Devotional affinity, proclivity and propensity for a cause − personal, social or political −forms the cornerstone of all the factors which motivate and inspire a man to scramble for the accomplishment of a cherished objective with enthusiasm and fervour. So devout adherent of a cause is, in fact, a repository of an indwelt intuitional urge to remain wedded and committed to his sacrosanct objective with unshakeable resolve and determination. The splendour of sobriety, probity and propriety of a devout activist ideally glamourizes his demeanour and struggle. His devotional zest and zeal accentuates and glorifies his missionary pursuit of the objective which is so dear to him.
Ostensibly-flamboyant political and religious leaders are basically doctrinists who feel overwhelmed by exuberant and ebullient sentiments of subjective assertion for an altruistic, populistic and egalitarian objective. They are, in fact, idealists who perpetually nurture seemingly romantic and innovative ideas for a change. They remain metaphysically engrossed and absorbed in a process of emotional metamorphosis which fructifies in the form of symbiotic communion of revolutionary ideas and notions. Sheikh Hasan-ul-Banna and Syed Qutub, the doctrinists of Egyptian revivalist Islamic movement Ikhwan-ul-Muslimoon, were passionate proponents of Islamic revivalism and renaissance. They were neither pedantic theorists nor doctrinaire romanticists. They were pragmatists and rationalists who believed that puritan transfiguration and transformation of Muslim society was achievable objective. So their objectivity was aimed at the revival of caliphate (Khalafat).
The accumulative momentum of the Ikhwan movement was an eyesore to the Egyptian self-centred and egotistic rulers who were, in fact, mavericks believing in hedonism, revelry and joie de vivre. Hypocrisy of the haughty rulers conviently facilitated the assassination of Sheikh Hasan-ul-Banna on Feb. 12, 1949. The popular pioneer of the revivalist movement was 43 when bullets of the morally barren and bankrupt rulers pierced through his chest. Sheikh Hasan’s martyrdom imbued his followers with hope and optimism. They remained asserting for their cause with added resolve. Syed Qutub, the author of 24 books (including Tafseer Fee Dalalil Qur’an), was a prominent pillar of his pro-Ikhwan movement. President Jamal Nasir, the dictator averse to the caliphate movement of Ikhwan-ul Muslimoon, connived with his sleazy coterie to facilitate the execution of Syed Qutub who had already undergone untold suffering and hardships during his 11-year detention and confinement. Eventually the 80-year-old Egyptian revivalist movement culminated in the coronation of Mr. Mursi as the democratic revivalist ruler of Islamic Republic of Egypt in 2012. This is how the burgeoning and plethoric revolutionary sentiments of Egyptian doctrinists got materialized; and their sustained struggle was, thus, crowned with success.
It was the monotheistic resolve of Egyptian doctrinists which successfully resisted the onslaught of the dictatorial and totalitarian dispensation there. So, in the dynamics of revivalist resistance of Egypt, monotheistic idealism and conviction played a pivotal and definitive role indeed. Now we understand why the eyes of pensive adherents of revivalism there become glaringly lustrous and glittery when they recite the verse of the Holy Qur’an: “Don’t feel dejected and disheartened; you will certainly emerge victorious if you are momineen (sincere adherents of Islamic faith)” (Surah Al-Imran-139).
Martyrdom of every doctrinist marks the beginning of a change; his martyrdom, in fact, delineates and portrays the preludial and precursory success of his movement. Syed Ahmad Barailvi, who achieved the objective of martyrdom on May 6 – 1831 (Zequa’dah 24, 1246 A.H.) at Balakote was the harbinger of what was christened as Pakistan movement when Muslim League, in its convention at Lahore, passed a resolution on March 23 – 1940 propounding the concept of a separate and sovereign Muslim state. Ten thousand Muslim scholars and clerics, all doctrinists symbolizing and typifying the sentiments of patriotism and monotheistic commitment, were martyred by British colonialists during the revolt of 1857 A.D. Quaid-e-Azam M. A. Jinnah, as an adept revolutionary jurist, adroitly capitalized on the heroic sacrifices of these martyrs to carve out an ideological Muslim state. Bhagat Singh, the revolutionary patriotic doctrinist, was gibbeted on March 23 – 1931 by the British imperialists for no fault of the patriotic warrior except that he was a committed freedom maximalist determined to take on the alien rulers even at the cost of his life. Monotheistic doctrinist and Mujahid Ashfaq Majeed Wani was martyred on March 30 – 1990 by Indian soldiers for no fault of the overzealous and uncompromising Kashmiri freedom zealot except that the 23-year-old revolutionary played a role that was reminiscent of the subjective assertion of 23-year-old freedom votary Bhagat Singh. The two coeval revolutionaries were coequal in patriotic resolve and militant initiative too.
Doctrinist Maqbool Butt, the protomartyr whose patriotism was based on monotheistic subjectivity and khudi, was an ideal guerrilla strategist who, with scientific precision and empirical appraisal, would determine the course of his militant manoeuvre. He literally jolted and unhinged his adversary in 1976 when he re-entered Kashmir valley to reorganize the revolutionary cadres here. Arrogance of the victors and triumphalists of 1971 war, which resulted in the dismemberment of great Pakistan, and abject capitulation of Sheikh Abdullah, the author of Indira-Abdullah accord of 1974, turned out to be a definitive in instigating Maqbool for militant assertion in 1976. Maqbool was arrested and lodged in Tihar jail where he had to languish for eight years in solitary confinement till Feb. 11 – 1984 when he faced the gallows at 7:30 AM morning of Saturday to become proud protomartyr of Kashmir.Maqbool’s presence in Kashmir valley as resilient guerrilla strategist and adventurist proved instrumental in neutralizing the trends of defeatism and escapism. He instilled hope and confidence into the hearts of freedom votaries here. Delhi hawkish rulers were rash and brash in their administrative protrusion when they decided to hang Maqbool. Thus the brinkmanship of impetuous and obstreperous Delhi liege lords proved counterproductive. All the young revolutionaries of Kashmir vowed on Feb. 11- 1984 to requite for the judicial rowdyism and peremtoriness and authoritarianism of Indian system. And July 31 – 1988 was the day one when Kashmiri Mujahideen began to provide every sort of impetus to perfectly indigenous and endogenous insurgency of Kashmir to give a rebuff and rebuttal to Delhi rulers. The upheaval and political cataclysm here forced the free world to take cognizance of the volatile situation, uncertainty and unpredictability that was writ large here. And today Kashmir is a nuclear flashpoint in South Asia.
In a situation when political escapades, reveries and eccentricities of hawks in Indian system are stoking the flames of belligerency, animosity and antagonism between India and Pakistan, Delhi rulers cannot disavow and disclaim the onus of accountability in the comity of nations. And culpability becomes an issue here. Remember that nuclear weapons and missiles of India and Pakistan cannot intimidate, browbeat and cow down the freedom loving people of Kashmir. And ultras would want to add to the vulnerability of India and Pakistan. Indolence, ineptitude, dereliction, imprudence, vapidity and passivity of rulers of India and Pakistan is no answer to the fluid situation. Fluff and mythomania of Indian media vitiates the atmosphere of cordiality. Who will chasten it? Is Salman Khursheed, the foreign minister of India, really serious when he says, “It is not advisable that the two nuclear powers, India and Pakistan, bequeath the legacy of wars to coming generations as shabby bequest”? A pertinent question haunts the mind of every pacifist. Who will solve the Kashmir problem which has already bedeviled and embittered the relations of the two neighbouring countries of South Asia? Indian and Pakistani rulers, while trying to understand the dynamics of resistance in Kashmir, Palestine and Afghanistan with meticulous care and objectivity, should develop, through chemistry of sustained interaction and discourse, a viable system of compulsive political codependency. That is how trends of war can be checkmated and thwarted. And that is a way to fortify mutual trust and understanding which is indispensably paramount as prerequisite for peaceful settlement of Kashmir issue.
Hallucinatory and illusory ambience of peace enforced by your stratocracy in Kashmir is something which the sane and visionary altruists and futurists of India cannot afford to bank on. Very recollection of the sacred blood of six lakh martyrs lying buried in 500 cemeteries of Kashmir makes an average Kashmiri feel agonized and traumatized. His inquisitive eyes are looking for a change and transition from debilitating serfdom to freedom. So Kashmiris should be allowed to exercise their right to self-determination. That is the bottom line in Kashmir tangle.
M. Azam Inqilabi is Patron of JK Mahaz-e-Azadi