The On-going Infighting
By considering the Khalipha (Successor of Muhammad) as head of the
Islamic nation, and the Shari’ah Law as the only way to control the
Umma Nation, little room, if at all, is left for secular
reformation.
In the absence, and presumably nonexistence, of an eligible and
recognised spiritual Khalipha leader, reversion to traditional
Islamic rule, remains unachievable. So long as the Khilapha post
remains in the void so will democracy remain absent, failing even to
make a head start. Such despotic regimes are clogged in the quagmire
of their own making.
Lack of civil liberty and personal choice impedes progress. Internal
conflicts, corruption and violence become part of the ruling system,
leading escalation of the ferocity of the conflict to outright war.
The bullet instead of the ballot box becomes the rule of law.
Freethinking is suppressed. Formation of voluntary institutions to
promote rapprochement and social justice among citizens of
diversified cultures remain non-existent or ineffective at best.
Establishment of Islamic social clubs, cultural societies, public
swimming pools and entertainment centres are discouraged. Social
group activities of the ethnic communities are disallowed. Formation
of sports clubs, mixed cultural centres and aboriginal societies are
seen as foreign and un-Islamic. The very few that exist are put
under constant surveillance. Civil liberty, freedom of expression,
graphic arts, figural representation and general sports activity for
the female gender are considered unethical and strongly discouraged.
In the turbulence of all this, the non-Muslim communities are
dragged alongside the continued unrest of the Islamic masses.
Muslims live with a one-track mind, believing that their way is the
only true way to salvation. Yet, they fail to manifest to the world
that the methods they apply in spreading their mission are peaceful,
and not by committing acts of terrorism in the name of religion
through jihad, but by being open to dialogue and sharing with the
rest of the religions in the good that comes out of such dialogues –
to keep that which is good and discard that which is not (Na’kol Al-Lobba
Wa-Narmi ‘l-Qushour).
During the reign of the Talaban, Afghanistan grew opium with the
excuse that its government needed hard currency to survive. Instead
of opening up to the world, it continues in its old ways of growing
opium, denying female citizens education and employment. Instead of
accepting change to improve its ailing economy, through freedom of
the individual, freedom of expression, education and social justice,
the Afghan Talaban government continues to grow opium and repress
its people, plunging the country into total darkness of ignorance
and deprivation. (Hiro, 1989: pp 6,12, 27, 41, 56, 122; Pryce-Jones,
1989: pp 122-123; Polk, 1991: pp 43, 48; Aburish, 1995: pp 105-106).
Relief organizations and aid agencies can only help in a limited
capacity in the field of distribution of food, medicine and
temporary shelter. They cannot change the social structure of a
country suffering from long endemic social problems, resentment to
change, political instability and absence of democracy. The bullet
echoes only to cries of terror and death and reverberates with sighs
of loss and grief. Nothing good comes out of violence and coercion.
To bring positive change, sectarian leaders of the Abode of Peace,
claiming high democratic values, need to take up courage and open up
to the world, in cooperation and equal opportunity, towards gradual
transformation of their country to growth, stability and peace.
Countries living in isolation of their narrow mindedness resemble a
tree trunk that eventually hollows out and crumbles on itself.
Without the uniformity of a written democratic constitution,
representative of all the people, despotism will continue. Lack of a
mechanism for a lawful system to control power, leads Islamic
regimes to absolutism and corruption.
In the Abode of Peace, Islamic law does not allow Christians, let
alone Jews, to hold any high official post in the Ministry of
Interior, Foreign Affairs, Defence and Justice, specifically in the
legislative council, in courts and judicial branches of any Muslim
government. This ban covers all the Muslim countries. Non-Muslims
are not allowed to judge Muslims in their Abode of Peace States. It
is against the Islamic (Shari’ah) law for a Christian or Jew to
condemn a Muslim. As a rule, non-Muslims are not entrusted with any
power of office that would directly or indirectly challenge a
Muslim. Regardless of status, rank or social position, the Muslim in
an Islamic court always comes out the winner if his accuser happens
to be non-Muslim (Burns, 1994: p 87).
How just and successful a secular system becomes in an Islamic
government depends mainly on how much freedom they are prepared to
give the other non-Muslim aboriginal nationals, and how much they
are allowed to exercise their basic human rights, equal to the rest
of the Muslim citizens.
With the steady rise in fundamentalism, room for compromise is
bitterly disappointing and remote (Hiro, 1989: pp 121; 178-179). The
duty of the international community is to deliver the indigenous
people from the clutches of such rigid and oppressive regimes by
allowing them to rule themselves. They would certainly be, by far,
much better off in every respect, than living under a system of
fanaticism and of haphazard nature.
[TOP]
