By Amir Zia
Thursday, July 03, 2014
The News
The stereotyping and branding of ‘terrorists’ under various religious tags is acting as a two-edged sword – defaming Islam as well as granting a sort of legitimacy to the perpetrators of such acts.
A few years ago, a non-government organisation held a seminar to discuss its research on literature produced by the local militant organisations. The seminar was titled ‘Jihadi media in Pakistan and its impact’. The focus of the research was mainly the outlawed militant groups carrying out acts of terrorism, sabotage, and violence including the sectarian motivated killings across Pakistan.
My humble submission to the select group of participants was: should we be calling the literature produced by militant or terrorist groups ‘jihadi media?’ Aren’t we providing these banned groups the kind of religious legitimacy they crave for given the fact that the concept of jihad remains sacred for all Muslims?
At the same time, isn’t the mainstream local and foreign media guilty of undermining the great religion of Islam by associating its sacred concept of jihad with terrorism? Isn’t it a fact that mainstream Islamic scholars and a vast majority of law abiding, peace loving Muslims – not just in Pakistan, but across the globe – have nothing to with these acts of terror carried out by a handful of extremists and a very small organised minority?
When the research was finally published, it was titled ‘Militants’ media in Pakistan and its impact’. But this hardly changed the fact that both the mainstream national and western media continue to use sacred Islamic terms while reporting, analysing and describing terrorism and violence committed by the non-state actors.
Phrases like ‘jihadists, jihadi organisations, jihadi literature, jihadi activities, and mujahideen’ remain in vogue to describe outlawed groups, terrorists and their acts of terror by the western media as well as Pakistan’s Urdu and English language press.
Leading academics, researchers and writers also do not hesitate in using such phrases in their flawed sense for terrorists, who as a matter of cold-blooded policy target and kill non-combatant civilians – not just people belonging to other faiths, but fellow Muslims too.
On the one hand, this kind of branding from friends and foes alike suits the militant groups as they try to put a stamp of religion on their otherwise political goals. On the other, it tarnishes the image of Islam, which clearly lays down rules of war and conflict that bar its followers from killing non-combatant civilians, attacking or slaughtering people at the places of worship and destroying public and private property. Islamic teachings even do not allow uprooting, burning or cutting down fruitful trees or spoiling cultivated fields and gardens, let alone taking lives of innocent people including women and children.
There is no dearth of meticulously-done research and edicts by leading Islamic scholars, who explain Islam’s rules of war in light of the teachings of the Quran and Sunnah.
In Pakistan’s context, there is a consensus among all the leading Islamic scholars and the mainstream religious parties – from various factions of the Deobandi Jamiat Ulema Islam to that of Ahl-e-Hadith Jamaat-ud Dawah, various Barelvi and Shia organisations and the Jamaat-e-Islami – that raising arms against the state, attacking the security forces, killing civilians or resorting to suicide attacks is forbidden. That is the reason some of the leading Islamic scholars and leaders themselves became the target of these terrorists groups and many others continue to live under constant threat.
However, despite the consensus among religious groups and other mainstream secular political parties that terrorism and violence against fellow Muslims is against the tenets of Islam, militants have been able to sell their flawed narrative using the mainstream media as well as their own publications – and new media.
Militants’ own publications, which include booklets, monthly and weekly magazines, books and pamphlets, are generally directed towards their hardcore followers, sympathisers and new recruits and converts, while new media is being used more for wider propaganda purposes. The worldview propagated in militants’ media is confrontationist, myopic and intolerant as it twists Islamic teachings – by selective and out of context inclusion even of the text of the Quran and Hadith and lacing it with their narrow political or sectarian message to incite violence, terrorism and radicalisation in the society. Their monthly, weekly or daily publications – many of which are easily available even at bookstores and at newspaper stalls from major cities to small towns and villages – can be at best described as propagandist in nature, using the Islamic terms of jihad, mujahid (holy warrior), shaheed (martyr) for their activities and activists. These publications have a high impact on their narrow targeted readership, though in terms of overall reach in society they remain limited.
It is ironic that it was the mainstream national and western media which should get the credit for ‘popularising’ the Islamic concept of jihad in all its narrow sense from New York to Karachi and London to Peshawar during the days of the Afghan resistance against the forces of the former Soviet Union and its backed communist government in Kabul. The United States and all its western and Muslim allied nations stand guilty of exploiting Islam for their political ends – the poisonous fruit of that harvest we are reaping even today.
