The Conundrum of Acknowledging Religious Radicalism

Ziauddin Choudhury

In 2007 Maulana Fazlullah, leader of a Frontier based militant Islamic organization

known as Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (who later became the leader of
Taliban-e-Pakistan) established a parallel government in about 59 villages of Swat
Valley in Pakistan and introduced Sharia Law. This came not in one fell swoop, but
after a long run in with Pakistan government and its feckless law enforcing agencies
in that part of the country that began with US operations in Afghanistan in 2002.
Maulana Fazlullah, also known as Radio Mullah because of his broadcast over
clandestine radio in the Malakand Agency (where Swat valley is), began propagating
Islamic jihad against Pakistan Government and its allies for establishment of Sharia
Law in Pakistan. His ultimate success in driving out Pakistan government forces form
Swat valley came after years of threats, both oral and real, to the people in the area
who dared oppose him and his armed militants who continued to swell in number.
He would be the supreme leader of the region for close to two years until Pakistan
Army, mainly under pressure from the United States, which was worried that the
rise of another militant group and its sway over the area close to Afghanistan would
stymie its efforts to eradicate the Taliban from Afghanistan.
During Fazlullahs reign in the Swat Valley, he not only drove out the Pakistan law
enforcement forces, but also civilian agencies and established his own laws that he
termed as Sharia inspired laws. Some of the draconian measures he took in the
name of Sharia were closing of cinema halls, DVD shops, banning of music, and
incredibly enough his supporters attacked barbershops for their un-Islamic
practices (because barbers shaved beards). Sufi mystics and dancing girls were
killed and dumped in the city square, and girls were not allowed to go to school.
Fazlullah later issued Fatwa against Malala Yusufzai, the girl who bravely stood up
girls education, and had her shot by his supporters even after he had been ejected
from Swat Valley.
Fazlullahs rise was enabled by a government that ignored the early signs of his
groups growth in part, but largely because of indulgence of radicalism by
succeeding governments of Pakistan by way of coddling of religious leaders,
religious institutions in preference to progressive and liberal institutions, purely for
short term political goals. The government of Ziaul Huq sowed the early seeds of
radicalism through thousands of Madrassas that he helped grow ostensibly to feed
the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan. He and his successors used the products of these
Madrassas later to form the Taliban group who would in future years topple
Afghanistan government and rule there.
The break-up of the Taliban in 2002 by US intervention drove their leaders to the
mountains including North West of Pakistan and lead to formation of a diverse group

of religious militants in Pakistan, including that of Maulana Fazlullah. While the US

was busy eradicating Afghanistan of the Taliban, they and their ilk would find shelter
in Pakistan, more precisely the Pakistan Army which had helped growth of the
original Taliban in the first place.
Maulana Fazlullah and his armed militants thrived because Pakistan Government at
that time was headed by a President (Asif Zardari of Pakistan Peoples Party) who
was busier in defending his Presidency against political foes than defending his
country from religious militants. His government was one of compromise, in
particular with the powerful Pakistan Army, and he dared not take the Army to task
for their seeming unwillingness to tackle the rising religious menace in Swat Valley.
The discussion on Fazlullah and his group is relevant for Bangladesh, not because
there is such a figure on the horizon of Bangladesh, although there was such a
threat some years ago posed by a militant in Northern Bangladesh. It is relevant
because leadership for religious militancy and terrorism does not have to originate
locally. The attraction that Islamic State or its affiliates have on youths inclined to
similar views can come from anywhere. Their proliferation can also happen in many
countries where youths are easily brainwashed or misled from parochial and illiberal
education, biased interpretation of religion and its message, and paranoid ideas
about the world where one is led to believe that their co-religionists are subject to a
world-wide persecution. These ideas are further cemented in a country that has
weak law enforcement, lack of personal security, and absence of good governance.
In such societies a section of youth can be easily deluded to believe that a strong
government can only be enforced through religion and a religion based system.
Anybody who opposes this is an enemy of religion and has to be eliminated.
There has been a string of murders in Dhaka and other places of Bangladesh in last
two years. The victims were people from a cross section; some were writers, some
publishers, some foreign nationals. Quite a few were from the minority section.
There has been no arrest, let alone any conviction in these murders. What we have
instead is speculation about the reasons for these murders from our political leaders
and persons in authority. But more importantly we have assertions of responsibility
for these murders (at least majority of them) from affiliates of radical Islamic groups
that are rooted thousands of miles away from Bangladesh. But strangely these
claims are refuted by our government leaders because admitting these assertions
would be acknowledging presence of militant groups with foreign loyalty in our
midst.
Rise of Fazlullah and his group in Pakistan and the menace they caused to Pakistan
and continue to cause now was possible because of political exigencies.
Bangladesh does not now have any known exigency of the kind Pakistan went
through in the eighties and nineties that contributed to rise of religious radicalism in
that country. What we have here are instances of some horrific murders that till now
have remained unsolved but clandestine groups claiming loyalty to foreign inspired

militant organizations have reportedly owned responsibility for these crimes. There
is no proof of these claims, but the apparent similarity of the victims (they were
either bloggers of liberal thought, writers with secular reputation, or minority
community members), should give hints to our law enforcing agencies that these
murders are not random acts. These may be preplanned and the perpetrators could
be organized militants waiting for an hour to strike.
I do not know when or if at all the perpetrators of these murders will be arraigned.
But what I do know is that a first step to close the gap would be acknowledgment by
our government that these murders are not necessarily shenanigans of political
opposition to embarrass the government. To embarrass the government a political
opposition has many other weapons in their arsenal other than killing bloggers,
writers, and foreign nationals without any rhyme and reason. Let us start from the
assumption that the murders could be the handiwork of a group of fanatics who
want to establish their laws in the country by terrorizing people and anyone who
opposes their belief.