Learning the Right Lessons

It is often argued that religion must be kept out of politics and state administration, perhaps because people do exploit religious sentiments for personal gains and create a wedge in society. If this is the reason, then the proponents of keeping religion out of politics and state have a sound argument.  

However, I look at religion from a different perspective. The state and politics can learn a lot from religious teachings in fair administration and dispensation of justice for the well-being of people.

This article is aimed at highlighting the significance of religious teachings and historical illustrations for learning the right lessons and correcting the course of any state that is being affected by polarisation and is plagued with societal ills. In fact, religion, as defined is ‘human beings’ relation to that which they regard as holy, sacred, absolute, spiritual, divine, or worthy of especial reverence. It is also commonly regarded as consisting of the way people deal with ultimate concerns about their lives and their fate after death.’ Therefore, societal matters can best be addressed through religious teachings, without seeing the latter as interfering with state affairs.   

I have written this earlier also that the Holy Quran encompasses in its contents the doctrinal elements, policy ingredients, strategic thinking, as well as tactical considerations on various aspects of life: personal, family, society, state, and the universe. Therefore, learning from Quranic teachings to address societal ills cannot be seen as dragging religion into politics and state affairs. Likewise, learning from Sunnah, as practiced by the Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him), would also be extremely helpful because of his exemplary leadership qualities and his experience of moulding the Arab society of the time. Moreover, the Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) followed the Quranic teachings in letter and spirit, and Sunnah is a reflection of Quran, only.

Next in line are the historical examples of moulding society and running state affairs in an orderly manner. Be it from Islamic history or Western history, they serve as a resource on the subject. These historical examples of governing a state may not necessarily reflect religious leanings but certainly carry the shades of religious teachings. Nearly all major United Nations’ Treaties are reflective of human values that carry the basic teachings of Abrahamic or all other religions. For instance, peace is fundamental to well-being of people and no society can progress without ‘peace within and peace without.’

Likewise, the Rights for all living being, including animals, are enshrined in all the worldly documents but are inspired by religious fundamentals. The basic rights of every human being for bread, clothing, and shelter are protected by all religions. Hinduism may have some differences with regard to equality among different sects, but no other religion preaches or practices that aspect.

The next source of drawing lessons for state governance are perhaps the contemporary models that have existed for decades now. These models are inspired by theories proffered by social scientists and are practiced by most developed nations and a number of developing states as well. However, the purpose of each of these theories and models is to manage state affairs in an orderly manner and the well-being of citizens. Wherever this particular aspect was ignored, either by practicing a certain philosophy or by an authoritarian regime, the people suffered and the state either remained isolated or backward.

At the cost of repetition, I support the argument that the role of religion in the affairs of the state for the benefit of society must not be ignored for the sake of following a dictum that religion should have no role in state governance. There is no denying that religion must not be used as a tool to motivate people in a particular extremist direction that is at variance with a state’s policy and strategy to manage its affairs in an orderly manner. However, the fundamentals of each religion serve as a huge resource of lessons for managing society, if the right lessons are drawn and implemented with sincerity of purpose and justice.

Dr Zia Ul Haque Shamsi is the author of ‘Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan’ and ‘South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace.’ He is presently working as Director (Peace and Conflict Studies) at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. The article was first published in Daily Times. He can be contacted at: [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »