The Past, Present, And Near Future Of Indian Muslim Politics: A Thorough Analysis By Prof. Mushirul Haq - Final Part

By Javed Akhatar, New Age Islam 11July 2023 This is an English translation of Mushirul Haq’s Urdu lecture on “Mazhab aur Hindustani Muslim Siyasat: Kal aur Aaj,” which he delivered in the third Sir Syed Memorial Lecture held at Aligarh Muslim University. Throughout the translation, I have made efforts to faithfully render the text. However, I am not responsible for the statements or opinions expressed therein. This article provides a thorough analysis of the past, present, and near future of Indian Muslim politics, making it an excellent piece. Mushirul Haq’s exceptional essay on Islam and Indian Muslim politics serves as a valuable resource for researchers, students, and general readers seeking to comprehend the ongoing political tumult in India. Here, presented is Part III. VI The Muslims in democratic India found themselves in an unexpected situation. The All India Muslim League, which had been representing Muslim interests, had suddenly disappeared from the scene. The so-called secular Muslim leaders, who had advised Muslims to remain loyal to the government, had either fled to Pakistan or were busy justifying their actions to prove their loyalty. Furthermore, the partition of the country led to bloodshed, indiscriminate killings, and mass migration. As a result, Muslim politics came to a halt temporarily. In 1948, Maulana Azad and the remaining Muslim leaders organized a convention in Lucknow to determine their future course of action. During the convention, it was announced that Muslims would no longer have separate political parties based on religion. This declaration marked a significant departure from their previous political approach. However, the prevailing circumstances were so intense that even the Ulema, who considered politics inseparable from religion, were compelled to exclude religious considerations from the political sphere. The Jamiat Ulema-e Hind, which had been a political platform for Muslim religious leaders, publicly declared that it would henceforth focus only on religious and cultural matters. Moreover, the Jamiat informally allowed its members, despite being opponents of the Indian National Congress, to individually join any non-religious party they desired. Perhaps the reason behind this extraordinary change was the Jamiat’s confidence that Maulana Azad and Jawaharlal Nehru’s presence in the government and the Congress party would ensure that Muslims would not be neglected in the new India. Consequently, there was no perceived need to form a lobby or pressure group within the Congress party to effectively address Muslim issues when necessary. However, it became apparent that besides the Muslim leadership, the concepts of secularism and secular politics were not well understood by the Indian secular leaders at that time. The debate over secularism in the Indian context had been ongoing for a long time, resulting in confusion and ambiguity surrounding the term “secular politics.” Meanwhile, anti-Muslim or non-secular forces remained united, causing Muslims to realize that they needed to rely on themselves to preserve their religious and cultural identity. Moreover, the occurrence of communal clashes and the indifferent behaviour exhibited by the bureaucracy towards the Muslim community once again opened the doors for those individuals who perceived it as their religious duty to advocate for the interests of Islam and Muslims. Over time, even the religious scholars began to recognize that despite all their sacrifices, the Indian Muslims were being deprived of the right to practice their religious convictions in their own homeland, hindering their quest for independence. Consequently, they felt compelled to publicly assert, in the words of Maulana Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi, “that the Muslims’ fervour for freedom from British rule would have waned if they had foreseen that their post-independence lives would not allow them to nurture their religious beliefs.” Over time, the situation prompted the Muslims to reconsider the Lucknow pact of 1948 and devise a specific political plan for potential future actions. Thus, in 1963, several senior leaders from the Congress party, as well as non-political figures, convened at the invitation of Dr. Syed Mehmood. After careful deliberation, they concluded that the Congress could no longer be relied upon to address the issues faced by Muslims. Consequently, they sought to establish connections with non-Congress political parties and leaders who showed willingness to assist the Muslim community. This led to the formal launch of the All India Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat (AIMMM or MMM) in 1963, which took active participation even from the previously hesitant Jamaat-e-Islami in politics. While the Majlis-e-Mushawarat, according to its manifesto, did not identify as a political party, it undeniably had strong ties to politics. It did not offer a constructive framework for Muslim voters. Until then, the Muslim community had been accustomed to casting their votes in favour of the Congress. However, in the 1967 general elections, the Majlis-e-Mushawarat advised Muslims not to vote for Congress candidates, but instead to support non-Congress candidates who promised to champion their cause. This approach was a completely new experiment. With the assistance of the Majlis-e-Mushawarat, a significant number of non-Congress candidates achieved success. However, soon after the election, it became evident that those whom the Majlis-e-Mushawarat claimed influence over regarded themselves as accountable solely to their respective party or to no one at all. The frustrating circumstances led a group within the Majlis-e-Mushawarat, which aimed to protect Muslim interests, to contemplate establishing a separate political party. Consequently, individuals within the Majlis-e-Mushawarat, dissatisfied with the organization’s passive approach and lack of involvement in political affairs, led by the late Abdul Jaleel Faridi, began