By AMICUS:
The Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan on 27 December 1979 offered unique opportunity to the United States to weaken its principal adversary, and to General Zia to prolong his obscurantist rule. A resistance movement imbedded with Islamic fervour appeared to be the most effective counter-measure to bleed the Soviets.
Pakistan and the Americans masterminded the formation, logistics and action plan of the mujahideen outfits. They secured services of the Jama-at-i-Islami and Jamiat-i-Ulema-i-Islam for inculcating the spirit of jihad and recruiting rank and file to fight what was primarily an American war. Foreign elements, including Egyptians, Palestinians and Saudis, were inducted in the mujahideen groups.
“The United States also pumped out inspirational literature of its own for the Afghan refugee camps, where U.S.-printed school books taught the alphabet by using such examples as: J is for Jihad, and K is for Kalashnikov, and I is for infidel. Mathematical problems would be something like: ‘If you had fifty Communist soldiers and you killed ten, how many would you still have?’ ”(Kathy Gannon, I is for Infidel, New York: Public Affairs, 2005, p. 141.)
The mujahideen movement thus became a meeting point for Islamic militants of Afghanistan. Pakistan and the Middle East. The United States, without any scruples, promoted and used Islamic militancy to defeat the Evil Empire. Generally the people from Pakistan and abroad, who were in the fore front of the Holy War against Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, professed and practiced the Puritan Schools of Islamic Shariah, where the Jihad is a practiced article of faith.
“They would continue to respond to the call of jihad. And yes, there are still others whose hatred for the United States and Israel accepts no bounds, but they think that without first equipping the Muslim World with science and technology and the art of modern ware-fare, the jihad in the form of qital is premature”. (Bernard Lewis, his What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response).
The unravelling of the Communist bloc in the late 1980s initiated a process that was to bring about a sea change in the pattern of power relations at the global level.
The demise of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to a unipolar world with the only ‘superpower’, the United States, at the apex and capable of unilaterally exercising its economic and military prowess to design a new international order.
As the Communism was losing its battle, Francis Fukuyama observed: “What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such, that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” (“The End of History”, The National Interest, Summer, 1989)
With the collapse of the so-called ‘Evil Empire’, the United States was in an ideal position to promote liberal democracy and help resolve inter-state disputes and conflicts that were a threat to international peace and security.
It was well equipped to address the festering wounds of the Middle East and South West Asia and support a humanitarian and reformist agenda in the region to initiate an era of harmony and progress. This would have removed many misgivings about the West and improved its image in the Muslim mind.
Bernard Lewis had observed as early as 1990: “For vast numbers of Middle Easterners, Western-style economic methods brought poverty, Western-style political institutions brought tyranny, even Western-style warfare brought defeat.” (“The Roots of Muslim Rage”, The Atlantic, September 1990)
In fact, the US support for corrupt regimes and the West’s insatiable greed for the region’s resources had largely been responsible for the failure of Western-style institutions where they were adopted in the Muslim/Arab World.
The United States could have changed this reality and consequently the perception of the Middle Eastern Muslims about the West.
But this was not going to happen.
Perhaps the American military-industrial complex and the oil lobby needed to invent a new enemy, and this real or imaginary enemy was to be Islam.
The United States had already been instrumental in promoting extremism and militancy in the name of Islam during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The Mujahideen were now to be projected as monsters.
The first Gulf War and the stationing of American forces in the holy land of Islam particularly offended and provoked the Muslim militants who had fought against the Russians in Afghanistan. Soon the United States managed to convert Al-Qaeda into a symbol of Islamic threat and became indirectly responsible for 9/11.
Before the collapse of the Soviet Union a considerable section of the Muslim intelligentsia and political activists looked towards socialism as panacea for their ailing society and state.
The Muslim intelligentsia now got divided into two segments: those who subscribed to the concept of ‘the end of history’ in the sense Fukuyama had used it and those who embraced what for semantic purposes may be called the radical version of Islam.
If the former sought to undermine the power of the ruling elite through establishment of democratic institutions the latter joined the ranks of those who cherished the grandiose vision of Islamic revolution.
