sign in sign up
<<
Home , Islam in Pakistan, Political Islam

Assessing Political whether it has been failed in the light of two Muslim majority countries: and

Md. Didarul Islam PhD researcher, University of Leeds Assistant Professor University of Dhaka Email: [email protected]

1 Assessing Political Islam whether it has been failed in the light of two Muslim majority countries: Egypt and Pakistan

Introduction

Islamist movements in the global is featured with a response to the western modernity which subsequently drifted the rise of political Islam or in a ‘modern’ fashion.

Political Islam, dating back from 19th century, has found its modern stand in Egypt, Algeria,

Saudi Arabia, , Iran and Pakistan giving rise a good number of Islamic political organizations such as in Egypt and Jamat-i-Islami in Pakistan.

Strategically and politically, these countries are different in many aspects resulting a different nature of political Islam in these regions. Hasan-al-Bannah, the founder of Muslim

Brotherhood in Egypt and Abul ala Al Maududi, the founder of Jamat-i-Islami in Pakistan set the cornerstone of modern political Islam or Islamism. They tried to brought legitimacy with a vision of returning to the original text of Islam; the and the ; and to the earliest community of Islam (Roy, 1994, p. viii). In this article, it has been argued that the emergence of Islamist movements or political Islam in two Muslim nation states, Egypt and

Pakistan respectively is a feature of modern political phenomenon. Political Islam in these two countries have taken distinctive forms in societies having some common characteristics and differences. For a critical exposition, the cases of Muslim brotherhood (MB) in Egypt and Jamat-i-Islami (JI) in Pakistan will be analysed. In addition, the argument of Oliver Roy

(1994, pp. 9-10) that the main projects of political Islam have failed has been supported from two grounds; the deviation of political Islam from its earlier promises and their failure to establish a perfect based Islamic society.

2 Islamist Movements: Emergence and Theoretical Genesis

Before starting the historical analysis of Islamic movements, it is important to understand political Islam or Islamism. Oliver Roy (2004, p.58) defines political Islam as the brand of the modern political which is premised on establishing a true Islamic society by not only imposing sharia alone but also establishing through political actions.

Modern day Islamism started its journey based on Salafist ideology with a view to returning to the Quran, and the sharia by rejecting any kind of historical commentary, four Sunni schools of law and Islamic civilization after the four caliphs (Roy, 1994, p. 36). In addition,

Islamism considers that society can be Islamised only through social and political action. This is why, Islamism consider as integral part of religion which will ensure the totality of religion. Roy (1994, p. 37) writes that Islamism adapts the classical version of Islam (Quran, hadith and Sharia) as complete and universal system as ‘ahistorical’ phenomenon. Thus,

Islamism rejects the necessity of modernise Islamic interpretation but they objectify Islam to implement Islamic injunctions in the modern society.

For being an Islamist movement or being in the domain of political Islam, there is no need to be involved in direct power dynamics in the state. Charles Hirschind (2016) showed that within the framework of political Islam, there are groups who focus on or preaching of

Islamic teachings instead of urging to capture state power. Many other Islamist movements are engaged in charity, alms giving, medical care, mosque building and other welfare activities. But the reason Hirschkind (2016) considers all these movements as political is the wide spectrum of political domain of state as these organisations need to get permission from the state by various means. These movements can never be ‘apolitical’. Hirschkind’s (2016) position is convincing because these movements, though not be directed to capture power might have link with the other movements for sponsorship.

3 Islamist movements can be traced back from the late 18th century when ibn

Abdul Wahab (founder of ) formulated his religio-political theory marking the base of modern political Islam or Islamism in general. His ideas, generally called Wahhabism have historical influence on other Islamists movements throughout the Muslim states despite significant differences from country to country. But present day Political Islam has direct connection with Salafist movements popularly called Salafism meaning the pious successors

(Mandaville, 2014, p. 47). Though Mandaville (Ibid, p. 48) interchangeably used Wahhabism and Salafism, he argued that Salafism is broader in scope than Wahhabism where the later mainly focus on the exclusion of bidah or innovation (Ibid, p. 48) from and going back to the earliest Islam. In addition, Salafism urges for the establishment of Islamic or society throughout the world. This Salafi ideological project has been developed by different 19th and 20th century activists of political Islam like Mohammad ibn Abdu Hu,

Jamal al Din Afgani, , Hasan Al Bannah, Sayeed Qutub and most recently

Ayman Al Zawahiri.

