Comment of Book “Islam, Democracy and West” of Benazir Butos

Buto provides important data on how Westernness is perceived in the Islamic world in the Western world, as it itself has lived in both of these civilizations, and also sheds light on the problems surrounding the Indian subcontinent.

While the author stands on the solid foundations of “information approach” it maintains objectivity and thus raises the quality of its work. However, it begins to slide over a wobble terrain when passing into “the analysis gives”. Buto tries to argue that Islam and democracy are compatible and that tolerance is an exclusive value of Islam. Quoting portions of the Qur'an and holy writings, she falls into the trap of contradiction.

The book does not contain any extensive analysis of the Koran's verses, but it simply mentions them by highlighting the author's weak argumental power. She quotes a curial verse that says “if you have killed an innocent person, it's like killing all mankind” to support her claims that Islam is the religion of peace. However, only a few pages below she mentions another verse that says “destroy the idolaters wherever you find”.

It seems that the two verses are inconsistent with each other, but a closer look at them reveals that they are not only inconsistent but complementing each other. The first Ajeti says you shouldn't kill innocents, while the second calls for the killing of <x0-> guilty”. According to the spirit that conveys the verses quoted by Buto, those who do not believe in God are enemies, are sinners, guilty against whom, as another verse mentioned by Buto commands, “must fight until they (disbelievers) pay tribute for fear”. All these authors go quietly and try desperately, among the arguments that rebel against her claims, to protect the theme that Islam calls for peace and tolerance. The the thesis she throws may be right. The point here is not to expose her. But the way Buto tries to reason with him allows much to be desired.

The brunt of arguments is also accompanied by the following book, where it claims Pakistan's backlog compared to India's installation of democracy can be attributed to the fact that India's leader has lived longer than his Pakistani counterpart. Insisting that a nation's fate may depend on an individual, it makes an effort to present itself as Pakistan's savior and the torch of democracy. The journey through the book gives the impression that the author is sinking deep into the morals of narcissism, but she manages to leave it masterfully and thus prevents this impression from taking root in readers. Buto, although countries seem to be subjectives and without the strongly argued dilemma, it in most cases transmits objectively and appears extremely argumentative.

Buto when she started writing this work as if she had felt her physical end. She often mentions the most critical times when the Taliban tried to kill her. These moments she writes with a precise surgeon when she remembers the victims divided in half as a result of suicide explosions, screams, mass despair, anxiety, frustration, anger, and recovery.

Moreover, commitment as an activist for Pakistani people's rights is inexhaustible in gender, racial and religious rights substance. It sets all these conditions straight in a model that, according to her, would bring freedom and much - asked peace to her people. Western politics towards the Pakistani people for it are unbearable, the more it prevents Western attitudes that use selective standards towards developing democracies. Former US President George W. Bush had helped then Pakistani leader General Mussharfin for the sake of fighting terrorism, but in fact it had direct links with terrorist groups. That's exactly what distracts him, and in many cases he does not save the West with criticism. But on the other hand, according to her, Western and Islamic values did not exclude each other. On this topic it tries to deconstruct the myth that “Islam is an integral part of the war by being called under jihad's clothing”. In fact, for Bhutto and Islamist philosopher Ibn Khaldun, Gihadi is not a permanent continuation of the war but, changing state character from a fighting state to a peaceful state that means moving towards a civilized state. Like imperial Rome that had evolved, Buto wants the same for Islam. But how self - sufficient is Islam to survive by not using jihad?

Persecuted several times on charges of corruption and calls for the adultery of Islam, she is forced to leave the state. Although she had won the elections several times, however, her mandate is interrupted from the Pakistani intelligence service and the military from time to time. The many gatherings she had held during 2007 present a clear picture of what difficult transition the Pakistani people were going through. Kidnapped by love for the country and enthusiasm to change the policy of radical Islam makes many supporters, but itself sacrificed for a free Pakistan. Buto also speaks of cases where Pakistani intelligence services had been infiltrated in the creation of the Taliban organisation in 1980. She argues by relying on sources of her relatives, so she's talking about the period when Musharafi ruled, which is recently the most talked about organising her murder.

Buto sometimes tries to deconstruct the religious element of Islam that is carried to Al Qaeda. According to her, this frightening organisation does not represent Islam, and their goal is to invade the people by exploiting, controlling and threatening them, but on the other side it is estimated to have served other states for expansionist purposes.

A general description is given to Middle Eastern countries from Iran to Pakistan. How political systems have been created, what ideological shades have embraced them and what has been the best model of development. It criticises Westernorists who say Islam and democracy exclude each other because Islam has roots in an authoritarianism promoting dictatorship. Buto makes efforts to criticise this approach by relying on her experience that she had spent in Western states such as the US or Great Britain. But to this point it seems insufficient this criticism regarding co-ordination of Western and Islamic values. It does not take into account the historical cycles through which these two civilizations, socio-economic and technological development.

Finally, she tries to bring some successful Western models into operation in her country. Norway's Alaskan model, Grameen Bank, is some of the models it dreams of donated to Pakistan. Rights and the fight for equality among women occupy a specific place in the model she had promoted to achieve peace among Muslim countries. She was the first Muslim leader to fearlessly promote women's right. Buto offers concrete ways to reduce the prejudices that foster civilisations towards each other, boost co-operation, plant seeds of understanding and tolerance, develop democracy and put it into the function of increasing people's prosperity. So it gives us guidance as to how the reconciliation between the two worlds, the Western and the Islam.

Like a woman who's educated and who's beating the streets of the world, she comes out beyond the frames that her naive society has installed on people's minds. Buto, throughout the book appears to be liberal, tolerant, unprejudiced, and an inspirational model, especially for people of her native land. However, Agreement It also contains several small doses of an Islamic-Patistan think tank, which more than the author, speak of the power by which culture exerts influence on the building of maps and mental schemes of individuals. The book of Buto cannot be understood as separate from her life. Even the book itself is a life story. Despite the fact that the author tries to support the contrary, the book teaches that culture shapes the individual more than the individual forges society. Democracy is not a system that can be installed by a human or a group of people, but it is a mass consciousness. So democracy flows from below, and it only sprouts on fertile soil. From above, only dictatorships can be placed.

It says: Agron Kelmendi