In in the mid-1990s, a large conference was held in London, where the topic was the revival of a caliphate in the Muslim world for the "implementation of pure Islamic doctrine", as is the goal of the HT. The conference was attended by delegates from around the world, and a key question was to determine an ideal place for the Islamic revolution. Many agreed on Pakistan, a land of valiant Muslim tribes that have traditionally responded enthusiastically to Islamic issues. And strategically, the country is well situated to embrace the Asian sub-continent and Central Asia - where initially the caliphate will be created.
Subsequently, hundreds of HT members, British but of Pakistani origin, many of them students at the London School of Economics and other centers of excellence, packed their bags and departed for Pakistan. By 2000, the HT had established itself in all urban centers of the country, but within three years it was banned. All police stations were given strict instructions to round up any person who claimed an association with the HT.
Hundreds of HT members were rounded up, and may reports of torture emerged. Of those produced in court, the only charges that were made to stick were those related to being a member of the HT.
This correspondent has spoken to senior Pakistani officials on the reason for the HT being banned, but none of them appears to have a clue - especially as the HT does not espouse violence or militancy.
HT members have even been encouraged by the authorities to change the name of the organization, as most other banned outfits do so that they can carry on with their activities, but the HT has refused to do so.
Pakistan, especially as a leading ally in the US "war on terror", has been urged by international intelligence agencies to continue cracking down on the HT. President General Pervez Musharraf has visited the United Kingdom and publicly advised parents to beware of the HT and keep their children away from its influence.
Asia Times Online spoke to the HT's chief in Pakistan, Naveed Butt. Butt is a graduate from Illinois University, Chicago, in engineering. He is a tall and smart man in his late 30s, and has devoted his life to the cause of HT. As a result, he is a wanted man. He traveled from Lahore to Karachi for this interview [1].
Asia Times Online: You claim that you are a political organization, yet you operate underground. Why?
Naveed Butt: The HT is a political party and cannot afford to operate underground. We have to remain in touch with the masses and cultivate them for our mission. Our leadership was open when it founded the HT in 1953 in Jordan. However, soon after the HT was established, Jordanian authorities brutally crushed it. Hundreds of our workers were arrested. So to preserve the organization, our top leadership - Shiekh Atta Abu Rashta and others - went underground. Since then, the HT has been unacceptable to rulers, and we have been forced to work underground all over the Muslim world.
ATol: Who is your central leadership?
NB: It is somewhere in the Middle East. I do not know their names and where they are located.
ATol: How come a political party can survive with no leadership visible to the public eye, nor even a party structure?
NB: We do not hide. We openly claim that we are members of HT. Hundreds of our workers were recently arrested by Pakistani law-enforcing agencies. We admitted that we were members of HT. However, we do not disclose the names of our top leadership because then they would not be able to operate and would face unnecessary obstructions.
ATol: You claim that HT is non-violent, but we saw HT supporters turn violent in Uzbekistan.
NB: It was not HT. Our leadership has already taken a position on that issue. We never did violence, nor will we in the future apply any violence in our struggle. Our goal is to mobilize the masses and bring about a peaceful revolution and revive the institution of caliphate. What happened in Uzbekistan is in fact a continuation of what previously happened in Georgia and other Central Asian states, it was an obvious power-struggle between Russia and the US to dominate in the region. Some agent provocateur used the Akramia group [an Islamic extremist organization] for their designs and created violence. There is no doubt that the HT is the strongest force in Uzbekistan and is facing state suppression, but we would rather bear state torture than turn violent.
ATol: So, the HT is non-violent, very intellectual and non-militant. Then why is it not tolerated, whereas other Muslim organizations are somehow tolerated and even co-exist in societies?
NB: To begin with, we do not accept the existing system, which all other religious parties accept. They claim that they are against the West, but they support Western democracy. In other ways, too, they are very much part-and-parcel of the system. This inclusion has silently rounded up those sharp edges which the West considered a threat. They raise Islamic slogans, but they have nothing to do with the Islamic cause. We have the examples of Pakistan and Turkey, where Islamists won [in elections] but failed to make any impact. Neither bullet nor ballot can bring about sustainable change in society. It is only when masses willingly mobilize and demand a change and adopt non-violent ways and replace the system with a real Islamic system, that real change will emerge.
ATol: Don't you think this will create anarchy?
NB: Anarchy is generated when the masses mobilize without any ideal. When they have an ideology, they will march towards the right path. We know our job. We have to float our constitution and manifesto among the masses and convince them fully that it is the real salvation.
ATol: At a conference in London in the mid-1990s, it was suggested that Pakistan would be an ideal state to establish an Islamic state, and from there proceed to caliphate. What is the significance of Pakistan in your world mission?
NB: Important decisions evolve with the passage of time. These decisions are not taken in conferences. Several participants expressed their opinions about different Muslim states, which would be ideal an Islamic state. Pakistan was among them. There is no doubt that Muslims in Pakistan have emotional commitment with Islam. It is situated at a place where an Islamic state could further its influence up to Central Asia and Turkey, where already Islamic movements have taken strong roots, and then this unit could work effectively for the liberation of Muslim-occupied territories.
ATol: In a way, the HT represents the concept of Pakistan's strategic depth developed by the generals in the 1980s, which suggested the Muslim Central Asian states Afghanistan and Pakistan come together in one confederation.
NB: We are not inspired by the establishment's rhetoric. We draw our strategy from the Koran and Sunnah [the sayings and the traditions set by the Prophet Mohammed].
ATol: You are branded as anti-Zionist ...
