I was watching a documentary on how the British ended the Muslim aliphate in 1924, using extraordinary means. And I wondered why the British, a seasoned empire, would use so much energy to end a Caliphate that was already without any power.

After reading up on it, I realized that democracy allowed the quick change of the people in power, so much so that there is no long term planning for the countries. Countries that had a permanent central powerhouse were always successful compared to countries with Democratic governments and no long term central power.

Examples of the success of the UK, Denmark, Japan, Thailand, Middle East and other nations with Royal families are quite obvious, while China had the central Communist party for long term guidance. In Malaysia the Royal families of each state take turns in governing the country, so they could not provide long term guidance, but the country had the two longest-term Prime Ministers to provide long term development. Similarly, Russia and Israel also benefited from long term leaders, but the recent problems in these countries highlight that a single person cannot hold this power for too long and eventually gets corrupted.

In the US there is no Royal family but a private bank that provides long term development. The bank is called Federal Bank and it is rumoured to be owned and controlled by a handful of families that bought its shares with investments when the bank was established. The bank created the US dollar economy in the world that made the US the superpower that it is today.

Therefore it dawned on me the importance of a central Caliphate for the Muslim World. As such, a figure would resolve issues between Muslim countries and stop wars from starting. Such a figure would also be able to reply to allegations against Islam and Muslims around the world while encouraging cooperation between nations.

For the Muslim World, the question then arises as to which country should be selected for this important role. One thing is clear that as leaders of the Sunni and Shia Muslims of the world, both Saudi Arabia and Iran cannot be selected. Similarly, with so many internal and ancient conflicts between the Middle East nations, none of them can be selected for this role as they cannot be biased.

Also, the family or country selected should be rich enough so that no one could bribe them and they don’t have access to the general public, but full access to the rulers of Muslim states.

The selection should be permanent with no option for any other party taking on this role. The successive “Khalifa” will be selected internally in the family or country. All Muslim countries or member countries of such an agreement would consider the Caliphate’s verdict as the final word in disputes and give proper respect to the Caliphate to ensure disputes are quickly resolved and locals of each country are not aroused against the Caliphate by foreign powers.

Pakistan should, therefore, propose the establishment of the Muslim Caliphate and ask all the Muslim countries to propose families or countries for this important position keeping in view the requirements of the Muslim World.

The Caliphate should target to end all wars between Muslim states within 6 months. It should also create a corporative economic plan that involves connecting all the Muslim nations through roads, shipping, rail and energy transport networks. It should also institute a new tax system for all member countries where citizens and companies are charged a fixed 5% on their wealth each year and additional tax on individual resource use. No taxes should be charged on salaries. Zakat would be mandatory with tax payment but managed by a different entity. Similarly, only Islamic banking with no fixed interest rates should be introduced across all nations in one year. Just the provision of a dispute resolution for Muslim Nations itself would have long-lasting benefits for the Muslim world.

SHAHRYAR KHAN BASEER P.ENGR.,

Peshawar.