Dr. Ruhanas Harun

The Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) has come a long way and to nowhere. From the original twenty-five Muslim countries that gathered in Rabat in 1969, the organisation has today expanded to include some 57 countries spanning from Morocco to Indonesia . It is a community inspired by the idea of solidarity among Muslims, the ummah, which is made up of a high degree of ethnic , cultural and political diversity. The purpose of its formation was to serve as a forum to create awareness of being part of the ummah and to develop ways and means to realize the political, economic and social potentials of the Muslims around the world. Given the fact that Muslims forms one third of the worlds’ population and UN member countries, controlling vast natural resources and strategic waterways, the potential for the OIC to emerge as an influential grouping is indeed tempting. In reality however, even among its ardent supporters, there is a sense of despair that OIC is an organisation that has yet to find a meaningful role in world affairs ,including those relating to Muslim countries. The issue that propelled the Muslim countries to campaign for greater cooperation among the co –religionists in the early years -- the desecration of the Al Aqsa Mosque ( Jerusalem ) –is now overshadowed by other interests. Politics, not religion, remains the essence of OIC’s raison d’etre. As such, how could OIC be reinvigorated and politically strengthened to fulfil its dream of uniting the Islamic ummah and making an impact in international relations.

A Bystander?

After 38 years of existence, OIC remains on the margin of world affairs, even when they concern Muslims and Muslim states. What is then wrong with OIC? Why does such an organisation with large membership and geographical diversity has little role in international affairs? The paralysis of OIC and its inability to adequately respond to the problems of the “ ummah” is not new. One of the most visible failures of OIC is the non-resolution of the Palestinian problem. It remains an issue of contention and dissatisfaction for the Muslim world. As time goes by, new issues are being added to the growing problems faced by the Muslim ummah and their nations, ranging from the high politics of nuclear to the issue of terrorism that is widely associated with Muslims. The recent Israel-Lebanon conflict again demonstrated this paralysis and the marginalisation of OIC in international affairs.

There is a strange paradoxical situation about the degree of support towards the OIC among Muslim countries. Having a large membership it can be expected to draw some advantages, but this is not the case with OIC. The geopolitical diversity and political differences of its members reduced its cohesion and ability to influence in international affairs . The circumstances that accounted for OIC’s success in its early years no longer have the same impact in developing the unity of purpose and decisiveness of actions of the organisation. A former Prime Minister of Malaysia, Dr Mahathir Mohamad remarked that the disparity of support between the economically powerful and politically influential Muslim countries and the less fortunate ones is somewhat glaring. Ardent supporters of OIC are often poor , politically weak and lacking in economic resources, while the richer and more influential members lack the political will to be in the driver’s seat to guide the direction of the OIC. This lack of political strength is further reduced by serious political intrigues and disunity among OIC countries, especially in West Asia . It is now an open secret that the world does not place much importance to OIC in resolving conflicts affecting Muslim countries Such was the case of the recent Israel-Lebanon conflict. There is more faith and trust in other actors such as the Arab League or the EU and even individual powers who are not members of OIC. In these situations, the OIC at the worst can stand and stare, or the best, functions as an attention getter and a crowd puller to fill up the gallery of an already informed audience, thus bringing into question the political role and strength of the organisation.

Economically the OIC has all the potential to be a formidable grouping combining resource rich countries, large population and member countries with considerable organisational and service skill coming not only from member countries, but also from other countries with large Muslim population such as India and Singapore . Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states are oil and capital rich, but their billions of dollars worth are carted away for investment and safekeeping in Europe and the United States . This high degree of economic and financial dependency of these countries make them vulnerable to European and American domestic and foreign policies, thus further reducing their utility in empowering the OIC and elevating it to a respected intergovernmental organisation. OIC in many of its summits have produced various “action plans” intending to develop and consolidate cooperation in economic, financial and development matters, which would empower the OIC. In practice , however, this was hampered by many obstacles. Most of Muslim countries main trading partners do not come from within the OIC, but from non Muslim or non member countries. Suggestions to create a common currency for OIC countries trading purposes and for the purpose of switching from the dollar has not materialised . Some of the economic and technical assistance provided under the umbrella of foreign aid to poor less fortunate Muslim countries from better off Muslim countries failed to make any significant impact as a result of the inability of recipient countries to fruitfully utilise such cooperation. Such is the case of the Malaysian Technical Cooperation Programme to several African countries leaving the donor country with a sense of frustration.

The weakness of OIC is also surprising when we see that a number of its members are militarily strong and with the potential to become militarily powerful nations. Iran , Pakistan , Egypt , Turkey and Indonesia have large armies , with Iran and Pakistan having nuclear ambition . A number of Muslim countries— Malaysia , Pakistan , Bangladesh and Turkey have participated in many of the UN Peacekeeping missions, demonstrating their ability to contribute towards international peace and security. However, any suggestion that OIC countries converge towards an alliance with military implication would be politically suicidal. Prevailing circumstances will not allow OIC to develop any form of common security policy or arrangements. Moreover , the event of September 11, 2001 has made Islam, Muslims, and the Muslim world suspects, adding to the fear that any attempt on the part of OIC to promote a military cooperation would be seen as threatening to the rest of the world.

With all those constraints and more, the OIC thus remains very much an observer in international relations, unable to act as a political force and to present a united front in the face of rising challenges of globalisation and the increasing gap between Western and Islamic civilisations. Can the OIC be politically united and economically empowered to make itself relevant in an era where many Muslim countries and communities are faced with wars, conflicts and political instability? This is a responsibility and commitment that major countries in OIC must be willing to undertake to enhance and consolidate its collective political, economic , strategic and cultural values, while at the same time striving towards greater dialogue, interactions and understanding with other actors on the world stage. Without this, OIC’s existence as an “ imagined community “ of the ummah and its role as a passive actor in international relations will be ensured. Its relevance and ability to adequately respond to the challenges of the 21 st century will be a question.