About one month ago, I wrote an article about the blasphemy law in Pakistan. Since then, events have caught up with theory with a vengeance.
The Punjab Governor has been assassinated by one of his own elite force guards. The guard gave himself up and has now claimed on TV that he killed him for the crime of opposing the blasphemy law.
The killer soon had a hugely popular fan page on FB. Now that the page is down, his supporters are replacing their own picture with his picture, on their profile page.
His confession is on Youtube already. He says the punishment of blasphemers is death. And he prays that the prophet will accept him as his slave.
And fans have made posters of the assassin (the title says "salute to the greatness of Ghazi Malik Mumtaz Qadri")
Lawyers (presumably supporters of Islamist parties) showered Mumtaz Qadri, self-confessed killer of Governor Salman Taseer, with rose petals on his first court appearance. He was also garlanded with a garland of roses.
The facebook page has since been shut down, but I think the page should NOT have been shut down. People are not "radicalized" on these page, they come to these page because they are "radicals". Let others see them and see what the mindset is really like. Otherwise, we will be forever plagued by Westoxicated liberals whose only frame of reference is postmodern western academia and who only know this type of Muslim through the eyes of some professor in Columbia University or Berkeley...little brown children, bravely struggling against the hegemonic discourse of the West or some such...
The hate against Governor Taseer did not spring up out of nowhere. It was built up over time. Check out this video on youtube. And behind all such efforts, people suspect the hand of Pakistan's brilliant intelligence agencies, working overtime to protect the nation. Reactions within Pakistan and outside have been varied and comments on our blog have been most interesting..
In any case, I think the month-old article on blashphemy laws in Pakistan remains relevant, so let me post it here again:
The decision of a lower court to award the death penalty to a poor Christian woman accused of blasphemy has ignited a wide debate over Pakistan’s blasphemy laws.
Liberals have asked that the Zia-era blasphemy law should be repealed or amended because it has become an instrument of oppression and injustice in the hands of mobs and gangsters (over 4000 prosecutions in 25 years with several gruesome extra-judicial executions). The religious right has mobilized its supporters to oppose any such amendment and regards these attempts as a conspiracy against Islam. Ruling party MNA Sherry Rahman has introduced a “private member bill” to amend the law and the governor of Punjab has intervened (somewhat clumsily) in the judicial process and indicated that a Presidential pardon is on the cards. The international media is arrayed against the law alongside Pakistan’s liberals and progressives, while the “deep state”, the Islamist front organizations and their mentors in the Gulf and Saudi Arabia are no doubt aligned on the other side. What will be the likely outcome of this struggle? It is always hazardous to make predictions, but let us make some anyway and try to state why these are the likely outcomes:
These predictions may appear pessimistic and discouraging, but I would submit that they are not meant to be discouraging; they are meant to be realistic. The law will not be repealed because the law is not just an invention imposed by General Zia on an unwilling populace. Rather, this law is the crude and updated expression of a pre-existing social and religious order. Blasphemy and apostasy laws were meant to protect the orthodox Islamic theological consensus of the 12th century AD and they have done so with remarkable effectiveness. Unlike their Christian counterparts (and prosecutions for heresy and blasphemy were seen throughout the middle ages in Europe) these laws retain their societal sanction and have been enforced by free lancers and volunteers where the state has hesitated. Thus, in Lahore in 1929, a carpenters apprentice named Ghazi Ilm Deen Shaheed executed the Hindu publisher of a book Muslims considered blasphemous. And Ghazi Ilm Deen Shaheed was not a lone wolf. Such action was being openly demanded by Muslim leaders like Maulana Zafar Ali Khan and thousands of protesters. Ilm Deen's best friend wanted to do the act and only stepped aside because they drew lots and Ilm Deen won thrice in a row.
He was then defended in court by none other than Quaid E Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah, who was asked to take up the case by our illustrious modernist, Allama Mohammed Iqbal. His funeral drew thousands and was attended with pride by Allama Iqbal, who supposedly said that “this carpenter has left us, educated people, far behind”. His grave is now a popular shrine and a Punjabi movie has been made about his exploit, complete with a dance sequence featuring the blasphemer enjoying himself before he meets his fate.
When Salman Rushdie’s book was declared blasphemous and rallies demanding his head were held all over the Muslim world, General Zia was not the agent of those protests. Such executions have even been attempted in Europe, most recently by textile engineering student Aamir Cheema in Germany. And Aamir Cheema too has achieved sainthood after he took his own life in a German prison, with his funeral attracting thousands and his grave becoming a popular shrine.
