This is obviously a reworking of my earlier post. Written for Farooq Sulehria’s excellent Viewpointonline (http://viewpointonline.net/)
Boko Haram is a Nigerian
terrorist organization that claims to be fighting for the imposition of âpure
Islamâ in Nigeria. The Northern parts of Nigeria have been components of many
Islamicate kingdoms and empires in the last few centuries, most recently the
Sokoto Caliphate (a large slave-owning empire that started as a violent Jihad
and was mostly run by Qadriyya Sufis who enforced Shariah law, thus creating
postcolonial studies discomfort at many levels). This empire was defeated by
the British and agreed to capitulate under fairly generous terms. The caliph
was retained as âSultanâ and retained some autonomy, but submitted to being a
British protectorate, etcâŠyou know the drill. By the way, the Sultanate still
exists and supposedly has some âspiritual authorityâ as well as temporal
influence (though only a Nigeria expert can tell us how important that is, or is
not) and is headed by a Sultan who used to be the military attaché in Pakistan!
Connect the dots comrades đ
Anyway, many people in
the North have more than a passing loyalty to strict Islamicate mores, and
ideas of Jihad and Shariah law were never far from the surface (though managed fairly well by the Brits, who told the Khalifa that prayer, Zakat and family life will not be interfered with, thus giving him the necessary fig leaf; imperialists who knew what they were about). The Nigerian
government introduced Shariah law into its Northern provinces (states) starting
in 1999 and this probably reflected the wishes of many, if not most, people in
those states. But the Nigerian government (corrupt to the core) remained in
charge and obviously did not satisfy those thirsting for more authentic
Jihadism and Shariah. It is not hard to imagine that this thirst was also
increased by Saudi money and propaganda, but again, a Nigeria expert will have
to step in to provide such details.
Whatever
the details, some section of true believers managed to get into a violent
conflict with the Federal state. In this, they may have been supported, or at
least ignored, by many âmoderate Muslimsâ in the North who had their own
conflicts and competition with Southern (mostly Christian) Nigerians, or with local rivals. Again,
the details are not for us to parachute in and reveal. Nigerians will have to
do that job. But what we do find of interest is that Boko Haram (the word means
modern education is a sin, perhaps more generally, that Westernization is a
sin) has now become a menace of tremendous size and 3 weeks ago, they kidnapped
250 plus girls from a boarding school and now they are threatening to sell them as slaves (a practice for which they claim Shariah backing; but this seems to strerch even Shariah notions of capturing enemy girls a bit, since these girls are enemies? exactly how?).
The generally
incompetent, internally divided and corruption ridden (they have had their own
long martial laws) Nigerian armed forces have been unable to do much to rescue
the poor girls till now and after some weeks the leader of the Boko Haram,
Abubakar Shikau (a man the Nigerian armed forces claimed to have killed several
years ago; like our own blessed âbad jihadisâ he seems to have nine lives) has
emerged on video to take âcreditâ for this kidnapping.
This video and the
prolonged agony of the poor parents (and the heartless attitude of the Nigerian
Federal Government) have managed to put this particular “non-western”
alternative form of social organization, i.e. the partly imaginary, partly
historical “Islamic model”, front and center. I learn from Wikipedia
(and from at least one Nigerian commentator) that this Abubaker Shikau
is “bookish” and was once known as âDar ul Tauheedâ (the house of Tauheed; Tauheed being the
oneness of Allah and the preferred name the Wahabis have for their own
ideology). Subhanallah. Here he is on video:
The video, as you can see
(though of course, thanks to Zardari and MNS, you cannot see in Pakistan)
starts with Quranic verses and Jihadi slogans and bears more than a little
resemblance to similar efforts from the Pakistani Taliban. The people who
produced this video (and carried out the girls kidnapping) obviously believe
they are on the right path and they are not doing something wrong; they are
fulfilling the will of Allah. In fact, they are the only people fulfilling the
will of Allah.
