Is Bangladesh an Islamic state ?

[showkot]

Is Bangladesh an Islamic State?

Recently Bangladesh government celebrated its 25 years 'independence' from Pakistan (West Pakistan),which was achieved with the help of the Indian government. The Indians also celebrated in New -Delhi, overthe victory of India over Pakistan in 1971. While many may feel the Hindu-Muslim tension and seeBangladesh as a traitor for causing a split in the Muslim unity and allying itself with the Hindus of India.Many would even go further see Bangladesh's role similar to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia's role in the Gulf war.At this point it is more important for us to asses what prosperity and independence has brought of thecountry in the last 25 years rather then to debate the issue of who was right or wrong in 1971. In 25 years ofindependence, Bangladesh has been plagued by wars, violent coups and military dictatorships. But recentlywe saw the election, with nearly three-quarters of eligible voters going to the polls. Sheikh Hasina of AwamiLeague won, whose father (Mujib-ur- Rahman) brought the nation to independence in 1971.

In order for us to understand the present situation of Bangladesh one needs to have a background on the Historyof the subcontinent, in particularly the formation of Pakistan in 1947. Prior to which the British ruled India, butthe second world war left Britain weak, and it had to relinquish India, which was the crown in the Jewel for the British Empire. The international situation had changed and USA became the leading nation, and called forindependence of the colonies and end to direct colonialism. The days of direct colonisation were over, and henceBritain resorted certain politicians to further their plans for this region. The age of neo-colonialism had began.Britain trained and supported these agents to extend her rule over these regions. In particular the Muslim leagueled by Mr Jinnah was one of their most important instruments (see earlier issue of Khilafah Magazine for abackground on Jinnah). Islamic sentiments of the masses were aroused by the Muslim League, promising thepeople that they would establish an Islamic State for the Muslims of India. Emotional slogans were used by the Muslim League leaders to persuade the Muslims that they were working for the cause of Islam. However, thebackground of the leaders and the ideas they carried were far from Islam. Mr Jinnah, the leader of the Muslim League was an Western Educated elite who knew little about Islam. He was more in tune with the ideas of thewest and believed in secularism and democracy. With the direct help of the British, Pakistan was eventuallyestablished, costing the lives of thousands of Muslims. More importantly, the British created a powerful Hindustate, India. The fact that Pakistan was far from an Islamic State was clearly apparent from its conception.

What one has to understand is that the political elite's be it Mr Jinnah, Ayub Khan or Mujibur Rahman had morein common than differences. They all agreed on secularism, democracy and of course nationalism. As such theyhad very little in common with the people of Pakistan and Bangladesh who were Muslims and understood littleor nothing regarding secularism, democracy etc. Like Pakistan was created in 1947 with emotional slogans, sowas the case in the creation of Bangladesh in 1971. In both situations the victims of the tragedy were the Muslimmasses. The secular and westernised politicians were more interested in furthering their own interests thanlooking after the affairs of the people. Like in 1947, it did not take the people long to realise that the eventsof 1971 was yet another betrayal of the masses. From the beginning, under the leadership of the so calledfounding father of Bangladesh Mr Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the people were suffering in various ways. Mr Mujibupheld the four principle of Secularism, Socialism, Democracy and Nationalism, as the way forward forBangladesh. However, these ideas meant little to the people. Whilst the politicians were in affluence the peoplewere denied the basic necessities of life. In 1974 famine struck Bangladesh - Millions Died. The leadership ofMujib was incompetent to solve the problems afflicting the nation. Discontent spread in the country, the failureof Mr Mujibs Secularism, Democracy, Socialism was clearly apparent. Soon Mr Mujib himself was assassinated. Surprisingly, there was little public anger at his elimination. This is especially so, considering that the hero ofthe liberation war was killed so soon after the formation of Bangladesh. Removal of Mujib did not mean an endto the plight and suffering of the people of Bangladesh. When General Ziaur Rahman came to power, theoppression and injustice continued. Ziaur Rahman was no different ideologically from either Mujib or Jinnah. Since as far as Islam is concerned nationalism of any form is Haram. Like Mujib, Zia also faced a violent deathagain in the hands of army officers. The death of Mujib or Zia did not mean an end to the ideas they held, bothleft behind political parties Awami League and Bangladesh Nationalist Party, respectively. To this very day,these two are the most powerful political parties in Bangladesh. There is very little difference in the politicalideas of these parties, both are secular and adopt democracy and capitalism as solution to the problems of thecountry. The death of Zia led to the emergence of another political leader General Ershad, who also came topower and formed a political party, the Jatiyo Party. This too is a secular, nationalist party upholding democracyand capitalism. The Muslims of Bangladesh were faced with a group of political parties who all agreed that itis secularism, capitalism and democracy that can provide solutions. These parties also agreed that Islam shouldbe kept out of politics. Even when these rulers were dead, the people were imposed with leadership from their wives and daughters, who were also incompetent.

