"Mufti" Musharraf on Khilafah By YAMIN ZAKARIA
Published: Dec 12, 2004
icssa.org/MushKhilafah.htm--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ike a chameleon Parvez Musharraf keeps changing his colour, from a General to a Military dictator then to a President and now a self-appointed ‘Mufti’ as he issued his ‘fatwa’ (Islamic edict) on the subject of the Khilafah (Islamic State). His latest comments were made when he delivered a lecture at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) [1] mocking the notion of the Khilafah and the sincere Islamic activists who are calling for it. If the Khilafah is to be discarded on the basis that it is medieval but then why call for democracy that is far more ancient; something does not become outdated merely by the elapse of time nor do we embrace everything that is recent or ‘modern’!
Is it a coincidence that both Parvez Musharraf and Gen John AbiZaid [2] referred to the imposition of the Khilafah by ‘force’ as an issue? Or is the ‘coincidence’ a similarity reflecting the royalties of two American generals who have been dispensing their duties; one in Iraq and the other in Pakistan/Afghanistan! It seems rather ironic for Parvez Musharraf as a former military dictator taking about others as wanting to “impose its will on others”. But again this is in line with the conduct of his masters who is lecturing the Muslims about human rights even as their soldiers are busy torturing, raping and executing in Abu-Ghraib style.
Let us look at the issues raised in his speech as he has cited certain terms without elaborating on its meaning given the current political situation. This of course gives him the flexibility to give those terms a different angle depending on the audiences that he is addressing, like a chameleon.
Enforcement and Democracy – Democracy is constantly touted as the only alternative to the enforcement of a political system without legitimacy. Democracy at its best is the IMPOSITION of the will of the majority; dictatorship by the majority and there is no inherent virtue per say in the absolute rule by majority. Did the majority in Germany not select and approve of the rule of Adolf Hitler? Interestingly when a majority as in Algeria and Turkey decide to select an Islamic orientated government democracy was not used as stick to reprimand those countries. Where is the much lecturing about majority rule when the lone US against the entire world constantly uses its veto power and continuously defending a racist state like Israel that is engaged in ethnic cleansing.
Why the enforcement of democracy by a military invasion or through a military dictatorship is any more legitimate than enforcing the Khilafah which is in compliance with the values held by the Muslim masses? In reality, it is the Khilafah that would be embraced by the masses willingly and would not require forceful imposition like that is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan.
If Musharraf is so keen on genuine democracy why did he arrest so many of the Islamic activists who belong to a political party [3], that is known to be a peaceful organization, also operating in other democracies like the US and the UK. Surely this is evidence of intellectual bankruptcy that one had to resort to such primitive measures. If they are a fringe let the majority in Pakistan decide in line with the democratic principles. Or does Mr. Musharraf fear the majority verdict, like the other ‘democracy’ of Israel that fears the Arab majority and thus preventing the return of the Palestinians displaced since 1948?
Terrorism and Extremism – I wonder how Parvez Musharraf would explain these terms in the context of Palestine, Kashmir and Iraq. Who are the terrorists and the terrorized there according to the criteria of Musharraf, whatever that maybe? Common sense and objectivity would dictate we look at the cause and effect to determine who the real terrorist is, instead of simply borrowing the term from one of the parties involved in the conflict. If poverty was the reason for such phenomena as Musharraf claims casually, then this would be found in the poorest Muslim countries not the richest; the resistance movements and the Islamic movements in general would not attract millionaires, doctors, engineers and other professionals.
Another simple test is may be to examine who has been delivering terror en masse using armies, killing hundreds of thousands civilians? Let us start to count the number of victims and evaluate the types of weapons that were used to murder them. Similarly who are the extremists and the freedom fighters? Avoiding elaboration of such terms is deliberate as it allows him to show loyalty to his masters, implicitly condemn the few that are bravely resisting imperialism, at the same time gives him the flexibility to give the words a different spin when addressing his domestic audience.
