Book Review
Chasing A
Mirage – The Tragic Illusion of an Islamic State.
- Author:
Tarek Fatah
-
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.,
Canada
- Reviewed
By: Javed
I.
Chaudry
The single most
remarkable impact that the legacy of 9/11 has left
behind is that it has created a fertile ground for
all sorts of writers who have emerged out of
woodwork to write on Islam and Muslims. A brand
new set of meaningless and derogatory terms and
phrases has been coined which are now in use in
like no tomorrow. Countless articles and books
have been written to chastise the Muslims and
reform Islam. The book, ‘Chasing A Mirage - The
tragic illusion of an Islamic state’ by Tarek
Fatah is one of the many publications that have
recently hit the shelves of the book stores. This
book will, no doubt, be a sought-after addition to
Neocon’s and Zionists’ book shelves.
With the fall
of communism, it seems that Islam has replaced it
as a threat to the new world order. As a matter of
fact, Islam may not be a threat to the world, but
many mullahs and Muslim writers certainly appear
to be a threat to Islam.
The central
theme of the book appears to be the premise of
separation of state from religion. The author has
stressed that the Muslims must not think of having
an Islamic state but they should only have a state
of Islam. He argues that if God had wanted the
Muslims to have an Islamic state He would have
created one for them. The author needs reminding
the Quranic verse (8:53)
which states that God does not change the fate of
nations, they do themselves. In other words, God
helps those who help themselves.
It is ironic
that the term, ‘Islamist’ appears on almost every
page of the book and the term ‘Islamic State’ is
part of the title, and yet no effort was made to
define and describe these phrases in any
comprehensive manner. What does the author really
mean by the term ‘Islamist’? It is mentioned just
in the passing, referring to those who want to
establish an Islamic state. However, after having
read the book, it is not hard for the reader to
realize that a Muslim who disagrees with the
author on Islamic or political matters is liable
to be labeled as an Islamist. Furthermore, Fatah’s
despise for Salafi (Wahabi) sect and the society
(the Saudis) that promotes it, comes out loud and
clear throughout the book.
It is rather
peculiar that a 400 page book that discourages
from setting up an Islamic state does not define
what makes a state an Islamic state. Would a
country where a vast majority of the citizens are
Muslims called an Islamic state, or a country run
on Islamic laws would be identified as an Islamic
state? There is a whole chapter criticizing the
creation of
Pakistan
as an Islamic state. It would be a valid question
to raise as to why a Jewish state can be viable
while an Islamic state is not?
The book
describes that 160 million Muslims live in an
Islamic state, Pakistan, while an equal number of
Muslims who live in India are in state of Islam –
a situation preferred by the author. In his
enthusiasm for promoting the sensationalizing
phrase, ‘state of Islam’, Fatah has totally
disregarded the pathetic and pitiful social
condition of the Muslims in India. What’s more,
he has the audacity to assert that Pakistan has
become the terrorist recruiting grounds for Al
Quida. I find this remark highly insensitive,
offensive and out of line. Who is exactly
responsible for the rise of terrorism in Pakistan?
None other than the Americans and the Soviets. One
does not have to go too far in order to look for
the answer; the answer is on page 273 of this
book. It describes how President Carter’s security
adviser, Brzezinsky told the mujahedeen to
go and fight against the Soviets in the name of
God. This began the ten-year CIA sponsored Jihad
against the Soviets. It is interesting to note
that in the introduction section of the book,
Fatah holds the ‘Islamists’ accountable for using
religion for political purposes.
The Jihadis
were simply the genie created for a specific
purpose – to fight the invaders. It is the same
genie that refuses to go back into the bottle and
still fighting against the invaders. But only
Fatah has switched sides this time. Those who were
called the mujahedeen during 1980s are now
called the terrorists or Islamists for simple
reason, it patronizes the current political dogma
of the West and sits well with the Neocons.
The book is
heavily padded with much of Muslim history; sadly,
no analysis is provided in order to co-relate the
lessons of history with the thesis of the book.
Instead, after reproducing lengthy narratives of
the history, the author simply jumps to draw the
inferences to his liking to support his own point
of view. For instance, the political account of
mid 18th century India is a good
example of this. According to Fatah, an Indian
Muslim, Shah Waliullah under the Wahabi influence,
after having visited Arabia,
invited Ahmad Shah Abdali of
Afghanistan to
raid India to help the fading Mogul empire and to
spread Wahabism in
India.
During early and mid 18th century,
India as
well as the Mogul empire were going through
extremely difficult period. The Marhattas and
Sikhs had become too strong for the weak Mogul
Empire and there was growing pressure from the
British East India Company. For Muslims, it was a
question of basic survival rather than worry about
importing the Wahabism from Arabia.
Following Nadir Shah’s attack in 1739, Abdali
attacked
India 7 times
between 1748 and 1767, not to spread Wahabiesm, as
Fatah asserts, but only in the interest of
expanding his own empire, which he did. He annexed
the area west of River Indus from Sindh in the
South and Peshawer in the North. If any thing,
Abdali’s attacks on India further weakened the
Muslims in general and the Mogul empire in
particular.
