LESSONS FOR INDIAN JIHADISTS IN ARAB SPRING

Victories of reform based Islamic democratic political parties like Ennahda  of Tunisia,justice and development party of Morocco and freedom & justice  party of Egypt in the recent elections herald good news to the pro democratic Islamic parties in India and also show a precedent to Indian jihadists to abjure arms struggle by joining mainstream. 
If people from the Muslim majority countries itself could attain their rights and power through democratic political struggle even  against a military junta as in Egypt,then why cannot minorities in India, “The largest democratic country in the world ?”

            Osama Bin Laden’s ideology and his struggle for 3 decades did not bring any social change in the world except his military victory over Russia in Afghanistan but the raise of reform based Islamic democratic  movements and their struggle through political ways have brought a great social change in the middle east and African continent which we are now witnessing.

            Arms conflict has no support from the people. Even in Syria and Egypt initially when they followed arms conflict, it was a big failure. The armed conflict in Syria against the regime of Hafez al Assad in 1982 which cost lives of more than 20,000 people was failed. In history, in the name of war held against jihad,the despotism strengthened its hand against their people and democracy as in syria and egypt.

            Chairman of International Muslim intellectual council dr Sheik Yusuf al Qardawi recommends Muslims to adapt democratic political ways to attain their rights and shares in power.

            Karl Popper states" democracy is the best form of government because it facilitates for the critical examination and correction of governments and their policies, therefore it isthe most possible way to correct previous policy mistakes and more effectively addresses the social political and economic problems what a given society encounters than any other form of government".

            In a democratic country we have so many ways to demonstrate our grievance, to demand our rights and to attain our shares in power. Then why should we  bear throes ourselves by violence.

            At the same time we have to analyze when and why the call for Islamic jihad was raised in India?. After India’s partition there were riots for 3 decades all over india in the name of religion. The data released by the Home Ministry of India reveals that 80% victims in the riots were minorities.

            Even though the victims were mostly minorities ,there was no call for jihad until the Babur Masjid was demolished in 1992.After that only some of the Muslim youths and leaders lost their hope in secular structure of India. Then Central and State governments not only failed to save the Holy Mosque but also the secular structure of our Indian constitution.

            If we deeply analyze that in India, jihad is not in a formal arms conflict or well organized guerilla warfare as maoists. Homemade jihadist in India till now mostly confine themselves only in revenge activities against riots which took place in Gujarat,Mumbai and Coimbatore except Kashmir. The violence is the tendency to show their anger and injustice done to them but not against Indian democracy as Maoists. There is a good news that we can reform and deviate them from violence by ensuring them justice and rehabilitation.

            while advising them to abjure violence we have some responsibilities. After 10 years still Gujarat riot victims are struggling for justice. State and Central governments should speed up legal process and ensure minorities for  the true justice. Government should implement justice Sachar and Misra commissions without any delay and improve socio economic and educational status of minorities. The government may consider announcing some political package for homemade jihadists who are willing to join  mainstream as north east militants.

        Finally, Indian ruling powers and political parties should welcome neophyte Islamic democratic political parties. We should know the difference between being an*Islamist* and *Extremist*. I think it would be better to quote the lines of Wadah Khanfar (ex-director of al Jazeera) which was published in “THE HINDU”on (nov- 29 2011)

"First we must define our term Islamist. It is used to describe Muslims who participated in the public sphere using Islam as a basis. It is understood that this participation is not at odds with democracy"

            But like West,Indian ruling governments and parties are treating neo Islamic democratic parties as anti secular parties. But they are the one who has truly confined themselves in democracy and secularism of India . They have no hidden agendas like Hindu rastra of hindutuva political  parties. Neo Islamic democratic parties are facing enormous pressures and barricades and there is a plot to expose them as extremist parties. It is not fair for Indian democracy.

By welcoming them we can strengthen the hands of indian democracy and also encourage jihadis to abjure violence and to join main stream.

Now a days majority people of minorities are gathering under these parties.now indian muslims realise and believe that the democracy is the only option to bring stability,justice and power to minorities. If the jihadis miss this golden chance to reform themselves then they will worry as middle east jihadis who are worrying now.


-Ibnu Mohamed
 (ibnumd2020@gmail.com)