coming together. As a result, the All India Muslim Majlis party was established in 1968, under the dynamic leadership of Abdul Jaleel. The party entered the electoral arena during the 1969 Uttar Pradesh Assembly election and fielded its own candidates, gaining significant influence as one of the prominent parties. The election results overwhelmingly favoured the Muslim Majlis, suggesting that the party had the potential to become a formidable political force that could not be overlooked. However, the party's success was short-lived, and it eventually faded away. Although it technically still exists, it has become merely a symbolic presence as it no longer operates or holds any significance. However, at the very least, the experiences of Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat and Muslim Majlis instilled courage in the Muslims, prompting them to openly discuss the establishment of their own political parties. Consequently, several parties were formed, including Awami Tanzeem in Bihar, Muslim League, and Adam Sena in Delhi. However, many of these parties emerged and dissolved without much public knowledge. Nonetheless, the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), also known as the League in Kerala, which had primarily operated in Kerala and Madras since independence, expanded its focus to northern India, particularly in the districts of Uttar Pradesh with a sizable Muslim population. Despite limited success thus far, the IUML continues to receive significant support from the Muslim community in the state. The AIMIM (All India Majlis-e Ittehad-ul Muslimeen) is a regional political party located in the state of Telangana, India. Its origins trace back to the British era when it was established as the Majlis-e Ittehad-ul Muslimeen in 1927 in Hyderabad. However, after India gained independence, the party faced a critical turning point where it acquired a negative political reputation, causing people to become fearful even of its mere presence. Its name gradually faded from people's minds. Yet, circumstances took a reverse course, and Sultan Salahuddin Owaisi revitalized the party. Through a series of electoral victories, starting from the city Municipal Corporation and state assembly to the Parliament, he transformed the party into a formidable organization. While its influence remained primarily regional, the AIMIM emerged as a powerful political force with a well-structured cadre, predominantly dominating Muslim-populated areas. As a result, other political parties can no longer afford to ignore the increasing influence and power wielded by the AIMIM. Even Jamiat ul-Ulema, a prominent organization of Islamic scholars, had previously shifted its focus away from politics following the Lucknow convention. However, circumstances gradually pushed them back towards their original political stance. Surprisingly, the party experienced internal strife and divided into two factions, much like other Indian political parties. Maulana Syed Asad Madani was appointed as the president of the original Jamiat ul-Ulema, while Maulana Syed Ahmad Hashmi (who passed away in 2001) and Maulana Waheed-uz Zaman Kairanawi (who passed away in 1995) separated from the Jamiat and formed their own Milli Jamiat ul-Ulema. Maulana Hashmi briefly joined the Bhartiya Lok Dal (Indian People’s Party), deviating from the Congress Party's Muslim-focused policies, but ultimately returned to the Congress Party. Regardless of the outcomes thus far, it is evident that the secular leadership, envisioned by religious leaders immediately after the partition, has failed to materialize. As circumstances have changed, the Muslim community has once again turned their attention towards religious leadership. The Ulema firmly believe that it is their duty to safeguard the religious interests of Muslims. They vigorously oppose any actions that could potentially encroach upon the religious life of Muslims. A notable example of this occurred during the 1977 Delhi Milli Convention, where Muslims from all walks of life gathered to express their religious identity. During this convention, a resolution was passed in support of those who argued that the appointment of commissions, such as the Nathwani Commission investigating alleged atrocities committed by the Bohra community's leader against his dissident followers, amounted to government interference in the religious affairs of a minority group. It may come as a surprise to some that while Pakistan was excluding the Ahmadiyya community from Islam, the Ulema in India were embracing the Bohra community. However, due to the prevailing circumstances, the Muslim leadership felt compelled to align with the chief of the Bohra community. Although opinions may differ on this matter, it is evident that the Ulema are genuinely concerned about fulfilling their responsibilities towards the Muslim community. The present-day Muslim politics differs greatly from what one might have expected after the country gained independence. Today, Muslim leaders and parties, whether involved in politics or non-political organizations, are direct in expressing their desire for proportional representation for Muslims in government services and decision-making bodies. In the past, during the general elections for India's 7th Lok Sabha in January 1980, the Jamiat Ulema-e Hind demanded a 33 percent reservation for Muslims in the police and other security forces. Similarly, the Muslim Majlis-e Mushawarat believed that Muslims should have greater representation in the police and administration. Syed Abdullah Bukhari, the 12th Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid in Delhi, went further and insisted on not only a 20 percent reservation for Muslims in law enforcement and the armed forces but also in the Lok Sabha and the Union Cabinet. To achieve these goals, the Muslim leadership actively explored the possibility of forming electoral alliances with parties willing to address Muslim concerns. It is worth noting how Indian political leaders, regardless of their party affiliations, sought to win the support of religious leaders and