Organization of the Islamic Conference, popularly known as the OIC, was born on September 25, 1969 in response to an arson attack in al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem by a Zionist fanatic. In 40 years the institution has grown to have become “the second largest inter-governmental organization after the United Nations” with 57 member-states. It has extended its activities from the mere holding of conferences of Muslim leaders to covering business, trade and commerce, culture and civilization, economy, education, history, humanitarian activities in member and non-member countries. In a bipolar world, the institution was hardly visible in international politics, but now all major countries maintain direct liaison with the OIC: the clash of civilizations thesis has placed the institution at a very significant position in international politics. But has the institution fulfilled the desired expectations? What was the potential forty years ago? How much of the potentials been accomplished? Are there new potentials? What are the difficulties in accomplishing the full potentials of the association? We shall answer and analyze these questions below.
The OIC declared it would promote “close cooperation and mutual assistance in the economic, scientific, cultural and spiritual fields, inspired by the immortal teachings of Islam.” But this apparent positive desire for cooperation came in response to a negative act –an arson attack on a Muslim place of worship. Does this mean that Huntington was right when he suggested that “enemies are essential” for “people seeking identity?” In this case were Muslims able to come up with the idea of close cooperation only when their one of their most revered place of worship was attacked? The answer is no. Because Muslim desire for unity is based on the Qur’anic guidance which was first achieved under the leadership of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in the 7th century CE. The idea survived till the 20th century through the institution of khilafah until it was abolished in 1923. In 1969 through the establishment of OIC the same desire was revived: the arson event was just an event lending toward this goal. Therefore the establishment of the OIC must not be viewed as against anything; rather it is pro-something.
Although a new international organization composed of newly independent nation-states, the OIC’s potential for cooperative achievement was very high. Among its member states,were capital-rich, labor-scarce countries on the one hand, and manpower-rich, capital-scarce countries on the other. Within the OIC system there are countries such as Brunei, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other gulf countries which are capital-rich, and there are countries such as Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistan and Turkey which have scientifically oriented and trained manpower. Their cooperative ventures could have become a model for development for the rest of the world. But that has not happened.
Expectations and achievements were moderate during the early years of the OIC. Islamic Development Bank (IDB) was founded in order to promote economic development, International Islamic News Agency (IINA) was established in order to enhance information and disseminate accurate news about Islam and Muslims, Statistical, Economic, Social Research and Training Center (SESTRIC) was set up to advance economic cooperation among Muslim countries. Islamic Center for Islamic, History, Art and Culture (IRCICA) was established to encourage and promote Muslim unity. Many more organizations and institutions such as the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Organization (ISESCO) followed throughout 1970s and 1980s.
During the early days of its existence, the OIC played a significant role in the area of conflict resolution. When a conflict broke out between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Jordan in 1970 Saudi Arabia’s King Faisal and Egypt’s President Jamal Abdul Nasir jointly led the OIC and Arab League initiative to resolve the conflict. They successfully brought the conflict to an end. In 1974 OIC was able to resolve the conflict between Pakistan and the newly independent Bangladesh. The OIC leadership also gained the confidence of common Muslims on the issue of the Ramadan War of 1973 against Israel and the successful oil embargo against supporters of Israel in 1974. The OIC adopted numerous resolutions declaring jihad in all fields against Israeli occupation of Palestine and to compel Israel to follow UN resolutions on the issue.
However, soon the OIC began to lose its momentum to shrewd Israeli under-the-table diplomacy. OIC leaders lost public confidence when Egypt broke ranks with the OIC and Arab League to unilaterally establish diplomatic relations with Israel in 1978. The OIC expelled Egypt from the organization in response, but within years it took Egypt back to its fold, without providing any convincing explanation. As a result the OIC lost credibility in the eyes of common Muslims. Also in 1978 the OIC had adopted a resolution not to allow the stationing of foreign troops on their soil, to be used against another member state. But within years some member states broke that commitment. Since then its status has continuously deteriorated. In 1980 when the Iran-Iraq war broke out, the OIC sided with Iraq, and thus lost credibility as a broker for peace between two conflicting member-states. Also a number of OIC member-states allowed the stationing US troops on their soil. OIC resolutions became a laughing stock. Many Muslims began to refer to it as “Oh! I see.”
New opportunities appeared in 2003 when Malaysia became chairman of the organization and in 2004 with the Secretary General coming from Turkey. These were fresh openings because these two countries are the most dynamic, progressive and respected countries among OIC member-states. These two countries had the potential to be the engine for development and unification the way Piedmont and Sardinia were for Italian unification in 19th century Europe. The OIC didn’t need to merge all Muslims under one nation-state and national flag; it could initiate a program similar to the European Union. But no initiative was forthcoming to revive the credibility of the organization. The OIC failed to stand beside victims of natural disasters such as the Tsunami in Ache, Indonesia in 2004, and earthquake victims in Kashmir and Pakistan in 2005, with much needed emergency humanitarian assistance.
Yet again another opening presented itself in 2008, with President Barak Obama’s extension of the olive branch towards the Muslim world. The OIC stands as the most legitimate organization to represent Muslims in this relationship. Although most Muslims believe that the Palestinian question is the main obstacle in this relationship and President Obama has made it issue number two, the Obama offer has provided the OIC with a unique opportunity to express Muslim interests and concerns on international forums. President Obama has made Afghanistan as problem number one in US-Muslim world relationship. Let it be so. For all practical reasons the Obama Administration has also bracketed Pakistan with Afghanistan. That shouldn’t be a problem either. However, when the Administration appointed Richard Holbrooke as the special envoy to handle the issue, it came under pressure from the pro-Indian lobby in Washington to delete Kashmir from Holbrooke’s terms of reference, and it was deleted. The OIC must tell the Obama Administration that if it cares for democracy in Afghanistan, it must also care for democracy in Kashmir. The issue must be decided on the basis of a universal common value – human dignity, not on the basis of ethnicity or nationality. As long as such double standards continue, Taliban and al-Qaeda will be able to continue to recruit fresh manpower to fight not only in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but all over the world. Although military authorities in Pakistan are claiming victory against these forces in Pakistan’s tribal areas, such victory can’t last: the history of the region clearly demonstrates this.
The best way out of this quagmire created by the so-called clash of civilizations thesis is to create an atmosphere of mutual trust between Islamic and Western civilizations. Let US-Muslim world cooperation move beyond controlling the spread of polio. The OIC should come forward and shoulder greater responsibility on the question of Afghanistan. More NATO or US troops to Afghanistan can’t resolve the crisis: in fact, in order to gain the confidence of the Afghan people, NATO troops should be withdrawn from Afghanistan. However, the current situation in Afghanistan is such that international troops can’t be withdrawn immediately. Therefore NATO troops should be replaced by OIC troops. Some OIC countries, particularly Bangladesh and Malaysia, have already gained reputation for their peace-keeping role under the UN flag. The argument that currently the OIC doesn’t have such a mandate is glib, for the creation and implementation of this mandate is just a matter of determination.
OIC troops in Afghanistan will force Taliban and al-Qaeda to find the middle ground because at least on paper they claim to be fighting for an Islamic system of governance. And an Islamic system of governance demands that the Muslims in conflict make peace with justice. Let Muslim intellectuals deliberate and decide how to bring peace in the region. The conflict must be encountered intellectually on the basis of common human, civilizational and Qur’anic values such as amānah (trust), ‘adālah (justice), shūra (consultation). Let these discussions be open and transparent so that common Americans and common Muslims know what is being discussed and whether they conform to fundamental values of Islamic and Western civilizations. In our opinion there is no other alternative to this problem. And a positive role for the OIC in Afghanistan will not only place the organization at the forefront of international politics, it will also enable the OIC to gain confidence and legitimacy among ordinary Muslims.
Abdullah al-Ahsan is Vice-President of the International Movement for a Just World, also Professor of History and Civilization at the International Islamic University Malaysia.
Malaysia.
23 September 2009.