India's quest for OIC observer status

The POST, Sun, May,14, 2006.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema


In a recent report on political issue, the incumbent Secretary General Prof. Ekmelddin Ihsanoglu has linked the development of positive relations with India to a just settlement of the Kashmir dispute. The report was placed before OIC’s body of senior officials meeting which began on 7^th May at Jeddah. It was stressed that as long as the tension between India and Pakistan persists over the unsettled nature of the Kashmir dispute, the development of good relations between the OIC and India would continue to remain a far cry.

The above mentioned linkage has been welcomed by many. Some even went to the extent of expressing hope that this linkage would be noticed by the United Nations, Non-Aligned Movement, the European Union, the British and the American governments, and many Kashmiri organizations. Many Kashmiri organizations even expressed optimism that the international community would not just take a note of this linkage but would also play an active role in ending the traumatic human rights situation in the Indian Held Kashmir. Many stressed that the influential members of the international community would make efforts and exert moral and diplomatic pressure on India to make the ongoing peace process meaningful and productive.

The OIC stressed that it has consistently extended its support to the Kashmiri people and their just cause. The OIC’s Contact Group on the Kashmir dispute has continued to convene its meetings alongside the OIC conferences rather regularly. Welcoming the reduction of tension between India and Pakistan and introduction of many confidence building measures, the OIC hopes that the ongoing peace process would impact positively on this chronic issue.

Since its establishment in 1969, the OIC has not lived up to the expectations of its members. It was not able to fulfill the dreams of Muslims whose unbridled yearning for unity and one voice reflecting desire of the members often experienced rebuffs after rebuffs. At times it demonstrated total chaos and disunity generating the impression that OIC is nothing more than a debating club. While the problems confronting the Islamic world continued mounting, the efforts to deal with them satisfactorily remained extremely disappointing.

The post 9/11 has given birth to many new problems and also complicated the existing difficulties.  Among new dangerous developments that need to be carefully assessed include terrorism and the concerted efforts to promote a distorted image of Islam. There exists no satisfactory definition of terrorism. Everybody seems to be engaged in defining terrorism in such way that it excludes the adverse trends and developments in one’s own country but can be applied to other specifically the adversaries.

Perhaps the most important issue that has emerged in recent times is the distortion of the true message of Islam. Despite the efforts of the many Muslims to convey the real and true message of Islam, many continue to believe in the twisted interpretations of Islam either because of their inbuilt hatred for Islam or the prevalent environment appears to be more conducive for the advancement of their interest which also requires maligning Islam. Obviously such pursuits are usually undertaken by those who may claim to be religious but in real terms are the ruthless exploiters of their own religion for ulterior purposes.

Not only the Muslims are subjected to discrimination in the West but concerted efforts are also being made to equate terrorism with Islamic world. The freedom struggles that are being waged by the Muslims in different parts of the world are being projected as the terrorist movements. Narrow, rigid and distorted interpretations of Islam are meticulously promoted for ulterior and parochial ends. Islam does not preach or promote extremism and violence. Islam means peace. But to engage in a struggle to secure one’s legitimate rights does not mean terrorism.

The extraordinary summit of the OIC that was held at Mecca on 7-8 December, 2005 and adopted what is known as Mecca Declaration. Undoubtedly the declaration reflects future roadmap for the Ummah. Stressing the need for unity, the Mecca Declaration clearly sought the help of experts in reinforcing the desired unity among the Muslims. The summit extended full support for the Kashmir cause and stressed that the Kashmiri people be allowed to exercise their right to decide their future. In this connection the member states also called upon the involved parties to respect human rights. Undoubtedly this appeared to reflect the continuing wish of many members of the OIC as most of them recognize the fact that it is unlikely to be secured as long as India refuses to acknowledge such blatant human rights violations.

Indeed this has been and still continues to be part of the OIC’s idealism. Unless and until a collective action is envisaged if India does not stop the ongoing human rights violations, the situation is unlikely to improve. It has been repeatedly proven over and over again that India merely pays lip service to all promises made for the stoppage of human rights violations. Perhaps the announced linkage could clearly communicate to the Indian decision makers that time has come to make concerted efforts towards securing a just solution of the Kashmir dispute and the linkage reflects the feelings of most members if not all.

Indian quest to be associated with the OIC began right from the beginning when the first Summit was arranged at Rabat after the burning of Al Aqsa mosque and the OIC came into existence. At the time of Rabat Summit in 1969 India put forward its case for membership on the grounds that it has a very large Muslim population. Pakistan opposed the Indian attempts and argued that neither India was an Islamic country nor it had impressive record of treatment accorded to its Muslim population. On the contrary it had been treating the Indian Muslim rather ruthlessly. Since then the Indian record with regard to its Muslim population has not all that substantively improved.

However what needs to be mentioned here that the OIC has given the status of an observer to many non-Muslim countries over the years. Admittedly the Charter stipulates that only the Muslim countries willing to promote the objectives of the organization were eligible for membership but many non-Muslim countries have secured the observer status and even the full membership of the OUIC. Therefore it can be argued that countries like India should also be considered for such a status. But on the other hand Indian policy pursuits in Kashmir, frequent occurrences of communal riots and killing of the Muslims, and its attitude towards the OIC Contact Group makes it difficult to subject Indian application to serious considerations.

The linkage that has been recently announced in a report by the incumbent Secretary General of the OIC makes it quite clear that unless the just settlement of the ongoing Kashmir dispute, India should not expect positive relationship with OIC. While one cannot deny the fact that India has more than 150 million Muslims and they deserve to be represented in an organization like the OIC, the Indian policy pursuits especially in Kashmir and it non-cooperative attitude are unlikely to be overlooked. Besides, the well acknowledged criterion of Muslim majority and the non existence of an active dispute with a Muslim country also tend to take a heavy toll of Indian quest for observer status.  Indeed this specific linkage would dampen the hopes of the Indians and satisfy many Kashmiri people and their sympathizers. However this does not mean that India would cease it efforts to secure the desired status as it is well aware of the fact that many members of OIC are sympathetically inclined to its overtures.

The writer works for Islamabad Policy Research Institute.