| |
| Join Our Newsletter |
 Please Select sub-criteria |  |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
By Akmal Asghar
Staff writer: New Civilisation
akmal.asghar@newcivilisation.com | |
| |
| |
| |
“If he were alive today, how might Mahatma Gandhi, the greatest apostle of non-violence, challenge Osama Bin Laden’s worldview?”
Lord Bhikhu Parekh’s imaginary dialogue between them in April’s edition of Prospect magazine explores their arguments and motivations. Differing with them both, non-violent political and intellectual struggles in the Muslim world have been caught in their cross-fire, marred by underlying assumptions of Islam and the Muslim world. How would these struggles answer Lord Parekh’s ‘Gandhi’?
Dear Gandhi,
I read with great interest your exchange with Usamah; it revealed openness in understanding attitudes that seek to influence our world, an approach commendable for its honesty. I noted, particularly, that when advising Usamah as to the fruitlessness of terrorist activities in removing American influence from the Muslim world, you call on him to fight 'ideas with ideas'. In so stating, you summarise the very essence of a struggle that many in the Muslim world are actively engaged in; a struggle overshadowed by campaigns of violence that render it marginal attention.
I would like to question, however, assertions I believe you have formulated from your dialogue with Usamah. Some make questionable assumptions. Others do not reflect the real motives or causes, behind efforts Muslims are now undertaking to create a real, lasting change in their lands.
Primarily, I think it is necessary to make clear from the onset that Muslims are not motivated to pursue such far reaching changes because of anger or hatred of the US. Nor are they motivated from resentment of the vast riches that western powers have accumulated, partly through effective colonial endeavours as well as creative wealth strategies, whether those of the nineteenth, twentieth or indeed twenty-first century. Neither is it because they seek to rival the US for its own sake; to match its imperial successes. In so stating, you assert that it is an equal greed and desire for imperial power that motivates the call for change in the Muslim world; to rival the Americans through continually matching our circumstances against theirs. Following this logic, one would conclude that the US is the cause of Muslim efforts and that if it did not exist, Muslims would sit idle.
It is not jealousy at the advance of others that has created a need for change. The many crises which plague the Muslim world, whether the squander of resources or failing political structures ranging from sham democracy in Pakistan to brutal dictatorships in Central Asia; the witnessed corrupt judicial processes and lawlessness, are hard to dismiss. Although the interference of the US has acted to obstruct progress somewhat, it would be dishonest to hold her responsible for all our problems.
Indeed, if one seeks to apportion blame, then it rest with Muslims. Failing to take control of their own affairs, despite having the ability, and the means to do so, the Muslim world must shoulder its responsibility and share the blame for not doing so. Islam, their belief and value system, is capable of resolving dire problems in the Muslim world, a point with which you may contend but to which I shall return later. Its application is capable of producing a stable, just and progressed society, for both Muslims and non-Muslims, as history demonstrates. Leaderships in the Muslim world however, have failed to apply its solutions choosing instead a cocktail of ideologies. It is this realisation that a hitherto dormant solution exists in our midst that has encouraged many to pursue a return to Islamic rule.
| |
| |
| |
| |
1 2 3 > Last »
Page 1 of 5 pages
| |
|
|