In this crucial respect
they are one step ahead of other murderous gangs in ungoverned African
countries (who are all capable of killing, kidnapping and raping). These
Boko Haramis have a coherent ideology with worldwide reach, and they sincerely
believe it is superior and is bound to triumph. In fact, so widespread are
sections of this ideology that most of this speech could be repeated without
adverse comment on PTV or Saudi TV (as long as you take out the specific
threats to the current rulers of Nigeria). The bit about marrying girls at 9
years old and 12 years old reflects a continuing (unfortunate) Islamic clerical obsession
with what we would now call pedophilia (though of course child marriage, with
or without early sex, was pretty much normal in most of the world for a
long time; being commonplace, though not universal, in India, China, the Middle
East and Africa).
This is a problem.
It is, first of all, a
practical problem; in the sense that murderous gangs with coherent ideologies
(that provide hope for victory as well as solidarity) have a longer life span
and greater staying power than murderous gangs that are just murderous gangs (see the
20th Century for many examples, most completely on display in glorious
Democratic Kampuchea).
Another aspect of the
problem can be seen in on display in what a White woman on twitter said yesterday (yes, yesterday, after all the news has been about): she doesnât
believe this story; she said Boko Haram âsounds so Hollywoodâ. She said it is “a Western front meant to
disrupt Africa to get at their natural resourcesâ. I kid you not. She actually
said all this on twitter! In other words, one aspect of the problem is that it is so
strange to some modern ears that those unused to certain commonplace historical trends (people living their life in a small ideological bubble perhaps?) are simply unable to
grasp what is going on. But this is a minor aspect. Who cares what some activist or op-ed
writer for the Guardian thinks. There is a much bigger problem: the one faced by
moderate Muslims…
For 50 years, the
“moderate Muslim” response to the modern world has been based on
fictive loyalty to the perfect model of early Islam, and EXTREMELY selective
adoption of that model. This is an important point. There are Christians and
Jews and Hindus and who knows, Shintoists, who believe they follow the
“essence’ of their great (and superior) religion and tradition (the two
words are used interchangeably based on context and need) but who do not feel
bound to imitate every particular act or order of their glorious ancestors. In
fact, they are even willing to re-examine what those acts supposedly
were…which ones actually happened, which ones are likely fake, which ones are
apocryphal, which ones are now out of date, etc. But the “moderate Muslim” model adopted in most Muslim
countries (Turkey being a notable exception under the Ataturkists, but now
reverting to mean) adopted complete (insincere in many cases) agreement
with classical texts and traditional accounts of early Islam as the publicly
accepted consensus; while carrying on with very different lives by simply ignoring
inconvenient traditions and theological points.
My description of the
process as it happened in Pakistan was given in this earlier comment:
Phase 1:
“moderates” obtain license to rule from colonial powers and being
half-educated opportunists for the most part, and with some encouragement from
the CIA (whose own ignorance of such things is legendary; and whose primary aim
in any case was anti-communism at that point), some of them mindlessly repeat
“Islamic formulas” in designing the curriculum and ideology for their
new “nations”.
Phase 2: In Pakistan’s
case, a specific CIA project to arm and train Islamic terrorists for
Afghanistan, also leads to dissemination of tradecraft (how to make bombs, set
up secret cells, take hostages, spread terror, etc.) to specially selected
young morons. This is very important because ideology is not enough. You also
need to know how to blow stuff up. That is not knowledge we are born with. Of
course, all the while the magic curriculum adopted to âunite the nationâ and
âfight communist infiltrationâ infects PMA level “strategists” with
just enough confusion to lose sight of their own future vulnerability to such
nonsense. The high level of corruption and nepotism also creates resentment,
pool of recruits, yadda yadda yadda. .
Phase 3. Idiot ruling
elite now includes haramis who actually believe in boko haram level BS. They
are a small minority (see Hamid Gul) but the majority of their colleagues (see
Musharraf) has been ideologically paralyzed by their own over-smart curriculum
and propaganda. BOOM BOOM BOOM…You know the rest.