Ulema in order to secure Muslim votes. However, the election results have shown that despite the Muslim masses' trust and admiration for the Ulema on significant occasions, they have been independent in their voting choices. For example, in the 1980 general election, Dr. Ishtiyaque Husain Quraishi ran as a candidate on the Janta Party ticket in the Sitapur constituency with the moral support of Maulana Ali Miyan. Maulana Abdul Khaliq competed as a Congress candidate in Saharanpur with the support of Maulana Asad Madani, and Rashid Alavi ran on the Congress ticket in the Amroha constituency with the backing of Maulana Abdullah Bukhari. However, none of them emerged victorious. Although these three constituencies in Uttar Pradesh are considered to have a Muslim majority, the election outcomes revealed the autonomy of Muslim voters. Despite the notion that the Ulema’s influence over the Muslim masses has diminished, the reality suggests otherwise. Apart from political campaigns, people consistently turn to the Ulema for guidance during crucial moments. Even though the government proclaims secularism, it cannot afford to disregard the Ulema and their significance on such occasions. One recent contentious case in India, known as the “Shaah Bano case” or “Shah Bano Begum v. Mohammad Ahmad Khan,” shed light on this matter. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of Shah Bano, an aggrieved divorced Muslim woman, stating that she had the right to alimony not only during the waiting period but also for her entire life or until she remarries. This judgment faced criticism from some Muslims who believed it conflicted with Islamic law, quoting the Qur'an to support their arguments. However, the Supreme Court, considering the Qur'an as the ultimate authority, concluded that there was no conflict between section 125 and Muslim Personal Law regarding the husband’s responsibility to provide maintenance for his divorced wife if she cannot support herself. This ruling sparked a nationwide controversy, with the media amplifying the issue. In response to the growing parliamentary discussions, Ghulam Mohammad Mahmood Banatwala, the general secretary of the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) and the representative of Indian Muslims, presented the “Shariah Bill” in March 1985. The bill aimed to exempt Muslims from the secular law of maintenance. Initially, the Indian government resisted, but eventually convinced Banatwala to withdraw his bill and introduced its own legislation called the Muslim Women's Protection of Rights on Divorce Bill, which was enacted in 1986. According to this law, a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to reasonable and fair provision and maintenance from her former husband. However, the husband's liability to pay maintenance is limited to the iddah period. Today, Muslim politics is confronted not only with the task of safeguarding Muslim Personal Law but also with various new challenges. These include the Babri Masjid dispute, the absence of daily congregational prayer at historical mosques, Friday prayers taking place on public roads, the opposition to the minority status of Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia Millia Islamia University, and the illogical debate over whether the builders of Taj Mahal, Qutub Minar, Jama Masjid of Delhi, and other heritage monuments were medieval emperors and sultans, or if these structures were actually constructed upon the remains of temples and palaces belonging to Hindu kings. It wouldn't be surprising if this list continues to grow in the future. However, our intention here is not to compile an extensive catalogue of issues. Nor do we wish to debate whether the Muslim leadership, which selectively addresses these problems while disregarding others, is beneficial or detrimental to the Muslim community as a whole. The significance of this question itself cannot be understated, and it warrants an explanation. However, it is not directly relevant to the ongoing discussion. Our intention was merely to highlight these concerns in order to understand the type of leadership that exists today for Indian Muslims. It is apparent that the Indian Muslims of today do not respond to such issues, which the Muslim leadership perceives as attacks on their identity, with immediate emotional reactions. Instead, they follow the guidance of their leaders. When instructed, they are willing to make sacrifices and endure hardships in their pursuit of truth. They engage in protests, organize marches, endure injuries, face detentions, and even lose their lives due to bullet wounds, among other things. If someone had predicted this transformation twenty-five or thirty years ago, it would have been dismissed as an unrealistic aspiration. What stands out in this situation is that this protest leadership is predominantly held by religious scholars (Ulema), rather than by secular and modern Muslims who have received a contemporary education. Furthermore, the few Muslim leaders who are not Ulema themselves and play a prominent role in this politics of protest are heavily reliant on the support and backing of the Ulema in order to make any progress. ------ Maulana Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi, Presidential Address (Urdu text), Dini Taʿlim Council, Moradabad Session, June 14, 1969. The IUML was founded in 1948 in Madras, by the remnant Indian Members of the All India Muslim League, led by M Mohammed Ismail. A new party by the name of Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) was thus formed “to advance the interests of Muslims in the Union”. A specified period of time that must elapse before a Muslim widow or divorcee may legitimately re-marry. Part One: Past, Present, And Near Future Of Indian Muslim Politics: A Thorough Analysis By Prof. Mushirul Haq, Part I Part Two: The Past, Present, And Near Future Of Indian Muslim Politics: A Thorough Analysis By Prof. Mushirul Haq - Part II URL: https://newageislam.com/islam-politics/indian-muslim-politics-analysis-mushirul/d/130185 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism