Abstract:
Over 1.5 billion Muslims inhabit the globe; two thirds of them live in the 57 Muslim
states while the rest live as minorities worldwide. The Muslim world, a generic term for
the collectivity of Muslim states, spreads over large parts of Asia and Africa with a
sprinkling of a few small countries in Europe (Albania, Bosnia, and the newly
independent Kosovo) and Latin America (Surinam and Guyana) too 1 . This huge
diversity, if anything, makes the politics of the Muslim world a bit complex.
Islam, like other Divine religions, has given its followers a collective self-identity by
declaring all the believers as brothers and sisters. The concept of ummah, that is
quintessentially unique to Islam, declares Muslims to be a single nation. Ummah is not
nation in the ethnic or nationalistic sense. The root of this word, Umm means mother or
source, in Arabic. Thus, the believers are treated to be people of the same (ideological)
flock. They have mutual rights and responsibilities, as belonging to the same fraternity.
This concept of Ummah also translates and manifests itself into calls for unity right from
the dawn of Islam up till the present day. Upon his Hijrah (migration) in 622 A.D, the
Prophet laid foundations of the first ever Islamic State which lasted as a political unity for
around one century and a half. This included the last ten last years of Prophet‟s own life
until his death on 3 rd June 632, the era of the first three of (what are called) the Right-
1
The definition of „Muslim State‟ has been adopted from Kettani (1993) that every State that joins the
Organization of the Islamic Cooeration (OIC) self-identifies itself as a Muslim state and hence may be
counted as such. The Muslim world, under this definition, consists of all the member-states of the OIC.
xivguided Caliphs (literally: the Deputy to the Prophet) to whom the political leadership of
the Muslim community had descended; the Ommayyad dynasty (661-750 AD), and
finally, the first ten years of the Abbasid dynasty (r. 750-1258). The exception was the
rule of the fourth Caliph, Hazrat Ali (r. 656-661 A.D), when the then Governor of Syria,
Amir Muawiyah raised the banner of revolt, chipping away the control of half of
Islamdom under his grip. After Ali‟s death, Muawiyah was able to assert his authority
over the whole known-Muslim world of that time which was retained, mainly through
repression and coercion, by the (Omayyad) dynasty he founded. However, within the first
ten years of the successor Abbasid dynasty, this semblance of single command was lost
with the secession of Andalusia (now Spain) and political unity of the Muslim world has
remained elusive ever since, till the present day. The institution of Caliphate has lasted in
one form or the other upto as recently as 3 rd of March 1924, when the last Ottoman
Caliph was deposed. Thus till the first quarter of the twentieth century, in the person of
Caliph--- a rough equivalent of the Roman Catholic Pope--- there was a symbol of
spiritual unity of the Muslim world.
It is no surprise, therefore, that in the four and a half decades that followed, since 1924,
the calls for unity seemed to come with renewed passions. The institution of Caliphate
could not be restored but the Muslim world managed to establish an institution, called the
Organization of the Islamic Conference, in 1969, that augments, reflects and articulates
the interests of the Muslim world on international forums. 2 The OIC alone was deemed
not sufficient for bringing “solidarity” in the Muslim world, so a whole panoply of
2
In 2010, the Charter of the Organization was amended and the name has been changed too as the
Organization of the Islamic Cooperation. But since the dissertation was submitted in 2009 and research
work took place in preceding years, the new name does not appear in the doctoral dissertation.
xvinstitutions were created under its tutelage for the purpose. Interestingly, the word “unity”
does not appear anywhere in the Charter of the OIC in its list of objectives or otherwise,
unlike the founding documents of, say, European Union and the African Union where
unity was the main founding objective. Be that as it may, these institutions and
organizations under the OIC umbrella have had their contribution in bringing the Muslim
world closer in the areas of politics, economics, and culture etc. However, the dream of a
pan-Islamic Union, which has a powerful following among the Muslim masses, has
remained a far cry up till now.
There have been many instances in the history of the world where states have come
together for a march towards a common destiny. United States of America, which started
from 13 states in 1776, has today 50 states in the Union, and is the most powerful country
on earth. The erstwhile Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) was another example
but the structure of repression associated with it could not outlive the demise of the
Communist system. With the end of cold war, the USSR disintegrated and all its 14 in
republics, besides Russia, regained their lost liberty and identity. And here lies the point--
- the main argument of the present dissertation--- that no Union can survive unless it has
the backing of the people. The notion of a “United States of Europe” propounded by
Monnet and Schumann more than half a century ago, despite all the hurdles and
handicaps, continues to move towards an “ever closer Union”. There is no unanimously
agreed or clear sketch or roadmap for a “United States of Islam” as yet. However, the EU
template with a common visa regime, same currency, identical taxation and revenue
structure, free mobility of persons and goods between the nations, etc may serve as a
xvimodel for those aspiring for the unity in the Muslim world. Why have the ideas of
Monnet and Schumann triumphed in Europe and why have similar notions for unity by
the likes of Iqbal and Jamaluddin Afghani failed in the Muslim world, needs further
investigation that the present dissertation aims at delving into.
The phenomenon of a political and economic Union in Europe, unlike that in the world of
Islam, is of fairly recent origin that started from a Coal and Steel Community between
just six nations, in 1951, after the Second World War. It moved on to become a Union
through the Treaty of Maastricht 1992, shortly after the end of cold war. The success of
the European Union, 3 from the ashes of two centuries of warfare in Europe including the
Cold War that divided Europe through an iron curtain for nearly half a century, makes the
failures of the Muslim world/ OIC more evidently, and (at least, for the proponents of
pan-Islamism) somewhat depressingly, comparable.
The European Union started with humble beginnings and modest aims. It expanded on
the wave of freedoms that the people enjoyed and cherished, while keeping religion at
bay from Statecraft. The route to political integration came through cooperation in the
field of energy, and ultimately, economics. The Schumann Declaration of 9 May 1950,
clearly starts with a vision of market as an instrument of freedom which and includes
everything from the movement of goods and services to the exchange of ideas. In the
decades that followed, the rule of law, accountability of rulers through regular elections, a
vibrant free press, equal participation of women in national affairs, all contributed to rule-
3
The doctoral dissertation has been written prior to recent economic turmoil in Ireland, Spain and Greece,
and may be seen in that light
xviibased pan-European governance. Freedom of expression helps governments in avoiding
mistakes where throttling dissent is not in the menu of options. Public participation in
integration process through frequent referendums leads people to own the pan-European
scheme, which in turn garners public enthusiasm for (and sometimes against) and
commitment to, the process of integration.
In contrast, the integration efforts in the Muslim world, under the OIC-framework, started
with grandiose aims trying to rely heavily on religious dogmas, rather than practical
considerations. Religion alone has hardly ever sufficed to forge unity among co-
religionists, in the recorded history, at least. Lack of public participation meant that
instruments of cooperation remained under control of the rulers who rarely represented
the peoples. Of course, there were individual vested interests that tried to mould and
manipulate integration efforts to their ends. This has resulted in a hotch potch of
institutions and policies, with little concrete output from a whole lot of input activities. It
relied heavily on political rhetoric, with a vain hope of translating it into economic unity,
instead of establishing an economic symbiosis first that would have made political
solidarity inevitable.
The focus on politics rather made the OIC an arena for competing aspirants of leadership
in the Muslim world notably, between Iran and Saudi Arabia, but also varyingly serving
the interests of countries like Malaysia, Pakistan, Turkey etc who had claims over
prominence in the comity of Muslim nations. The role of the United States and --- during
the Cold War eta--- that of the Soviet Union did not help the matters either. But this last
xviiifactor was more pronounced in Europe where Cold War divisions denied the EU an
opportunity to expand Eastwards for a long period.
The research is restricted to the first three decades after the genesis of the OIC (i.e. 1970-
2000) and analyses five areas of cooperation in the Muslim world, spear-headed by the
OIC. It is not out of place to mention here that as the dissertation is submitted to the
Department of Pakistan Studies, Pakistan‟s role in these pan Islamic schemes has been
accorded a separate mention in all five areas:
In the domain of political cooperation, the OIC had no permanent institutions such as
the European Commission and the European Parliament. The Muslim world‟s collective
decision making emanates from the OIC‟s twin fundamental organs; the Islamic Summit
Conferences that meet triennially, and the Islamic Conferences of Foreign Ministers
meeting annually, for a few days each. The political coordination has thus been ad hoc
and issue-based, although, in all fairness, it must be accepted that more often than not,
such efforts did show results as in the crises of Bosnia, Afghanistan and South
Philippines etc. In the realm of economic cooperation, there has been significant
improvement in intra-Muslim trade in the three decades under review (1970-2000), but
how far, such increase owes to pan-Islamic sentiments is unclear.
The cooperation in the field of science and technology suffers from lack of scientific
advancement in Muslim countries; they have hardly anything to share with each other.
Another area studied in my work is cultural cooperation in the Muslim countries under
xixthe umbrella of the OIC during the same period ranging from documentation of Islamic
History, organization of intra Islamic sports competitions, coordination in architecture,
calligraphy, and performing arts etc. And finally, military cooperation in the Muslim
world whch sometimes takes the form of intelligence sharing on terrorists or even
political dissidents opposing autocracies in some Muslim countries--- hardly the job of a
professional army. The only real noteworthy coordination was during Bosnian civil war
1992-95 where the Militaries of leading Islamic countries like Turkey, Iran, Saudi
Arabia, Malaysia and Pakistan coordinated their support for Bosnian army.
Relying basically on secondary sources, the dissertation shows that while the efforts
towards cooperation since the inception of OIC and upto 2000 have brought the Muslim
States closer, than would have been the case, had there been no OIC. But that does not
make the Muslim world anywhere nearer to where the EU stood in 2000, in terms of
achieving goals for unity, especially after the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997) and the Treaty
of Nice (2000).
After analyzing the five areas of cooperation in the Muslim world, the dissertation looks
at the history of European integration, especially the main milestones achieved uring the
period under review i.e. 1970-2000 and argues that despite its failings, the EU experience
has been a much greater success with a single parliament, a common market, a common
visa regime, a coordinated foreign and security policy, among many other trappings of a
meaningful Union.
xxMy work delves into the reasons for this disparity in the outcome of two contemporary
integration efforts and concludes that the failure of the Muslim world owes to unrealistic
aims, undue emphasis on theological rationale for unity (as opposed to practical gains for
national interests) and because of the democratic deficit where the citizenry is not
involved into the decision making. It follows that all the endeavors in like direction by
the OIC may remain isolated unconnected events unless the Muslim world embraces the
modern trends towards democracy 4 , rule of law, education, tolerance of free debate and
respect to human rights, including gender equality, as done by the European Union.
Unity in the Muslim world may follow proactive actions towards the fundamental
freedoms and the supremacy of law, rather than precede it. Mere rhetoric and
sloganeering is a road to nowhere! Though not in the purview of the period under study,
it may be said to the OIC‟s credit that, lately, it has done some reorientation of its focus
with a distinctly reformist character. The Charter has been amended substantially in 2008
to include focus on Human Rights and Good Governance. An Independent Permanent
Human Rights Commission (IPHRC) has been established --- the first ever in the Muslim
world on human rights. And what is more important to note is that references to Sharia
have been abandoned altogether in its founding Statutes unlike the Islamic Declaration of
Human Rights (Cairo; 1990), quarter of a century earlier, which referred to Sharia, and
not the universally accepted valued enunciated in the international human rights
instruments and protocols, as the “sole source of reference”. The direction is right but
proof of pudding is in its eating. The IPHRC remained conspicuously inactive during the
4
The research work was done before the present Arab uprising of 2011-12 that has so far swept dictators
from Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen, and the fate of ruling juntas Syria and Bahrain appear doomed.
xxiglaring trample of human rights during the Arab spring in many countries. To be able to
do something for the Muslim peoples, the OIC will have to make itself relevant to them
first!
Saad S. Khan
Doctoral Candidate
18 March 2012