Migration, fundamentalism & terrorism in Asia
By Farooq Tariq
July 9, 2016 – Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal reposted from Europe Solidaire Sans Frontières – Religious terrorism has become one of the major challenges for most of the countries in Asia, particularly in South and West Asia. It has resulted in a seemingly nonstop bombings, suicidal attacks and other means of terrorism.
On the 1 July 2016, after an 11-hour-long hostage situation, 20 hostages were killed in a restaurant packed with foreigners in Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh. Nine of them were Italian, seven Japanese, one US citizen and an Indian. The responsibility for the barbaric act was claimed by the so-called Islamic State. The incident is a manifestation of the international character of the threat posed by Islamic religious fundamentalists.
Over the course of 20th century, Islamic fundamentalism has emerged as the most serious threat to democratic values, peace and security in most of the Asian countries.
In Pakistan, the menace of terrorism, in particular terrorism of the religious kind, has spread throughout the length and breadth of the country. There are people and groups who extend direct or indirect support to the terrorist activities of the Taliban and its ilk in name of religion. Violence has become a norm and religion is routinely used to silence voices of reason and compassion. The society has taken a turn towards the right-wing.
In India, attacks by fanatic Hindu fundamentalists are becoming increasingly common in Muslim minority areas. As part of its campaign to spread its reactionary political ideology to all of India, the governing conservative Bhartia Janta Party (BJP) is patronising communal violence and promoting communal polarization.
For quite some time now, Afghanistan has been embroiled in conflict involving a religious terrorist organisation and a weak government supported by US imperialism. Suicide attacks have become a norm. The strategy of the NATO forces has not resulted in peace and security in Afghanistan. The influence of the Taliban remains intact despite the killings of some of its top leaders in US drone strikes.
Daesh’s spectacular growth in West Asia has resulted in some of the most barbaric acts of terrorism witnessed in history. The so-called Islamic State has emerged as the most dangerous religious terrorist organisation in the region. It has taken over parts of Iraq and Syria and now controls or can operate with impunity in a great stretch of territory in Western Iraq and Eastern Syria, making it militarily the most successful jihadi movement ever. It has the resources at its disposal to organise terrorist activities across the globe.
The tactical differences among Western countries in dealing with Daesh have resulted in new contradictions. The Syrian government, supported by Russian Federation, is on an all-out bombing campaign, reducing to rubble various towns under Daesh control.
Mass migration of people out of these conflict zones has led to an unprecedented refugee crisis and taken the miseries of the affected people to a whole different level. This state of affairs has shattered all the established relations among nations throughout Asia and Europe. The whole project of European Union is under threat amid differing strategies to deal with the issue of migrations and border controls.
Migration of people from zones affected by religious conflict is not just confined to Western Asia. South Asia has witnessed various instances of mass migrations by persecuted religious minorities. In Pakistan, scores of Ahmadis, Christians and Hindus have left the country for safer shelters.
Over 800,000 people have left their homes in the Federally Administrated Tribal Areas (FATA) linking Pakistan and Afghanistan in the wake of an ongoing military operation since December 2014. Most of these have ended up as internally displaced people (IDPs) and are forced to live in inhumane conditions in refugee camps.
In Pakistan, religious fundamentalism is fighting on several fronts to gain more mass support. They do not spare a single opportunity to promote their “anti India” sentiments, a pillar in developing Islamic religious fundamentalism in Pakistan. Weak civilian governments, littered with neo liberal agenda, are cornered by mass disconnect to take any decisive action against fundamentalism. The Pakistani state has failed miserably to curb the rise of religious fundamentalism. There is always a soft spot for them. For a long time, they were encouraged by the state as a second line of security. The security paradigm meant an anti-India enmity was the core purpose of state patronage. The process of Islamisation was accelerated by military dictator Ziaul Haq, with the full support of US imperialism.
Apart from creating and supporting jihadist groups for decades, the state and military with the financial and political assistance of imperial power has indoctrinated millions with conservative Islamic ideology for the purpose of safeguarding its strategic interests.
What is religious fundamentalism? “Essentially the term fundamentalism suggests going back to the basic texts and reproducing as closely as possible the laws and institutions found then. It has also come to imply a dogmatic adherence to traditions, orthodoxy, inflexibility and a rejection of modern society, intellectual innovation and attempts to create a ‘golden era’. Islamic fundamentalists have exploited the dream of the ’golden era of Islam’, in poverty stricken, economically backward Muslim countries through the local”mullahs".
Religious fundamentalists are not an anti-imperialist force. They are not a class-based social set up. They are new kind of neo-fascist groups. Opposing imperialism does and should not mean an alliance with the religious fanatics, or vice versa.
