BY Khalil Ali Haidar
How have Western societies and developed Asian countries like Japan and South Korea succeeded in keeping their religion and politics peaceful? Most of the Arab and Muslim world has failed to do that and is paying the price for it.
Why have religious and Islamic political groups turned into national and international threats? We do not see religion being a burning issue and an axis of conflict in the majority of developed nations, and perhaps in most of the world?
Why did religious groups flourish in our countries and communities and spread among our men and women, polarising thousands, if not millions, of educated and illiterate people, the rich and poor alike? Why does religion dominate our educational curricula, books and even television and radio programmes, and form the framework of many people’s culture? And why does what is called “political Islam” have a major influence on our communities?
What can we do to get religion performing its social, ethical and psychological missions once again? What steps should we take to restore our social, political and religious stability in order to mould Arab and Muslim communities to be like societies of the 21th century? Maybe achieving this goal is easier than we imagine!
There are three steps or initial thoughts that, if I am right about their effectiveness, could possibly lead us to stability, renaissance and urbanization, and therefore the modern era.
The first thing we should emphasise is that religion is a personal issue in a society governed by laws and a constitution. It is not a political issue.
Religion is about the spiritual relationship between a person and his Creator, it is about personal beliefs. It is not about having one’s life, the society’s course and religious practices guided by political diktats and lists of do’s and don’ts.
We do not see the world’s developed communities open their doors wide to religious parties with their secretive leaders, controversial funding and sectarian membership. Such groups have limited appeal and goals incompatible with current realities. They are not also in a position to control their communities or the thoughts and emotions of their people.
The religious parties were originally created to enforce what is claimed to be the “right form of religion” in communities, and not to convince people by democratic means or open debate.
That is why we see religious parties promote violence, repression and harsh penalties. These parties do not care for constitutions or international laws, but sometimes pretend to follow constitutions and claim to have modernised their agenda.
Muslims, Sunni and Shia, agree that religion is a personal issue. Freeing communities from religious parties and alliances is the first step needed to modernise the Islamic world and bring stability to its communities and maturity to its people.
The second thought is to frankly and openly admit that any state the Islamic parties call for cannot succeed. Most of the declared political, social, cultural, legal, international and economic objectives of these groups are delusional and in conflict with the international status quo.
We also should realise that the interests of the Arab world, the needs of the Islamic world and the great pressure imposed on us by poverty and backwardness do not leave any room for further political drift and religious conflicts. Running after the mirage of “The Caliphate” could itself lead to international, regional and local conflicts in future, especially if expansive violent groups wage wars in Asia, the Middle East, and maybe in Europe and Africa.
We should understand the key differences between the communities and ethics of the past and those of today; our life is very different from what it was in earlier times. There is also a big difference between establishing a primitive Islamic state with a limited population — as was the case when Islam began to spread — and doing the same when the population of Muslims is over a billion, including those in Europe and the Americas.
Due to this expansion, and in the interests of Arabs and Muslims, practices like slavery, calling people infidels, and marrying at a young age fell out of favour. It is not acceptable nowadays to ignore international laws and customs; doing so can isolate Muslim communities. It can also exacerbate the Islamic world’s problems and harm its international relations.
Encouraging discriminatory practices, regardless of their religious justification, won’t serve efforts to spread Islam, especially when we see the impact of campaigns that promote fear about Islam’s spread in the West.
The third thought is about giving up violence and coercion and any justification for using these as tools in Islamic political and religious life. This is no longer accepted, no matter how peaceful and justified the religious aim looks like and no matter what the historical experience was in relation to religious practices in the first Hijri century.
The world has changed a lot, and human rights are upheld internationally. The dangers of violence, terrorism, and weapons have become crystal clear in our countries, which are suffering because of making religious practice violent, with bombs and machine guns used as tools of expression.
We need to stop extremist leaders and founders of terror groups, who justify violence and kill their enemies while quoting debatable religious text and rulings (Fatwas).
We cannot ignore the reality and not go ahead with the three aforementioned thoughts to save the Arab and Islamic World. We should think about what price we will pay otherwise.
The author is a researcher and writer
