EAST PAKISTAN TRAGEDY: A DAILY DIARY

Every year, 16th of December brings tears of the tragedy to some and tears of joy and happiness to some. Following are the episodes of this day.

Pakistan held General Elections in Dec. 1970, its first and fair since Independence under the scrutiny of military government of General Yahya Khan.

Total turnout of voting was 63.1% the highest turnout ever.

Awami League headed by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman won 160 seats (74.9%) in East Pakistan out of total allocation of 162 seats for East Pakistan.

Pakistan People Party headed by Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto won 81 seats (27%) out of total seats of 138 for West Pakistan.

PPP failed to win any seat in East Pakistan.

AL failed to get any seat from West Pakistan.

All leaders from West Pakistan, including PPP leaders, strongly resisted the notion of an East Pakistani-led government.

Bhutto voiced his infamous phrase, “Udhar tum, idhar hum” (there you, here me) – thus dividing Pakistan verbally. The same attitudes and emotions were expressed in East Pakistan.

Gen. Yahya convened National Assembly first session in Dacca on March 3, 1971.  Z.A.Bhutto and some rightist leaders denied attending the N.A session in Dacca.

On 12 Jan. 1971, General Yahya Khan held a decisive meeting with Sheikh Mujib.  Sheikh Mujib was not prepared to concede an inch on any ground and the President closed the meeting in disgust. He left Dhaka in anger and went straight to Larkana where he was hosted by Bhutto for two days. There they were joined by Gen. Abdul Hamid Khan. During the next two days, momentous decisions were taken about the fate of the country. A lot has been written about this meeting but it is all guess work. None is alive now and nothing on official records of their meeting proceedings.

During Jan. and Feb. 1971, Gen. Yahya had visualized the possibility of a military crackdown accompanied by the suspension of all political activity.  He therefore prepared a plan called Operation Blitz. It meant the suspension of all political activities in the country and a reversion of Martial Law rule in East Pakistan.

Gen. Yahya backed up from convening National Assembly session in Dhaka and on 6^th March he blamed Sheikh Mujib for the crisis by not allowing any concessions in his six points manifesto.

On 7^th March the army was put on full alert to go into action in the event of Mujib’s declaration of Independence in his public speech.

On March 7, Mujib successfully contained in his public speech the pressure of the extremist wing of his party to announce Independence, and left the room of negotiations with Pakistan army open within the framework of united Paksitan (Stranger in My Own Country, by Lt. Gen. Khadim Hussein Raja).

Tikka Khan sent out to put down the unrest swelling in East Pakistan.

On 25^th March Tikka Khan directed the brutal military crackdown (Operation Searchlight) with the help of Major Gen. Rao Farman Ali and other Army Generals that stunned the Bengalis with gross violence, atrocities and massive human rights abuses.

Lt. General Yaqub Khan, the then commander of East Command insisted that Gen. Yahya must not postpone the session of the National Assembly elected after the 1970 Elections. He insisted that the President should visit Dhaka in person at the earliest, and take decisions that only he could take.  Yaqub sent several messages, via telephone and in writing but President was not convinced that his presence would help. Gen. Yaqub informed to Peerzada, the personal secretary of the President, that since the President’s visit did not materialize, he was unable to carry on with his responsibilities; he was resigning from his post, and that the written resignation would be communicated on the morning of 5^th March, 1971.[1]

Gen. Niazi was sent to Dhaka to replace Gen. Yaqub Khan and he took the command of East Pakistan.

Hartal and boycott started countrywide March 7, countrywide on call from Awami League. Mujib house in Dhanmandi, Dhaka, became the focal point of all political activities and Awami League high command went into round-the-clock session there. Responsibilities were delegated for all functions of the government including the public utility services, banks, transportation and the information media.  Even the buses and railway trains were left at wayside stations where they were deserted by their staff.  The Dhaka airport staff also went on strike and disappeared.  The unity of action and purpose demonstrated by the entire province was surprisingly complete.  The Martial Law Administrator, at this stage, was left with no one to answer his commands, except his troops.  In fact, it seemed obvious that on a clarion call from Sheikh Mujib, they would even take up arms in his support.

