Tajikistan: A Critical Perspective on the Ban of Islamic Symbols

Editorial 

In recent weeks, the attention of the Muslim community has been focused on Tajikistan's controversial ban on headscarves and curtail Muslim holidays, actions supposedly aimed at "preserving Tajik culture." However, beneath these headlines lies a deeper narrative rooted in three decades of simmering Islamophobia in the Central Asia's economically challenged country. With 98% of its population adhering to Islam, Tajikistan's policies have puzzled many, making a thorough analysis of the issue crucial.

Tajikistan and Islam

Tajikistan, with a population of approximately 10 million, is composed of 62% Tajiks, 24% Uzbek Turks, 8% Russians, and 6% other ethnic groups. The religious composition is predominantly Sunni (95%) and Shia (3%). A portion of the Tajik population speaks Persian. The Tajik people embraced Islam through the Islamization of the Khorasan regions. Since then, Sufism has played a significant role in shaping their moral and social values, influencing classical Tajik-Persian literature.

Following the Russian invasion of Muslim Central Asia and the establishment of the Soviet Union in 1922, Central Asian Muslims faced a period of repression. The Soviet authorities, who aimed to completely eradicate Islam, realised that they could not destroy the religion and decided to subordinate it to the state after the Second World War. They established a theocratic regime for Muslims that was far from the spirit of Islam and certain fundamental aspects of the religion. Naturally, the population resisted these measures. When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, there was an expectation of a period of freedom where Muslims could freely practice their religious beliefs. However, despite the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the atheist state's pressure to abandon religion persisted. The leadership of these countries remained in the hands of leaders who inherited the Soviet perspective of viewing Islam as a threat to their regimes.

From Kazakhstan to Uzbekistan and from Kyrgyzstan to Turkmenistan, anti-Islamic sentiment has been implemented in various degrees. In Tajikistan, this situation manifested as conflicts between religious and secular factions. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the devoted segment of the population, which had struggled for years, desired their country to be governed by Islamic principles, while the anti-religious elite strongly opposed this. This led to a civil war, fuelled by support from Uzbekistan and Russia, claiming the lives of over 100,000 people, and it ended with an agreement signed in Moscow on June 27, 1997. According to this agreement, President Emomali Rahmon was to allocate 30% of the government to the opposition represented by the Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan (IRPT). However, this promise was never fulfilled. Instead, Rahmon consolidated his power and systematically eliminated all his opponents.

Who is Emomali Rahmon?

Born in 1952 in the Soviet Union, Emomali Rahmon began his bureaucratic career by serving as the Chairman of the Collective Farm Union Committee in the Dangara region under Soviet administration. In 1990, he was elected as a deputy to the Supreme Soviet of the Tajik SSR. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Rahmon held the highest office, Chairman of the Supreme Assembly of Tajikistan, from November 20, 1992, to November 16, 1994, during the civil war period when the presidency was abolished. Rahmon became president in 1994 and has continued to secure his position through various fraudulent means in the 1994, 1999, 2006, 2013, and 2020 elections.

Emomali Rahmon, who has held leadership for over 30 years, has not managed to establish meaningful governance beyond creating a cult of personality and despotism. During his tenure, he and his family have enriched themselves significantly. Tajikistan, under Rahmon's rule, is characterised by high levels of nepotism, corruption, and poor governance. According to diplomatic correspondence from the US ambassador, which leaked in 2010, he and his family control the country's major enterprises, including its largest bank.  The nation's sole industrial exports are aluminium and hydroelectric power, with revenues from the state-owned Tajik Aluminum Company (Talco) mostly flowing to a proxy company owned by the president.

In such dire circumstances, many young Tajiks are forced to migrate to Russia for work, making Tajikistan one of the world's largest sources of migrant labour. Remittances from migrant workers constitute 49% of the country's GDP, amounting to $9.2 billion. Over the years, the only groups capable of meaningfully opposing Rahmon's rule have been Islamic movements. Therefore, Rahmon believes such movements must be completely eradicated, and the populace must be kept away from religious consciousness.

The Rahmon Government's War on Islam

Despite decades under Soviet policies of secularisation, approximately 98% of Tajikistan's population is Muslim. Evidence suggests a renewed interest in Islam across Tajikistan following the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, this situation does not bode well for political elites. In 2015, at the height of Rahmon's efforts to de-religionize the country, Pew Research Center data indicated that over 50% of the population considered religion important in their lives, with 56% of adults saying they prayed five times a day. Rahmon is keenly aware of this sensitivity; in response to critics of election standards during the 2006 Tajikistan presidential elections, he stated, "Tajikistan is a country where more than 99% of the population is Muslim. We have a different culture, and this must be taken into account." It is clear from these remarks that Rahmon recognises that the country's population is Muslim, and that Islam is a source of their morality. However, he has vowed to oppose both the obligations and the principles of Islam.

Recent prohibitions on headscarves and children's holidays in Tajikistan have brought to light the authoritarian regime's numerous atrocities, which many have overlooked. Rahmon's policies to repress Islam include a ban on beards, a ban on mosques for women and children under 18 (since 2011), a ban on pilgrimage for those under 40, a ban on studying in Islamic schools outside Tajikistan (since 2011), a ban on authoring, importing, or exporting Islamic books without permission (since 2017), a ban on broadcasting the call to prayer via loudspeakers, a ban on veils, the prohibition of Islamic political parties and Arabic-origin names (since 2016). Approximately 2000 mosques have been closed across Tajikistan in recent years, many of which have been converted into cafes, tailoring workshops, kindergartens, and even cinemas.

During the pandemic, Rahmon cited "Islamic scholars" to claim that fasting was harmful to "farmers, livestock breeders, and those engaged in hard labour." This was not the first instance of Rahmon engaging in "fatwa shopping" for his anti-Islamic stances. For example, in 2004, he issued a “fatwa” that, according to the Hanafi school, prohibited women from attending mosques under the guise of "modesty". However, this fatwa is widely recognised as an attempt to prevent women from engaging in religious practices and hindering future generations. All of these measures have been made possible by bringing religious institutions under government control and training individuals under a single institution to become "Islamic scholars," most of whom have little to no knowledge about Islam.

Religious Education in Tajikistan

Education is a critical area in Tajikistan's de-religionization project. Religion, with its beliefs and practices, is a phenomenon that must be learned. That is, in order for someone to become a Muslim, they must first learn about Islam. That is why there is religious education. While efforts to eradicate religion are ongoing, those opposed to religion try to hinder this education. This is exactly what is happening in Tajikistan.

It has been a long time since religious topics have been removed from primary and secondary school curriculums. In place of these, a subject on morals has been introduced for young students aged 9-12, which incorporates both national (Tajik) and Islamic cultural values. Here, religion is not taught as a belief system. However, in the eighth grade, a subject called Islamic Knowledge is taught. This subject covers topics such as Islamic history, principles, Islam's perspective on science and knowledge, and its role in Tajik society. When the government introduced this subject in 2009, it aimed to steer young people toward "Hanafi Islamic ideas" and away from “radical Islamic ideologies.” However, it is not very surprising to discover that the textbooks portray Prophet Muhammad as a political figure, and Islam as a product of his imagination.

In the name of "religious education," a course titled "History of Religions" was introduced in higher education in 2005 in the social and humanities sciences field to alienate people from religion. While Islam is not the central focus of this course, its content and teaching methods offer interesting facts. Topics related to Islam are taught from the textbook titled "Islam," prepared by Russian theologian Yablokov in Moscow. Moreover, the content of religious education and teaching materials is prepared by academicians who taught atheism during the communist era and fundamentally reflects a materialistic approach. There are no faculties of Islamic sciences. The only institution teaching Islamic sciences is the Tajik Islamic Institute, and only graduates of this institution can become imams or preachers. Consequently, the government criminalises the provision of "unapproved religious education," including via the Internet, even if the educational material is not religiously extremist.

 Tajikistan and the "Radicalism" Discourse

There are two excuses behind Rahmon's government's crackdown on Islam. Firstly, the claim to protect Tajik culture, despite the president himself having no connection to Tajik culture. Secondly, the pretext of preventing radicalism has been deemed unreasonable by experts and is not plausible to anyone with a sound mind.

It is true that Tajiks have been involved in some violent incidents, such as the attack on the Istanbul Church and certain attacks in Russia carried out by ISIS members of Tajik origin. However, the primary question is: are these individuals not products of Rahmon's governance itself? Impoverished people with little knowledge of Islam, making them vulnerable to radicalisation? What is particularly intriguing is that many of these individuals became radicalised while working as labour migrants in places where Rahmon's economic policies led them. Meanwhile, the rhetoric of radicalism of the Rahmon regime, which was allied with the US during the war in Afghanistan, has been described by experts as serving its own political purposes. Consequently, the Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan (IRPT), which served as a primary channel for religious expression, was hastily labelled a terrorist organisation. Thus, Helene Thibault, who has authored books on post-Soviet Tajikistan's religious and political history, expressed in an interview with Mecra that terrorism and extremism accusations against IRPT were fabricated to suppress the country's last opposition forces.

In addition, it must be recognised that the state is afraid that people will awaken to its injustice. As Thibault articulated, in Tajikistan, Islamic values are seen as the only means to express dissatisfaction and seek justice. In this context, IRPT leader Faizrahmonov asserts that violence in Tajikistan stems not from religion but from political nihilism.

Conclusion

Tajikistan claims religious freedom in its constitution. However, while the president urges, "Love Allah with all your heart, but do not forget your own culture," he inadvertently creates a contradiction between Islam and Tajik culture. Yet, Islam has been an integral part of Tajik culture for over a thousand years. This situation is inherently contradictory, isn't it? It is also saddening that the Muslim world, which largely keeps Tajik Muslims at arm's length, remains largely silent about the oppression of a dictatorial secular regime.

Certainly, researching the issue of Tajikistan and intervening in this matter can be complicated. For instance, Alexander Sodiqov, a doctoral student from the University of Toronto, was arrested on espionage charges in Khorog in 2014. Similarly, in 2016, despite being on a legal visit, a group of Muslim lawyers from Türkiye were detained. Human rights assessments in Tajikistan have been a serious concern for Rahmon's regime. However, it is observed that while the U.S., which provides millions of dollars in aid to Tajikistan, holds the country responsible for restricting Jehovah's Witnesses, Muslim-majority countries remain silent. For example, pressure was exerted for the release of Jehovah's Witness Shamil Khakimov, who was arrested in 2019. Why, then, do Muslim countries advocating for the rights of Muslims remain silent?

According to its charter, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) can advocate for the rights of Muslim communities in non-member states. So, can’t it raise issues in Tajikistan, its own member state? The same OIC was at the forefront of advocating for the education rights of Afghan girls against the Taliban. Why, then, are Tajik Muslims deprived of such advocacy? Surely, the right to education is no less important than the right to practice religion in the Qur'an. Hence, at the very least, dialogue should be initiated on this matter. Furthermore, the academic and media communities of the Islamic world should not remain silent on the persecution faced by Tajik Muslims!

Reference