Fundamentalism finds its roots in the backwardness of the society, social deprivation, a low level of consciousness, poverty and ignorance. To sum up, it can be said that religious fundamentalists are against democracy, pluralism, religious toleration, and free speech. They fear of annihilation by secular modernity.
Religious fundamentalists are a new kind of fascists in the making. This phenomenon now dominant is the assertion of fascist currents with religious references (and no longer the triptych “people/state, race, nation”). They appear in all the “great” religions (Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and so on). They now pose a considerable threat in countries like India or Sri Lanka. The Muslim world thus does not have the monopoly in this field; but it is certainly there that it has taken on a particular international dimension, with “trans-border” movements like Islamic State or the Taliban and networks which are connected more or less formally from Morocco to Indonesia.
The religious fanatic groups are internationalists. They want an Islamic world. They are against democracy and promote Khilafat (kingdom) as a way of governance. They are the most barbaric force recent history has seen in the shape of “Islamic State” and Taliban. There is nothing progressive in their ideology. They are not anti-imperialist but anti-American and anti-West.
They must be countered, however, a military solution to end fundamentalism has a very limited scope with long term negative effects. The US way of fighting back in shape of “war on terror” has failed miserably. Despite all the US initiatives of occupations, wars and creating democratic alternatives, the religious fundamentalists have grown with more force. Fundamentalists are stronger than they were at 9/11, despite the occupation of Afghanistan.
In several Muslim countries, strategies to counter religious terrorism have been misused against working class activists and peasantry. Anti terrorist laws are used against opponents to jail them for lives. Progressive groups and social movements are becoming target of these laws. In Pakistan, anti-terrorism laws are very often used against climate change activists, striking workers and peasantry along with political opponents.
To effectively curb the growth of religious fundamentalism and religious terrorism, the state must break all links with fanatic groups. The mindset that religious fundamentalists are “our own brothers, our own people, our security line and guarantee against ’Hindus’“,”some are bad and some are good” and so on must be changed.
There is no short cut to end religious fundamentalism. There is no military solution. It has to be a political fight with dramatic reforms in education, health and working realities in most Muslim countries. Starting from nationalisation of religious madrassas, it must go on to provide free education, health, residence and transport as one of most effective means to counter fundamentalism.
Right-wing ideas are promoting extreme right-wing ideology. A mass working-class alternative in the shape of trade unions and political parties linked with social movements is the most effective manner to counter religious fundamentalism.
Farooq Tariq, general secretary Awami Workers Party. This paper presented at the Asia Europe People’s Form (AEPF) being held from July 4-6, 2016 at Ulaanbaatar in Mongolia.
Asia Europe Peoples Forum’s proposal to Asia-Europe Meeting
July 6, 2016 – Awami Workers’ Party – On behalf of our "Peace and Security" thematic group at Asia Europe Peoples Forum being held at Ulaanbaatar in Mongolia, Farooq Tariq, general secretary Awami Workers Party was asked to present the recommendations.
Here are the recommendations that will be presented to 51 heads of the states from ASEM, including Pakistan next week here in the same pace
The AEPF has continuously appealed for a negotiated end to armed conflicts; lowering of threat perceptions between nations and social cohesion within countries and has opposed arms buildups while arguing for universal disarmament, peace with justice and human security. In 2014, within the framework of the tenth Asia-Europe People Forum, the “Peace and Security” Circle, in coordination with peace movements in Asia and Europe, organized a series of activities which discussed a variety of issues including military spending and arms transfer/arms trade, nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction; killer drones, killer robots, other secret weapons and infrastructures; disarmament policies and conflict prevention in Asia and Europe, etc. Accordingly, various recommendations were made and submitted to ASEM leaders in order to maintain peace and security in the two continents and the world as a whole.
Two years later, it can be seen that although some countries said they would cut programs and military weapons to reduce the defense budget deficit, the situation seems to be more complicated. The volume of international transfer of major weapons has gone up 14 percent in the 2011-2015 period compared to 2006-2010 (SIPRI fact sheet – February 2016); conflicts and disputes in such hot spots as the South China Sea, the East China Sea, the Korean Peninsula, the Middle East, Ukraine; the worse ever refugee crisis in Europe, which is said to be the result of conflicts, tensions and human insecurity in the Middle East and elsewhere (such as the long conflicts and other oppressions in Africa and Afghanistan and many other regions); the rise of the terror group calling itself the Islamic State (IS) and other terrorist movements that continue killing innocent people, using rape and violence as a way of threatening the world’s security, shows that countries need to re-strategies methodologies to create a more sustainable peace. …
In such a context, peace movements and people’s organisations have raised their voices in an effort to contribute to easing the situation and making the two continents and the world as a whole a peaceful place to live for everyone. Clearly, much more needs to be done.