While Abdu Hu focused on purification of Islam based on individuals and society, Rashid

Rida formulated the framework for the Islamic state based on political power which influenced Sayeed Qutub and Maulana Maududi. This Islamic state, according to Rida should be solely based on sharia but must be compatible with modern day political norms. On this point, equating Islam and sharia with modern political norms, Maududi and Qutub differed their opinion rejecting any kind of compatibility with western political norms (Mandaville,

2004, p.49).

Since the beginning of Salafism, it can be grouped in three broad groups (Mandaville, 2014, p. 49); Salafist quietist who focus on individual spirituality and attainment of purification but rejects the establishment of Islamic political order or Islamic state, Salafist jihadist who want

4 to establish Islamic state by any violent means what Roy (2004) describes as neo- fundamentalists, and Salafi Islamists who want to establish Islamic state through the mainstream process of the present political structure ( One section of Muslim brotherhood for instance). In addition, Salafist reformism was grounded in another question why have failed to compete with the west (Roy, 1994, p.310). This question triggered Afghani,

Rida and Bannah to search for their ideological base. In addition, because of associating their

Islamic projects to anti-western strategy, Salafism became popular in Arab region. Two specific reasons played a vital role here; a feeling of threat from the colonial power and a sense of fragmentation of religious authority (Mandaville, 2014, p.51).

Political Islam had to go under two kinds of Islamist movements; Islamic revivalism and

Islamic reformation. In response to the westernisation and the trajectory of the Muslims,

Abdul Wahab (1703-92) started revivalist movement focusing on the need to return to the primary model of Islam. His ideas have originated Salafism later on. He rejected

(mystic order) stating this as bidah or innovation. His book The Book of the Divine Unity laid the foundation of the modern day Saudi Arabia kingdom in the name of Muhammad Ibn Saud

(Mandaville, 2014, p. 58). According to the Wahhabis, the only solution to counter the hegemony of westerns is to go back to the original teachings of Quran, and the four caliphs. It has been noted by the theorists that Wahab was greatly influenced by Ibn Tymiah

(a 13th century Muslim intellectual) to formulate the concept of going back to the early Islam and rejecting the historical compliance of Islam throughout centuries (Armajani, 2012).

In response to Wahhabism, Jamal-al-Din Afghani (1839-97) started Islamic reformist movement theorising the Muslims trajectory condition as product of the western colonialization and deviation from the true teaching of Islam. Mandaville (2014, p. 59) called this movement as a response to the imperialism. Afghani, criticising the then Muslim scholars as stagnant, wanted to establish pure Islamic society by not rejecting the historicity or

5 historical civilisation like Abbasiads or umayads. He urged for the improvement of science what can be derived from the Quranic philosophy has a historical supremacy over the west

(Ibid, p.59). Later on, his follower Abdu Hu accelerated this reformist movement. According to this lineage, it is not possible to establish Islamic society or state by rejecting the long historicity of Islam nor by rejecting the modern-day phenomenon; either political or scientific.

Findings:

Islamism in Two Nation State

Islamist organisations have been best flourished in countries like Egypt, Pakistan, Tunesia where they lack political freedom, democratic institutions and coupled with military rulers.

Islamist movements or organisation like Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Egypt and jamat-i-

Islami in Pakistan took the advantage of this situation to fill the political and cultural space

(Taj Hashmi, 2015). In the modern day political juncture, they have equipped themselves in the modern political process. Though their main project is to unite Islamic ummah as much as possible, they operate their organizational work in national boundaries (Roy, 2004, p. 59).

Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Egypt

Premised on the Salafist ideological projects, Hasan Al Bannah (1906-1948) founded

Ikhwanul Muslemeen or Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in 1928. Over the course of time, the

Muslim Brotherhood (MB) has become the most influential modern Islamic political organization (Pew Research Forum, 2010). This group promotes both personal and social reforms based on Islamic teachings. Starting from a resistance organization, it quickly became politicised with a view to establishing sharia based Islamic state with the principle of

‘Islam is the solution’ (Pew Research Forum, 2010). Rejecting the western ideas, Bannah

6 argued that the solution of the Muslims in the modern days lies in returning to the original teachings of Islam. It is true that he had been influenced by the teachings of Rida, Abdu Hu and Afghani but his own interpretation of Islam found the modern ground of political Islam

(Armajani, 2012, p. 48). MB became popular very quickly reaching the active members of

MB to half a million. Like Jamat-i-, in order to spread his teachings, Bannah founded many charitable hospitals, schools and mosques so that he could reach to the people easily. In response to the western colonial economic model, he urged for economy to solve the economic problems of the Muslim nations; more specifically in Egypt (Armajai,

2012, p. 51). MB remained financially solvent in the 1940s with amidst high inflation, weak economy and lower employment rate which gave them a sound footing to spread their work on anti-government stand point.

Primarily Bannah rejected any radical or violent path to establish Islam in all spheres. But in his later days, he used to preach more jihadist philosophy which was radical in nature (Taj

Hashmi, 2015). Armajani (2012, p. 52) noted that during 1940s, MB members started to be influenced by the Nazi philosophy which later on within the lifetime of Bannah, gave rise another section of MB that urged for using violent means to debacle the government, the western socio-economic models and to kill high officials. Thus, it can be said that Mb started to be more radical in the late 1940s. Though Armajani (2012) argued that Bannah was not extremely radical in his teachings, the radical path which has been followed by MB members over the period is grounded in the ‘jihadist philosophy’ of Bannah who called as the art of death. Richard Mitchell (1993) argued that besides propounding a radical philosophy of jihadist movement in order to establish Islamic society, he used Nazi model violence in many places in Egypt to debacle the Egyptian government.

These violent activities can be observed through some incidents such as in 1948, Egypt's

Prime Minster Nukrashi Pasha was assassinated by a MB member and MB members burnt

7 around 750 nightclubs, theatres, and hotels in Cairo in 1952. They supported the military establishment in Egypt and promoted the idea of establishing a global . It must be noted that a significant change in MB’s political behaviour was changed during Sayyed

Qutub (the most influential leader of MB after Bannah) who preferred radical means to establish Islam in its fullest (Taj Hashmi, 2015).

Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966) called for “jihad” against the West, the society he believed as compared to ignorance (jahiliyyah) of 6th century Arabia (Taj Hashmi, 2015). It is true that

Qutub was always against the western imperialism, he never used Islam as a counter philosophy instead of secular values propounded by America until his journey to America in

1948. During his visit to America, he found American values have been premised on

‘consumption’ which lacks morality in every societal spheres (Armajani, 2012, p. 55).

Though MB supported General Nagib’s military regime, they tried to assassinate military president Naser in 1954 for his anti-Muslim Brotherhood strategy. This killing mission accelerated the ban of MB in public sphere. Naser viewed the political Islam as a threat to the security of the Egyptian society (Taj Hashmi, 2015).

Moreover, Asef Bayat (2011) argued that there are two sections of the MB members now.

The old school is still reluctant to adopt modern democratic strategy while the comparative young MB group follows the Justice and Development Party of Turkey. After a long period of underground work in the following years, Muslim Brotherhood rose to power in the face of

Arab spring in 2012 which resembles the dominance of comparative modern MB members.

But the ideological standpoint of MB was summarised by the then president Moorsi as: "the

Koran is our constitution, the Prophet Muhammad is our leader, jihad is our path, and death for the sake of is our most lofty aspiration...sharia, sharia, and then finally sharia. This nation will enjoy blessing and revival only through the Islamic sharia" (Mark Durie, 2013).

8 This statement clearly shows that Muslim Brotherhood is still premised on the earliest philosophy of political Islam at least in theoretical level. Later on, following a military coup,

MB government led by Dr. Moorsi lasted for only one year and faced a formal ban in politics again.