However, with every passing day Awami Leave tightened its grip on the administration in East Pakistan.  All organs fo the government reported to Sheikh Mujib's headquarters for instructions.  Even Inspector General of Police stopped coming to Martial Law headquarters, but started reporting to Sheikh Mujib’s residence.  Sheikh Mujib had, in the meantime, announced that he would address a public rally at the Ramna Race Course on 7 March 1971 at 4 p.m.

Tikka Khan had settled down for barely a weekwhen President Yahya Khan arrived on 15 March  He called fact finding conference the evening he arrived.  He was explained the details of the prevailing situation.  On 16 March, he went into negotiations with Sheikh Mujib.

“At about 10 p.m. on 17 March, Tikka Khan informed Maj. Gen. Ferman, Gen. Abdul Hamid Khan and me that the negotiations with Sheikh Mujib were not proceeding satisfactory and the President, therefore, wanted us to be ready for military action and to prepare a plan accordingly.  No further verbal or written directions were issued.

On the morning of 18 March, Farman and I assembled in my office to work on the plan.  Short of time, we agreed on the broad details of the plan. The President had his own plan—to flee from Dhaka prior to the military action.”[2]

“On 21 March Mr. Bhutto arrived with his party advisers and lieutenants and joined negotiations with Sheikh Mujib which reportedly failed.  On failure of negotiations, he returned to West Pakistan safely.

The new plan, prepared by Farman Ali and me was named ‘Searchlight’.  I was instructed to put Operation Searchlight into action on the night between 25 and 26 of March 1971.  This was a momentous decision and I was very sad for the country.  The President had apparently decided to dump East Pakistan and let it go its own way. He seemed to be concerned about his personal safety only. Therefore, he left Dhaka under some sort of a cover plan at about 7 p.m. on 25^th March, which fooled nobody except, probably, himself.”[3]

After disarming of almost all centers of the East Pakistan Rifles, elements of the East Bengal Regiment and the Reserve Police, the Pakistan Army, in collusion with religious extremist razakars of Al-Badr and Al-Shams, engaged in the systematic genocide and atrocities of Bengali civilians, particularly nationalists, youth and religious minorities.[4]  Neighboring India provided economic, military and diplomatic support to Bengali nationalists.  Bangladesh government-in-exile was set up in Calcutta.  Mujib was arrested and flown to West Pakistan.  Most of the Awami League leaders fled and set up a government-in-exile in Calcutta, declaring Bangladesh an independent state.

The civil was created a widespread displacement of civilians in East Pakistan and widespread violations of human rights – carried out by the Pakistan Army with support from political and religious militias, beginning with the start of Operation Searchlight on 25^th March 1971.  Independent researchers put the toll at 300,000 to 500,000.  A further eight to ten million people fled the country to seek safety in India.[5]  Bangladeshi sources cite a figure of 200,000 women raped, giving birth to thousands of war babies.[6]

Wary of the growing involvement of India, the Pakistan Air Force launched a pre-emptive strike, called Operation Chengiz Khan,  on Indian Air Force planes on the ground.  The strike was seen by India as an open act of unprovoked aggression.  This marked the official start of the Indo-Pakistan War.  Three Indian corps was involved in the liberation of East Pakistan.  They were supported by nearly three brigades of Mukti Bahini fighting alongside them, and many more fighting irregularly.

This was far superior to the Pakistani army of three divisions.  The Indians quickly overran the country selectively engaging or bypassing heavily defended strongholds.  Pakistani forces were unable to effectively counter the Indian attack, as they had been deployed in small units around the border to counter guerrilla attacks by the Mukti Bahini.  Unable to defend Dhaka, the Pakistanis surrendered on 16 December 1971.[7]

On 16 Dec. Lt. Gen. A. A. K. Niazi, CO of Pakistan Army forces located in East Pakistan signed the Instrument of Surrender.  Over 93000 Pakistani troops surrendered to the Indian forces, making it the largest surrender since World War II.

To ensure a smooth transition, the Simla Agreement was signed in 1972, between India and Pakistan.  The treaty ensured that Pakistan recognized the independence of Bangladesh in exchange for the return of the Pakistani 93000 PoWs.[8]

For full episodes of Army actions, failure of political negotiations, faulty political decisions of the leadership of Pakistan Peoples Party, and for fact finding search, it is highly recommended to read through the pages of Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report.

[1] Lt. Gen. Khadim Hussein Raja; “Stranger in My Own Country”; p.57

[2] Ibid. Khadim Hussein Raja; p.71.

[3] Ibid. p.79.

[4] “Leading News Resource of Pakistan”, Daily Times, May 17, 2010; and GenocideBangladesh.org.       Retrieved Dec. 14 2014.

[5] Rummel, Rudolph J., “Statistics of Democide: Genocide and Mass Murder Since 1900” Chap.8, Table 8.2 Pakistan Genocide in Bangladesh Estimates, Sources, and Calculations.

[6] Menen, Aubrey (23 Jul.1972). “The Rapes of Bangladesh”, The New York Times.

[7] Encyclopedia Wikipedia, Chap. Bangladesh Liberation War 1971.

[8] Ibid.

RIGHTEOUS-RIGHT: پاکستانی مسائل اور انکا حل

RIGHTEOUS-RIGHT: پاکستانی مسائل اور انکا حل: تحریر: اسرار حسن فلوریڈا: ٩ دسمبر ٢٠١٨ سابقہ ستر سال کے تجربات سے یہ بات ثابت ھے کہ پاکستان کا سدھار کسی پاکستانی لیڈر یا جرنیل کے ہ...

پاکستانی مسائل اور انکا حل

تحریر: اسرار حسن

فلوریڈا: ٩ دسمبر ٢٠١٨

سابقہ ستر سال کے تجربات سے یہ بات ثابت ھے کہ پاکستان کا سدھار کسی پاکستانی لیڈر یا جرنیل کے ہاتھوں ہونا ناممکنات میں سے ہے- بات مایوسی کی ہے، پر نہیں—بات تاریخی حقایق کی ہے- پاکستانی قوم کے لئے ایک راستہ ہے؛ ایک تلخ راستہ-

١٩٢٠ کے آخری عشرہ میں امریکا اور یورپ میں great depression کا دور شروع ہوا-  ٤ اگست ١٩٣٣ کو فریںکلن روزویلٹ نے امریکا کی صدارت سمبھالا تو اس وقت معاشی بدحالی زوروں پر تھی- خزانہ خالی تھا اور حکومت ساہوکار ملکوں کا قرض دار- روزویلٹ نے امریکا کے سارے امراء ساھوکاروں سے مالی مدد کی درخواست کی اور انکو تصویرکا بھیانک رخ دکھایا- اگر امریکا کوساہوکار ملکوں کے ہاتھوں گروی کیا گیا تو امریکا کے سارے امراء  اور انکی جمع شدہ دولت کا کیا حال ھوگا؟ روزویلٹ کے اس تنبیہ پر امریکا کے سارے امراء نے اپنی دولت اور تعاون کا منھ کھول دیا-  امریکا دوبارہ اپنی پیروں پر اس قوت و طاقت کے ساتھ کھڑا ہوا کہ ١٩٣٤ کی دوسری عالمی جنگ کا ھیرو بن گیا-  پاکستان کے لئے تاریخ عالم میں ایسے واقعات کی کمی نہیں ہے- اگر کمی ہے تو فقط حب الوطنی کی اور جذبہ قربانی کی-

- O -

RIGHTEOUS-RIGHT: اسلام سے مسلمانوں کا تعلق

RIGHTEOUS-RIGHT: اسلام سے مسلمانوں کا تعلق: تحریر: اسرار حسن فلوریڈا: ٢٨ نومبر ٢٠١٨ 

 اسلام سے مسلمانوں کا تعلق

تحریر: اسرار حسن

فلوریڈا: ٢٨ نومبر ٢٠١٨

اٹھارہویں اور انیسویں صدی کے دوران دنیا کے
مسلمان ملکوں کا غیر ملکی حکومتوں سے آزادی اسلامی دنیا کے لئے ایک خوش ایند واقع
تھا- یہ حقیقت اس اہمیت کا بھی حامل تھا کہ ان تمام نوزائیدہ مسلم ممالک میں جو
مراقش سے انڈونیشیا تک پھیلے ہوۓ  تھے ان
کی جد و جہد آزادی میں اسلام کا ایک بڑا عمل دخل تھا- لیکن بیسویں اور اب اکیسویں
صدی میں ان تمام ملکوں کی دوسری اہم بات یہ ہے کہ ان میں کوئی بھی مسلم ملک عملی
طور پر ایک ترقی یافتہ عملی-سیاسی ملک نہ بن سکا- ان باتوں کے علاوہ دوسری
افسوسناک حقیقت یہ ہے کہ ان خود مختار مسلم ملکوں کا کوئی ایک بھی مسلم سوسائٹی
اپنی داخلی مسایل کو موجودہ صدی کے تقاضوں کے مطابق حل کرنے کی جد و جہد کرتی رہی
لیکن اب تک کامیاب نہ ہو سکی ہے-

صرف ترکستان کا ایک ملک ہے جہاں اتاترک نے
سیکولر نظام زندگی کو متعارف کرایا وہ آج تک اس پر گامزن ہے- ترکی کے علاوہ دوسرے
مسلمان ملکوں کا معاشرہ برابر یہ محسوس کرتا رہا کہ انکے نظام ریاست میں جدید نظام
ڈیموکریسی کے ساتھ اسلام اور شریعہ کا کچھ نہ کچھ عمل دخل ضرور ہونا چاہیے- ایسے
ممالک کو سخت پرابلم کا سامنا ہے- یہ پرابلم نہایت اہمیت کے حامل ہیں- ایسے اسلامی
ممالک جنہوں نے اپنے معاشرہ کو ماڈرن ڈیموکریسی کے تقاضوں پر لانے کی کوشش کی ناکام
رہے- ایسا مسلم معاشرہ  سیکولرازم کی ایک
مسخ شکل میں اجاگر ہوتا ہے- جو نہ تو ڈیموکریٹک ہوتا ہے نہ ہی اسلامی- وہ تضادات
کا ایک مجموعہ ہوتا ہے-

اسلام کی ابتدائی فتوحات پر ایک نظر ڈالیں تو ھم
اسلام کو ایسے بے شمار چیلنجز سے نبرد آزما پاتے ہیں-  عراق، شام، مصراور شمالی افریقہ کے ممالک میں
اسلام کو بیشتر مخالف چیلنجز کا سامنا کرنا پڑا تھا- یہ چیلنجز مذہبی اور نظریاتی
بھی تھے اور سیاسی، سماجی، اقتصادی، بھی تھے- اسلام نے ان سارے چیلنجز کو کس طرح
حل کیا اور کامیاب ہوا؟ یہ ایک علیحدہ موضوع ہے- پھر کبھی اس کو قلمبند کرونگا-

آج بھی اگراسلامیات اور فقہ اسلامی کو خالص
اسلامی تقاضا کے مطابق عمل در آمد کرنے کا وقت دیا جائے اور اسپر کام کیا جائے تو
آج بھی اسلام موجودہ سائینسی اور ڈیموکریسی کے تقاضوں کو پورا کر سکتا ہے- بشرطیکہ
اس میں مختلف طبقہ فکر کے مسلم حکمرانوں اور انکے علماء کے ذاتی مفادات کا عمل دخل
نہ ھو- اسلام کی ترقی کی راہ میں سب سے بڑی روکاوٹ مسلمانوں کے مختلف طبقہ فکر کے
متصادم فقہ اور انکے متصادم مذہبی خیالات کا عمل دخل رہا  ہے-

دنیا کے ھر ترقی پذیر سوسائٹی میں جدیدیت اور
قدامت پرستی کا ٹکراؤ رہا ہے- یہ کویی نئی بات نہیں ہے-  ضرورت اس بات کی ہے کہ ھر مسلمان ملک خلفائے
راشدین کے نظام حکومت کے بنیادی اصولوں  کو
صحیح سمجھے- اوراپنے موجودہ ملک کے پرابلم اور ضروریات کو صحیح سمجھے- اور انکو
اسلامی اصول سے ھم آہنگ کرنے کی کوشش کرے- مسلمان حکمرانوں نے اگر ذاتی مفادات کو
قومی مفادات پر فوقیت دیا، جیسا کہ خلافت بنی امیہ سے خلافت عثمانیہ تک ہوتا آیا
ہے تو اسلام کی ناہلی کی شکایت ہرگز جائز نہیں ھے-اٹھارہویں اور انیسویں صدی کے دوران دنیا کے مسلمان ملکوں کا غیر ملکی حکومتوں سے آزادی اسلام...