On the subject
of Jihad, Fatah has presented a rather convoluted
account which could only confuse his typical
audience specially those who have already become
prejudiced against Muslims by the negative hype in
the popular media that has been going on since
9/11. A piece that he has borrowed from The
Washington Post is indeed concise and describes
Jihad in just a few lines, which is:
“Jihad means to
strive or struggle to realize God’s will, to lead
to virtuous life, to create a just society and to
defend Islam and the Muslim community. But
historically, Muslim rulers, backed by religious
scholars, used the term to legitimize holy wars to
expand their empires”.
Throughout the
book, wherever Quranic verses are quoted, their
reference numbers are provided, but the following
verse has no reference, it is copied below as it
appears in the book:
“But when the
forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the
pagans, wherever you find them. And seize them,
beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every
stratagem (of war). But if they repent and
establish regular prayer and practice regular
charity, then open the way for them; for God is
Oft-forgiving. Most merciful”.
Fatah writes
that “Jihadis use this verse to justify their
actions, not realizing that the verse was revealed
for a specific narrow application for a particular
skirmish with pagan Arabs”.
This is verse 5
of chapter 9. The preceding 4 and the following 2
verses describe the background and justification
clarifying the real intent of this verse. Those
who want to make their deceitful claims against
the Quran often quote this verse without referring
to the preceding and the following verses.
Many opinion
polls taken around the world over the last several
years in Muslim societies provide clear proof that
a vast majority of Muslims hate America for its
hegemony and the foreign policies that hurt
Muslims. But Fatah insists on dwelling on a few
radicals, he writes, “For the Islamists, it is not
West’s imperial ambitions or capitalist greed that
offends; it is the West’s embrace of unfettered
freedom and individual liberty that is cause for
concern”. It is no doubt same as repeating the
well known statement by President Bush, “They hate
us for our freedom”.
Although it has
no apparent connection to the thesis of the book,
Fatah wants Pakistan to give self rule to
Pakhtoons, Kashmiris and the province of
Baluchistan.
The Pakhtoon problem was created by Afghanistan
and India due to their cold war nexus with the
Soviets. It went away with the dissolution of the
Soviet empire in 1989. The Kashmir
problem heavily revolves around
India’s
aggressive policies on Kashmir.
It is much too complex to meaningfully discuss it
here. But Fatah, nevertheless added this point
against
Pakistan and its Muslim population hoping to get
another brownie point from his Western readers.
Baluchistan,
rich with natural resources, is the largest
province with about 40% of the total geographical
area of Pakistan but the smallest population,
about 6 million as compared with the total
population of about 160 million. Fatah appears to
be suggesting disintegration of Pakistan which
would suit the Neocons rather well to bring the
oil and gas pipelines from Central Asia to
Afghanistan and through Baluchistan to the
Arabian Sea.
With friends like Fatah, Pakistan does not need
enemies. He describes the founder of Pakistan,
Mohammad Ali Jinnah as Short Sighted and Petty.
Fatah possesses
a rather odd sense of analytical skill to analyze
and compare the historical events and
circumstance. Here are a couple of examples:
Fatah Writes,
“I have sincerely attempted to find the so
called Golden Age of Islam that was free of
bloodshed, civil strife, palace intrigues,
outright racism, slavery and pillage. I have
failed. From the Ridda (Apostasy) Wars of Caliph
Abubaker to the humiliating defeat of Caliph
Mustasim, I have not found a single period that I
could in all honesty I would trade for my 21st
century existence as a Muslim living in a secular
democratic society”.
What a farcical
statement. Would he trade his 21st
century existence with middle age times of
Mongolian, European or Russian empires? Would he
like to go to medieval England only to get burned
alive for not being a Christian? Should he not be
comparing the same era and times?
Another
example:
Fatah writes,
“When
US jets bombed
Yugoslavia in the 1990s, the same Islamists who
now march to denounce the United States were out
celebrating in the streets of Europe and the
United States. For the Islamists, US military
intervention in a foreign land was not a problem.
Their objections to US imperial ambitions come
into play only when those ambitions affect Muslim
lands”.
Fatah appears
to have difficulty in placing facts and events in
proper perspective. In Yugoslavia, it was a civil
war premeditated for genocide and ethnic
cleansing. It cannot be compared with unilateral
invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan in
the interest of controlling oil or the route for
oil and gas pipeline. The American interest in
Afghanistan and its so called war on terror is
destroying life and peace in
Pakistan
as well.
I find the book
‘Chasing a Mirage’ just another attempt to cash in
from the post 9/11 Islamophobic environment. It
completely lacks in a justifiable critique of
Muslims with due regard to applicable economic and
political constraints. The separation of state and
religion is a new concept in the history of
mankind which took root only during the last
couple of centuries. During this period most
Muslim societies were subservient to others. The
only exception is the Ottoman Empire which was
going through a decay during the last 150 years of
its existence. The newly emerged Muslim states are
still not totally independent of imperial
influence of the old colonial masters. They need
time and courage to shed the foreign authority and
manipulation to establish their security before
they can turn inwards to review and reform their
political cultures.
Send questions or
comments to
Family of the Heart