By Mahfuzur Rahman
IN recent months, there has been a spate of headlines about activities of Islamist militants all over the country. A veritable redoubt has been discovered in the south of the country, complete with training facilities, explosives, arms and ammunition, and even a moat to make it impregnable. Militant women have been found with jihadi literature in their possession. There have been reports of renewed activities by militant groups that had been driven underground by police action.
As usual, these have raised an alarm. There has been talk of reforming madrasa education. One important minister has talked about bringing the traditional madrasas within the ambit of general education under government supervision. Alarmed at the prospect, madrasa leaders rushed to meet the prime minister to seek her assurance of their continued academic autonomy and, perhaps more significantly, to assure her that they would themselves fight militancy.
And then there has been silence. This is reminiscent of the many earlier episodes of militant activity, its quick condemnation, warnings from the government that such activities would not be tolerated, and finally, a declaration that Islam was a religion of peace and therefore did not sanction violence. In retrospect, the latest noises are as meaningless as the ensuing silence is dangerous.
Look closely at two features of the latest reaction to militancy; the government’s wish (as far as it can be guessed from ministerial pronouncements) to bring madrasa education in line with general education, and the pledge of the leaders of madrasa education to fight militancy. Both are seriously short on details; both obscure great obstacles.
First, there has been talk of introducing “secular” subjects of general education, such as science and mathematics, into the curriculum of madrasa education. But, to start with, the indications are that madrasa leaders will jealously guard against any such move, except perhaps insofar as the change is only peripheral. If the proposed changes were radical, madrasas would not be madrasas. Would they? That has, in fact, been the assertion of these leaders. And they have a point.
But suppose courses in science and mathematics are introduced, will that make a difference? It is highly unlikely that it will. Teaching of elementary science at school level will do nothing to change attitudes among young minds. The only exceptions are the science of evolution, and an area of astrophysics that places man in relation to the unimaginable vastness of the universe. It is hard to imagine that these areas of science will be favourites in a madrasa curriculum.
The crux of the problem of militancy is the closing of the mind that much of madrasa education accomplishes. That brings us to the second reaction to the recent talks about reform; that leaders of madrasas will themselves fight militancy. It is not at all clear how they propose to that.
The only effective way to entice young minds away from militancy is to encourage them to interpret injunctions in the Quran and hadith in the light of circumstances and the state of human knowledge that are vastly different from those a millennium and a half ago. Madrasa leaders must take a lead here. It is highly unlikely that they will.
The more likely scenario is that literalist Islam will dominate the curriculum. The pledge to fight militancy in that case will surely be an empty one. It will simply not be enough to tell the students that Islam is a religion of peace.
Makers of education policy must go far beyond just talking about reform. Mere tinkering will not do. To begin with, they have to enter into a serious dialogue with the leaders of madrasa education, asking them how precisely they wish to fight militancy, given the considerations briefly mentioned here.
It is also essential to see the entire question of reform of madrasa education in the context of the constitutional commitment of the country to establish a truly pluralist society, where all shades of individual preferences are free to thrive. Leaders of madrsas must explain how their thinking fits in that context.
If this looks like something that goes way beyond just education policy, it is because it does. The questions raised by talks of education reform involve far more than that. The sooner this is realised the better. The silence that has fallen after the recent noise about reform portends the danger of the real issues being shoved under the carpet — again.
Mahfuzur Rahman is a former United Nations economist and an occasional contributor to The Daily Star.