The ideas of secularism and democracy has been promoted by only a minority of Bangladeshi's especially thoseholding influential positions in University, the Government and the media. These ideas ofcourse have someeffect on the young generation some of whom are beginning to adopt the western ideas of freedom bringing withit the problems that we so frequently see in the west. It is also leading to the energence of people like TaslimaNasreen who openly wrote books attacking Islam and Muslims. Failing to provide jobs for the people, thosewho run Bangladesh have made prostitution a legal profession. As long as a Prostitute carries a Licence she isallowed her "freedom" to sell her body. Display of womens flesh as part of obeying the western concept offreedom is increasingly appearing in Bangladesh. For example, for the first time under the leadership of KhaledaZia a Bangladeshi women participated in the beauty contest "Miss World". This was hailed by the so calledlovers of Democracy in some Bangladeshi Newspapers as a sign of "progress" in Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasinais continuing with policy of furthering this progress and she had no problem letting Miss Bangladesh participatein the Miss World competition held in India.

The decline in the level of intellectual discussion amongst the government and so-called intellectuals is clearlyevident from the nature of debates that appear in the media. Often these politicians and intellectuals debate onthe issue as to whether people living in Bangladesh are Bengali or Bangladeshi, or should one use the slogan"Bangladesh Zindabad" or "Joy Bangla". The politicians and the so-called intellectuals are divided into twocamps corresponding to the two main political parties, Awami League and the BNP. The latter calls forBangladeshi nationalism (use Bangladesh Zindabad as their slogan) whilst the former calls for BengaliNationalism (and use Joy Bangla as their slogan). Journalists and intellectuals in Bangladesh and in Britain havewritten volumes discussing this "profound" issue as if this would provide the solutions for the people. The issuehas been given so importance that in Universities students have fought each other over these slogans. This trulyepitomises the sad and the low intellectual level afflicting the so called intellectual class in Bangladesh. It is clearthat these secular regimes have not provided any real alternatives to the people in Bangladesh. In 1971 it wasquite easy to unite, because the culprit was the Pakistani government, and hence people united on the basis ofNationalism. Nationalism is no ideology, it does not provide practical solutions for the real problems in society.It does not feed the nation, nor does it unify the people, rather it divides people and creates misery. Now peopletend to unite on the basis of regionalism, which again is mini form of nationalism. The successive governmentshave poured funds into areas of their respective origin, politician have used their position in order to benefitthemselves. One suddenly finds all their relatives are in lucrative positions within the government. These so callednationalist are all hypocrites, you find most of their relations, sons and daughters study and reside abroad. Theydon't have confidence in their own system. The prevalent attitude of most people is the desire to emigrate toEurope, USA, Middle East and even places like Pakistan and India. Increasingly you find that most of theAcademics, professionals, and the likes are emigrating to the west, the brain drain is having a severe impact onthe countries economy. Bangladesh needs to unify its society and this can only be achieved by adopting anideology rather then pushing empty emotional slogans of the secular regimes. The country far from becomingindependent and liberated, it has become more and more dependent over the foreign countries, botheconomically and politically. The secular system over the last 25 years has failed to produce anything with realsubstance in any field, but the likes Taslima Nasrin. It has been a failure in every sense, people suffer fromeconomic depravity, they don't have confidence in their own system, bribery and corruption is a way life, crimeis also on the increase, penetration of western culture is now more then ever before. Bangladesh is not shortof resources that is necessary for establishing a wealthy nation. It is rich in both human and natural resources. Consequently, the failure of Bangladesh can be attributed to its successive leaders and their ideology (which iscapitalism & democracy). Bangladesh is just another little nation state that litters the landscape of the MuslimWorld. Like the other 54 such states, it has its founding fathers, its national holidays, its national heroes, itsnational anthem, its national flag, its national language, its national football team and so on. Whilst they all havethese differences, they have something in common which is far more important than the differences. Thiscommon factor that unites them all is their allegiance to capitalism. Democracy and the UN, and everything thatemanates from them such as preventing the emergence of Islam in the form of an Islamic State. As suchBangladesh is no better or worse than Pakistan or any other Muslim nation state, they are all products of westernideas and conspiracies. Millions of Muslims gave their lives during British rule, during 1947, during 1971hoping for a better life - each time they were betrayed by their leaders. Bangladesh like all other Muslimcountries are victims of democracy, capitalism, socialism and secularism. These ideas have failed in thosecountries where they were invented, what hope is there for their success in Muslim countries. Moreimportantly, since these ideas are contrary to the beliefs of Muslims, their application in Muslim countries willonly lead to contradictions and divisions leading to problems that are so common in countries such asBangladesh. An idealogy is required that will unify the people, an ideology that the people are convinced of -for a Muslim who believes in Islam - can there be any other ideology than Islam. Islam alone that can trulysolve the problems that afflicts not only the Muslim Ummah but mankind in general. The Muslim Ummahurgently needs to re-establish the ISLAMIC STATE that is THE KHILAFAH which will unify all Muslims undera single leadership. It is through such a state can Muslims truly regain their rightful and dignified position.

