using his relationship with an AL MP Abdur Rahman procured the dealership of fertiliser and earned a lot of money during AL rule. On the other hand, Dr. Ghalib of RU who now heads the outfit maintains warm relation with some influential political leaders of different parties.

On the other hand, concealing his real profession and identity secret during AL period, Dr. Ghalib using a business passport went to India and stayed there for 11 days. When this forgery came to light, the then Register of RU Prof. Mohammad Younus served showcause notice on him and took disciplinary measures against him. But the initiative deterred and foiled due to the interference of the then Home Minister Mohmmad Nasim and the Mayor of Dhaka City Corporation Mohammad Hanif. Both belong to AL. During interrogation, the arrested persons informed that an Indian prominent religious leader used to come to Bangladesh and inspired them to work for Islamic revolution. A number of Bangladeshis got huge amount of money, arms, explosives and Other materials through this Indian religious leader. As a result, the activities of these groups suddenly expanded in bordering districts like Satkhira, Chapai Nawabganj, Rajshahi, etc.

It is learnt that Indian RAW tried to brand Bangladesh as a terrorist country using these elements The coal of raisine outwardly Islamic outfits was to throw the government to an awkward position-internally and internationally. When the government would take punitive measures against the outwardly Islamic militants, the common Bangladeshis will go against it. On the other hand, if the government remain mum, it will be isolated from the international community. In that case, India will get chance to prove that the government nurses the militants. India will also try to persuade the western powers to impose punitive measures against Bangladesh, including trade embargo, economic blockade, even military invasion. Its short-term goal is to unseat the present government, while its long-term goal is to isolate Bangladesh from the international community and finally invade her.

The international community should evaluate India’s historical design and evaluate its involvement in imposing terrorism in her neighbouring countries, particularly in Bangladesh. If a giant country constantly designs to undo a tiny neighbour, it can neither wipe out terrorism, nor survive. India is well aware of this evil theory and deliberately creates terrorists in different sectors to meet her ulterior goal. India is the architect of terrorism in Bangladesh. Under this situation, international community before blaming Bangladesh for all sorts of terrorist activities, should identify the real sponsor of terrorism, that let loose the terrorists not only in Bangladesh, but also in other South Asian countries and ask her to refrain from such heinous misdeeds.

Islamic militant movements between tradition and modernity

The Arab world is in turmoil. In most parts of the transcontinental land that extends from Casablanca to Baghdad, internal conflict has become the norm and uneasy stability is the exception. The growing cult of Islamic militancy in the Arab world owes much more to socio-political than to religious factors. The major causes of Islam being articulated as answer to the prevailing ills of the Arab polities are basically two:

1)       The failure of the Arab political elites to evolve responsive political systems to take the place of traditional ones which no longer exist; and

2)       The humiliating defeat of the Arabs in the Arab-Israeli Six-Day War of June 1967 causing reverberations not only in the Middle East but the wider Muslim world.

Islamic Theory

In traditional Islamic political theory the state rested on three pillars: the Ummah (the community of Muslim believers), the Caliphate, and the Shariah (Islamic Law). Except perhaps in the early decades of Islam, this theory, however, did not always conform to what happened in real life.

The Ummah embodied an ideal which could not be realised in full even in the early period of Islam. As long as Islam was confined to the Arabian Peninsula, the Ummah was a homogeneous community held together by the bonds of Islam. But once Islam spread into the non-Arab territories to the north, the dichotomy between the Arab and non-Arab Muslims arose. The Arabs found it difficult to