Here is a piece of text uncovered (here and here) by Yassir Latif Hamdani which exposes the duality of Jamaat-e-Islam through the words of its founder, Abul Ala Maududi. After years of sabotaging the creation of Pakistan, denouncing Ali Jinnah as a religious lightweight and decrying democracy as satan’s handiwork, Maududi made an astonishing 180 degree flip and embraced Pakistan, Jinnah and democracy. The question is, did he actually do any of this in good faith or was it all a ploy to further the aims of Jamaat-e-Islam and turn Pakistan into an Islamic state?
Here is an English translation of the 10 Urdu quotations of Maulana Maududi, founder of the Jamaat Islami, quoted above:
THE WORDS OF MAULANA MAUDUDI:
1. “The establishment and birth of Pakistan is equivalent to the birth of a beast.”
2. “Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s place is not on the throne of leadership. He deserves to face trial as a traitor.”
3. “There were three actors in the partition of India. Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s performance proved to be most unsuccessful.”
4. “It is haraam to vote for the Muslim League.”
5. “Muhammad Ali Jinnah is the founder of fool’s paradise.” 6. “Pakistan is a fool’s paradise and an infidel state of Muslims.”
7. “Pakistan is filled with millions of robbers, thieves, murderers, adulterers and uncouth wrongdoers.”
8. “An election campaign is a race of hounds.”
9. “The Muslim League is an unrighteous and immoral party that has made our collective environment filthier than the lavatory.”
10. “The Mohajirs are deserters and cowards, who fought a national battle, but when the time came to pay the price, they took the path of escape.” (Bin Ismail, a PTH visitor)
All throughout the years of anti-British struggle in India, when the idea of independent statehood for “All India” began to gain currency, Abul Ala Maududi the spiritual leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami was a fierce critic of the state of Pakistan, prior to its independence in 1947. He led a campaign to denounce the leaders of the Muslim League for wanting an independent secular state for Muslims rather than an Islamic state. However when it became clear that India was going to be partitioned and Pakistan created, Maududi changed his mind and embraced the idea of a Pakistani state which he had criticised so fiercely. Maududi moved to Pakistan in 1947 and worked to turn it into an Islamic state.
Yassir Latif Hamdani, editor of the Pak Tea House blog has a cracking piece exposing the Machiavellian inconsistencies of Maududi:
What a turn around. Maududi was the most vociferous opponent of Mr. Jinnah and the Pakistan Movement. I reproduce here some of his referenced works here from his “Muslims and the Present Political Turmoil” (Vol.III) First Edition published from Delhi. Jamaat-e-Islami claims that the whole Two Nation Theory project was derived from Maududi’s writings which is completely untrue. Maududi described the idea of Muslim Nationalism as unlikely as a “chaste prostitute”.
Nearly twenty five years later, the Jamaat-e-Islam opposed the creation of an independent Bangladesh and actively collaborated with the Pakistani military’s brutal genocide of the Bangladeshi people in 1971 on Maududi’s reactionary principles. Today the JI are all but rehabilitated into the public arena as a theocratic party which has supposedly accepted democracy. Perversely, this rehabilitation is so complete that the Jamaat have been legitimised as a political party in spite of the fact their leaders have not yet seen justice for their participation in the heinous war crimes of 1971.
Here in the UK, the Islamic Forum Europe (IFE) is an emanation from Jamaat-e-Islami which operates out of East London Mosque. Like their Southasian overlords, IFE leaders profess to have accepted the singular benefits of democracy but are careful to keep their Islamist plans out of the way of public scrutiny. The entryist tactics of the IFE have shown that they are as adept at infiltrating into the Labour party just as they are into the Conservative or the Liberal Democrats.
Do the JI actually ever embrace the ideals of any party they infiltrate, or the principles of democracy they tacitly adopt or indeed the spirit of any nation they inhabit? Or is it, as Maududi showed us, just a strategy to enter the body politic to complete their own medium to long-term projects of establishing an Islamic state with sharia law (with hudud punishment, of course) and all the other Islamist paraphernalia which are universal to any Islamist political group you care to name.