The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion
The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion |
| Of sectarianism, secularism and power politics Posted: 27 Aug 2013 04:39 PM PDT
A climate of fear and tension appears to be gripping the Muslim world today – not only in the ever-conflicted Middle East, but even here in Malaysia. In recent months we have seen an increasing zeal on the part of the authorities, certain politicians and right-wing groups. The gross overreaction in the handling of issues such as the surau in Johor, the "dog lady" video incident, the use of the word "Allah", and the growing persecution of minorities such as the Chinese, the Christians and the Shias, have revealed uncharacteristic fanaticism. Since when have we become such an intolerant society? The worst part is that most of these sentiments do not assume any rationality. Take the virulent stance against the Shias, for example. During one of the terawih prayers that I attended in the recent Ramadan, a popular cleric had been invited to deliver a tazkirah or sermon. In his sermon, the cleric nonchalantly informed us all that the Shias were not really Muslims, and that they worshipped a different religion altogether. I thought this extreme view was perhaps an isolated one, until I read that the Kedah state government is planning to gazette a fatwa that will effectively treat Shias as deviants. Now, if Shias are deviants and regarded as non-Muslims, why do we invite them every year to participate in our annual Tilawah Al-Quran competition at the Putra World Trade Centre? In fact, since 1961, nine Iranians (read: Shias) have won the men's recital competition. Furthermore, why is Iran accepted as a member of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)? What about the thousands of Iranian students that we are willing to accept as students in our universities every year? Obviously, there is more to it than meets the eye. I believe that this sudden surge of bigotry and hawkish posturing has more to do with local political manoeuvrings than cultural fault-lines. It is no coincidence that certain political leaders have adopted extremely hard-line stances just as their internal party elections loom around the corner. From now until October, I suspect we will see a proliferation of instant Malay-Muslim heroes. The only question is whether a keris will be brandished this time around. In the same vein, a lot of what is interpreted as "sectarian tension" between Sunnis and Shias in the Middle East could also very well be a manifestation of geopolitics and the competition for power and influence, in particular between Iran and Saudi Arabia. After all, as Duke University professor and Iranian exile Mohsen Kadivar astutely commented during his recent visit to Malaysia, the Sunni-Shia divide is 14 centuries old. After 1,400 years, no amount of fighting can change what happened. What happened, happened. Whether it was right or wrong, it happened. That is no longer the issue. Therefore, the conflict manifesting in the Middle East today is not really a quarrel over a historical event, but rather a struggle over influence and power in the region. Seen in this light, the couching of the conflict in sectarian or religious terms is merely a convenient label to justify the actions of the power-hungry. After all, who can argue with God? Secularism as a safeguard against abuse by the state? It is relevant to be aware of how popular opinion and perspectives can be shaped by political agendas, not only in interpreting the dynamics of conflict but also in discussing social and political philosophies such as secularism. This term has become highly contentious in our country, mainly because different communities understand it differently. For the minority non-Muslims, secularism is what they believe to be the foundation of our state – a guarantee of their freedom to express themselves and practise their beliefs without undue interference by the state. However, the majority Malay-Muslims have an altogether different view. They are inherently suspicious of the term and believe it to be antithetical to the Islamic deen, or way of life. This is mainly due to the fact that their understanding of secularism is largely shaped by the Turkish experience of Kemalism and the Iranian experience under the Pahlavi Dynasty. This influence is pervasive because most religious knowledge in Malaysia is derived from post-Islamic Revolution scholars and literature. As such, the thought of secularism brings to mind the trauma of statist governments that suppress religious expression. Now, while the regimes of Atatürk and the Shah can be considered harsh forms of secularism, it must be noted that they were both authoritarian regimes. In contrast, democratic models of secularism are far more moderate, such as that exists in India, Europe and the United States. In effect, secularism is not a definite concept and can take on various manifestations, ranging from the extreme to the liberal, depending on the nature of its implementers. Broadly speaking, secularism in the political context is meant to denote a separation of religion and state. It is not to be confused with the secularisation of society. In fact, far from suppressing or casting aside religion, secularism as a concept of state can arguably provide greater respect for religion. For example, an ideal secular state would respect freedom of religion and ensure that all religions can be practised without state interference and control, and instead be accorded assistance and support from the government. In India, for example, the government has for decades been subsidising the airfare of Muslims going on the Haj pilgrimage. And we are talking about a secular country with a majority Hindu population! Implemented well, a democratic secular state would also protect and allow greater space for discourse on cultural matters. This will allow civil society to flourish and contribute to the enlightenment of the populace. At the same time, cultural decentralisation will also be allowed to take its natural course – something that is relevant to our country. As we know, Malaysia is a federation of states in which Islam, alongside land and local government, is designated as a state matter. As a result, states may and do differ in opinion on various matters in the religion, thus allowing localised context and idiosyncrasies to exist. For example, different states have differing opinions on the legality of practising yoga, the poco-poco dance, smoking and even investing in Amanah Saham unit trusts. Now, whether right or wrong is a matter of opinion, and should ideally be debated by a mature civil society. Unfortunately, this isn't the case in Malaysia. Not only do we have very little room for discourse, we are now seeing things start to go wrong when overzealous officials attempt to implement opinions as laws set in stone and then go on to persecute those who question them as criminals. In short, state capture of sociological identities rarely results in positive outcomes. As we have seen in Malaysia and elsewhere in the world, race and religion are too easily hijacked and abused as tools for political gain and convenience. To avoid this, we need to entrench certain "secular" safeguards in governance, provided they conform to democratic norms, in order to not only protect against state abuse of race and religion, but also to facilitate healthier discourse and development via civil society. The absence of such safeguards will allow room for those in power to impose their will in an arbitrary and self-serving manner. After all, if history has proven anything, it is that whatever the ideological nature of the conflict, be it over race, religion or even class, the underlying pattern of power politics always remains the same. - August 28, 2013. * This is the personal opinion of the columnist. | |
| Menyokong syor debat calon naib presiden Posted: 27 Aug 2013 03:42 PM PDT Shukur mempunyai lebih 30 tahun pengalaman sebagai wartawan dan bekerja dengan pelbagai media. Beliau kini pencen tetapi menjadi pemerhati politik yang tegar. Menjelang Muktamar PAS di Shah Alam November ini, mungkin beberapa tokoh berhasrat untuk bertanding sebagai calon Naib Presiden dalam pemilihan muktamar tersebut. Pada masa ini ada tiga Naib Presiden PAS, iaitu Salahudin Ayub, Datuk Husam Musa dan Datuk Mahfuz Omar. PAS sebenarnya tidak kurang tokoh berwibawa untuk memegang jawatan penting di masa depan baik dari kalangan ulama, professional, veteran, mahupun aktivis masyarakat yang telah menyerlahkan prestasi kerja mereka selama ini. Oleh itu cadangan seorang AJK PAS Pusat, yang juga salah seorang ideolog PAS, Dr Mujahid Yusuf Rawa, supaya diadakan debat terbuka bagi para calon Naib Presiden menjelang Muktamar November ini menarik perhatian saya. Beliau mengutarakan cadangannya ini dalam sebuah forum baru-baru. Ia hanya sebuah cadangan, boleh diterima dan boleh ditolak. Beliau mencadangkan supaya debat terbuka kepada para tokoh yang hendak bertanding sebagai Naib Presiden PAS. Menurutnya, jika di peringkat AJK PAS begitu ramai, maka biarlah hanya di peringkat Naib Presiden kerana beliau melihat ada kemunasabahannya. Menurut Dr Mujahid, mekanisme seperti siapa yang akan menganjurkan debat itu, bagaimana bentuk majlis itu serta saiz majlis debat tersebut dan sebagainya boleh difikirkan kemudianya. Yang penting, katanya, kita bersetuju atau tidak Debat Naib Presiden itu. Baginya, debat seperti ini adalah sihat, memenuhi ciri demokrasi, tidak bertentangan dengan akhlak Islam, malah ia diurus berasaskan etika Islam, justru ia dilakukan dengan mengambil kira sepenuhnya matlamat dan peraturan serta kesan debat itu sendiri. Menurut Dr Mujahid lagi, calon Naib Presiden yang akan mengambil bahagian dalam debat tersebut akan mengemukakan idea, wawasan atau gagasan masing-masing dalam merancang masa depan jika ia dipilih oleh perwakilan. Debat ini tidak akan memberi ruang kepada serangan peribadi, sindiran, pandangan negatif akan sesuatu golongan dan sebagainya. Calon itu, seperti dikatakan oleh Dr Mujahid, akan diukur qualitinya berdasarkan idea dan gagasannya, caranya berinteraksi, tahap intelek dan pemahaman Islamnya, serta kemampuannya berhujah. Debat ini sama sekali tidak menjejaskan perlembagaan dan struktur organisasi parti, malah tidak menjejaskan konsep syura yang ada dalam PAS. Ia hanya sebuah pendekatan yang bertujuan menolong memberi lebihan maklumat kepada para perwakilan untuk memilih calonnya. Memang benar debat ini bermula di Barat, terutama dalam pemilihan Presiden Amerika. Namun hendaknya jangan ada hujah menolaknya hanya semata-mata ia datang dari Barat dan tidak ada dalam sepanjang sejarah Islam. Perlu diingat, debat seperti ini sudahpun dilakukan dalam beberapa Pemilu (Pemilihan Presiden dan Naib Presiden) di Indonesia sejak zaman selepas pemerintahan diktator Soeharto dan pulihnya demokrasi di negara umat Islam terbesar itu. Debat Pemilu itu, di mana yang mengambil bahagian ialah calon Presiden, Naibnya dan pasangan lawannya. Seperti yang pernah saya saksikan sendiri di Jakarta pada Pemilu di tahun 2004 dan tahun 2009, ternyata debat itu sangat damai, segar dan jauh dari serangan peribadi. Tiap calon presiden, naib dan pasangannya mengemukakan idea, gagasan dan bentuk kepimpinan masing-masing. Yang menariknya, debat Pemilu Presiden itu disaksikan oleh Ahli Majlis Ulama Indonesia, Ormas (NGO), tokoh intelektual, ekonomi dan sosial, wartawan dalam dan luar negara. Ini bermakna debat seperti ini direstui oleh para ulama Indonesia dan para tokoh moralis di mana ia menjadi sebahagian dari ciri demokrasi yang begitu segar di Indonesia. Oleh itu saya sangat bersetuju dengan cadangan Dr Mujahid supaya diadakan debat calon Naib Presiden PAS yang akan bertanding dalam pemilihan Muktamar PAS akan datang. Walaupun mungkin majlis debat itu bersaiz kecil atau sederhana tetapi sudah tentu mempunyai makna yang penting bahawa demikian hidupnya demokrasi dan pemikiran terkini PAS. Debat seumpama ini juga mampu memberikan ruang berfikir yang secukupnya kepada para perwakilan muktamar ketika hendak memilih calon Naib Presiden, justru ia bukan saja tahu peribadi seseorang calon itu, tetapi juga lebih jauh idea dan gagasannya, prestasinya dalam parti di masa lalu serta bentuk kepimpinan yang hendak dilakukannya jika dipilih. Debat terbuka ini boleh mengelakkan – jika ada - kempen bisik, kempen melalui SMS, facebook, twitter dan sebagainya. Walaupun rekod yang ada menunjukkan tidak pernah berlaku sebarang kekecohan dalam sepanjang sejarah Muktamar PAS selama ini, tetapi kewajaran mengadakan debat calon Naib Presiden ini masih tetap ada seperti yang saya sebutkan tadi. Kalau begitu tentu ada yang bertanya, mengapa pula hendak diadakan debat sedangkan pemilihan di setiap muktamar tidak ada kekecohan seperti parti politik yang lain? Maka jawapannya ialah, debat ini memberi kesempatan lebih luas untuk para calon mengemukakan idea, gagasan dan bagaimana ia hendak memperkasakan parti sesuai dengan keadaan masa kini. Dalam hubungan ini juga, perwakilan akan benar-benar berpeluang dari segi masa dan sebagainya, untuk memilih tokoh yang paling terbaik dari yang terbaik. Ini tentunya sangat menyegarkan dan demokratik. Dalam masa yang sama, masyarakat umum akan melihat bagaimana PAS diuruskan dengan cara yang amat terkini, terbuka dan begitu demokratik. Ia akan dilihat mendahului parti lain dan bersifat sangat kontemporeri sesuai dengan sifat Islam yang didukung oleh PAS iaitu sentiasa sesuai dengan zaman dan perubahan. Ini sesuai dengan pesan bekas Presiden PAS, Almarhum Ustaz Fadzil Mohd Noor, bahawa, "Perubahan itu seperti air yang mengalir dari bukit ke anak-anak sungai. Ia bersih, jernih dan boleh digunakan. Adapun sesuatu yang tidak berubah atau enggan berubah, ia seperti air yang bertakung, tidak mengalir, ia kotor dan tidak boleh digunakan." Pada pendapat saya, PAS sewajarnya menjadi air yang mengalir dan berubah untuk ia memberi manfaat kepada rakyat. - 28 Ogos, 2013. * Ini adalah pendapat peribadi penulis dan tidak semestinya mewakili pandangan The Malaysian Insider. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from The Malaysian Insider : All To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan