Saudi Arabia’s framework of moderation can help Pakistan’s counter-terrorism initiatives

In August, Saudi Arabia hosted a two-day international conference “Communication and Integration” in Makkah. The conference endorsed the promotion of moderation and tolerance in line with Islamic principles as antidotes against extremism and terrorism. Over 150 leading religious scholars and diplomats from 85 countries, including Pakistan, attended the international event.

Against the backdrop of recent incidents of communal violence by angry mobs and continued attacks of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Daesh-Khorasan, Pakistan can take a leaf out of Riyadh’s moderation framework for its counter-terrorism messaging. Definitely, Pakistan will have to adopt Saudi moderation strategies to its local environment and context for effective working. Riyadh is Islamabad’s time-tested friend and has always helped the country in tough economic situations. Recently, the Saudis have announced an investment of $10 billion to build an oil refinery in Gwadar.

As the custodian of Islam’s two holiest sites, Makkah and Madinah, and the source of its largest foreign remittances, Saudi Arabia has a lot of goodwill both with the Pakistani state and the public. Therefore, if Pakistan takes Saudi assistance in developing its counter-extremist messaging, it can gain public traction. At the same time, Islamabad will have to overcome its economic challenges because moderation and tolerance do not work on empty stomachs.

In the past, counter-extremist frameworks like former President late General Pervez Musharraf’s notion of ‘enlightened moderation’ failed to take off due to Pakistan’s involvement in the US-led war on terror in Afghanistan. During that era, the Pakistani public perceived such policies as part of Western-funded programs to secularize society. Furthermore, the high-level of anti-Americanism in Pakistan undermined the legitimacy and efficacy of counter-extremist strategies.

Likewise, the Pakistan People’s Party-led government’s (2008-2013) initiative of promoting sufi Islam as an 'antidote' to extremism also had a limited appeal for two reasons. First, promoting one religious school of thought as the torch bearer of tolerance in Pakistan’s heterogenous society where multiple denominations of Islam co-exist and practice their faith proved counterproductive. It created more problems than solving the existing ones. Second, it inadvertently empowered outfits like Tehreek-e-Labaik Pakistan (TLP) which added to society’s radicalization instead of countering it. Similarly, under the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz’s government (2013-208), hate speech was banned and the unlawful use of loud speakers was criminalized under the National Action Plan (NAP). However, criminalization of hate speech suppresses intolerant attitudes, but does not change extremist mindsets. In other words, policing intolerance through laws and penalties is not the right answer.

The involvement of Riyadh can also nudge the ulema to play a more proactive role. In Pakistan, the mosque networks are the most effective medium of messaging at the grassroots level.

Abdul Basit Khan

Critically, intolerance is a larger challenge than faith-based militancy and extremism. The latter requires group-centric policy interventions, while the former is a systemic problem where a generational shift is required. Group-centric extremism can be securitized by framing it as a threat to society and the use of physical force can deter militants to an extent. Radicalization, on the contrary, as a social undercurrent can be addressed through serious introspection and soul-searching and hence it requires a more subtle and nuanced approach. In other words, de-radicalizing hardened militants seems easier than moderating a society. If intolerance is pervasive in a society, it fosters conditions that produce individuals which become cannon fodder for militant groups.

In the majority-minority context for inter-faith harmony in Pakistan, the state should act as a neutral arbiter in regulating (adversarial) interactions between different ethnic and faith groups. This notion refers to Christopher Larkin’s governance model of political judicialization which has three elements, two contracting sides constituting a dyad and a dispute resolver, thus making a triad. In times of communal conflicts and sectarian tensions, as long as the state intervenes as a guarantor of dyadic (inter-faith) relations, the chances of violence remain low. On the contrary, when the state becomes partisan (by taking sides) or becomes absent due to apathy or incompetence, the triadic rule-making collapses, negatively affecting inter-communal harmony.

Keeping the above in view, the US withdrawal from Afghanistan can be seen both as a challenge and opportunity for Pakistan. Though terrorism has surged by 73 percent since the US exited Afghanistan, it has also given Pakistan an opportunity to rethink its counter-extremist messaging indigenously under a long-term approach. In re-conceptualizing Pakistan’s counter-extremist messaging, promoting moderation consistent with Islamic principles can be effective and long lasting. Such an approach will be free of the Western shadow and enshrined in religious idiom that a common Pakistani will easily correlate with. In counter-extremist messaging, the medium, the messenger and the language are as important as the message itself.

Potential Saudi assistance to Pakistan for counter-extremism will not only do away with the public misconception that such initiatives indirectly aim to secularize society, but provide it with much-needed legitimacy as well. Despite start-stop efforts, the ulema in Pakistan have not played their optimal role in sustaining counter-extremist messaging. The involvement of Riyadh can also nudge the ulema to play a more proactive role. In Pakistan, the mosque networks are the most effective medium of messaging at the grassroots level. So if the message of moderation is delivered through the mosque pulpits, it will not only have a widespread outreach, but ideological legitimacy as well.

The fight against extremism is a struggle for Pakistan’s heart and soul. Hence, instead of looking for temporary solutions, we should tackle it as a generational challenge under a whole-of-state-and-society approach.

- The author is a Senior Associate Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Singapore. Twitter @basitresearcher.