اسلام سے مسلمانوں کا تعلق

تحریر: اسرار حسن

فلوریڈا: ٢٨ نومبر ٢٠١٨

اٹھارہویں اور انیسویں صدی کے دوران دنیا کے مسلمان ملکوں کا غیر ملکی حکومتوں سے آزادی اسلامی دنیا کے لئے ایک خوش ایند واقع تھا- یہ حقیقت اس اہمیت کا بھی حامل تھا کہ ان تمام نوزائیدہ مسلم ممالک میں جو مراقش سے انڈونیشیا تک پھیلے ہوۓ  تھے ان کی جد و جہد آزادی میں اسلام کا ایک بڑا عمل دخل تھا- لیکن بیسویں اور اب اکیسویں صدی میں ان تمام ملکوں کی دوسری اہم بات یہ ہے کہ ان میں کوئی بھی مسلم ملک عملی طور پر ایک ترقی یافتہ عملی-سیاسی ملک نہ بن سکا- ان باتوں کے علاوہ دوسری افسوسناک حقیقت یہ ہے کہ ان خود مختار مسلم ملکوں کا کوئی ایک بھی مسلم سوسائٹی اپنی داخلی مسایل کو موجودہ صدی کے تقاضوں کے مطابق حل کرنے کی جد و جہد کرتی رہی لیکن اب تک کامیاب نہ ہو سکی ہے-

صرف ترکستان کا ایک ملک ہے جہاں اتاترک نے سیکولر نظام زندگی کو متعارف کرایا وہ آج تک اس پر گامزن ہے- ترکی کے علاوہ دوسرے مسلمان ملکوں کا معاشرہ برابر یہ محسوس کرتا رہا کہ انکے نظام ریاست میں جدید نظام ڈیموکریسی کے ساتھ اسلام اور شریعہ کا کچھ نہ کچھ عمل دخل ضرور ہونا چاہیے- ایسے ممالک کو سخت پرابلم کا سامنا ہے- یہ پرابلم نہایت اہمیت کے حامل ہیں- ایسے اسلامی ممالک جنہوں نے اپنے معاشرہ کو ماڈرن ڈیموکریسی کے تقاضوں پر لانے کی کوشش کی ناکام رہے- ایسا مسلم معاشرہ  سیکولرازم کی ایک مسخ شکل میں اجاگر ہوتا ہے- جو نہ تو ڈیموکریٹک ہوتا ہے نہ ہی اسلامی- وہ تضادات کا ایک مجموعہ ہوتا ہے-

اسلام کی ابتدائی فتوحات پر ایک نظر ڈالیں تو ھم اسلام کو ایسے بے شمار چیلنجز سے نبرد آزما پاتے ہیں-  عراق، شام، مصراور شمالی افریقہ کے ممالک میں اسلام کو بیشتر مخالف چیلنجز کا سامنا کرنا پڑا تھا- یہ چیلنجز مذہبی اور نظریاتی بھی تھے اور سیاسی، سماجی، اقتصادی، بھی تھے- اسلام نے ان سارے چیلنجز کو کس طرح حل کیا اور کامیاب ہوا؟ یہ ایک علیحدہ موضوع ہے- پھر کبھی اس کو قلمبند کرونگا-

آج بھی اگراسلامیات اور فقہ اسلامی کو خالص اسلامی تقاضا کے مطابق عمل در آمد کرنے کا وقت دیا جائے اور اسپر کام کیا جائے تو آج بھی اسلام موجودہ سائینسی اور ڈیموکریسی کے تقاضوں کو پورا کر سکتا ہے- بشرطیکہ اس میں مختلف طبقہ فکر کے مسلم حکمرانوں اور انکے علماء کے ذاتی مفادات کا عمل دخل نہ ھو- اسلام کی ترقی کی راہ میں سب سے بڑی روکاوٹ مسلمانوں کے مختلف طبقہ فکر کے متصادم فقہ اور انکے متصادم مذہبی خیالات کا عمل دخل رہا  ہے-

دنیا کے ھر ترقی پذیر سوسائٹی میں جدیدیت اور قدامت پرستی کا ٹکراؤ رہا ہے- یہ کویی نئی بات نہیں ہے-  ضرورت اس بات کی ہے کہ ھر مسلمان ملک خلفائے راشدین کے نظام حکومت کے بنیادی اصولوں  کو صحیح سمجھے- اوراپنے موجودہ ملک کے پرابلم اور ضروریات کو صحیح سمجھے- اور انکو اسلامی اصول سے ھم آہنگ کرنے کی کوشش کرے- مسلمان حکمرانوں نے اگر ذاتی مفادات کو قومی مفادات پر فوقیت دیا، جیسا کہ خلافت بنی امیہ سے خلافت عثمانیہ تک ہوتا آیا ہے تو اسلام کی ناہلی کی شکایت ہرگز جائز نہیں ھے-

RIGHTEOUS-RIGHT: Use and Abuse of Shari’a

RIGHTEOUS-RIGHT: Use and Abuse of Shari’a: In Pakistan, Zia al-Haq introduced Hudud Ordinance, under which theft was made punishable with the amputation of hands; adultery a...

