The concept of an Islamic state does not stir as much controversy as the term ‘Islamic State.’ Any term can have positive or negative connotation. Today, many western strategists are demanding that Islamic radicalism — which to them is not different from Islam — be tackled on the same lines as ‘communistic aggression.’

A mere three decades ago, the US was lauding the Afghani population because it served their purpose. Now we can’t even mumble such words in our own countries for the fear of international backlash. The world should realise that negativity towards Islam or terms associated with it only strengthens the hardliners on both sides. Hate begets hate and insult begets blasphemy.

The ‘Islamic State’ was never meant to be like the one that ISIS controls. Everyone knows it is not an Islamic state and we should not call it one. It is due to the propagation by the media that there is a universal acceptance of it existing as a radical ‘state’.

When Yugoslavia disintegrated, two of its seceding states, Serbia and Montenegro proclaimed themselves as a continuation but the world didn’t recognise this claim and declared Yugoslavia an extinct state. Taiwan calls itself ‘China’ but the world refuses to acknowledge the claim. The American terrorist Ted Kaczynski proclaimed his organisation, a ‘Freedom club’, to entice American youth but the media always called it ‘Una-bomber’. Then why treat Islam differently?

SIDRA SHOAIB,

Karachi, November 12.