But I do think itâs a
passing phase. If the haramis win, itâs over in a few years, if they lose, itâs
over in a few years.
But also, it will get
worse before it gets better. See the above video. We have trained similar
psychopaths in our Jihadi organizations. They will try to enforce their laws. Alhamdulillah.
I am going to post a
comment thread from Facebook here as it may explain some of what I mean:
Omar Ali: Boko
haramis are going to send all of Karen Armstrongâs diligent apologia straight
to hell
13 hours ago · Like · 2
Amer: Sex slaves and trading of women was very
much part of Islamic history from day one so this man is just a shining example
of an Islamic tradition.
10 hrs · Like · 1
Omar Ali: But to be fair, in early Islamic history all
this was very much within period norms. WTF are the haramis doing in THIS day
and age?
1 hr · Like
Ahmed : Well, if the general premise of Muslims is
that the Prophetâs actions and teachings are good for all times and all
humanity, then itâs quite natural to descend to this level of tragic absurdity.
1 hr · Edited · Like
Omar Ali: Ahmed you said “the general premise of
Muslims is that the Prophetâs actions and teachings are good for all times and
all humanity” …Yaah, but you know Muslims donât really mean that (except
for the nutcases, retards and haramis, all of whom are in a minority). EVERYONE
i know selectively borrows from the Quran and even more selectively from hadith
and mostly ignores both. Thatâs just a meaningless line people repeat because
they learned to repeat it in Islamiyat class. Itâs not taken THAT seriously.
Look around you.
1 hr · Like
About Pakistan in
particular, someone asked if and when this may happen here? I think the
Pakistani state is an order of magnitude more competent than the basket-case
Nigerian institutions. so I think right now this is unlikely on this scale. But
smaller scale events will surely happen and are already happening…
Of course, the Pakistani state
and army have to come out of their Islamiyat-Pakstudies stupor to recover and move on. They
may do it. They may not. If not, what then?
Here is my summary of
who may be in a position to save us if the Pak army fails to change course (I
sincerely pray to Allah that they do NOT fail)
1. IF the army fails to
change direction, Punjab will have a short but terrible religious apocalypse. Itâs
inevitable in Punjab because Pakistaniat and Islamiyat are widely established and there is simply no armed group that can match
the Jihadis if the army is gone. But post-apocalypse, we can be saved by the Khalsa.
By that I donât mean the literal Khalsa of yore, I just that once shariah law and jihadi rule is discredited (as it inevitably will be), Sikh rule may be
the nearest palatable alternative, perhaps under overall Indian control. We can all hope and pray it does
not come to that.
2. Pakhtoons can only be
saved by Afghanistan. IF the army fails to change course, then there is simply
no armed force IN KP that can fight the jihadis. But Afghanistan has an armyâŠ
3. The Baloch can only
be saved by China (i.e. if the Chinese switch sides). No further explanation is
necessary.
4. The Sindhis can only
be saved by? …India? I donât know. I await input on this one.
I will also say this
(since some Pankaj Mishra fan is sure to bring up âthe Western nation state is not
the only modelâ yadda yadda yadda): Yes.
The modern (“Western”) model of the nation state is not the only way
society can be organized. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Show
me where Haramis or Trotskyites or Leninists have created something better and genuinely different and we can talk.
Cuba, for example, is a
modern nation state. More socialist than most and not as liberal as some (though maybe to the liberal side
of others that still managed to survive). The essential elements of a modern state can be defined by academics, but seem to include borders, an army (except, I am told, in Costa Rica, bless their souls), the police, bureaucracy, schools, colleges, exams, nationalism, propaganda, etc.
in no particular order. Various political systems (modern social democracy
being the best of the lot till now?) can manage this state. And of course, avowed Marxists and Leninists have managed them too…I just meant that they managed them as modern states, not as some
alternative “system” that rejects modern states.
Something like that. More on this later..