A minister in Musharraf's enlightened cabinet wrote more than one op-ed commending such acts and fantasizing about the day Salman Rushdie's skin will be torn from his body with sharp hooks. In short, while it is indeed true that misuse of the law has become common after General Zia’s time (an intended consequence, as one aim of such laws is to harass and browbeat all potential opposition), the law has deeper roots and liberals who believe that it is possible to make a distinction between true blasphemy and misuse of the law, may find that this line is not easy to draw.
The second, and perhaps more potent reason the law will not be repealed is because the law was consciously meant to promote the Islamist project that the deep state (or a powerful section of the deep state) continues to desire in Pakistan. The blasphemy law is a ready-made weapon against all secular opposition to the military-mullah alliance (though some sections of the military now seem to have abandoned that alliance, hence the qualification “section of the deep state”). Secular parties are suspected of being soft on India and are considered a danger to the Kashmir Jihad and other projects dear to the heart of the deep state. At the same time, Islamist parties provide ideological support and manpower for those beloved causes. In this way, the officers of the deep state, even when they are not personally religious, recognize the need for an alliance with religious parties and against secular political forces (Musharraf was a good example). They have been forced into an uneasy (temporary?) compromise with secular parties by circumstances beyond their control (aka America) but with American withdrawal a real possibility, the deep state does not wish to alienate its mullah constituency too much. They will be needed again once the Yankees are gone. Hence, no repeal at this time.
But in the long term, change is bound to come. Pakistan does not exist on an island apart from the world. And the world is moving on from blasphemy laws and apostasy laws into the domain of capitalist individualism, if not yet into the realm of democracy or socialism. It is this capitalism that pays the bills for the deep state and its patrons in China and Saudi Arabia. This capitalism, as Marx pointed out, is a universal acid, “it batters down all Chinese walls..it forces the barbarians' intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image”. Islamic hardliners may be useful to great world powers at particular times and places, but they will not be allowed to become an alternative power, nor do they have the intellectual resources to be able to do so.
Of course, blasphemy accusations and their use to suppress speech are not limited to Muslim countries e.g. Sikhs have resorted to violence to protest blasphemy and Hindu mobs enforce the sanctity of Shivaji's memory in Mumbai but Islamist violence has merged with secular political grievances to create a particularly potent combination and their conflict with the modern bourgeois world has an edge that other fanatics can only envy. But while this conflict may see many local ups and downs, in the long term the advantage lies with the modern world. The world is what it is and the hard-line Islamists simply cannot provide what the population of Muslim countries desperately wants; more wealth in this world, not just in the next. Capitalism with a Muslim face is certainly possible, even likely; Capitalism with a human face, maybe. But hard-line Islamic supremacism of the type being protected by blasphemy and apostasy laws is not likely to dominate in any country that aspires to also become modern. In the long run (decades, not centuries) it’s going to be forced to compromise, one way or the other (with one way being less painful than the other).
PS: Meanwhile, a reward has been offered...
PS: for more on what the blasphemy law leads to in the Islamicate world, click here
*** #10 had some typos which could mislead...please ignore and read this...***
The murder (and not death) in Islamabad is not shocking, it is rather sad and gloomy. It is depressing too. The incidents pose a seemingly hopeless situation. The cancer is deep and all around. An entire society has got infected. The followers of Islam who believe in coexistence with rest of the world WITHOUT converting all to Islam need to be very cautious and active, the race looks to be against time.
Each socio-religious system has its own weak points, but in case of Islam the voice of difference looks to be choked and the figures look to be trembling. But it is sure that the solution is within and the leaders for change have to be invented within Islam, soon.
The key message is coexistence with other religions. Islam must give up, at the basic masses' level of understanding, the idea of making entire humanity following Islam. That is the key.
Omar Ali draws a parallel between MAJinnah-AllamaIqbal-InfluentialBlasphemer-Assasin and SalmanTaseer-ModernTerrorist-PoorAasiyaBibi-BlasphemyLaw.......as long as dubious liberals like Ali lose their sense of perspectives and draw parallels between well known leaders and modern-day terror-mongers, there is not much hope that the average pakistani would be led down the sane path.
Im sorry but folks like Ali are not helping.