King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia is to be complimented for his vision and initiative. The vision that something was seriously amiss within the comity of Muslim nations, and the initiative to call them together in an extraordinary summit of the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Conference) to cogitate on the seriousness of the situation and to come forth with meaningful remedies. A few months earlier, he had called together intellectuals and publicists from Muslim countries and communities to seek their views on the Muslim condition.
The Makkah conclave was well attended by kings, Presidents and Prime Ministers of countries that are members of the OIC. It produced a declaration that is strong on sentiment and exhortation, and less so on specifics. It does nevertheless speak of Joint Islamic Action and of a 10-year Programme of Action aimed at eradication of illiteracy, diseases and epidemics, and poverty.
The backdrop to the meeting (December 7-8) and the declaration is the Islamophobia that has of late come to characterise the Western world's perception of Islam and Muslims. There is also a propensity to aggregate and simplify diverse happenings arising out of a multiplicity of causes.
Surprisingly, the declaration tends to accept such aggregation and repeatedly underline the need to counter and combat terrorism and extremism.
The declaration bemoans the Muslim condition: "we find ourselves today at an age of muddled concepts, misguided values and pervasive ignorance." The last is evident and quantified; the other two however need to be amplified. What are these muddled and misguided concepts and values? Who put them in place? Who sustained them? Who can make these judgments of right and wrong? In Islamic jurisprudence, Muslims are enjoined to obey God and those in rightful authority. Conversely, it is the duty of those in authority to provide rightful guidance. Is this then an admission of failure? What implications might it have for the legitimacy of these authorities?
The Makkah Document refers to "true Islam" and its "original principles and values." It should have been simple for the gathering of leaders to spell these out. Why was it eschewed?
Hard questions emanate from the assertion that "our conscience throbs synchronously with the hearts and minds of the Ummah" and is therefore "only too aware of the political, developmental, social, cultural and educational challenges." Would Muslim masses in OIC lands simply be generous enough to forgive failures of governance of this magnitude?
The final communiqué of the summit amplifies some of the points in the Declaration. It "condemns terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, rejects any justification for it." It lends support to the measures proposed by the counter-terrorism conference in Riyadh earlier this year.
Two practical suggestions, relating to the emphasis on reform of educational curricula and on a measure of control on the issue of fatwas, hold out hope for meaningful correctives.
Selective reference The communiqué is selective in its traditional reference to "Muslim issues." Palestine, Iraq, Cyprus, and Jammu and Kashmir find a mention. Each of these sections reflects the OIC practice of adopting the formulation suggested by the principal advocate. On Iraq, prudence and the consensus requirement necessitated that the treatment meted out to an OIC-member - invasion and occupation - be overlooked in favour of a bland support to the recent Arab League initiative.
In a similar vein the paragraph on J&K is out of touch with ground reality, even as perceived by the President of Pakistan.
The two documents make evident the real purpose of the extraordinary summit: to propel OIC-member states to take an unambiguous position in their condemnation of terrorism and influence public perceptions accordingly.
The conference agenda, in fact, was set by the Bush-Abdullah Joint Statement of April 25, 2005, in which Saudi Arabia called "on all those who teach and propagate the Islamic faith to adhere strictly to the Islamic message of peace, moderation and tolerance; and reject that which deviates from those principles."
Western discourse on Muslim societies has tended to focus on the so-called battle for the Muslim mind. Muslim rulers now seem to have joined the chorus. Both conveniently overlook the historical development of half a century. They are hesitant to acknowledge that Islamism in some form or shape is now a firmly-rooted factor in Arab and Islamic political life, will be a component of any democratic transition that may set in, and may not of necessity be an impediment to modernity.
In the Arab world, news of the Makkah Summit was superseded by the electoral happenings in Egypt and the occupation-induced anarchy in Iraq. The problems would evidently lie in the detail.
At the end of the conference, the Saudi Foreign Minister summed up the position: "It is now up to every Muslim government to implement the measures, God willing."
Poet Firdausi would have summed up the outcome thus: "a meeting was convened for consultations; they met, discussed, and dispersed"!
The author is former Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations and former Vice Chancellor, Aligarh Muslim University. He is presently a Distinguished Fellow at Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi. Source: The Hindu, December 15, 2005. * Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
PREV
