The two statements that have stood out in recent days have been given by Maulana Fazlur Rehman of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F) and Syed Munawar Hassan of Jamaat-e-Islami (JI). Both are the chiefs of their parties which are considered mainstream religio-political groups.

Mainstream?

The JI and JUI-F are considered ‘mainstream’ because, though religious in nature, they incorporate certain political correctness and realities into their agenda – however minimally that may be. This ensures that they remain close enough to the centre of the political spectrum, which is where politically viable options are located when it comes to electoral contests, and right enough to appeal to a particular base. It is a delicate balancing act.

Also, though they have never been the largest parties of the country at any point in time, mainstream religio-political parties were basically the only group representation of the religious right in national institutions such as parliament, where they acted as a sort of political filter for extremist ideology. Groups espousing radical ideology (on both the left and the right) are usually on the fringes and only serve as external pressure groups outside the mainstream. Like them or not, this was a key function in a country where religious sentiment runs higher than most – and that too on whim.

There is no doubt that mainstream religio-political parties have long held ties with the extreme right or left, call on them for support for their political campaigns and protests, and, in many cases, even have members that hold such extreme views. But, historically, that is the extent of such collaboration. There are exceptions, of course, such as the involvement of some mainstream political parties in the sad history of East Pakistan and the provision of sanctuary to al Qaeda leaders post 9/11. But these are usually exceptions, not the norm.  More