The “Sharia (Islamic law) Friday” has introduced a new Islamic movement that will make the civil forces regret the unexploited opportunity for dialogue with moderate groups such as the “Brotherhood” and the Salafist “Nour” Party. The civil forces are placing themselves in front of an extremist group that will not accept a constitution that would be less than the Sharia itself.
Few months earlier, these forces came up with the “Kandahar Friday” appellation. Back then, we could not differentiate between Salafist and the Muslim Brotherhood. They all looked as one movement.
The Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists did not participate in the “Shariaa Friday”, however we have seen that the “Tahrir Square” was unexpectedly overcrowded. We have heard Sheikh Hazem Salah Abu Ismail delivering his speech from the stage, praising the “Kandahar” term and threatening of many other “Kandahars”.
We are facing a “Kandahari” movement that can quickly and smoothly rally people on the grounds of the sensitivity of the community regarding all the religious issues and since it is anxious about the liberals and secularists; this movement is increasing with the mounting controversy which is roused by the political Islam scarecrows.
It is very easy to provoke the emotions of the Muslim countries where this movement represents a majority, as if they are saying that there are modern alternatives for power, other than the Islamic law. They are also saying that the religion is valid only to worship God and not to manage the daily life.
95% of the Egyptian society has a “Kandahari” spirit and it is wrong to provoke it when giving tribute to the liberal heritage of the past two centuries: the iron curtains in the former Soviet Union and the communist bloc countries did not succeed in extinguishing the flame of the Muslims’ nostalgia towards their religion. Bosnia and Herzegovina still had a “Kandahari” spirit, despite the richness of its Muslim community during the Yugoslavian era.
When I met President Ali Ezzat Begovich in Sarajevo, in the early days of the Bosnian war, I shared with him an opinion piece I had read earlier written by professor Fahmi Hueidi and stating that the independence of Islamic Republics such as Bosnia and Herzegovina from the Federal republic of Yugoslavia would lead to massacres on their territory. He did not like what he heard and he showed the book of Sayyid Qutb, Ma'alim fi'l-tareeq or Milestones, saying he had kept it under his bed during his imprisonment years under Tito, adding that this book led previously to his detention. He revealed at that moment his belonging to the Qutbism that can be compared in our case to the Salafist Kandahari Movement.
The Egyptian is a close model, although Bosnia might be superior since it was affected by Europe, however, this did not change people’s religious feelings. Women used to carry guns to defend their Islamic entities, despite knowing that this might change the rules of comprehensive equality by which they were raised.
Maybe “civilians” can realize that it is better to agree with the moderate Islamic movement because the Kandahari movement is crawling behind them!