Use and Abuse of Shari’a

In Pakistan, Zia al-Haq introduced Hudud Ordinance, under which theft was made punishable with the amputation of hands; adultery and slander with flogging and death.  Soon after its promulgation the Pakistani courts were inundated with cases alleging all kinds of atrocities against women. A Karachi court sentenced twenty-five year old Shahida Perveen and thirty-year old Muhammad Sarwar to death by stoning them on the charge of adultery. The sentence could not materialize for lack of witnesses and evidence.

In another instance, twenty-four year old Roshan Jan moved the court for divorce, alleging physical torture by her husband.  She left her home (as required by the ordinance) and moved into a neighbor’s house.  Meanwhile, her husband lodged a complaint with the police, accusing her of committing adultery with the neighbor, who was married.  On the basis of the complaint, Roshan Jan was arrested and persecuted.

Commenting on such instances, the influential Pakistani daily, Muslim of Islamabad said there were dozens of Muslim women kept in jail without trial and pointed out that unscrupulous men were taking full advantage of the Hudud ordinance to indulge in the sexual exploitation of women. There are many such instances that are horrifying and show how the shari’a laws, however, well-intended, are misused.

The second achievement of Zia-ul-Haq was introduction of Blasphemy Law in 1980.   The Criminal Code of Pakistan’s Penal Code provides penalties for blasphemy ranging from a fine to death. Of all the Muslim countries, Pakistan has the strictest anti-blasphemy laws.   The Federal Shari’a Court was created and given jurisdiction to examine any existing law to ensure it was not repugnant to Islam. A person can be charged with blasphemy on testimony alone, and be immediately and arbitrarily detained without opportunity for bail. Under this law, the only evidence needed is one 'reliable' man's word. The political and societal clout of Islamic extremists and clerics makes it unsafe for lawyers to represent the accused and for courts to acquit them. It also puts great pressure on local police officers to file phony blasphemy charges. For instance, Shafiq Masih, a Faisalabad Christian, was charged with blasphemy following a dispute with a neighbor. A crowd of over 1,000 persons soon converged on Shafiq's home and were prepared to lynch him. Although police intervention saved his life, the local police chief charged Shafiq with blasphemy to calm the sentiments of the mob. In 1997, Lahore High Court justice Arif Iqbal Hussain Bhatti (who in 1995 had ruled to acquit accused Christian blasphemers Salamat and Rehmat Masih) was killed after a spate of death threats.[1]  The assassination of the Governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer, on Jan. 4, 2011 in Islamabad.  Taseer advocated that the clause in the Constitution declaring the Ahmadi community to be non-Muslims should be revoked. He commented on a TV interview about the country's blasphemy law and also expressed his intention of filing a mercy petition for Asia Bibi who has been sentenced to death by a court under the Blasphemy Law.[2] Taseer was against the amendment made by military dictator, General Ziaul Haq.  The next day, thousands turned up for his funeral in Lahore in spite of denunciations by some clerics and religious scholars from mourning Taseer.[3] The Jama’at Ahle Sunnat  threatened mourners with the same fate as that of Taseer, and warned that  'No Muslim should attend the funeral or even try to pray for Salman Taseer or even express any kind of regret or sympathy over the incident.’  It said anyone who expressed sympathy over the death of a blasphemer was also committing blasphemy."[4] Qadri reportedly said he killed Taseer due to the latter's vocal opposition of the blasphemy law in Pakistan.[5] Supporters of Mumtaz Qadri blocked police attempting to bring him to the Anti-Terrorism Court in Rawalpindi, and some supporters even showered him with rose petals.[6]

In Nov. 2010 the Lahore High Court in Pakistan barred President Asif Ali Zardari from pardoning the Christian women, Asia Bibi, a 45-year old mother of four, sentenced to death on charges of insulting Islam. This is not an isolated incident; allegations of blasphemy against the Prophet and desecration of the Qur’an have often been used against Christians in local and personal disputes. In Aug. 2009, allegations that Christians had desecrated the Qur’an led to several days of rioting and violence, during which an estimated crowd of 1000 stormed a Christian neighborhood in Gojra, Pakistan. The mob killed eight, including six women, and burned and looted dozens of houses.[7]

Asia Bibi strongly denied the charges and requested a presidential pardon after a lower court sentenced her to death in a case stemming from a village dispute. The violent reactions of militant leaders and mosque preachers triggered the assassination of Salmaan Taseer—the governor of Punjab and an outspoken critic of the blasphemy law—by one of his bodyguards on 4 Jan. 2011. The assassin, Mumtaz Qadri, admitted that he was influenced by the fiery sermons of militant preachers who had denounced Taseer.  “Not a single registered imams in the city of Lahore with its 13 million people was willing to read Taseer’s funeral prayers. Five hundred lawyers have signed up to defend Taseer’s assassin, Mumtaz Qadri, but Taseer’s wife could not find a single criminal-lawyer to prosecute him. It is hard to see which judge is even likely to pursue the case to its obvious conclusion.”[8]

In addition, the blasphemy laws are used fairly routinely to harass those considered "improper Muslims such as the Ahmadis who are subject to onerous restrictions under law. Although Ahmadis regard themselves as Muslims and observe Islamic practices, a 1974 Constitutional amendment during the time of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto declared Ahmadis to be a non-Muslim minority because, according to the Government, they do not accept Mohammed as the last prophet of Islam. In 1984 the Government passed an amendment prohibiting Ahmadis from calling themselves Muslim and banning them from using Islamic words, phrases, and greetings. The punishment for violation of this section is imprisonment for up to 3 years and a fine.[9]

In addition to it, an exhaustive list of violations in Pakistan, apart from Blasphemy, relates to Universal Human Rights, child abuses, intolerance and persecution of minorities, woman’s persecution under Hudood Ordinance, and ethnic, sectarian, civil and religious blood-lettings and killings throughout Pakistan.

Freedom of religion in Pakistan has come into conflict with Shari’a Law. The original Constitution of Pakistan did not discriminate between Muslims and non-Muslims. The amendments made during Zia-ul-Haq's Islamization led to the controversial Hudood Ordinance and Shariat Court. Later, Nawaz Sharif's government tried to enforce a Shari’a  Bill, passed in May 1991. After the incident of 9/11, Pervez Musharraf government took steps to curtail the religious intolerance among different factions of Muslim communities and non-Muslims.

In September 2009, Abdul Kahar Ahmad pleaded guilty in a Malaysian Shari’a court to charges of spreading false doctrines, blasphemy, and violating religious precepts. The court sentenced Ahmad to ten years in prison and six lashes from a rattan cane.[10]  Somalia's hardliner Islamist group al-Shabaab whipped women who were wearing a bra, and whipped men for being beardless. The group said violation of Islamic custom deserved whipping.[11]

The so-called division of the world into dar-ul Islam (sphere of Islam) and dar-ul harb (sphere of war) is neither the outcome of the Quran; nor the Sunna.  It is the invention of the classical jurists and legists. This division of world into War and Peace is definitely not applicable in the present world.

Our survey shows how unrealistic this assessment has been. Even today there is no ganging up among the Muslims. Muslims have not been belligerent towards the non-Muslim; nor have the Muslims tried to convert darul harb into darul Islam either by force or by persuasion.  On the contrary, their efforts have been directed solely towards settling disputes among the Muslims, except in respect of their campaign against Israel.  There are more than forty-five Muslim-majority states, which comprise nearly seventy percent of the total Muslim population; the other thirty percent live as minorities in non-Muslim states.  There have been wars or guerrilla skirmishes between one Muslim state and another; for instance between Malaysia and Indonesia, Pakistan and Bangladesh, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, South Yemen and North Yemen, Oman and South Yemen, Libya and Chad, Libya and Morocco, Libya and Algeria, Pakistan and Afghanistan and the eight-year war between Iraq and Iran.  The current surge of revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria, Jordan and many others expected to come in the wake, all these relate to the conflicts amongst Muslims. There have been hardly any disputes, bloody or otherwise, between the Muslim and non-Muslim states, barring the Arab-Israeli and India-Pakistan wars.

In the last many decades, summit conferences of the heads of Muslim states and governments have been held many times under the auspices of the Organization of Islamic Conference: in Rabat in 1969; in Lahore in 1974; in Mecca in 1981; in Casablanca in 1984 and in Kuwait in 1987; but they have never been successful to bring all the conflicting interests of the Muslim states at one platform.  Islamic solidarity and solidarity of Muslim Umma had always been a distant cry.  Fundamentalists do cause some disturbances here and there; but they have not succeeded in taking over state power and shaping the world in their own image. Even the Khomeini revolution in recent years is producing more frustration than fulfillment among the Shi’a Iranians.  Piety is, no doubt, important in the life of an individual; but on it alone ‘collectivity’—a term wisely used by Imam Shafi’i, to connote a nation—cannot be built.

Prof. Ziauddin Sardar of King Abdul Aziz University of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, has described in a somewhat picturesque manner the negative role of the Islamic militancy:

“By emphasizing the precision in the mechanics of prayer and ablution, length of beard and mode of dress, they have lost sight of individual freedom, the dynamic nature of many Islamic injunctions….They have founded intolerant, compulsive and tyrannical orders and have provided political legitimacy to despotic and nepotistic systems of government. They have closed and constructed many enquiring minds by their insistence on in-objective parallels, unending quibbles over semantics.  They have divorced themselves from human needs and conditions. No wonder then that the majority of Muslims today pays little attention to them and even foster open hostility towards them.[12]

Theologians have complicated the definition of a Muslim with various rules on how he should bathe, shave, keep his beard, trim his moustache, clean his nostrils, wash his private parts, dress, talk, walk and sleep; to them Ghazali has replied in his Faysal al-Tafriqa thus:

“Among the most extreme and extravagant of men are a group of scholastic theologians who dismiss the Muslim common people as unbelievers and claim that whoever does not know scholastic theology in the form they recognize and does not know the prescriptions of the Holy Law according to the proofs which they have adduced is an unbeliever.

“These people have constricted the vast mercy of God to His servants and made paradise the preserve of a small clique of theologians.  They have disregarded what is handed down by the sunna, for it is clear that in the time of the Prophet, may God bless and save him, and in the time of the Companions of the Prophet, may God be pleased with them, the Islam of whole groups of rude Arabs was recognized, though they were busy worshipping idols.  They did not concern themselves with the science of analogical proof and would have understood nothing of it if they had.

“Whoever claims that theology, abstract proof, and systematic classifications are the foundation of belief is an innovator.  Rather belief  is a light which God bestows on the hearts of His creatures as the gift and bounty from Him, sometimes through an explainable conviction from within, sometimes because of a dream in sleep, sometimes by seeing the state of bliss of a pious man and the transmission of his light through association and conversation with him, sometimes through one’s own state of bliss.”[13]

---

[1] South Asian Voice, August 2002.

[2] Wright,Tom  (JANUARY 5, 2011). "Leading Pakistani Politician Killed". The Wall Street Journal. 

[3] The Guardian, 5 January 2011. Retrieved 2011-01-07.   

[4] BBC News South Asia, 5 January 2011. Retrieved 2011-01-07.

[5] "Governor assassinated in Islamabad, Pakistan". IndiaVoice. 2011-1-4.  

[6] "Demonstrators Prevent Court Appearance of Alleged Pakistani Assassin". Voice of American,  6^th  January 2011. 

[7] oxfordislamicstudies.com; Letter from the Editor in Chief, John L. Esposito; retrieved 6/17/2011.

[8] www,guardian.co.uk; 8 Jan. 2011.

[9] Ibid.

[10] “Malaysia Court sentences Muslim sect leader to 10-year  jail and caning over false teachings”. www.3nes.co.nz; retrieved 21 Oct. 2009.

[11] “Hardliners whip young women for bra-wearing deception”.  http://thescotman.scotsman.com/latestnews/hardliners-whip-youg-women -for.5742459.jp. Retrieved 15 Nov. 2009;

[12] Ziauddin Sardar, The Future of Muslim Civilization, London, 1979, p.58.

[13] Rafiq Zakaria; The Struggle Within Islam: The Conflict Between Religion and Politics; Penguin Books (India) Ltd. ; 1989; p.303