Recently Bangladesh government celebrated its 25 years 'independence' from Pakistan (West Pakistan), whichwas achieved with the help of the Indian government. The Indians also celebrated in New -Delhi, over the victoryof India over Pakistan in 1971. While many may feel the Hindu-Muslim tension and see Bangladesh as a traitorfor causing a split in the Muslim unity and allying itself with the Hindus of India. Many would even go furthersee Bangladesh's role similar to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia's role in the Gulf war. At this point it is more importantfor us to asses what prosperity and independence has brought of the country in the last 25 years rather then todebate the issue of who was right or wrong in 1971. In 25 years of independence, Bangladesh has been plaguedby wars, violent coups and military dictatorships. But recently we saw the election, with nearly three-quartersof eligible voters going to the polls. Sheikh Hasina of Awami League won, whose father (Mujib-ur- Rahman)brought the nation to independence in 1971.

In order for us to understand the present situation of Bangladesh one needs to have a background on the Historyof the subcontinent, in particularly the formation of Pakistan in 1947. Prior to which the British ruled India, butthe second world war left Britain weak, and it had to relinquish India, which was the crown in the Jewel for theBritish Empire. The international situation had changed and USA became the leading nation, and called forindependence of the colonies and end to direct colonialism. The days of direct colonisation were over, and henceBritain resorted certain politicians to further their plans for this region. The age of neo-colonialism had began.Britain trained and supported these agents to extend her rule over these regions. In particular the Muslim leagueled by Mr Jinnah was one of their most important instruments (see earlier issue of Khilafah Magazine for abackground on Jinnah). Islamic sentiments of the masses were aroused by the Muslim League, promising thepeople that they would establish an Islamic State for the Muslims of India. Emotional slogans were used by theMuslim League leaders to persuade the Muslims that they were working for the cause of Islam. However, thebackground of the leaders and the ideas they carried were far from Islam. Mr Jinnah, the leader of the MuslimLeague was an Western Educated elite who knew little about Islam. He was more in tune with the ideas of thewest and believed in secularism and democracy. With the direct help of the British, Pakistan was eventuallyestablished, costing the lives of thousands of Muslims. More importantly, the British created a powerful Hindustate, India. The fact that Pakistan was far from an Islamic State was clearly apparent from its conception.

The fact that the prevalent ideology, in Pakistan, was secularism and nationalism, the natural consequences ofthese man made ideas were to have an effect on the future of that state. From the onset divisions of various typewas appearing. Needless to say foreign forces hostile to Muslim Unity were eager to widen the divisions withinthe society. When in 1952 Urdu was declared the official state language of Pakistan, nationalists in East Pakistanvoiced their disapproval. Student demonstrations were widespread culminating in the killing of students inDhaka on the 21st February 1952. This enabled a crystallisation of the Nationalist Movement into a politicalmovement which gained strength by publicising actual or imagined injustices by the Pakistanis. Naturally, foreignforces, particularly India openly supported the Nationalist movement (financially, and politically at first , latermilitarily) which was moving towards a complete secession from Pakistan. The political party that was in theforefront of Bangladeshi Nationalism was Awami League under the leadership of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Itwas established in 1949 as the Awami Muslim League but later the word Muslim was dropped in order to attracttheir fellow Hindus. To this day Awami League is known for its open unashamed support for the Hindus, Whenthe Babri Mosque was attacked in India, or when the BJP fanatics kill innocent Muslim women and children,Awami League remained silent and did not condemn the acts at all.

