The Islamic State (IS) caliph’s recent remarks about the knowledge, competence and credentials of Mullah Omar, the Taliban’s caliph, have not merely spawned the strange scenario of two contending caliphs muddling the most flaunted Muslim concept of a single unrivalled Caliphate but are also feared to be fuelling fresh turf wars among terrorists trampling various regions. Baghdadi’s tirade actually came just as the Taliban announced their new spring offensive against the Afghan army and remnants of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). Surfacing almost simultaneously came the claim from Baghdadi’s IS of causing about 35 deaths in Afghanistan. The battles between Baghdadi’s brigades and the Taliban as well as their onslaught against the Afghan-ISAF alliance just at the juncture of the impending ISAF exit could aggravate the havoc already wrought there. Some other jihadi bands in other regions similarly could raise their own caliphs, multiplying the regional caliphates and conflicts, and exposing the utter impracticality of the concept of a single caliphate. These confrontations could eventually implode the entire caliphate adventure like the failure of many other frenzied faith feuds that, despite the devastation wrought by them, faded into the morgue of history. The futility of the medieval, European sectarian wars to revive Christian glory, for instance, could be an apt reminder.
The horrors of caliphate contentions similarly could also stir a wider disillusion and disenchantment against these tactics for caliphates. As a result, the stark realities and impracticalities of the caliphate, already evidenced by increasing Arab nationalism and rebellions against the Ottoman Caliphate forcing the Turks into abolition, will once again be laid bare. Even some of the most ardent enthusiasts of the caliphate, consequently may be forced to accept that the caliphate or any kindred system of governance, foisted through force and coercion, and without the explicit consent and approval of the governed, ascertained through a patently transparent and trusted process, is able to cause perpetual terror and turmoil. The possibility to perpetuate the exclusive rule of any particular faith or sect thus has become long redundant. Accepting the diversity of faiths, cultures, concepts, interests and aspirations of every stakeholder in society is the only possible path for a lasting peace, stability, progress and pervasive fulfillment.
This path, as proved by cumulated wisdom and experience, can only be attained through democratic dispensations and realistic minds, accordingly, have now inexorably moved towards this system. Yet the caliphate fiends believe it to be dictated by divine will and hence infallible and superior to all systems evolved through human wisdom and experience. They, unfortunately, even ignore the most incontrovertible evidence that human beings always differ in the interpretation and implementation of divine will. The caliphate in Muslim history also soon became controversial, splintering followers into the Sunni and Shia sects. It became mostly a Sunni preserve alienating the Shia swaths and morphed into the monarchies maintained invariably through inheritance, contravening evidently its core concepts and standards. Originally, the concept indeed involved some consent, at least of the influential elite and the potentates, and can be assumed as the rudimentary form of a democratic system. However, it lasted merely for an ephemeral span of the perceived virtuous rule. Gradually, it became almost titular as the Muslim dynasties in Spain, Egypt, India, Afghanistan and other regions ruled independently, eliciting a mere nominal reverence and some occasional presents for the caliph.
The militants currently flaunting the caliphate, however, have now turned it into an antithesis of democracy, which they denounce as a system of infidels. They insist on imposing their version of religion as the sole instrument of state and society, mandating it as a binding force for humanity transcending racial, regional, tribal, domestic and cultural aspirations, compulsions and affinities. Such idealistic assertions, however, have been repeatedly refuted by historic realities. The gory feuds plaguing the fourth caliphate, like the Battle of Jamal, were certainly evident, embryonic signs. Religion similarly could not furnish a sufficient cementing force to sustain even a nominal caliphate by keeping the Arabs even in a looser confederation with the Turks. The caliphate declared by the Sharif of Mecca similarly foundered. So, it could not even unite the Arabs as they are still fragmented into over 23 countries and territories. Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, the discord, divisions, duels and the scourge in Syria and Yemen, Egypt, Libya and Lebanon, and the strife and uncertainty stalking Saudi Arabia inexorably demonstrate that religion has failed to forge unity even among the Arab lands. Away from the Arabs, the fighting between Iraq and Iran, and the turmoil that tore East Pakistan from its western wing could not be prevented by the bonds of faith.
The failure of religion to be a binding force has been even more phenomenal among the ranks of its most ardent followers. Pakistan, for instance, has over 200 different religious parties, all parroting the same mission. The militants fighting to unite the entire Muslim world under one caliphate are also equally fractured. The Taliban trampling the northern territories in Pakistan, for example, were known to be a conglomerate of over 40 groups. Yet about a dozen more sprouted when a dialogue with the Nawaz Sharif government was being carried out. These disparate bands evidently cannot unite the whole Muslim world when they cannot unite even among themselves. The most devastating wars in European countries likewise were waged among the followers of the same Christian faith. The clash between the two most towering titans of the caliphate has once again demonstrated the futility of the forced caliphate in forging unity among Muslims in the present world.
Democracy, in contrast, has demonstrated that it can unite nations, countries and territories that, for thousands of years, were ruthlessly ravaged by religious wars, craze for conquests, colonisation, commercial rivalries and bouts of ethnic and racial superiority. The emergence of the European Union is an apt and irrefutable achievement, showing how 28 different countries are evolving into a larger, single community. The contrast between the endless carnage and conflagrations by militant Islamists and the curative course of democracy is again an evident illustration for minds with militant streaks, strands and sympathies. Democracy, which in a way may be interpreted as the modern equivalent of the Islamic exemplar of tolerance, equality and pluralism — if sincerely embraced and implemented — could indeed also reprise a larger elected caliphate of Muslim countries.
The writer is an academic and freelance columnist. He may be contacted at [email protected]