NB: Islam is not racist at all. However, we talk about the liberation of Muslim territories and bringing them back into the discipline ofkhilafah [caliphate]. We talk about the liberation of the entire Palestine, and we want to establish Muslim rule over there. We don't talk about Kashmir alone. We talk about the liberation of India, because India was ruled by Muslims, and it was a Muslim state.
ATol: Excuse me. India was invaded by Muslims and they established their rule for 1,000 years. However, India was never an Islamic state. There were some adventurers who happened to be Muslim and they captured India.
NB: There are a lot of misconceptions which are required to be addressed. The Muslim caliphate remained intact in its letter and sprit for 30 years. After 30 years it turned hereditary, yet it was a caliphate because all other tenets were fully practiced. For instance, it was compulsory that subjects would pledge their allegiance to the caliph (bait). The system of the judiciary remained intact, which strictly enforced Islamic laws. Different schools of jurisprudence worked independently, but their work remained part-and-parcel in the system of governance. It was the same in Hind [India]. There were monarchs who were Muslims, and many were not upright in their character. However, if you see the system of the judiciary, it was Islamic. The education system was Islamic, etc. Therefore, Hind was an Islamic state and part of a Muslim caliphate.
ATol: In the West, the HT is perceived as a serious threat to social liberties, concepts of civil society, etc. And also in Muslim states. Why?
NB: They know exactly why we are a threat. We do not believe in using patches of the Western social system and calling it Islam, or in applying tenets of the capitalist economy and calling it Islam. We are not the kind of Islamists who say that since Islam does not forbid such systems, therefore there is no harm in adopting them. For commodities, though, we can say that since Islam does not forbid something, therefore it is allowed. For instance, if somebody drinks a syrup in which there is no prohibited ingredient, there is no debate. It is allowed.
However, all actions and mechanisms in life must be substantiated and drawn from Islam, whether it is in the economy, politics, trading and even agriculture. This kind of purist approach does not suit the West or its allies in the Muslim world, who work to establishriba-free [interest-free] banking, but at the same time allow multinational corporations to circulate like blood in their economies.
ATol: You mean the HT would not allow multinational corporations [MNCs] to operate?
NB: Let me explain that there is a difference between MNCs and non-Muslim traders. Non-Muslims can trade with an Islamic state, and they are allowed to freely operate. However, MNCs are the flag-bearers of the colonial system and Western capitalist economies. Whether it is Coca-Cola or McDonalds, it is not simply the name of the commodities that is marketed. It is a complete culture which impresses on societies, and such cultural intrusions in the garb of MNCs would not be tolerated.
ATol: I will repeat my question. Are you anti-Zionist?
NB: A Muslim cannot be anti-Zionist or anti-Christian. Jews always had a golden period in Muslim empires. When there was a full season against Jews in the Christian world, Jews were given refuge in the Ottoman empire. Hasidic Christians and Christian Orthodoxy are still very well preserved in the Middle East and in Egypt. Had Muslims been so intolerant, what prevented them from eliminating Christians? The Koran says there is no coercion in religion. At the same time, our name is Hizb ut-Tahrir. Liberation Party. We are not Hizb ut-Tahrir al-Islami [Islamic Party of Liberation]. Therefore, we think of salvation of the whole of humanity, as the Prophet Mohammed was sent for the whole of humanity, and we are working to liberate humanity from the cruel clutches of the Western capitalist system.
ATol: What about Shi'ites? In the political history of Islam, they opposed a caliphate. [HT is often labeled in the Western media as being a "Sunni" group".]
NB: Not in the early period. Shi'ites of the early period were not against a caliphate. It was a very late development when they brought the concept of Imamat [2] versus caliphate. We don't engage in such debates. We would accept Imamat if it practices true Islam. After the Iranian revolution [1979] a HT delegation went to Tehran and welcomed the revolution. We presented Iranians [most of whom are Shi'ites] our constitution and offered that if they implemented it we would pledge our allegiance [bait] to the leader of Iran. Ayatollah Baheshti, who was later killed in bomb blast, was very appreciative of the HT's role and its literature. Imam Shoqani of the Zaidiya sect wrote a book on the Islamic state, which is a very important part of the HT's syllabus.
In fact, we never talk about Shi'ites and Sunnis. We talk only about Muslims. This is what the Koran does. In Iraq, we had historic relations with the Da'wa Party [a Shi'ite party]. The slain [Shi'ite] Iraqi scholar Baqir Sadr [executed by Saddam Hussein] was very close to HT circles. Recently, when the HT held a conference in Iraq, Muqtada al-Sadr's representative attended the meeting. [ Muqtada is a Shi'ite cleric]
In fact, there is no bitter division between Shi'ites and Sunnis. As far as killings are concerned, they are all isolated events. Had there been any division, there would have been Shi'ite-Sunni riots everywhere in the world where Shi'ites and Sunnis lived side-by-side. It is again the Western imperialist agenda which fans Shi'ite-Sunni divisions in Muslim societies for their ultimate objective.
ATol: What is your strength in Pakistan?
NB: I would never tell, but it is so significant that the state machinery thought it necessary to ban us after only three years of our existence [in the country].
Notes
[1] Naveed Butt and other HT members have an uneasy "truce" with the authorities. As long as they lie low, they are generally left alone, but any suspicion of "activity" and they are liable to be arrested by the police.
[2] According to Shi'ite doctrine, the Imamat continues by heredity in the Prophet's progeny through Ali and Fatima.
| 
Their religion is not obvious from their demeanor or the cut of their clothes, yet it is embedded in the very core of their hearts, and is the driving force behind all their actions.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق