Author: Editorial
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: March 24, 2008
Bogus declaration hides the truth
The 'All-India Anti-Terrorism Conference',
organised by Darul Uloom Deoband and attended by representatives of various
Islamic seminaries, has come up with a patently bogus declaration which, on
the face of it, 'denounces' terrorism but justifies it in West Asia, the Balkans,
Iraq and Afghanistan -- the clerics may as well have added Jammu & Kashmir
to their list of exemptions. Indeed, there is nothing new about the declaration,
which is understandably being touted by Islamists and their apologists as
a big step forward in distancing faith from terror. Any such claim is bunkum,
not least because the text of the declaration hides more than it reveals;
it also lays the blame for Islamist terrorism on the "tyrant and colonial
master of the West", seeking to legitimise jihadi violence as nothing
more than manifestation of Muslim rage over what are clearly imaginary grievances.
Indeed, the entire declaration is anchored in imagined victimhood, which is
the mainstay of radical Islam: From Bosnia to Hyderabad via New York, London,
Godhra and Mumbai, Islamists have elected to inflict death and destruction
even as the community has pretended hurt innocence. This is unacceptable.
If Darul Uloom Deoband and other Islamic seminaries wish to be taken seriously,
then they must unequivocally condemn terrorism without any exceptions. More
importantly, they must denounce those who have slaughtered Hindus in Jammu
& Kashmir, bombed trains in Mumbai, blown up markets in Delhi and attacked
Hindu temples, including Sankat Mochan in Varanasi and Ram Janmabhoomi Mandir
in Ayodhya. Their silence on these and other acts of terrorism tells a story
that flies in the face of their spurious claim.
It is not for the Muslim clergy -- or, for
that matter, theologians of any faith -- to lay down the line for India's
foreign or domestic policies. Ours is a secular state and it is for Government
to decide what is in the best interest of the nation. Therefore, the sly criticism
of India's foreign policy as well as its steps to check terrorism, which have
been described as 'anti-Muslim' in the declaration, must be denounced as uncalled
for interference and rejected with the contempt it deserves. What should be
of concern, however, is not the clergy's hocus-pocus formulation of terrorism
as they perceive it, but their advice to Muslims to "spend their lives
in the country following Islamic shari'ah and teachings with full confidence".
This is as good as advising Muslims not to accept the secular laws of India,
which are obviously in conflict with shari'ah. The ulema, therefore, wants
the ummah to be a nation within the nation and assert a separate identity
that shall forever clash with the national identity. Not surprisingly, the
declaration ends with the suggestion that the entire world must embrace "Islamic
teachings". The Darul Uloom Deoband declaration is of a piece with the
OIC's 'Observatory Report on Islamophobia', which blames everybody but Muslims
for radical Islam and Islamist terrorism. Both documents belligerently insist
that any criticism of the twisted ideology that sustains Islamist terror is
unacceptable to the ulema and the ummah, that prosecution of those who inflict
death in the name of Islam is wrong, and that the state must accept the supremacy
of Islam. Had radical Islam not been a real threat to democracy, freedom and
pluralism, we could have treated the Darul Uloom Deoband declaration as no
more than a bad joke.