Ashraf Ansari From Greece
IN the aftermath of Indian annexation of Kashmir and assassination of Iran’s General Soleimani, a couple of days back, questions are justifiably being raised regarding usefulness of OIC, Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Original title of the organization was based on the concept of conference but only recently the word “conference” was replaced by the word “cooperation”. It is said that the name was changed on the behest of Pakistan which had stressed for making the OIC vibrant and mutually beneficial.
The Muslim world has been witnessing crisis after crisis, challenge after challenge, disgrace after disgrace but the “Islamic” forum of OIC whether in its original name or the reformed one, did not have any role to coordinate some sort of collective action. And you say cooperation! What does cooperation mean when millions of Kashmiris are reduced to the “Wretched of the Earth” by a Fascist regime of a country, when millions of Rohingya Muslims have been subjected to disgraceful atrocities by another country and when Palestinian people are persistently denied their right to peace and statehood.
No conference under the banner of OIC and no cooperation in its framework has resulted in any concrete action to relieve the oppressed Kashmiris, Rohingyas, and Palestinians. And where was cooperation in the framework of OIC to eliminate ISIS and Al-Qaeda. But then you better visit covenant of OIC. Does it have a mechanism to address real and urgent woes of the oppressed Muslims? And if cooperation means economic or political cooperation, where is such cooperation?
The recent Kuala Lumpur summit was an attempt to fill the void. But at the same time, the summit was not only a manifestation of the dangerous divide among the Muslim world but also it widened the wedge. The summit indirectly highlighted the perception that OIC is a body without a soul, a dead horse.
The movers of the Kuala Lumpur summit could have tried to breathe soul in the OIC with a view to making it an effective representative organization of the Muslim nations. One can appreciate the spirit that was behind the step of changing the name of the OIC to organization of the Islamic cooperation but the abstract spirit was worthless as it did not motivate the organization to reform itself and address real issues faced by the oppressed Muslims in Kashmir, Myanmar and the Middle East.
And if the word “cooperation” in the title of the OIC does not mean cooperation among the Muslim countries to jointly act against misdeeds, the oppressed Muslims are subjected to, in certain parts of the world, how come the organization can claim to be Islamic in any connotation? On one hand, the Muslim countries collectively possess formidable military power and energy resources while on the other hand millions of Muslims are being denied human rights and are rather disgraced in certain countries. The OIC was founded on the premise of “Muslim Ummah”. What does the word Muslim Ummah mean??? Does it not mean that distress of one Muslim is distress of the whole Ummah??? And if you mean anything else by uttering this useless term, then whom are we deceiving? Perhaps only ourselves (as “Muslims”). What else is hypocrisy of greatest magnitude after all!!!
Muslim countries cannot escape shame by looking the other way, when they come across the Kashmiris, Rohingyas or Palestinians being subjected to daily torture and humiliation. The “Muslim” rulers across the world have lost all sense of honour and their moral obligation, it must be for Muslim masses across the globe to give jolts to their governments out of shameless passivity.
On a wishful ending note, there must be an OIC summit to take stock of the situation in the “Muslim world” and formulate a strategy to address common issues faced by the Muslims, especially those being denied the human rights. The Charter of the OIC has to be rewritten to ensure vibrance of the organization. The OIC has to come out of its wraps with inscription “Oh, I see!”
