The Right Message

As al-Qaeda threatens global reprisals for the death of its leader, Osama bin Laden, the Philippine government, itself battling an al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorist organization south of its border, is warning the nation to be on alert for potential terror attacks. And as Filipino Muslims sympathetic to bin Laden started staging protest rallies in Manila, presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda, has issued an appeal worth emulating everywhere:

“It’s a war against terrorism and a warrior of terrorism is no respecter of persons. Bin Laden should pay for his misdeeds,” presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda told reporters in a briefing. “I appeal to our Muslim brothers and sisters to look at the consequences of bin Laden’s actions and not at his being a Muslim,” he said. “This terrorism affects our country as well and the entire globe. . . They should not base their judgment on his being a Muslim. Bin Laden had inflicted terrible suffering on the world.”

Hear! Hear!

What To Do With Pakistan?

America’s quandary over the role of Pakistani military in providing safe haven for Osama bin Laden revolves around these two ideas: whether Pakistani officials are guilty of complicity in tolerating or helping bin Laden or “were so inept that he lived for years right under their noses.” Embarrassed Pakistani authorities, according to this piece, say it is the latter but that some members of the US Congress are not buying it, putting in jeopardy the $1.3 billion military aid that the US government provides to Pakistan’s anti-terror efforts. Indeed, who are they kidding?

Common sense would have anyone believe that certain Pakistani officials were hiding these terrorists precisely because they’re their bread-and-butter. Why turn them in when they attract US cash? I could just imagine these Pakistani officials pointing those drone strikes away from Abbottabad, chuckling in the process while extending a secret handshake with their resident terrorists, and making America the laughingstock of the Waziristan region.

So why America is agonizing over what to do with Pakistan? If Pakistan is engaged in double-dealing, why continue to deal with it? That seems harsh, and a blanket condemnation of the entire Pakistani government may be adding fuel to the fire. But we have to show anger and demand accountability, at least. How much leverage does Pakistan have over our security interests in the region, anyway? In this crucial war against bin Laden, it was practically a non-player. While its nuclear arsenal is cause for concern, India can deter it by way of a détente agreement, to be underwritten by the international security forces’ air strike capabilities. And why would Pakistan resort to it if it understands that unleashing one’s nuclear capability is tantamount to a national suicide?

So the question to ask of Pakistan is simple: are they with us, or are they against us?

Contradictions in Islamic Banking

What makes Islamic banking unique to its Muslim customers and endemic to the Muslim world, according to its proponents and defenders, is its alternative form of financing that is “more ethical and more equitable” because it is informed by the teachings of the Koran and the Sunna. It offers interest-free transactions on loans and home mortgages as it channels penalties on late payments to religious charities in the form of donations. In this Washington Post article, a Meezan bank officer, Irfan Zulqemain, an MBA degree-holder and who has “a vision of Islam as a socially transformative force,” views interest as a curse: “We don’t treat money as a commodity, which just makes a few people richer and everyone else poorer. Our way generates economic activity and spreads money throughout society.” With religion as its selling point, Islamic banking is rapidly spreading in countries like Pakistan where to be financially successful should also mean to be religiously correct.

According to Prof. Timur Kuran, professor of economics and political science at Duke University, Islamic banking is part of an intellectual tradition called “Islamic economics” that seeks to give the economy an Islamic character. It promotes among other things a form of banking that offers an interest-free alternative to traditional savings accounts and a wealth-redistribution process called zakat -- Islam’s tax on wealth and income -- that would help solve inequality and poverty in society.

In his scholarly and voluminous work on Islamic banking and economic development in the Middle East, Kuran argues, however, that Islamic banking has not made significant achievements because its emphasis on economic morality runs contrary to human nature. He also argues that wealth-redistribution based on zakat has not reduced inequality and that in fact the direction of the distribution of wealth is going away from the poor. He is also worried that charitable-giving only leads to the strengthening of Islamic fundamentalism.

Revisiting Prof. Kuran’s work will help shed light on the Muslim world’s perceptions of Islamic banking. His article on“The Economic Impact of Islamic Fundamentalism (in Martin E. Martyand R. Scott Appleby, eds. Fundamentalisms and the State: Remaking Polities, Economies, and Militance (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 302-341) is especially enlightening as he traces the intellectual and historical traditions of Islamic economic thinking.

Such knowledge is what Naeem Bumey, a Meezan Bank client, needs. During an interview for this Washington Post article, Naeem says, “Most of us don’t have detailed knowledge of what is Islamic or un-Islamic. . .There may be a gray area in how a bank determines its profit, but if the scholars have declared this to be Islamic, then at least you don’t have any doubt.”