Jamat-i- Islami in Pakistan

In the face of anti-British movement in the 20th century, Abul Ala Maududi founded Jamat-

Islami in 1941 aiming to establish a ‘pure’ Islamic society based on Quaran, Hadith and

Sharia (Nasr 1996, pp. 88-92). Pure Islamic society was meant to be a society based on complete injunctions of Sharia and based on the principles of the prophet (pbuh) and four caliphs. Influenced by Mohammad ibn Abduhu, Maududi understood other societies like the abbasiads, the Umayads and other dynasties as un-Islamic due to its submissive character towards ‘kings’ (Armajani, 2012, p.167-168).

Jamat believes that a proper understanding of Quran and its implementation in every aspect in human life can solve all the problems from political to social. As an eternal way, Quran contains four aspects; divinity, lord, worship and religion. This religion is the totality of a society from religious to social or political. Thus, Jamat conceives religion and politics as inseparable and identical (Armajani, 2012, p. 165).

Maududi conceived two enemies against whom the Muslims; especially Indian Muslims should fight. These are Indian National Congress which was a more pro-Hindu organisation and Muslim League which was grounded in non-Islamic ideals, according to Maududi.

Because these parties were non-Islamic and were influenced by the western values and democracy (Ibid, pp. 171-172).

The idea of pure Islam of Maududi is grounded in the establishment of Islamic state. He de- emphasised on the role of free election in democratic process. To him, all power is vested in

Allah and He is the only source of power. As a representative, an emir will rule the state

9 where power will be vested in him (Nasr, 1996, p. 89). State will be rightly guided by sharia.

People will have no option to give their opinion as these ideas might be contradictory to sharia law. Taj Hashmi (2015) termed his model as ‘Theo-democracy’.

Arjamani (2012, p. 168) said that there are two reasons, Maududi is authoritarian and anti- democratic. Firstly, Maududi maintained that the prophet (pbuh) ruled only based on absolute

Sharia which is incompatible with the western democracy. Secondly, Maududi was suspicious about democracy as the western colonials used democracy as a weapon of discrimination against the majority in India. Maududi even rejected any democracy even in Pakistan because it would give religious minorities and wrongheaded Muslims too much power to direct the affairs of Islamic state. Even before the establishment of Pakistan, he said that it would be ‘Napakistan’ meaning a place of unholy things (Islam and Huda,

2016, Islam 2014).

Maududi believed that an Islamic state can be attainable through a process of Islamic revolution. It is more a series of process rather than overnight phenomenon. Pious people should understand about potential enemies and threats like Marxism, democracy and secularism. Muslims should, he argued that resist these enemies like the prophet Muhammad

(pbuh) in 7th century. For a successful Islamic revolution, it requires dedicated pious minds who will spread the teachings of ‘ideal Islam’ (Armajani, 2012, p. 169).

Starting from a resistance party, Jamat ended up as a mainstream political party in the early

50s. They started to preach their teachings by printed documents, sermons and mosque teachings. This played an enormous impact in the Pakistani society as soon Jamat and

Maududi got a significant attention of the government. This is why, in the formation of the

Pakistan constitution in 1956, Jamat influenced much to form a “Islamic Constitution’ naming the country as of Pakistan. This influence, according to Armajani

10 (2012, p. 175) was the first political victory for Jamat. They used this achievement for gaining popular support in .

In the face of anti-Jamat attitude of who accused Jamat as an obstacle to progress, Jamat made an ally with secular and non-Islamic political parties in 1960. One example is significant to understand the dualistic nature of Jamat. Maududi in his writings spoke against the women leadership of the state. But Jamat supported Fatima Zinnah in the

1965 presidential election who was a secular woman (Armajani, 2012, p. 176). Thus, Jamat was diverted from their own principles like non-obedience to women leadership and democracy.

The dualistic character of Jamat could not provide a huge political opportunity as they could win only 4 seats in the general election of Pakistan where Awami League, a secular political party got the majority with 167 seats in the national assembly. But Jamat’s engagement in formal election procedures was the first political establishment of them in democratic process.

Jamat’s dualistic character was featured again when they supported Ziaul Haq for a military coup after debilitating Bhutto. With a promise of Islamisation of law and judiciary in

Pakistan, Jamat gave Ziaul Haq direct support. Ziaul Haq, in response tried to legitimise his regime with ‘Islamic popularity’. Jamat used to call this relation with general Ziaul Haq as

‘daughter-mother’ relation (Armajani, 2012, p. 178). Due to the state sponsorship, Jamat started to spread their ideology with enormous enthusiasm and got a popular support for their fundamentalist and radical principles. This support base was a key to engage with Afghan

Taliban in the later days.

A Comparison between Jamat-i-Islami (JI) and Muslim Brotherhood (MB)

At least from two perspectives, Muslim brotherhood (MB) and Jamt-i-islami (JI) share few common characteristics. From organizational perspective, both parties were established in the

11 wake of anti-colonial movements with a leader centred mobilization, Hasan Al Bannah and

Abul ala Maudidi respectively (Armajani, 2012, p. 181). From methodological perspectives, both MB and JI use printed teaching materials to spread their ideology along with their mosque based education, establishment of educational institutions, training people who would collect new adherents and spread teachings in grass root level (Ibid, p. 181). But the most similarities between these MB and JI lies in the shifting position in terms of democracy.

Siddiqui (2012) argued that Till date, both Jamat and MB have been continuing their

‘brotherly’ relations as they have common philosophy in terms of authoritarianism, anti- western attitude and establishing a global Islam. Both MB and JI in their early years were more a resistance group than that of political parties. But since 1970 election, Jamat has been continuing its presence in the ongoing electoral process. This is true to Muslim Brotherhood as MB ascended to power in Egypt through general election in 2012. In addition, both JI and

MB ended up with nationalist politics instead of their earlier premises to establish global ummah (Taj Hashmi, 2015).

It cannot be denied that amidst of many controversies against these two Islamist parties, they have a strong support base in Egypt and Pakistan. They have shifted their strategy and ideological projects in order to go to power. In Egypt, MB is more successful in terms of power dynamics. Because after a long period of formal ban, they won the general election after . They have proved that still the Egyptian society is dominated by the

Muslim Brotherhood’s philosophy. Though after one year, General Fattah Al Sisi, a secular military personnel became the president with military backup. But the case of Pakistan is not comparable to Egypt. Many Muslim political organizations have strong support base in

Pakistani political juncture. Many of them are anti-Maududi as well. It is true that Pakistani society has a strong dependence on Islamic political organizations, but it does not mean that they have to be solely dependent on Jamat.

12 Have the main projects of the Islamists been failed?

It is true that political Islam has changed the global discourse of Islam in political front, yet political Islam cannot be described as a success story in its fullest. It is not because of their success in achieving political power, it is because of their ideological shift from their earlier promises and the failure to establish a perfect Islamic society. Oliver Roy (1994) developing the theory of ‘failed political Islam’ has argued that the main projects of political Islam have been failed because of two reasons. Firstly, political Islam has shifted its own ideological premises and agendas. Secondly, political Islam has failed to establish such a society which can be called ‘pure Islamic’ compared to the early age of Islam (Roy, 1994, pp. 8-10).

Islamism is historically a failure as nowhere in the world a new society based on the assumptions of Islamism has been established, not even in Saudi Arabia, Iran or Afghanistan.

Political Islam generally rejects the 1400 years of historical incidents and civilizations accusing for bidah or invensions which has made a vacuum from 7th century to the modern days (Armajani, 2012). This rejection of historicity will not let them to re-establish the society of 7th century or to establish a new society. Lack of political modernity and incompatibility with modernity are the keys to the deadlock of political Islam (Roy, 1994, p.

9-10). However, it is not that Political Islam will not be in power. Political Islam succeeded to achieve state power but could not succeed to establish a new Islamic society which is the ultimate project of political Islam. In addition, the lack of feasibility to reinstall a 7th century society has triggered the Islamists to shift their ideological and strategical agendas (Roy,

2004).

13 From the following two examples, it can be proved that the argument of Roy (1994) is valid.

Firstly, it is known to all that both Muslim Brotherhood and Jamat-i-Islami rejected the western democratic model. But later on, they have entered into this democratic system. This is why, Durie (2013) described Muslim Brotherhood as an ‘accommodative’ political party which is even different from the main Salafist projects. This ‘accommodative’ statement is true in case of Jamat-i-Islami as well. For instance, Maududi himself rejected democratic system under the secular governments but he himself joined the Pakistan general election in

1970. His party continued the election process later on. In addition, instead of the project to establish global caliphate, these parties ended up as national political parties. Secondly,

Islamists have been failed to establish a total Islamic state as they have promised earlier like

7th century Islamic state led by the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his companions. This establishment has never seen the light since political Islam started its journey in 18th century onwards.