The calculated ferocity with which the American neo-cons acted against the Al-Qaeda and the Taliban regime in the aftermath of 9/11 and the occupation of Iraq by the US-led coalition forces on the trumped up pretext that the Saddam regime possessed the weapons of mass destruction strengthened the position of the militants. They could argue that the United States had a sinister agenda of enslaving the Muslim Ummah, through proxy regimes and direction intervention and a clash of civilizations was in the offing.
Still the majority of Muslim masses yearned for participatory democracy and responsible government, although they continued to hold a negative perception of the United States and other Western Powers.
They were also getting conscious of their own failings and weaknesses in a world that was in the grip of globalisation process.
Thus the wave of protest and unrest that has swept across the Arab countries of West Asia and North Africa – Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Libya, Bahrain, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia – in varying degrees represents the outburst of hitherto pent-up feelings of the Muslim masses against one or more of the harsh realities they have been facing at the hands of surrogate regimes and their foreign sustainers. These include:
1. Civil or military dictatorial regimes and absolute monarchies or sheikhdoms under which the people lack the sense of participation in the governance of the country. They are denied the fundamental rights those are touchstone of any modern and civilized society. The curbs on political activities and media create an environment of suffocation for the people.
2. Governments under leaders who are perceived as puppets and stooges of foreign powers, principally the United States, and serving them instead of protecting national interests. For the Islamists, this is a situation in which the state assumes a character akin to ‘darul harb’ i.e., land of war where according to Islamic fiqah jihad (holy war) to restore Islam’s supremacy or hijrah (migration for safeguarding faith) becomes obligatory.
3. Bad governance that includes incompetence, inaptitude, mismanagement, negligence of duties, corruption, nepotism, favouritism and abdication of responsibilities. Large sections of population are denied basic civic amenities. At times the state fails to protect life and property of its citizens.
4. Economic injustice and unequal opportunities. The ruling elite / classes control and exploit the resources of the state for self-aggrandizement and unrestrained accumulation of wealth. Usually this wealth is transferred to secret accounts in foreign banks and invested in properties abroad. Perennial poverty for teeming millions.
5. International financial crisis that has led to increase in unemployment and under-employment. Rampant inflation, particularly rising prices of essential food items.
6. Tribal structure of the Arab societies. In some Muslim countries one tribe or a couple of tribes controls the state apparatus and enjoy lion’s share in its resources. In others one tribe is pitted against another.
7. Sectarianism, in particular Shia-Sunni divides with one sect dominating the institutions of government.
8. Communication explosion, which has created awareness about quality of life enjoyed by the people in the West and yearning for the same.
9. Demographic changes due to which there is a huge population of young people who are angry and frustrated with the prevailing situation in the Muslim, particularly, Arab World.
We know that it all began with self-immolation of a youth in Tunisia who was depressed and frustrated with injustice meted out to him. The people revolted against the system. In Egypt, the people were fed up with Mubarak’s dictatorship and yearned for real democracy. In both countries regime-change has taken place.
In Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, there is disaffection among the Shia minority and majority respectively and in Syria it is the other way round. Here the Sunnis are in majority but the government is under the Alawis.
Both Saudi Arabia and Bahrain have adopted the policy of carrot and stick. The rulers have doled out billions along with strict law enforcement. In Syria, the government has made concessions to conservative Muslims by removing the ban on hijab (veil) in educational institutions.
In Libya and Yemen, there is resentment against long-serving autocrats in addition to tribal rivalries. In Jordan, the people want more democratic rights under a constitutional monarchy.
Although the so-called Obama Doctrine speaks about humanitarian concern for the oppressed people, the United States and most of its NATO allies have not maintained a single standard in responding to the crises.
They have their strategic interests to protect. To continue to exploit the oil resources of the Arab and Muslim countries and to ensure the security of Israel are their principal considerations.
They find no qualms in supporting anachronistic regimes of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain and autocratic government of Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen because of their pro-West policies.
They have unleashed their military might against Gadhafi because he is, again, not in their good books. The country has virtually got divided. They would be prepared to punish Bashar Al Asad if conditions deteriorate in Syria.
