Unravelling ‘Enlightened Moderation’

Absolute power often leads to a conviction that one is omniscient. Pakistanis have seen this happen to President Pervez Musharraf, whose passion for giving long, all-knowing style speeches is only increasing with time. From being an authority on what is best for Pakistan, General Musharraf, since the last Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) meetings seems to have become an authority on what is best for Muslims too. He is keen to sell his vision of "enlightened moderation" as a solution to problems of the Muslim world.

The opening of the OIC meeting in Islamabad the week before last was followed by a massive attempt to once again promote General Musharraf's vision. The Pakistani president published an article entitled "Plea for enlightened moderation" not only in the Pakistani press but also in The Washington Post and Egypt's Al-Ahram Weekly. Given that the article deals with a vision for the entire Muslim world, it is important to unpack it and see where the blame is laid; whom it addresses and what solutions it suggests.

Many points within the article raise serious concerns. To begin with, the main achievement of this piece is to solicit pity from the West for the Muslim world. The tone suggests an extremely apologetic mindset; it paints an extremely bleak picture of the current state of Muslims. When considering the role of Muslims in today's world, General Musharraf admits, "my heart weeps". He depicts Muslims as the "poorest, the most uneducated, the most powerless and the most disunited people in the world". True, Muslim countries are not leading the world today, but the Muslim world is by no means as deprived and miserable as Musharraf views it to be; he completely ignores the huge numbers of educated, intelligent Muslims, and fails to give credit to the rich traditions and culture of the Muslim world which remain intact.

There are two key problems with painting such a hopeless and demoralising picture of Muslims. Firstly, the situation does not reflect the diversity of the Muslim world but reduces it to one helpless, powerless bloc. Apart from everything else, what about the oil wealth of Muslim countries which, if controlled by the Muslim world, could send shudders down the spine of the Western world? Secondly, it automatically puts the West in a superior position with Muslims assuming a subordinate role. Why General Musharraf should want to publish this self-pitying article in a leading US daily is beyond comprehension. All it does is tell the American audience that, yes, you people are right, the Muslims are a hopeless case and are to be held responsible for the problems in today's world.

The article wholly accepts that Muslim groups are responsible for terrorism. It refers briefly to the politics of the Western world that have led to resistance within the Muslim world, but in terms of today it holds only Muslim extremist groups responsible for current tensions. The differentiation between freedom fighters and terrorists finds no place in his analysis. Nor does Musharraf have any thoughts on how the US-backed "war on terror" fails to provide the solution to bridge the perceived gap between Muslims and the rest of the world.

Musharraf's solution to the current state of Muslims rests on what he calls "enlightened moderation" which is a very simplistic two-pronged strategy. The first step of this strategy implores that "Muslims should shun militancy and extremism and adopt the path of socio-economic uplift." The second step is for "the West, and the United States in particular, to seek to resolve all political disputes with justice and to aid in the socio-economic betterment of the deprived Muslim world".

What an amazingly enlightening solution it is. According to this strategy, therefore, Muslims should henceforth shun all forms of militancy and think only of winning more bread and butter. But is life that simple? What about the militant suicide bombers in Palestine for whom there is no other way to resist the oppression of US-backed Israel but to kill themselves? Who is going to provide Palestinians with the weaponry to match Israel's sophisticated arsenal, which would eliminate the need for them to blow themselves up? When the Israeli forces humiliate and search every single Palestinian at checkpoints, are we to tell the young men to concentrate on socio-economic reform; should we tell them not to feel humiliated and angry that they are being treated like this in their own land?

What about the self-imposed dictators of the Muslim world who have never invested in education or health, who have neglected to establish societies based on a constitution rather than the orders of one man? Are they suddenly going to disappear, or will they now experience a major change of heart and begin investing in the people of their own countries? Since General Musharraf is the one proposing this vision for socio-economic reform in Muslim countries, I would like to mention a serious issue in Pakistan: 32 people, mainly children, have died over the past two weeks due to the supply of contaminated water in Hyderabad and Dadu. And what has the government done?

Coming to the second step of the two-pronged strategy, what makes us think that the US will suddenly metamorphose into a benevolent entity, which will "resolve all political disputes with justice"? Miracles do happen, but they have their limits too. How can we expect a display of altruism from a nation whose entire foreign policy is centred on self-interest? Do we actually think that one day the US will suddenly declare that India should stop killing Kashmiris, that it is unjust? Or that Israel should stop butchering Palestinians, that it is unjust? To propose such a thing is to present a simplistic view of the world.

General Musharraf's "enlightened moderation" is not a two-step process. It is one thing and one thing only: a request for all Muslims to bow unquestioningly to US demands; the salvation of the Muslims lies in the benevolence shown by the US as a reward for complying with those demands. Once unpacked, this is what General Musharraf's view of "moderation" boils down to. But after all, that is exactly the message he wanted to convey by publishing this article in The Washington Post. Have we not just recently heard Colin Powell's statement that, "We would not be supportive of any effort to change the government of Pakistan in a way that is not part of the political process."

Since when did the US start to care about political process and constitutionality? General Musharraf did not come to power via political process, nor is he protected by the original constitution. But because the US for the present requires Musharraf as he is, it is clear that the US will not support change in Pakistan, regardless of whether or not the current regime is democratic. For a nation like this to expect benevolence and justice in political disputes, as General Musharraf does in his vision of "enlightened moderation", suggests either complete ignorance or vested interests. One can only hope that at least some leaders in the rest of the Muslim world can think of better solutions for the Muslims than General Musharraf can.