Understanding the mind of the South Asian Jihadi - part 1

Zaid Hamid - image courtesy pakteahouse.net

2008 was the year my interest in learning more about extremist and Jihadi ideologies was kindled...

I was watching CNN and saw that they were covering the infamous Mumbai attacks live. The next day I was searching for other media coverage on the attacks on Youtube, and chanced upon on a Pakistani 'news show', what really seemed at best like irresponsible journalism.  One of the participants on the show was the gentleman on the left, Zaid Hamid, with statements and conspiracy theories that seemed so outrageous I was appalled. I decided to watch more of Pakistani television, and have since tried to piece together what I think is in the mind of the South Asian (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) Jihadi. Here's part 1, for I'm sure there's more to come.

You will see a lot of Pakistani television talk shows that discuss/debate topics like 'What is wrong with Pakistan?', 'Kerry-Lugar ke paise lene ke liye hum beygairat qaum nahin hain', 'Pakistan mein jamhuriyat ya kisi aur ki hukumat honi chahiye', etc. A lot of existential questions, a lot of questions that may only appear on an Indian television channel on Independence Day, for example. However, these are weekly affairs on Pakistani television channels, with many hosts and participants just rambling on and on, sometimes using expletives. It definitely is fun to watch, and I have caught a lot of Urdu words along the way too..

Zaid Hamid is a good example to stick to in understanding the Jihadi because he spent a lot of time on TV (many of these archived on Youtube) doing his 'security and geopolitical' shows where he spewed his conspiracy theories against all and sundry. He is seen lesser these days..

In summary, there are a few beliefs that I think the extremist South Asian holds. I say South Asian, because there may be people in India, and most definitely Bangladesh too, that hold some of these beliefs, not necessarily just in Pakistan.

1. India is a Hindu country.
• This is not a good assumption. True, India is predominantly Hindu, 80+%, but most states have healthy minority percentages and religion as such is less a problem in India than are class and other such issues. There is no religious persecution in India, has never been, beyond occasional minor skirmishes. So, when the ignorant Pakistan tries to equate Pakistan's 98% Muslim majority and its air-sucked-out-of-the-atmosphere environment to India's Hindu, but secular peoples and environment, they are quite off the mark. However, you do need to imagine things a certain way to feed the frenzy.
2. The Hindu was 'our slave' for a thousand years.
• Indira Gandhi is rumoured to have said that India's role in liberating Bangladesh was a reply to the Hindus having been slaves of the Muslims for a 1000 years (or words to that effect). I don't know if there is documented evidence of her having said this, but even if there is, I don't think the statement itself is accurate. True, the Delhi sultanate kings ruled large parts of north India, even down to south central India for a long time, and later the Mughals. And during this time, a lot of conversions took place (forced or otherwise, a different topic). It is not as if the downtrodden Muslim was 'ruling' over the Hindu. Other than the ruling classes, the ordinary Muslim was nowhere close to slave owner status. 
• One need only pick out other Pakistani public figures like Nasir Naji or Hassan Nisar who agree with this straightforward fact, something apparently so difficult for the average Pakistani to understand?
3. We suffer from terrorism too.
• True, Pakistan suffers the most from terrorism. It is for this reason one of the most dangerous places on earth now. The problem with this statement though is that this terrorism is the Pakistan state's (and non state actors') own doing. There is a lot of documented evidence of public and overt fund raising for jihad in Kashmir. Pakistan's role during the Soviet-Afghan war in the late eighties, and subsequent Taliban support, diversion of terrorists into India as a central tool of their state policy, etc. is all too well known. That their state's agencies have now lost control of these groups, and see them attacking their own people, is their own doing. As you sow, so shall you reap. The rest of the world is unwilling to listen to Pakistan when it says it suffers from terrorism too. You can hold all the talk shows you want and repeat the victimhood claim, but nobody is going to listen, sorry.
4. Spain hamare haath se chalaa gaya.
• A lot of commentators agree with what I have to say on this matter, so this isn't new from me.
• Much of the Jihadi's ideology comes from a glorification of the 'Muslim' past. A glorification that makes many Pakistanis see Mahmud of Ghazni as their ancestor, rather than as an aggressor. In the same vein, a glorification of the khilafa (the Islamic khalifates, of which the Ottoman empire was the last) is still an ongoing spur for terrorism in many parts.
• Spain was conquered by the Arabs sometimes during the 9th century (or thereabouts) and they held it for about 200 years. The capital of the Arabs in Spain was Cordoba. They were ultimately driven out, and Spain is probably the only Western country that they ever held, even if for a short period. While the Arabs may feel pride in having held Spain (though they were aggressor anyway, much like the British were imperialists later on), the Pakistani has no business in imaging this glory as being their own, merely on the basis of sharing the same religion. 
• India is the only other country (Spain is the other) that ever 'went out of the hands' of Muslim aggressors, and it is for this reason that I think that the Jihadi ideologies views these two countries as prime targets.
• Interestingly, the mosque ('Islamic center') being built near the September 2011 crash site in New York is called Cordoba House, which name hasn't attracted much attention.

There's more to come. Add comments if you think you agree/disagree with me.