Killings in the desert and the mirage of caliphate

THE name is now all too familiar, so are the violence and brutality associated with it. A caliphate, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, or ISIS, has been proclaimed.  A caliph, with a suitable name borrowed from the first caliph of Islam, has proclaimed himself as head of the Islamic State.  The evocative name of Baghdad of the glorious days of Islam has been duly affixed to the title.

The caliphate has not been coy about its own image. It has turned the desert into a killing field. It has so far beheaded five western hostages and has put up the gruesome acts on show in the social media.  Sweeping down from the heartland of Syria, it has captured vast territories in western and northern Iraq and it has killed thousands: from among the shi'a, the not- so- good sunnis, the Yazidis, and others. It has vowed to pulverise shia cities such as Karbala which it sees as citadels of corrupt Islam.  As in ancient times, captured women have in many cases been forced into servitude and sex. The ISIS has imposed strict shari'a laws (according to its interpretation of them) in the lands conquered. This includes requirements of head-to-toe garments for women made of suitable fabrics that truly conceal the female body as well as stoning to death for adultery. A very recent video of life in the Syrian town of Raqqa, the ISIS capital, shows a man crucified for murder still sprawled over a tall cross, for everyone to see. Public beheadings are flaunted on the social media.

To the jihadists of ISIS, the caliphate is as important as its Islamic substance.  The caliphate is the antithesis of western democracy. In a modern democracy, sovereignty lies with the people; in a caliphate, as the Islamists understand it, sovereignty and authority belong to Allah alone.

There is little doubt, that the idea of a caliphate has proved attractive to many. Thousands from around the world have flocked to fight for ISIS though its main fighting force is still predominantly Arab. The masked man who beheaded James Foley, the journalist, is said to be British Muslim. There are reports suggesting that young Muslims who have joined the ranks of the caliphate's jihadists from Britain and continental Europe number many hundreds, if not thousands.

The fascination with the idea is strange because the historical caliphates have proved far less attractive as role models. Nor is the attraction of the idea limited to the jihadists. Professedly peaceable Islamist groups, including quite a few in our own country, wish for an Islamic state modelled on a caliphate. Apparently, they do not know their history or have forgotten it. One remembers too how, way back in the years following World War I, many Muslim political leaders on the Indian subcontinent went lachrymose over the demise of the moth-eaten Ottoman caliphate.

The question of a caliphate arose immediately after the death of the Prophet (sa) of Islam. The difficulty with it also rose almost simultaneously. Tension arose among his companions over succession. Some from the Ansar, Muslims in Medina who hosted the Meccan immigrants, the Muhajirun, in the latter's dire circumstances, wanted a man from among them to be chosen caliph. Abu Bakr and 'Umar, two of the most prominent companions of the Prophet (sa) prevailed on them to back down. Abu Bakr became the first caliph of Islam. The four caliphs, close companions of the Prophet of Islam and eulogized as the rashedun (the Rightly Guided), ruled for only twenty-nine years. Three out of the four were murdered.

Abu Bakr's two- year rule was crucial in solidifying Islamic rule in Arabia. His rule was marked by fighting against a number of apostate tribes and the conquest of most of Arabia. Muslim victories in fights against apostates ensured that Islam in Arabia had come to stay. 'Umar's ten-year rule further consolidated Islam's power, strengthened Medina's central authority and saw rapid Arab imperial expansion. Conquest brought huge wealth to the conquering Muslims. The result was not entirely salutary to a society long accustomed to poverty and deprivation.

The rest of the history of the four Rightly Guided caliphs is of stupendous significance for the idea of caliphates. 'Umar was assassinated by a Persian former slave. On his deathbed he appointed a six-member Consultative Council tasked with choosing the next caliph. The council included prominent associates of the Prophet (sa), 'Uthman and  'Ali among them. After deliberations that stretched over several days,   'Uthman was chosen, much to the chagrin of 'Ali who nevertheless pledged allegiance to the new caliph. 'Uthman's twelve-year rule saw a further consolidation of Islam's power and extension of the empire. It also saw the beginning of trouble for the caliphate. Opposition to him was brewing. It arose among soldiers in garrison towns sprouting in the conquered territories. There were also serious allegations of nepotism and favouritism on the part of the caliph, especially over appointment of governors. 'Uthman was assassinated after a forty-day seize of his residence. The Caliph's supporters could not save him. For the first time, blood of a Muslim was shed by Muslims.

'Ali assumed the caliphate amidst a serious fraying of the consensus the Consultative Council was supposed to uphold. Two of the stalwarts in the Council, Talhah and al- Zubayr, declared their allegiance to 'Ali after a great deal of prevarication.  The caliphate was marred by the first serious split in the Islamic community.  Mu'awiyah, a strongman appointed governor of Syria by 'Uthman, openly defied 'Ali and refused to concede to the new caliph's demand that he give up the governorship. Some of other gubernatorial nominees of the caliph faced opposition in places they were supposed to govern. An acute feeling of insecurity led 'Ali to relocate his capital to Kufah, far from the cradle of Islam in Medina.       

The Koran considered fitna, meaning variously tumult and oppression, as well as civil strife, as something worse than slaughter (2: 217). Yet that was exactly what was happening at the time of one of the caliphs. 'Ali's short five-year caliphate saw the first serious fitna, in Islam. Among his prominent opponents were 'A'ishah, the Prophet (sa)'s  favourite wife, and Talhah and al-Zubayr, who found in her a valiant adversary of 'Ali. In a battle known as the Battle of the Camel, fought near Basrah, both Talhah and al-Zubair were killed. The battle itself was brought to a quick end by 'Ali disabling 'A'ishah's camel, which signaled loss of leadership to her forces. 'Ali treated the Prophet's wife with great respect nonetheless. A larger battle was fought at Siffin, near the city of Raqqa, the capital of the present-day ISIS, between the forces of Ali and Mu'awiyah. The caliph appeared to have the upper hand and Mu'awiyah avoided defeat and destruction by a ruse and called for arbitration to settle their dispute. 'Ali accepted arbitration.

A new dimension was soon added to the fitna: further dissent arose soon. As described by al-Tabari, some of 'Ali's followers who had earlier supported arbitration (which 'Ali had at first been opposing) now changed their mind and considered arbitration a sin, because authority to arbitrate lay with Allah, not with any human being. To 'Ali an agreement had to be honoured and he therefore stuck to arbitration. The challenge to 'Ali was vociferous and increasingly menacing. The protagonists of this idea withdrew their support from the caliph, earning for themselves the nomenclature of the khawarij, or the khwarejite, those who withdrew. Conflict between the two factions, each calling the other sinners and rebels against Allah, became inevitable. Each side was calling for jihad on the other, even though both were Muslim. In their short insurgency, they excelled in brutality. The final battle, fought on the bank of a canal, resulted in a great slaughter of the khawarij.     

The khawarij were not eliminated. However, soon three of the dissenters conspired to kill simultaneously both Ali and Mu'awiyah as well as Amr b. al- 'Ās, a close collaborator of Mu'awiyah's.  In the end it was 'Ali alone who was killed.  After a short rule by al- Hasan, 'Ali's son, the caliphate passed on to Mu'awiyah, son of Abi Sufyan, an arch antagonist of Prophet Muhammad (sa) till his conversion to Islam shortly before the latter's death. The much cherished consensus to choose a caliph vanished. A  long series of caliphs  ̶  some pious, a few patrons of intellectual inquiry, others debauched, and yet others indifferent  ̶  from the Umayyad and Abbasid, chose themselves, often after bloodbaths, till the Mongols put an end to the Baghdad caliphate in the thirteenth century.                 

The ISIS is apparently pursuing the mirage of the caliphate of the Rightly Guided caliphs.  In its literalist interpretation of Islam, it is like the khawarij. It certainly looks like them in extreme brutality. One can be reasonably sure it will be defeated and destroyed sooner or later. Perhaps it will split or self-destruct. Its seventh century mindset will see to that. Meanwhile other advocates of a caliphate must pause and ponder. It is quite unlikely, though, that the masked killers in the Syrian deserts will.

The writer is a former United Nations economist and author.