We gather here again at the Asia-Europe people forum, join our hands and would like to submit our recommendations to ASEM member states:
Recommendations
1. Welcome Mongolia’s nuclear-weapons-free status, highlight it as successful government-civil society cooperation, and expand nuclear-weapon free zone including in Northeast Asia. Ban the research, development, use and proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, and support the Humanitarian Pledge to "fill the legal gap for the prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons.” Support the Ulaanbaatar Process for civil society dialogue.
2. Work out a strategy to: Find ways to solve the refugee crisis and to assist countries and populations through strategic partnering, association agreements, civil society/ people-to-people dialogue and direct aid. To sensitise different sections of society like political parties, organizations and institutions to the problems faced by refugees and the common responsibilities to address this issue.
3. Support and put pressure on related parties to settle all conflicts, disputes and tension in different areas such as the Ukraine, Middle East including Palestine, the Korean Peninsula, South China Sea and East China Sea, by peaceful means in compliance with international laws and regulations including The United Nations Charter, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC),... and in the spirit of constructiveness. To plan mass advocacy against the use of violence as a way of retribution.
4. To discuss and work out a concrete plan on cutting military spending (by at least ten percent in the next five years) and move the fund to social services as way to build peace with justice.
5. To support the promotion of Education for Peace, human rights and peaceful conflict resolution. To see peace advocacy as one based on rights and secularism.
6. Support all war victims, including nuclear victims, victims of Agent Orange, napalm, chemical barrel bombs, in their daily lives and their struggles for justice.
7. To address differences and social inequalities between groups, races, religions, genders in states by clear and balanced definition of rights amongst those groups in the constitution of the country.
8. We call on the people’s organizations and peace movements in two continents to initiate discussions on alternate theories and strategies. Meetings should be held as far as possible where there can be physical presence and intervention by organizations dedicated to the goals of AEPF; to strengthen the solidarity by concrete proposals, joint projects, and strategies for action adequate cooperation and connection in order to create effective synergies in the struggle for peace.
9. We propose the ASEM leaders to organise a symposium on connectivities between ASEM sea areas like South China Sea, Black Sea and Baltic Sea.
10.To respect the role of civil society organisations in decision-making process and work out a mechanism which involve them in peace-building activities, formal institutions and structures.
A comment and a question
Farouk, thank you for your article on this appalling situation. I think for comrades living in countries such as Pakistan, where some of the most terrible and seemingly senseless acts of terrorist slaughter have taken place, this must be an extraordinarily difficult issue.
I have one small comment and a question.
Regarding Syria, you say: "The tactical differences among Western countries in dealing with Daesh have resulted in new contradictions. The Syrian government, supported by Russian Federation, is on an all-out bombing campaign, reducing to rubble various towns under Daesh control."
It is certainly true that the Assad regime and its Russian backers have reduced every city in Syria to rubble in massive bombing that kills mostly civilians, in enormous numbers. Your comments about the pointlessness of "military solutions" such as this are well-taken. It is important to note, however, that these have not at all been cities and towns under Daesh control. Overwhelmingly, they are cities and towns under the control of various Syrian rebels, all of whom fight Daesh and see it as their enemy in the same way they see the regime as their enemy. Studies have shown that the Assad regime and Daesh both overwhelmingly target the rebels rather than each other. Yes, Russia and Assad have also bombed Daesh-held Raqqa and Deir Ezzor,occasionally, and kill civilians, but it is mostly the US bombing these cities. Often the US bombs in tandem with Assad. The heroic underground anti-ISIS organisation, Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently, vigorously condemns these bombings from all quarters, which do nothing to weaken Daesh control.
My question is about Bangladesh. The sheer sadism of this latest terrorist atrocity you wrote about is almost beyond comprehension. Clearly the individuals that the jihadists have employed to carry out this deed are deeply sick. But I'm lost as to what has led to the jihadist forces organising such terrible attacks (and though ISIS later took responsibility, I'm not sure that this was really organised by someone sitting in Mosul or Raqqa). What are their local Bangladeshi motives? I'm not suggesitng any motives make terror OK, of course, but one can see some kind of warped 'rationale' in bombing Baghdad (get at US forces, and kill Shia) or Medina (hit Saudi monarchy 'apostates') or Paris (get at French for intervening in mideast) etc. But it seems even more senseless in Bangladesh. Any light you could shed would be most appreciated.