Pakistan PM, Imran Khan, made a short speech at the 14th OICsummit, held in Mecca, on June 1st. He first talked about the issue ofblasphemy, and how it spoils the relationship of the Muslim and the Westernworld. He emphasised the point that OIC, as an apex Muslim organisation, isduty-bound to raise this issue at the global fora, like UN. It can be read as arealisation that leaving such emotive issues to the protesting crowds hasearned Muslims a bad name. There are finer points in this statement. One, Muslimsmust organise their argument in a non-violent way, and articulate it throughknown and accepted collectives, as is OIC in this case. Second, Muslims havefailed to get across and it contributes to the disruption of communicationbetween the Muslims and the the West. What the West thinks about religion, andhow it treats religious themes, are waydifferent than how Muslims treat religion, and understand religious themes. Ina nutshell, Imran wants Muslims to undertake a democratic route, and use dialogue,to make their point. One can not agree more with Imran Khan on this. We needthis change of attitude desperately, and urgently.
But the point here is that Imran Khan has to begin it wherehe comes from – Pakistan. Here is acountry where the Army and the religious groups are in a long association totake such matters from the state and give it to the crowds. From a decent, andnon-violent, talking to the rest of the world, Pakistan turned it into avirulent, and crude contest. So Imran Khan has a huge task back home, and if hesucceeds in doing this, it would not be his historic contribution to Pakistanalone, he will certainly initiate a change at the global level. The world iswatching for this.
This brings us to the part of the speech where he talksabout radicalisation, and how religion is associated with terrorism. Here hemakes that oft repeated line that ” religion has nothing to do with terrorism”,and associating Islam with the acts of terror, raises the spectre ofIslamophobia. According to Imran, it blurs the distinction between a moderateand a radical Muslim. This is just ordinary, and we have been repeating thisthing in our defence over and over again. The world doesn’t take it seriouslybecause there is a problem in our understanding of religion, and our practicalassociation with the text of Islam. Imran Khan blames the heads of the Muslim states for their failure to”explain powerfully enough” to the rest of the world, particularly the West,that “Islam has nothing to do with terrorism.” While this is true, but it isnot the entire truth. There is much that remains unsaid.
Why Imran Khan, or other Muslim heads of the state, remainsilent on this count. One of the simplest explanations is that Muslim states,and their heads, don’t take the trouble of understanding this problem. Theyperfunctorily approach it, gloss over the core of the problem, and resort to mediocre, and pedestrian,explanations. Two, the political stakes in their home constituencies come inthe way of an honest debate on why Islam got associated with terrorism. Thereal test for Imran Khan is actually here. He knows, and in some of his earlierinterviews he has mentioned it, that speaking about such things entails payinga huge price; so his is a fraught silence. Otherwise he knows there is a personcalled Ghamidi who comes from Pakistan, and who by Imran’s own admission is afriend. Ghamidi’s Counter-narrative takes up this problem head on, and ImranKhan must look for the ways to get the world attention towards this counter-narrative.By doing this, he will, I repeat, make a game-changer contribution not just toPakistan, but to the larger world. The world is watching for this too.
Now the third part of his speech. This is closer home, andcarries an element of urgency. Imran argues that by dovetailing Islam withterror, the Muslim political struggles for freedom have been delegitimised. Thecase in point is Kashmir, and Palestine. So for Imran Khan restoration of thelegitimacy to these political struggles is contingent on delinking Islam andterrorism.
Then Imran goes on to repeat the oft repeated – humanrights, self determination, UN resolutions. These are all Pakistan’s legal andpolitical references to Kashmir case, engraved in its political customs.
The real task for Imran Khan is to think of Kashmir as apeople’s struggle, and contribute instrengthening its independent, political character. This task is subliminally linked to the earliertwo tasks. Here, he has to fight against the two most powerful structures ofhis country. One, the warrior class – the Army. Two, the religious parties –the non-state. In his earlier interviewsImran Kahn has expressed his intent toclose down “all militant groups”, and also “de-weaponise” Pakistan”. If ImranKhan can accomplish this task, he will pull up the miracle of this century.Once again, by doing this, he would be changing the fate, not only of Pakistanand Kashmir, but of the entire world. And the world is watching for this too.
Right now Imran Khan can begin by using his influence tounleash a political process within Kashmir, making all shades of politicalopinion in Kashmir sit together, and further the politics of Muslim-Kashmir in all forms possible. Imranspoke about the Indian parliamentary elections, whatever he spoke. Can he makeup his mind and speak a line or two about how the upcoming elections in Kashmirare crucial to the survival of Muslim-Kashmir.
The world may or may not watch for this, but we in Kashmirare anxiously waiting for this.
Dear Khan, we wish you luck in your battles ahead. Up untilnow you have been bowling over the wickets, for a change, come round thewickets.