Conclusion:

From the above discussion, it can be said that the Islamist movements in different nation states have diverse nature with a common philosophy to establish Islam in every sphere of life; from social to political. Political Islam does not conceive religion as ‘apolitical’. This stand point has given Islamic political organizations a scope for the politicisation of religion.

Their entire establishment theory is grounded in the establishment of Islamic state which will be run by the Quran, the Hadith and the Sharia law. Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Jamat- i-Islami in Pakistan have played a key role in the respective countries to promote political

Islam. These Islamist parties have been accused of radical principles and ideological alteration in order to gain political power. This ideological shift has been a key reason for the failure of political Islam. In addition, the rejection of modernity, historical discourse and

14 democracy have become incompatible to the modern ages which has not given political Islam unanimous support. Even after acquiring political power, Islamist political parties in different

Muslim countries could not establish a society based on the Quran, the Hadith and the Sharia.

Thus, it can be said that though political Islam has accelerated the velocity of global political discourse, but the main projects of political Islam have failed.

Bibliography

1. Armajani, Jon. 2012. Modern Islamist Movements: History, Religion and Politics.

USA: Wiley-Blackwell.

2. Bayat, Asef. 8 February 2011. Egypt, and the post-Islamists Middle east. Open

Democracy. Last accessed [ 05 June 2017]. Available at

https://www.opendemocracy.net/print/57934?

utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlit

%25E2%2580%25A6%25C2%25A0%25C2%25A0

3. Dorie, Mark. June 6, 2013. Salafis and the Muslim Brotherhood: What are the

differences. Middle east Forum. Last accessed [4 June, 2017]. Available at

http://www.meforum.org/3541/salafis-muslim-brotherhood

4. Hashmi, Taj. March 08, 2015. Muslim Brotherhood, Jamat-I-Islami and Global Jihad.

Last accessed[ 03 June, 2017]. Available at http://www.thedailystar.net/muslim-

brotherhood-jamaat-i-islami-and-global-jihad-35118

15 5. Hirschind, Charles. 2016. What is Political Islam. Middle east research and

Information Project. Last accessed [4 June, 2017]. Available at.

http://www.merip.org/mer/mer205/what-political-islam

6. Islam, M.D. and Huda, Fazrin. 2016. Religion and Politics: Bangladesh Perspectives.

International Journal on Management and Humanities. 2(4). pp. 1-5.

7. Islam, M.D. 2014. Political Use of Religion in Bangladesh. The Daily Sun. January.

8. Mandaville, peter. 2014. 2nd ed. Islam and Politics. London: Routledge.

9. Mitchell, R.P. 1993. The Society of the Muslim Brothers. New York: Oxford

University Press.

10. Nasr, Seyyed Vali Reza. 1996. Maududi and the Making of Islamic Revivalism. New

York: Oxford University Press.

11. Pew Research Forum. September 15, 2010. Muslim Brotherhood and Jama’at-i

Islami. Last accessed [ 03 June, 2012]. Available at

http://www.pewforum.org/2010/09/15/muslim-networks-and-movements-in-western-

europe-muslim-brotherhood-and-jamaat-i-islami/

12. Roy, Oliver. 1994. Tr. Volk, Carol. The Failure of Political Islam. Cambridge:

Harvard University Press.

16 13. Roy, Oliver. 2004. Globalised Islam: The Search for a New Ummah. London: Hurst

&Company.

14. Siddiqui, Salman. July 18, 2012. Drawing parallels between Jamat-i- Islami and

Muslim Brotherhood. The Tribune. Last accessed [June 04, 2017]. Available at

https://tribune.com.pk/story/409788/drawing-parallels-between-jamaat-e-islami-and-

muslim-brotherhood/

N.B. This article has been produced as a partial fulfilment of my MA in Religious studies and

Global Development at the University of Leeds (2016-2017). A modified version has been uploaded here.

17