A Protest Against The Waqf Amendment Bill Near Karipur Airport In Kozhikode, Kerala, Organized By The Solidarity Movement, Youth Wing Of Jamat E Islami, Became Controversial After Demonstrators Displayed Images Of Islamist Figures, Including Sayyid Qutb, Yahya Sinwar, And Sheikh Hassan Al-Banna. Introducing Unrelated And Potentially Controversial Figures Like Sayyid Qutb Can Undermine The Legitimacy Of The Movement And Distract From The Genuine Concerns Of The Muslim Community In India. It Is Crucial For Protest Organizers And Participants To Be Mindful Of The Symbols And Messages They Employ To Ensure That Their Cause Is Represented Accurately And Effectively.
The image of Egyptian Islamist thinker Sayyid Qutb at a protest rally in Kozhikode, Kerala, may appear a trifle during political discord. But in reality, it holds great and troubling importance that deserves closer examination—especially in a country like India, where democratic values and peaceful coexistence are continuously under challenge.
The rally was meant to be a protest against the Waqf Amendment Bill. Most of the Muslim groups in India interpret this bill as the central government meddling in Muslim religious and charity funds. But when an image of Sayyid Qutb was flashed—carried aloft by protesters—the protest meant something different and was something more than what it was intended to be.
To understand why this was a big issue, you need to know who Qutb was, what he thought, and how his thoughts influenced some of the most violent factions in recent history.
Sayyid Qutb: The Radical Intellectual
Sayyid Qutb was an Egyptian writer, intellectual, and influential member of the Muslim Brotherhood of the 1950s and 60s. He began as a literary critic and secular nationalist, but Qutb changed his religion after he went to the United States and later to an Egyptian prison under Gamal Abdel Nasser’s regime.
While in prison, he wrote prolifically—his best-known works are Fi Zilal al-Qur’an (In the Shade of the Qur’an) and Ma’alim fi al-Tariq (Milestones). In Milestones, Qutb declared that modern Muslim societies had fallen into Jahiliyyah, a Qur’anic term that was originally used to describe a time of ignorance before Islam existed in Arabia. Qutb believed that governments and societies of the present day that did not conform to Shari’ah were in this state of ignorance and were therefore illegitimate.
He argued that only a few believers—the vanguard—should arise and topple these regimes in order to establish Islamic rule. While Qutb never directly promoted suicide bombing or attacks on civilians, his model of viewing modern secular states as illegitimate has been widely adopted by militant and terrorist groups, including Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
Even Qutb’s brother, Muhammad Qutb, travelled to Saudi Arabia with his thoughts and assisted in spreading them through schools and mosques. Osama bin Laden is said to have been influenced by these ideas.
Why Qutb’s Ideas Will Not Fit for India
India is not an Islamic state. India is a secular democracy and multicultural. Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, and others live in India. The Indian Constitution provides individuals the right to practice their religion, personal laws, and safeguards for minority rights.
Qutb sees the world very differently from this world. He does not think that you should co-exist or bargain with a secular democratic order; he desires to combat and re-shape it through revolutionary means.
Using his face in an Indian protest sends a chilling message: that to be Muslim in India is to be identified with a global Islamist idea and not with the Indian Constitution. This symbolism can be (and already has been) used by right-wing political elements to claim that Indian Muslims are shaped by foreign, extremist ideas.
It must be remembered that this is not just an optics issue. In the volatile communal environment of India, even a symbol can be inflammatory. The picture of Qutb was not just misread—it was fundamentally in conflict with the very message that the protest was attempting to convey: that Indian Muslims wish to defend their religious buildings within the framework of Indian democracy.
A Self-Defeating Symbol for a Legitimate Cause
Protests against Waqf Amendment Bill are political and legal. Muslim communities are within their rights to protest against government intervention in religious trusts. Waqf boards have been a feature of India’s legal landscape since British times and play significant religious and charitable roles.
When demonstrators hold the image of the man who was demonstrating against non-religious government, they weaken their case. The message changes from “defend our rights in the Indian system” to “reject the Indian system altogether.”
This causes confusion among allies, inspires enemies, and feeds into current Islamophobic discourses. It provides political fuel for those who blame the Muslim community for being separatist, even when the community is calling for constitutional rights.
Alienating the Broader Public One of the most significant tasks of a protest in a democracy is not merely to be heard by those who already agree with it, but to convince the undecided and to touch the emotions of the wider public. This requires a clear message and well-considered symbols.
By mentioning Qutb, even as an aside, the protest drove away non-Muslim Indians who otherwise could have lent their support. The average Indian citizen will not differentiate between Qutb’s political ideology and the legitimate call for religious freedom. What they will listen to is a protest which seems to identify itself with figures known worldwide for Islamist extremism.
Indian Muslims do not accept most of these beliefs. Indian Islamic history has overall been one of moderation, acceptance, and coexistence with other faiths—either through Sufi tradition, reform efforts, or efforts to interact with the constitution. Qutb does not represent the real life of Indian Muslims.
The Danger of Misplaced Solidarity
In a world where Muslims are being treated unfairly and exposed to war, it is no wonder that some protest movements draw inspiration from international Islamic leaders. Many are driven to mobilize in favour of Muslim causes worldwide, from Egypt to Palestine. But such acts of solidarity must be well-considered.
There exists a tremendous difference between displaying a Palestinian flag and displaying a photo of Sayyid Qutb. The flag represents the resistance of a nation against occupation; the photo represents an idea that has been used to justify brutal domination and violence.
India’s Muslim citizens need to recognize this difference. Solidarity does not equal symbols. Borrowing other people’s symbols, particularly those of nations with complicated histories, is a potential issue in India’s unique democratic and plural environment.
A Lesson in Political Messaging
What we witness from the Kozhikode protest is that messaging is important. Symbols are important. And context is most important of all.
The photo of Qutb was probably employed by some or a limited number of protesters and not the key protest organizers. But in today’s world of rapidly spreading images and political openings, a single image can represent an entire movement.
In Kerala, it served to divert the national discussion from the significant issues regarding the Waqf Bill to the sensational allegations of Islamist support. This is not a victory for the protesters. It is a distraction—and a destructive one.
Moving Forward: Responsible Protest and Clear Vision
Indian Muslims are confronted with serious challenges: increasing marginalization, communal violence, and increasing state surveillance of their institutions. Their political action and protests have to be strategic, disciplined, and Constitution-based. Individuals such as B.R. Ambedkar, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, and Sir Syed Ahmad Khan are better role models for demonstrations than Sayyid Qutb. These leaders were of the opinion that they should speak, learn, reform, and cooperate with the Indian state—instead of boycotting it.
There is power in moderation, and strength in clarity. As one Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ says:
خَيْرُ الْأُمُورِ أَوْسَطُهَا
“The best of affairs are those that are moderate.”
(Musnad Ahmad)
If Indian Muslim activists want their demands to be heard and respected, they must also speak a language that resonates with India’s constitutional and pluralistic values—not imported ideologies that sow division.
Courtesy: New Age Islam