Secularism Does Not Necessarily Provide a Neutral Ground for All Religions
By
Syed Mohammad Ali
December
24, 2020
We live in
a world beset by false dichotomies which seek to readily label communities and
even countries as being secular, moderate or extremists. Yet, a closer examination
often reveals that such tidy labels often do not match realities on the ground.
In the
post-911 context, for example, there has been increasing international anxiety
about the threat of extremism in a nuclear-armed Pakistan. This concern has led
to recurrent speculations about the nature and functioning of ‘non-moderate’
Islamic groups within the country. Yet, efforts made to define and
differentiate between these groups remain problematic.
Common
categorisations of non-moderate Pakistani groups distinguish between entities
which operate beyond the borders of the country (in India and Afghanistan),
those with more sectarian outlooks (Sipah-e-Sahaba or Lashkar-e-Jhangvi), and
groups which have directly targeted the state itself for not being Islamic enough,
or for becoming an alleged stooge of western powers (TTP).
This above
categorisation is however problematic and prone to contradictions. Consider how
many sectarian groups have not only been causing havoc within the country but
are also accused of taking up the cause of cross-border ‘jihad’. Similarly,
militant groups aiming to oppose the state and implement their own version of
Sharia (such as the TTP) are not entirely distinct from groups which operate
beyond the national borders (as TTP itself has found refuge in Afghanistan).
Such overlaps and contradictions make neat categorisations difficult, and
complicate the state’s response in dealing with these groups.
Simplistic
understanding of moderates versus extremist groups is thus not merely issues of
intellectual curiosity. Such inaccurate categorisations also results in
unintended consequences. Recall, for instance, how the Barelvis began being
considered the ‘good Muslims’ in the West after 9/11, as opposed to the
Deobandis who were deemed more austere, intolerant, and even more prone to
militancy. Leaving aside the fact that the Deobandi/Wahhabi affiliates had been
relied upon to wage a proxy war against the Soviets in the 1980s, the decision
to not only consider Barelvis more positively but to actively support groups
such as Alhe-Sunnat to counter entities like the TTP soon proved short-sighted.
After Governor Taseer was gunned down by a Barelvi adherent, western
endorsement of Barelvi groups came to an abrupt halt.
Thinking of
all Barelvi Muslims as being enlightened moderates, for their reverence to Sufi
saints, was a false assumption which did not quite understand the history of
varied Barelvi groups in the Indian subcontinent. Such policy faux pas can be
averted in the future if there is a deeper reflection on what terms like
secularism, progressive, democracy or being modern mean.
Participating
in the democratic process does not provide fool-proof criteria for moderation
either. We have seen the rise of religious nationalism in India where Modi has
secured a landslide victory in the biggest elections in the world, based on an
explicitly anti-Muslim Hindutva manifesto.
Terms like
modern or rational are also problematic. The Salafis and Alhe Hadith claim to
have a rational and even modern approach to religion, yet these groups have
instead bred much myopia. Conversely, even the term ‘secularism’ can be
interpreted quite differently. Prior to the ongoing efforts to turn it into a
Hindu state, India has touted itself as being a secular state which views and
treats all religions equally. Yet, communalism has been plaguing the Indian
state long before the rise of the BJP.
Western
states also pride themselves for having achieved the separation of state and
religion. Yet, secularism does not necessarily provide a neutral ground for all
religions. The anthropologist, Talal Asad, has compellingly demonstrated how
many secular societies themselves exhibit harsh exclusions, as evidenced by
debates concerning the rights of Muslims in France.
Academics,
policymakers, and analysts need to think more deeply about what terms like
extremist, modern or secular really mean. Or else, public policies to ensure
religious freedom, to address religious intolerance, or to contend with
extremism will remain confused and continue producing mixed results.
Original
Headline: Rethinking extremism, moderation, modernity
Source: The Express Tribune
URL:
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism