NEW DELHI: The Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) has again rejected New Delhi’s request for an observer status at the forum.
An Indian official here blamed the OIC for ignoring India’s 120 million Muslims, the second largest Muslim population in a country after Indonesia, at the behest of Pakistan.
Seeking anonymity, the official said while Thailand and Russia have been allowed entry as observers to the OIC despite their miniscule Muslim minority, India with 12 percent Muslim population was still denied observer status. India has never officially applied for the 57-member organisation membership. But it has been making overtures through friendly countries to get at least an observer status.
The official here said Pakistan has “consistently and effectively” quashed any suggestion of India coming on board.
At the last OIC summit in Khartoum in 2000, Qatar had suggested that India should be inducted as an observer, but Pakistan had rejected the proposal. The official said the forum has turned into an India-bashing club. He said New Delhi was expecting a resolution condemning the Gujarat riots and the “usual sermon” on Held Kashmir.
There is more bad news for India as the post of the OIC secretary general falls vacant in 2004. Bangladesh has proposed the name of Salauddin Qadir Chowdhary to take over from Secretary General Dr Abdelouahed Belkeziz of Morocco. Mr Chowdhary is known for his anti-India stance. Saudi Arabia has endorsed his candidature.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by TomSawyer: *
Do they give any reason for the objection?
[/QUOTE]
The reason why Pakistan objects to the membership of countries such as India and Russia, where there are large Muslim population, but which form a small minority amongst the populations, is that the OIC should represent Muslim states - i.e those states where Muslims are a majority amongstthe population.
After all, if 15% Muslim India is allowed into the OIC, then the question would be raised of why 20% Muslim Israel isn't allowed in....
Because they dont want Pakistans dominance in such organizations. You people are too obsessed with us for some reason and follow us everywhere. I fail to understand that though.
A great coup for pakistan. The OIC is such a unified voice in the Muslim world that the HIndians and Russians would ruin the effectiveness of such an organization.
Next up for Pakistan's "super" diplomatic corps..quashing the east coast/west coast rap feuds.
Now what I want to know, is that ok the OIC is seen as a pretty ineffective organisation by many, but why does India want to be part of it? I guess it’s their obsession with Pakistan, that they have to follow us around everywhere?
I think its not because of Pakistan alone that India wants to join the OIC. (though one can never be sure of India's designs).The reason can also be the muslim population, plus India's long standing ties with the Gulf states. But its strange, a country where the ruling elite or atleast its militant offsoots and party members indulge in the massacre of muslims and is very much a party in crime is trying to represent that very community in an international organisation.
For a while I thought, it would infact be better for Pakistan if India joins OIC. So far PAkistan has not been able to get all the Muslim states to support its stance on KAshmir, let alone reprimand India. By having India within OIC... (its just my thought though), Pakistan might be able to OR lets say the other countries would put some pressure on India to improve the human rights situation in the Indian held Kashmir....? Is that possible( not that the Muslim states have a clean record in that regard). But don't you think that the possibility exits.
I think the Muslim countries have a great deal of leverage in world politics. So that is why India want to stay on their good side. That is why it never made its cooperations with Israel public knowledge upto now. Also, they can make sure that Pakistan doesnt influence these countries and at the same time, down play Pakistans influence in general.
i think the OIC should ammend its constitution/byelaws etc and make it clear that only muslim countries shall be eligible to join. the size of muslim population would then not be a matter of importance. Besides, what purpose would there remain for the OIC to function as a conference of 'Islamic Countries' if it starts issuing memebership to non-muslim countries like Russia, India etc. no matter how secular they may claim to be. Who knows, if they are made members, Israel and the US may soon follow presenting their statistics of muslim populations etc and we can only imagine what role this already feeble organization would play for actual muslim countries then...
i think Indian muslims should have a voice though... They are a large population regardless of the country they belong to. Im probably giving to much credit to the OIC but it can be a useful tool in getting Mulsims heard, and Indian Muslims have a reight to be heard as much as the next guy. Although, their status should be limited.
How does one define an "Islamic Country"? 10% (or even 20%) muslims living in a country, do not make it an Islamic Country, per se. Or does it?
This question is not only for India, but also for Russia, China, USA or any other country with significant muslim population. Do the muslims in those countries only "get a voice" if their government gets a seat in OIC? I don't think so.
The OIC accepts countries that have an Islamic Government, along with a country with an Islamic majority from what i remember Faisal. If you were to allow a country with even insignificant proportion of Muslims, every country on the planet would be a member of the OIC.
Honestly, this aint a big victory. Its a bloody waste of time. If countries like Qatar support India's claim to be in the OIC, why do we even bother to deny them admitance. Its like only Pakistan vetos the whole bloody thing the rest of the muslim countries dont care. Ironically they will most likely end up looking at Pakistan as the last bastion of the Islamic world once the US is done with the Middle East.
The OIC is as useful as a bucket in a sinking ship, i.e. not at all. It rather gives false hope.
If some organization is not effective, does it mean that it should be discarded? What a narrow way of thinking!
The great organization called UN is infact the most impotent, especially for Muslims.
Would somebody care to shed some light on the effectiveness of the United Nations instead of just criticising OIC. OIC is the only hope, if it is made effective. Its the will of the optimistic people in the Muslim world which will make OIC effective; not criticizers!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Asif_k: *
OIC should start calling itself Oraganization of Impotent Countries. India and Indian muslims are better off without it.
[/QUOTE]
Well, you should be praising its present role in the world, as you prefer secularism and are against any dominations of the muslim worlds. You should thank the OIC for doing a job that its not supposed to do.
Islamabad, there is a big difference between the UN and the OIC. The UN feeds the hungry, it gives children education and homes. It aims to help refugees, it saves important aspects of World Heritage and i am describing the role of only 4 UN organizations. The UN does a lot of good work. Just because the Political UN is defunct, doesnt mean the whole UN should be discarded.
While on the other hand with the OIC. Name me on thing the OIC has done for a muslim country and I will name 8 things the UN and its organs have done for the World, of which 4 will consist of acts infavor of Muslim countries.
