There is no IS in Kashmir. It’s not a mere perception but confirmed by the Indian Home Ministry just about a month ago, in Rajya Sabha. Yes, there are flags here and there, and that’s what it’s limited to. There are apparently three different motivations for those who unfurl these flags: 1) To anger the forces during the stone-throwing, since during the battle you want to hurt the enemy even psychologically, as much as you can. Since it’s a one sided-battle of stones against the pellets and bullets, the frustration of the weaker side manifests itself by displaying what’s considered to be the most extreme, by the other side. This is plain psychology at play. There’s no connection of these boys with Syria. Most of them wouldn’t even know where it’s on the map. 2) The black flag, which is adopted by the IS as their flag, is actually considered to be an Islamic flag, 14 centuries old. There’s even a mention of it in the sayings of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). In fact, this is why IS tried to own it since its claim is to represent Islam. It’s unusually square shaped which is what is said to be the shape of Rasoolullah (saw)’s flag. There’s his stamp on it, and the writing of Shahada on it is very ragged-akin to the 6th-century style. So, some people in Kashmir say that they do not display the flag of ISIS, but simply an Islamic flag. Well, a counter question to this group could be as to why didn’t they display it before the year 2014? And if they had forgotten it then, it’s their responsibility to ensure that they keep a banner attached saying it shouldn’t be misconstrued as the IS flag. Anyway! The third group is minuscule but equally significant to understand. These people argue that the un-Islamic acts ascribed to ISIS by the West and its media should not be believed. It’s not that they approve of their cannibalistic outlook; it’s just that they do not believe it to be true. They do not trust the news. Again, the counter question to them could be that then where from have they got the true news about IS being truly Islamic if we agree that the media is faking it? At the best, they can claim ignorance about it.
This takes us to a broader debate of whether Kashmir’s right to self-determination is Islamic or political. For the sake of fair analysis, this discussion will be academic, and will not represent my stance. I’ll make observations as a third person. Humans have a tendency to create binaries and see everything in either black or white, and they usually tend to run away from deeper analysis since it takes effort and time. Let’s decipher and attempt to unwind the complicacies. There are issues which are just religious and wouldn’t have existed in absence of the religion. A Muslim wouldn’t have prayed the way he does if he didn’t have faith in Islam. There cannot be any motivation to pray, other than the religion. Thus, a prayer of any religion is just because of religion. On the contrary, same cannot be said for charity even though it’s professed by almost all the religions. In Islam, it is one of the five pillars. I’m aware that highest charity-givers in the world are said to be Muslims, followed by other Abrahamic religions-the Christians and the Jews. However, we see Hindus, Sikhs and even Atheists giving charity. Why is that? This is because God has made our Fitrah (nature), and the feeling to help the needy is instilled in us. Since we also tend to be selfish at times, charity is entertained and promised a reward for, in the hereafter. In Islam, Zakat is Fardh (obligatory). Now, when you see Muslim and an atheist doing the same thing, it does not make it any less Islamic. It’s still the pillar of Islam. Also, you cannot know whether a Muslim helped the poor with the intention of pleasing his God or he just felt pity for the poor like the atheist did, or maybe both. However, it wouldn’t be wrong to assume that a Muslim might have been inspired by Islam to do so, since as I said that the highest charity is done by them. Now, if you are asked if the charity is Islamic or secular, what would you say? Would you say that since charity is done by atheists too, so it’s unislamic?
This is exactly the issue of Kashmir. If the people in Kashmir think that the tyrant Maharaja had no right to decide their future, and that no country can suppress their aspirations by killing, maiming, raping and blinding them, and that they will not accept oppression, it is the human nature at play. When the British ruled India, it was human nature for the Indians to seek Independence from the throne they didn’t want to pledge allegiance to. So again, it was the human nature at play. Does that prove this struggle is not Islamic? No, it doesn’t. No matter where the oppression is, Islam asks to oppose it. Quran says in Surah Nisa (verse 75): And what is (the matter) with you that you fight not in the cause of Allah and (for) the oppressed among men, women, and children? So, if the Chinese occupy Malaysia, they would resist exactly the way Japanese would, but most of the Malaysians-being Muslims may be inspired by Islam to do so. So, if you are now asked the same question, what would you say: Political or Islamic? It all drops down to your Niyah (intent). This is what has created confusion. Some Hurriyat leaders say that this is a political issue and has nothing to do with Islam, which enrages those who feel that why should a Muslim die for anything other than Islam, and then considers anything political as antithetical to Islam, as if Islam doesn’t encompass politics. The two ideas are not mutually exclusive to each other. There’s this new slogan: Shariat Or Shahadat. Is caliphate the only commandment of God? Those who follow Islam to resist occupation anywhere in the world, are they apostates, as is being insinuated by this slogan? Those who save women, children and old against the atrocities anywhere in the world, following the above-cited verse, are they apostates? Is this what Islam has shrunk down to? Islam encompasses every sphere of life. Such people need to answer the question: If criminals attack your house for loot and plunder, and molest women, what does Islam require you to do? Don’t tell me Islam hasn’t any say here since it’s the complete Deen. Islam asks you to fight this oppression and save your household and its dignity. Imagine a person who would argue in this situation, that “Why should I spill my blood for anything other than Shariah & caliphate? Fighting against oppression is not a fight for Islam, I better watch the show”. This is exactly what this new breed of over-zealous and less thinking militants say. Those who limit it just to caliphate are doing a disservice to it. These people call even Pakistan a Taghoot. Well, the pro-Pak people would also argue that since Pakistan is the only Muslim nation made in the name of Islam, and that they are fighting to make Kashmir as well as Pakistan even bigger caliphate. So, this caliphate logic doesn’t cut the ice even here. Those who ascribe Kashmir’s rebel fighters to the IS should watch Eisa Fazili’s video message. He indeed has talked about Islam, but he talks about Aasiya-Neelofar, Kunaposhpora and says he felt as if his sisters were calling him for help. Those at the helm, instead of buying this ISIS narrative, should realize that it’s the atrocities and the unresolved status of Kashmir, which is pushing young boys to the wall. Once they feel victimized, they find legitimacy to fight oppression, from scriptures. So, scriptures come later, oppression comes first. This is where they misunderstand fight against oppression and jump to the idea of a caliphate, which is altogether a different concept.To say that glorification in huge funerals makes their adrenaline rush and they go out to become heroes is incorrect. This boy clearly spells out his reasons for taking to arms. Their mind is clear, and they are not just misled. In their age, to accept tyranny and humiliation is usually hard. The end of such tyranny will ensure that our young boys do not lose lives. It’s the government of India which can end militancy in Kashmir, not by killing them but by resolving the genuine issue of Kashmir. Our boys should also understand that to go out to fight without any strategy at all, could show your conscientiousness and selflessness, but just to go out and die is not a good idea.
Besides, I accept that Islam, apart from guiding our daily lives, also has a model of governance including its economic system- which many opine is the middle ground between Marxism and Capitalism with none of the drawbacks of the either. It’s not terrorism to suggest that this model is good, whether you like it or not, exactly the way people talk about Socialism and Communism. So, what form of governance-model people want to adopt, is also their right, but that’s when they are free to do so. When you are not in a position to defend your right to life, talks about the governance model is uncalled for, especially if it helps the other side. Therefore, it’s against the Islamic hikmah (strategy) to display flags which hurt us more than it helps. If hollow bravado without strategy were true Islam, the greatest of men who ever walked on earth would not have signed the treaty of Hudaibiya and walked back to Madina. They could’ve said that if Allah is with us, there’s no need of strategy. True, Muslims do not die for anything other than Islam. Islam is not a problem, but those who limit it to some group which they have no knowledge of is problematic as well as inappropriate to this context. Don’t give wrong signals. Be proud of Islam. And true, we do not die for anything other than the commandments of God. One just needs to understand what that means. Most of the Kashmiris believe in the Islam of Muhammad (saw), not of the ISIS. If anybody wants to discuss IS, they should go, live there for a month, and then talk as the authority on the subject. Till then, excuse the Kashmir struggle, which is human, political and anyway Islamic, and there’s nothing wrong with it ince Islam includes humanism and politics too.