What one has to understand is that the political elite's be it Mr Jinnah, Ayub Khan or Mujibur Rahman hadmore in common than differences. They all agreed on secularism, democracy and of course nationalism. Assuch they had very little in common with the people of Pakistan and Bangladesh who were Muslims andunderstood little or nothing regarding secularism, democracy etc. Like Pakistan was created in 1947 withemotional slogans, so was the case in the creation of Bangladesh in 1971. In both situations the victims ofthe tragedy were the Muslim masses. The secular and westernised politicians were more interested infurthering their own interests than looking after the affairs of the people. Like in 1947, it did not take thepeople long to realise that the events of 1971 was yet another betrayal of the masses. From the beginning,under the leadership of the so called founding father of Bangladesh Mr Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the peoplewere suffering in various ways. Mr Mujib upheld the four principle of Secularism, Socialism, Democracyand Nationalism, as the way forward for Bangladesh. However, these ideas meant little to the people. Whilst the politicians were in affluence the people were denied the basic necessities of life. In 1974 faminestruck Bangladesh - Millions Died. The leadership of Mujib was incompetent to solve the problems afflictingthe nation. Discontent spread in the country, the failure of Mr Mujibs Secularism, Democracy, Socialism wasclearly apparent. Soon Mr Mujib himself was assassinated. Surprisingly, there was little public anger at hiselimination. This is especially so, considering that the hero of the liberation war was killed so soon after theformation of Bangladesh. Removal of Mujib did not mean an end to the plight and suffering of the people ofBangladesh. When General Ziaur Rahman came to power, the oppression and injustice continued. ZiaurRahman was no different ideologically from either Mujib or Jinnah. Since as far as Islam is concernednationalism of any form is Haram. Like Mujib, Zia also faced a violent death again in the hands of armyofficers. The death of Mujib or Zia did not mean an end to the ideas they held, both left behind politicalparties Awami League and Bangladesh Nationalist Party, respectively. To this very day, these two are themost powerful political parties in Bangladesh. There is very little difference in the political ideas of theseparties, both are secular and adopt democracy and capitalism as solution to the problems of the country.

[The_Oshik-kitoe]

Thank you for the rather long. But interesting topic.

Brother Shokit..the answer to your Question is NO. All though we are a Muslim majority of 88.3%, Bangladesh is not an Islamic country with an Islamic state.
After being the majority Muslims we yet, go by the Legal system based on English common law. (Which is 'supposed' to be Christian law!)

Bangladesh is more of a cultural country then Islamic one. And talking of culture, we as Bangladeshis are also confused of our culture as well as our religion!

First Bangladesh can never be an Islamic country unless we understand our true culture, our true traditions and our true faith.

(We will be discussing this on my topic Confusion between Culture and Islam. If you wish please feel free to join in.)

Second our Literacy skills in Bangladesh are vary dim, only people aged from 15 and over can read and write in Bangali, and half them are not aware of the Islamic culture.
And soon as they can say a few words in public, they are forced to join some political group, and are forced away from their studies.
Then these students grow up to be the political leaders of our country and due to their lack of understanding in culture and religion. They destroying our country and prevent it from being an Islamic state.


Please note that: Bangladesh was independent in 1971 making it 29 years of independent in a few months not 25 years.

Brother Shokot..Please give me your opinion on how Bangladesh can be an Islamic state,
Thank you Jazak Allah

The student of life the Oshik-kitoe


------------------


[This message has been edited by The Oshik-kitoe (edited 20 August 2000).]

[Abdur_Rahman]

.

[This message has been edited by Abdur Rahman (edited 21 August 2000).]

[Abdur_Rahman]

I have not read all of your post but most of it seems right.
Bangladesh is a Secular, socialist, capitalist and communist country all in one, The Government has little or nothing to do with Islam.
Bangladesh is not an Islamic Country it never was and I also do not see it being an Islamic country for the forseeable future But I pray to the Almighty that He brings about a leader who resembles the Prophet in everyway so that he may be able to guide the country to the Divine.
We need a revolution a revolution that was shown by the Prophet (Saw). To re-vitalise this revolution or reform call it what you like we need to look at our history and the Islamic movements around the world, from then to this present day.
We need to study each and every one to see what these groups or movements did, their history, how they came about, who went wrong where,and who were right and what they have acheived, who were the enemies, what tacticks and strategies had they used; and then based on these analysis we can build a strong platform to move forward...for the Almighty. However many in the past have started sincerly but slowly either got lost in the worldy materials or were easily brushed away by those who actually orchastrated it in the first place.
Sometimes we get these islamic groups just to supress the real love and zeal for the true Islam from the people.
This isssue is very shaky and thus we need to carefully ponder, analyse and sincerly ask for Allahs guidence because we can easily fall in to many traps laid by the Satan and his families as has history proved many a times...