All through the 1980s and even in the initial years of 1990s, the terms of jihadists, jihad, mujahid, shaheed were used to glorify the violent non-state actors – who served as the proxies of the United States and its allies. Successive Pakistani governments openly patronised many of these extremists groups.
Once the international yardstick of journalism advocated the use of neutral words such as militants for violent non-state actors rather than exalting or vilifying them with defining terms or adjectives. This journalistic practice was overwhelmingly abandoned during the heat of the Afghan war.
However, all these terms, which once had positive connotations in the western media changed to the negative from the mid-1990s when Al-Qaeda and its inspired organisations took on the west. After the Sept 11, 2001 terrorist strikes on the United States, these terms are now overwhelmingly used by the western and the national media for non-state actors who are largely seen as ‘villains’ and ‘terrorists’ by the states and their institutions.
The stereotyping and branding of ‘terrorists’ under various religious tags is acting as a two-edged sword – defaming Islam as well as granting a sort of legitimacy to the perpetrators of such acts.
Today, the mainstream media inadvertently helps associate Islamic concepts with militancy, which is more the result of sloppy journalistic practices that do not take into account the larger impact of the indiscriminate use of words including jihad and jihadists for terrorist groups and their members.
The answer to this predicament in this war of narratives is a conscious effort to not use religiously-loaded terms for militants and violent non-state actors. Media persons, especially in Pakistan, have to revert back to the basic and old tried and tested yardstick of using neutral words for these non-state actors rather than labelling them as the militants wants to be labelled.
This becomes all the more important as the Pakistani armed forces have finally started the much-awaited operation against militants in the North Waziristan – the last safe haven of Al-Qaeda linked and inspired foreign and local militants. The mainstream media can deprive these militants of one of their major shields and blunt their ideological weapon if it stops associating them and their activities with Islamic concepts.
Jihad after all is not just about raising weapons. It is a much higher concept that begins with self-control and acting with moderation and justice – be it in peace or during wartime. In an overwhelming Muslim state like Pakistan, it is only the government that can give a call of jihad and not a group of narrow minded clerics. If extremists are allowed to use and abuse this sacred Islamic concept, each and every one of our neighbourhoods will stand divided not just against the other, but even from within. The media should help the state win this battle of narratives.
Thursday, July 03, 2014
The News
The stereotyping and branding of ‘terrorists’ under various religious tags is acting as a two-edged sword – defaming Islam as well as granting a sort of legitimacy to the perpetrators of such acts.
A few years ago, a non-government organisation held a seminar to discuss its research on literature produced by the local militant organisations. The seminar was titled ‘Jihadi media in Pakistan and its impact’. The focus of the research was mainly the outlawed militant groups carrying out acts of terrorism, sabotage, and violence including the sectarian motivated killings across Pakistan.
My humble submission to the select group of participants was: should we be calling the literature produced by militant or terrorist groups ‘jihadi media?’ Aren’t we providing these banned groups the kind of religious legitimacy they crave for given the fact that the concept of jihad remains sacred for all Muslims?
At the same time, isn’t the mainstream local and foreign media guilty of undermining the great religion of Islam by associating its sacred concept of jihad with terrorism? Isn’t it a fact that mainstream Islamic scholars and a vast majority of law abiding, peace loving Muslims – not just in Pakistan, but across the globe – have nothing to with these acts of terror carried out by a handful of extremists and a very small organised minority?
When the research was finally published, it was titled ‘Militants’ media in Pakistan and its impact’. But this hardly changed the fact that both the mainstream national and western media continue to use sacred Islamic terms while reporting, analysing and describing terrorism and violence committed by the non-state actors.
Phrases like ‘jihadists, jihadi organisations, jihadi literature, jihadi activities, and mujahideen’ remain in vogue to describe outlawed groups, terrorists and their acts of terror by the western media as well as Pakistan’s Urdu and English language press.
Leading academics, researchers and writers also do not hesitate in using such phrases in their flawed sense for terrorists, who as a matter of cold-blooded policy target and kill non-combatant civilians – not just people belonging to other faiths, but fellow Muslims too.
On the one hand, this kind of branding from friends and foes alike suits the militant groups as they try to put a stamp of religion on their otherwise political goals. On the other, it tarnishes the image of Islam, which clearly lays down rules of war and conflict that bar its followers from killing non-combatant civilians, attacking or slaughtering people at the places of worship and destroying public and private property. Islamic teachings even do not allow uprooting, burning or cutting down fruitful trees or spoiling cultivated fields and gardens, let alone taking lives of innocent people including women and children.
There is no dearth of meticulously-done research and edicts by leading Islamic scholars, who explain Islam’s rules of war in light of the teachings of the Quran and Sunnah.
In Pakistan’s context, there is a consensus among all the leading Islamic scholars and the mainstream religious parties – from various factions of the Deobandi Jamiat Ulema Islam to that of Ahl-e-Hadith Jamaat-ud Dawah, various Barelvi and Shia organisations and the Jamaat-e-Islami – that raising arms against the state, attacking the security forces, killing civilians or resorting to suicide attacks is forbidden. That is the reason some of the leading Islamic scholars and leaders themselves became the target of these terrorists groups and many others continue to live under constant threat.
However, despite the consensus among religious groups and other mainstream secular political parties that terrorism and violence against fellow Muslims is against the tenets of Islam, militants have been able to sell their flawed narrative using the mainstream media as well as their own publications – and new media.
Militants’ own publications, which include booklets, monthly and weekly magazines, books and pamphlets, are generally directed towards their hardcore followers, sympathisers and new recruits and converts, while new media is being used more for wider propaganda purposes. The worldview propagated in militants’ media is confrontationist, myopic and intolerant as it twists Islamic teachings – by selective and out of context inclusion even of the text of the Quran and Hadith and lacing it with their narrow political or sectarian message to incite violence, terrorism and radicalisation in the society. Their monthly, weekly or daily publications – many of which are easily available even at bookstores and at newspaper stalls from major cities to small towns and villages – can be at best described as propagandist in nature, using the Islamic terms of jihad, mujahid (holy warrior), shaheed (martyr) for their activities and activists. These publications have a high impact on their narrow targeted readership, though in terms of overall reach in society they remain limited.
It is ironic that it was the mainstream national and western media which should get the credit for ‘popularising’ the Islamic concept of jihad in all its narrow sense from New York to Karachi and London to Peshawar during the days of the Afghan resistance against the forces of the former Soviet Union and its backed communist government in Kabul. The United States and all its western and Muslim allied nations stand guilty of exploiting Islam for their political ends – the poisonous fruit of that harvest we are reaping even today.
All through the 1980s and even in the initial years of 1990s, the terms of jihadists, jihad, mujahid, shaheed were used to glorify the violent non-state actors – who served as the proxies of the United States and its allies. Successive Pakistani governments openly patronised many of these extremists groups.
Once the international yardstick of journalism advocated the use of neutral words such as militants for violent non-state actors rather than exalting or vilifying them with defining terms or adjectives. This journalistic practice was overwhelmingly abandoned during the heat of the Afghan war.
However, all these terms, which once had positive connotations in the western media changed to the negative from the mid-1990s when Al-Qaeda and its inspired organisations took on the west. After the Sept 11, 2001 terrorist strikes on the United States, these terms are now overwhelmingly used by the western and the national media for non-state actors who are largely seen as ‘villains’ and ‘terrorists’ by the states and their institutions.
The stereotyping and branding of ‘terrorists’ under various religious tags is acting as a two-edged sword – defaming Islam as well as granting a sort of legitimacy to the perpetrators of such acts.
Today, the mainstream media inadvertently helps associate Islamic concepts with militancy, which is more the result of sloppy journalistic practices that do not take into account the larger impact of the indiscriminate use of words including jihad and jihadists for terrorist groups and their members.
The answer to this predicament in this war of narratives is a conscious effort to not use religiously-loaded terms for militants and violent non-state actors. Media persons, especially in Pakistan, have to revert back to the basic and old tried and tested yardstick of using neutral words for these non-state actors rather than labelling them as the militants wants to be labelled.
This becomes all the more important as the Pakistani armed forces have finally started the much-awaited operation against militants in the North Waziristan – the last safe haven of Al-Qaeda linked and inspired foreign and local militants. The mainstream media can deprive these militants of one of their major shields and blunt their ideological weapon if it stops associating them and their activities with Islamic concepts.
Jihad after all is not just about raising weapons. It is a much higher concept that begins with self-control and acting with moderation and justice – be it in peace or during wartime. In an overwhelming Muslim state like Pakistan, it is only the government that can give a call of jihad and not a group of narrow minded clerics. If extremists are allowed to use and abuse this sacred Islamic concept, each and every one of our neighbourhoods will stand divided not just against the other, but even from within. The media should help the state win this battle of narratives.
No comments:
Post a Comment