Madrassas – In line with his values and family ties with the heretical Qadianis ‘Mufti’ Musharraf is not satisfied with fighting against the Jihad of the Mujahideen now the impoverished Islamic education system is being targeted. This is being done in the name of curtailing ‘extremist’ activities, since there is no definition or elaboration of the term, we can only assume that Musharraf has borrowed the term from his fellow ‘Mufti’: George W. Bush. This means ‘extremist’ activities is simply any resistance to the US led aggression.
So what will happen to the countless verses on Jihad making it obligatory upon the Muslims to resist foreign aggression? What will happen to the direct commandment to implement the Islamic penal codes, social and economic laws? Or are those too medieval for ‘Mufti’ Musharraf? Musharraf went on to state he wanted the ‘real’ value of Islam emerging from these institutions but nobody knows to date what that is and how suddenly Musharraf was inspired with such ideas after centuries.
Could we have glimpse of his Islamic credentials? Yes, we can, inferred from his adoration of Mustafa Kemal, which was stated when Parvez Musharraf appeared on TV clutching his dogs! Mustafa Kemal’s Islamic credentials are: he abolished the Sharia laws as he dismantled the Islamic state in 1924, replaced the Arabic alphabets, killed many of the Islamic scholars (Ulemas), forced honorable Muslims women to unveil and tried to introduce Music and shoes inside the Masjid (Mosque).
Enlightened Moderation – This was proposed as a solution to the problems of the Muslims Ummah, in the previous OIC (Organization of the Islamic Countries) meeting. The solution is the result of the ‘ijtehad’ (Scholarly exertion using the tools of Islamic sciences) carried out by ‘Mufti’ Musharraf! Part of his solution suggests that the West should address the political disputes in the Islamic world. So, he has been constantly approaching these belligerent nations with a begging bowl to date but with no results.
I am not sure if Parvez Musharraf had noticed, the vast majority of the political disputes in the Islamic world were created by the West in the very first place, from Palestine to Kashmir! In fact those same countries are committing genocide in Iraq, desecrating Mosques and much more. If you examine their past track record one cannot be very optimistic, especially where there are lots of natural resources to exploit. On the contrary, the West is busy creating new fault lines in Iraq. Besides, Capitalist nations are not charitable institutions that they would resolve these political disputes impartially! Did ‘Mufti’ Musharraf take these basic factors into account when he did his ijtehad?
Khilafah – Many ordinary Muslims view the Khilafah is the means by which the Muslims can start to foster real unity; liberate the Muslims from the clutches of dictators, opulent monarchs, remove the colonial borders and eventually extinguish the poison of the US-Zionist Imperialism.
Parvez Musharraf views the Khilafah as only the "period of rule of our first four Caliphs" and he considers it as an utopian concept, how ‘enlightening’! Perhaps it is true that the ideal Khilafah had a short duration up to the first four Khalifs but the latter period would constitute a failure of the successive Muslim generations not an evidence for its abolishment. Secondly, God All-mighty would not command the Muslims or any human beings to implement laws and values that are utopian which are unattainable by definition! The essence of the Khilafah is the implementation of the Islamic laws and values; allegedly Pakistan was created for this purpose!
Loyalty and Treachery
‘Mufti’ Musharraf should know the clear verses in the Quran forbid the Muslims from allying with the belligerent infidels against fellow Muslims. Loyalty belongs to God, His messenger and the camp of the believers. If Pakistan was created for the sanctity of the Muslims, how is it that Musharraf takes pride in handing over Mujahideen to Washington to be tortured and executed? He claims to be a defender of Kashmir, yet, he has handed the sincere Mujahideen to the belligerent infidels in Delhi. This is not the action of a Muslim leader but of a circumcised Hindu or a Qadiani! It is the responsibility of the sincere generals and others in the Pakistan military force to rescue the situation before the conditions becomes irreversible.
Notes
[1]
www.iiss.org[2]
www.dawn.com/2004/11/28/int1.htm[3] Hizb-ut-Tahrir (Islamic Liberation Party,
www.khilfah.com