The turmoil in Arab World has increased the dependence of many regimes on the United States. The sovereign status of the Arab countries has further been compromised.
For the Muslim World a matter of grave concern is the sectarian aspect of the turmoil. The Iran-Saudi antagonism may get intensified if Shias are suppressed too heavily in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. The division of the Muslim World on Sunni-Shia lines would be disastrous socially and politically for the Muslim countries.
It is not clear ultimately what toll the turmoil will take. It is time for the Arab regimes to reform their government and administrative structures. The communication explosion and manifold increase in international travel, trade and cultural exchanges have exposed the Arab societies to foreign influences. Participatory democracy, good governance and establishment of an egalitarian socio-economic order are the demands of the modern age.
For the United States and other Western Powers it is important that they do not go against the aspirations of the Arab peoples. If the legitimate aspirations of the Arab masses are throttled, they would get further frustrated with their lot.
The Islamic militancy has its origin in a strong tradition of defensive reaction to intrusion by alien culture in Muslim value-system or attempts by forces hostile to Islam at political domination. It assumes itself to be based on the concept of retributive justice. It has adopted methods that are not always consistent with or warranted by Islam.
The frustrated people look towards alternatives. In the present scenario that alternative is present in the form of Islamic radicalism and militancy. International volatile issues like, Palestine, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Iraq and Chechnya need to be addressed and resolved, as these fuel the so called radicalism and militancy.
Bringing in qualitative and quantitative socio economic in puts in the areas of education, health, economic opportunities and moderate, democratic and good governments in the volatile regions of Middle East, South and Central Asia is imperative. It is a daunting task. But there are no short cuts.
While concluding it may be stressed that unless there is realization in the comity of nations, particularly the Developed World, that in the post Bi-polar World of Twentieth Century, there is a void, a void that has left the majority of the fellow human beings in the so-called developing or non-developed world, devoid of any meaningful and representative leadership, particularly in the regions where Muslims are concentrated.
As a result of turmoil in the Arab World, with a broad Sunni Muslim bloc of countries lining up against an emerging Pro-Iran Shiite Crescent in the Middle East, Sunni-majority and nuclear-armed Pakistan has become a proxy battleground for both Iran and the Saudi Arabia.
In response to the wall chalking and banners against the Saudi Arabia’s monarchy by the different Shiite organizations, the Pakistani madressas belonging to the Deobandi and the Salafi school of thought have also activated their cadre in support of the Saudi Kingdom. Last week one of the largest Pakistani Islamic Seminary Jamia Binoria Al-Alamia situated in the Pakistani southern port city of Karachi published an advertisment in the newspapers, in which it has announced a meeting of all clerics and the prayer leaders of the Karachi mosques to prepare a strategy “In defense of the servant of the two holy places” an official title used for the King Abdullah.
Asia Times Online wrote that Pakistan’s Fauji Foundation, an armed forces entity, organized the recruitment of over 1,000 ex-army personnel for service in Bahrain’s National Guard. The small Persian Gulf state, which is headquarters to the United States 5th Fleet, is suppressing protests with the help of Saudi invasion forces. Bahrain’s ruling elite is Sunni, although about 70% of the population is Shiite.
The advertisement for Pakistanis to join Bahrain’s National Guard was published about three weeks ago in a mass-circulation Urdu-language newspaper. Since then, the process of recruitment has continued unabated. According to investigations by Asia Times Online, the recruits have been promised 100,000 Pakistani rupees (US$1,174) a month, beside other perks including free medical and accommodation. People with names that have a traditional Shiite ring – such as Syed, Abbas, Ali and Hussain – are being overlooked. Iranian media have broadcast stories predicting a strong Pakistani role in the Gulf region; this resulted in Iranian-sponsored agitators in Bahrain killing several Pakistani workers for “collaborating with the Sunni rulers of Bahrain”.
But what if this all is the game plan of the US military-industrial complex and the oil lobby?
The impetus or beneficial fall out for people of Pakistan from uprising in the Arab World may be a matter of conjecture, but the specter of a second sectarian proxy war in Pakistan may become a reality.
http://www.pkhope.com/understanding-the-turmoil-in-arab-world/
