A Quest for Identity: The Case of Religious Populism in Pakistan

Pakistani Identity

 Source: BBC

Abstract:

Since its founding, both civil and military Pakistani governments have used religious populism to consolidate support and legitimize their actions. This has paved the way for religious populism to become a part of the nation’s cultural imagination and identity. During the country’s “infant” or “fragile” democratic phase, religious populism was repeatedly used to consolidate support. Religious parties and groups hold great political sway in the county. Through the use of religious populism, these factions have been allowed to nurture their own “people” who are partisan towards “others.” The weak level of governance, political turmoil, and distrust in institutional capabilities has pushed the public into the arms of religious populists. 

The article can be read at European Center for Populism Studies

Pakistan: Religious nationalism in retreat from 1947 to the mid-1970s

Pakistan was formed on the basis of religious nationalism but in its initial years,  Islamic modernism was the dominant paradigm as Nadeem Farooq Paracha explains in his article. The ruling elite, from 1947 to the mid-1970s, wanted to implement Islamic principles, not Islamic punishments. The mullah and the cleric did not have much to do with the affairs of the state.

Source: Smokers' corner: Curbing the mullah

In Questioning the Authority of the Past historian Dr Ali Usman Qasimi explains how from 1947 till about the mid-1970s, the state and subsequent governments consciously kept the ulema away from directly influencing government legislation.

Usmani adds that this was not due to the fact that those who ran the state and governments between the mentioned years were secular. Instead, their idea of faith and its role in the formation of Pakistani nationalism was different from those held by the ulema and the clerics.

The civil-military establishment which was at the helm of state and government affairs from 1947 till the early 1970s was an extension of the idea of faith and Muslim nationalism developed and evolved by the likes of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Syed Amir Ali, Chiragh Ali, Ahmaduddin Amritsari, Muhammad Iqbal, Ghulam Ahmad Parvez, Dr Khalifa Abdul Hakim, and to a certain extent, Dr Fazalur Rehman Malik.

These scholars were the main shapers of ‘Islamic Modernism’ in South Asia. As an idea it encouraged the acquirement of universal sciences and philosophies to facilitate a rational, practical and informed reading of Islam’s holy scriptures beyond the ‘dated’ interpretations penned by ancient ulema or contemporary clerics.

From the mid-19th to the mid-20th centuries, these scholars, through hefty scholarly treatises and philosophical discourses, urged the snatching away of matters of faith from the clutches of clerics and ‘dogmatic ulema.’

They advocated addressing the faith’s ‘stagnant’ and ‘retrogressive’ state through modern scholarly, scientific and cultural means so that its ‘true form’ (which was vibrant and supple) could be brought back to life. To them this recouped form was to become the engine empowering the rejuvenation of South Asia’s Muslims into becoming an enlightened and dynamic polity.

The founders of Pakistan led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah were very much a part and parcel of this narrative and of the evolving tradition of Islamic Modernism in South Asia.
For example, just a few months after the country’s creation in August 1947, Jinnah green-lighted the creation of the Institute for the Reconstruction of Islam (IRI) headed by the celebrated Jewish-journalist-turned-Muslim-scholar, Muhammad Asad.

Ishtiaq Ahmad in 1987’s The Concept of Islamic State quotes IRI’s first scholarly initiative as a detailed treatise which suggested that “no specific form of government had been prescribed by Muslim scriptures and it was up to the Muslims of every age to agree on one that suits their conditions.” The report emphasised that no matter what form of government Muslims decide to enact, it needed to be run on one of the central Islamic principles of “socio-economic justice.”

Even though the 1949 Objectives Resolution passed by the Constituent Assembly declared that Pakistan was to become an ‘Islamic Republic’, Usmani reminds his readers that the Resolution did not envision any special authority for the ulema. (see Smokers' corner: Curbing the mullah for full article)

Israel: Marginalization and minoritization continues

As discussed in this blog before, religious nationalist states usually suffer from two predicaments. First, as citizenship is based on religion, religious minorities in the country are de facto second-class citizens i.e. they have fewer rights than those belonging to the state/state-preferred/majority religion. Second, since religion is one of the main sources of laws and regulations, the sectarian differences within the state-preferred religion become political issues and powerful groups within the state-preferred religion try to impose their interpretations on others through the state, giving rise to sectarianism (See Religious Nationalism and Sectarianism). Sectarianism is generally slow at the start as groups outside (i.e. religious minorities) are being tackled but once outside groups are "tamed," the heretics or those who do not subscribe to the mainstream/state-preferred interpretation are targeted. Thus, sectarianism becomes a big issue and minorities are formed within the majority i.e. within the adherents of the state-preferred religion. Over the last seventy years, Pakistanis have seen this process of state marginalization and minoritization happening. Before the separation of Bangladesh, it was primarily the Christians and the Hindus who faced or felt state discrimination but later on, after 1971, in addition to the non-Muslims, groups that called themselves Muslims felt they were being victimized because of their religious beliefs. The Shias, for instance, held their first political demonstration in July 1980 when they marched to Islamabad and laid siege to the federal government offices to protest against the Zakat Ordinance promulgated by the government of General Zia-ul-Haq.

One can see the same processes of marginalization and minoritization currently at play in Israel. Being a religious nationalist state since its formation, Israel is not new to this process. Soon after independence, thousands of Muslim minority members were murdered and forced to flee their homes. No process was adopted to see whether those being killed or made refugees had actually fought against Israeli forces. Then, Law of Return was passed in July 1950 to make Israeli citizenship available to all the Jews in the world while Muslims that had lived in Israel for generations were denied return to their ancestral homes. However, the process of marginalization and minoritization soon progressed from non-Jewish minorities to Jewish minorities. Jews from Arab or Muslim lands, called Mizrahi Jews, faced "scorn and detestation" primarily because they were non-European but also because their religious practices were either considered primitive or not genuinely Jewish. They were considered too influenced by crude and barbaric cultures of the Orient.  Israel's founding father and Prime Minister for first fifteen years, David Ben Gurion (1948-54 and 1955-63)'s quotes below demonstrates the attitude of ruling Ashkenazi (European) Jews towards Mizrahi Jews:

We do not want Israelis to become Arabs. We are bound by duty to fight against the spirit of the Levant that corrupts individuals and society. 

and 

Even the immigrant from North Africa, who looks like a savage, who has never read a book in his life, not even a religious one, and doesn’t even know how to say his prayers, either wittingly or unwittingly has behind him a spiritual heritage of thousands of years…

and

The ancient spirit left the Jews of the East and their role in the Jewish nation receded or disappeared entirely. In the past few hundred of years the Jews of Europe have led the nation, in both quantity and quality. (See The roots of anti-Mizrahi racism in Israel, David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s Segregationist Founder and Post-Zionism and the Sephardi Question for further information about discrimination against Mizrahi Jews in Israel)

Coming back to the present, the Israeli government is furthering the process of marginalization and minoritization of two communities. First, Arab (Muslim) Bedouins are being stripped of their Israeli citizenship. Those who have been citizens for decades are being told to apply for citizenship again:

When Bedouin citizens come to Interior Ministry offices in Be’er Sheva to take care of routine matters such as changing their address, obtaining a birth certificate or registering names, the Population Authority examines their status, as well as that of their parents and grandparents, going back to the early days of the state. In many cases, the clerk tells them that their Israeli citizenship had been granted in error. On the spot, he changes their status from citizen to resident and issues them a new document. People who lose their citizenship are given no explanation and no opportunity to appeal. Instead, the clerk suggests that they submit a request and start the process of obtaining citizenship from scratch, as if they were newcomers to Israel. (See Why Stripping Non-Jews Of Their Israeli Citizenship Threatens Zionism)

Indigenous Arab Bedouins have been discriminated since the establishment of Israel. Their homes and grazing lands were allocated to Jewish settlements and they were forced to settle or to relocate to areas chosen for them by the Israeli authorities. Many of their villages were not recognized as official municipal areas and so were not provided civic amenities and were razed whenever there was need for more Jewish settlements (See European Parliament condemns Israel's policy toward Bedouin population and New Jewish settlements planned 'on top of' Bedouin villages). Cultural appropriation and disappropriation at the hands of Israelis have also been the fate of Bedouins as is the case with the general Palestinian population (See a recent example at Palestinian Bedouin Dress at New York Fashion Week Reveals Stakes of Israeli Cultural Appropriation).

Source: Land grab: Israeli govt backs bill to forcibly relocate up to 40,000 Bedouin villagers

However, the denial of citizenship is a completely new level of discrimination and member of Israeli Parliament Knesset Juma’a Azbarga argues that something sinister (i.e. changing demography) is behind this new policy:

I believe this is part of a process happening beneath the surface...They want to slowly reach a critical mass of citizenship-less people in order to make it easier when they come to transfer us. The name of the game is demography; the Bedouin make up 34 percent of the population in the Negev. In the eyes of the state, that’s a threat.

The state established a network for Bedouin settlement. We are not settlers — we are the natives here. So they put pressure to force the Bedouin to move to areas without infrastructure or sources of income — a forced urbanization and ghettoization of an agrarian society. We have enough land in the Negev for everyone. The Bedouin claim less than six percent of the land as their own, but they want to concentrate us in 1.5 percent of the territory. For the state it is ideology, for us it is a war for survival. (See Is Israel turning its Bedouin citizens into a stateless people?)

Secondly, the Israeli government made a decision in June 2017 which clearly demonstrated (again) that Reform and Conservative Judaism are not considered authentic Jews in Israel. The government suspended the 2016 agreement which would have provided the Reform and Conservative Jews a separate place (a pluralistic prayer pavilion) to pray at the Western Wall (Kotel). Despite the opposition of the ultra-Orthodox rabbis, who currently administer the whole sacred space around the Kotel, the Israeli government decided to treat all branches of Judaism somewhat equally. The agreement was reached after a great effort by both the Israeli government and the Reform and Conservative movements and the Israeli government was proud to take credit for it (for a detailed look at the controversy and the 2016 agreement see Western Wall prayer controversy in Israel). However, due to the pressure of ultra-Orthodox parties, the Israeli government suspended the agreement indefinitely. Rabbi Rick Jacobs, the head of the North American Reform Movement, on hearing the news called it "a very, very dark day" and said, "To hear the government of Israel make a statement today that the rights of non-Orthodox Jews don’t matter is deeply distressing" (See US liberal Jews decry ‘slap in the face’ from Netanyahu on Western Wall prayer).

Members of "Women of the Wall" praying with a Torah scroll near the Western Wall (July 2017)

Source: Reform Conservative movements incensed by Netanyahu attack

In September 2017, Prime Minister Netanyahu added fuel to the fire by declaring that the Reform and Conservative movements were using the Western Wall agreement as a stealthy way to get recognition from the Israeli state. This was vehemently denied by leaders of both Reform and Conservative movements and they accused the Prime Minister of lying and betraying their trust:

Netanyahu reportedly told members of the press in New York Monday night that the Reform and Conservative movements wanted to get recognition “via the backdoor, secretly, under the pretext of a technical clause of joint administration of the Western Wall,” according to Army Radio reporter Ilil Shahar...

Rabbi Gilad Kariv, director of the Reform movement in Israel, said that the prime minister’s comments demonstrated that he had decided to join “the wave of haredi incitement against millions of Reform and Conservative Jews.”

Kariv also noted that Netanyahu had been involved in every detail of the deal, had celebrated the approval of the deal and demanded credit for it as well.

“The Reform movement does not clandestinely demand recognition bur rather openly and publicly,” said Kariv. 

“The prime minister has shown a lack of leadership regarding the Western Wall, and political weakness, and in order to hide this he is choosing to attack the Reform movement,” adding that Netanyahu should find ways of rebuilding trust with Diaspora Jewry “and not to deepen the damage he and his government have done.”

Director of the Masorti [Conservative] movement in Israel Yizhar Hess said Netanyahu was “distorting reality” and pointed out that “it was this government of Israel, the prime minister and his people who proposed to us this model of agreement, including explicit emphasis on the prima facie advantages of the of the agreement regarding the issue of recognition in light of the fact that we would have official representatives on the administrative council for the site.”

“To present this now as our manipulation is a new record in fake news,” Hess added.

Netanyahu said at a briefing in New York with reporters Monday that were the issue merely one of finding an egalitarian prayer space at the Western Wall, then the issue would have been solved. (See Reform Conservative movements incensed by Netanyahu attack)

The discussion shows that, like in other religious nationalist states, the process of marginalization and minoritization is continuing in Israel.