http://thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=34866&Cat=9
Tuesday, March 08, 2011
For anyone with even the slightest interest in Pakistan’s future, Shahbaz Bhatti’s assassination should spur some serious problem-solving. The first question any good problem-solver asks is: “What is the most urgent and immediate problem that needs solving?”
For some Pakistanis, it is that people aren’t outraged enough by these killings. Not enough Pakistanis condemn terrorism, and not enough reject extremist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba. This failure to reject extremism, the thinking goes, creates the space for acts of violence, like the suicide bombing in Nowshera, and the assassination of Shahbaz Bhatti. Indeed, the lack of moral clarity about violence in the name of ideas is a huge problem. But is it the most urgent and immediate problem?
For other Pakistanis, it is that the CIA and other intelligence outfits are operating with impunity in Pakistan, and conducting false flag operations. These operations, the thinking goes, are designed as a psychological operation to de-legitimise Islam, and pave the way for the “secularisation” and “de-nuclearisation” of Pakistan. Though the evidence for these claims is scant, and the linearity of the arguments is questionable, if foreign intelligence operations do enjoy impunity in Pakistan, then this is a failure of the Pakistani intelligence community, a huge problem, if there ever was one. But is this the most urgent and immediate problem?
It seems that if the discussion is about dead people – people killed by suicide bombs, fedayeen attacks, targeted killings and assassinations – then the most urgent and immediate problem is that people are dying. It is shocking how controversial and unpopular this simple truth really is.
The problem is not whether or not those dead people are mourned appropriately, and how much moral outrage their funerals generate. For example, (thankfully) the funeral for Shahbaz Bhatti, a Pakistani hero, was attended by thousands in Islamabad, and over 30,000 in Faisalabad, at his home village – but Salmaan Taseer’s was not. Muslim clerics were more vocal in condemning Bhatti’s assassination than they were in condemning Taseer’s. Does this mean that there is something more morally wrong with Bhatti’s assassination, than Taseer’s? Of course not. Because when a politician campaigning for justice is killed, the primary, most urgent and immediate problem is not how many mourners he leaves behind. The most urgent and immediate problem is that he is dead.
The problem is also not whether or not those dead people are victims of false flag operations by the CIA, RAW or Mossad. Indeed, even if the JSOC is operating in Pakistan with impunity (and the approval of both civilian and military leaders), these operations would represent a problem that is altogether and entirely different in nature than the problem of people dying.
The problem of foreign conspiracies against Pakistan – even if it is accepted, at face value that they exist – is a problem of a weak intelligence, poor counter-intelligence and ineffective foreign policy. Pakistanis, including Salmaan Taseer and Shahbaz Bhatti, may be getting killed within a context of these weaknesses, but they are being killed with bullets coming out of guns, and bombs strapped to young men.
Weak intelligence, poor counter-intelligence and ineffective foreign policy are certainly important problems worth attending to, but the most urgent and immediate problem they are not. The most urgent and immediate concern is that Pakistanis are getting killed.
These distinctions are uncomfortable, because in Pakistan, we have spent the entire post 9/11 era on opposite sides of each other, flinging names, accusations and ideological claptrap. Innocent Pakistanis keep dying, and different kinds of narratives keep attempting to frame the problem in accordance with the cultural and ideological principles that they hold dear.
Thus far, the argument between the minority so-called “liberals” and the vast majority in the so-called “mainstream” seems to be about whodunit and why. “Liberals” insist the violence is Islamist terror and is committed in order to destroy an orderly society, and take over power. Mainstream opinion seems to insist that the violence is externally funded and arranged, in order to destroy an orderly society, and take over Pakistan’s nukes. These are the caricatures of the two poles that define the debate in the aftermath of this violence.
Save for a vocal minority that celebrated the Taseer assassination however, it is almost unheard of that either side disagrees on the fact that violence that kills innocent people is bad. This tremendous resource, the consensus that people dying is a bad thing, is being wasted at the altar of our specific ideological passions. We are wasting the opportunity to come together and defeat this menace, and reclaim both the Pakistani state and society.
In trying to solve the problem of Pakistanis being killed due to violence, the Pakistani state (civilian and military) is on the wrong side of the equation, no matter whether you are liberal or conservative, outlier, or mainstream. Impunity for violent killers exists because the state is either incapable of dealing with them, or is unwilling to deal with them. There is no third explanation for it.
If the state is incapable, either out of fear, or genuine incapacity, or a lack of resources, then it needs to ask for real help – not just the financial support it keeps getting, but actual material assistance. This could mean Turkish and Malaysian boots on the ground, Saudi intelligence, Israeli technology and Indian and Afghan support.
If the state is unwilling, either because it is in league with killers, or because it fears taking them on could mean the end of the prevailing “order” of things, then serious thought needs to be invested in just how long Pakistanis and the rest of the world can wait till international intervention is something we begin to seriously discuss.
The problem however is not in the state alone. Pakistani society is bitterly divided. It is time to attempt the bridging of this divide.
If a majority of Pakistanis believe in conspiracy theories about violence in the country it is time to begin investing effort in understanding what is causing such a failure of reason and logic, above and beyond standard explanations of the manipulative nature of the establishment. It is time to begin to inspect the anger and sense of indignity that serves as an engine for this lack of reason. No country in the world can have an irrational and unreasonable majority – without some context. It is time to start exploring what that context is, why it exists and what can be done to deal with it. Notwithstanding the manipulation of the mainstream by the establishment, calling people names may be a poor way to begin this process of engagement.
If we want fellow Pakistanis to share the pain and despondency of the assassination of Shahbaz Bhatti, the least we can do is to empathise with fellow Pakistanis’ politics and positions – no matter how unreasonable they may seem. Such compromises are a part and parcel of the very civility that is so lacking in the public discourse. They represent small but vital investments in a better, more coherent Pakistan. There can be no better way to honour Shahbaz Bhatti’s memory.
I like the notion that it is the dead that we must mourn, more so than the plight of the state. It is in the death of ordinary people that we must feel greatest outrage. It is a wonderful and simple point that Mr. Zaidi articulates. When we seek to reduce death to a statistic, seeking only to place the blame for the deed, then we dishonor those who die. And with it dies our humanity.
Every death must mean something to us, something to be mourned. From it comes a value for life, and from it comes our compassion. It teaches us the rules for right conduct and right action. Pakistan is being sapped, and it must find the core of its humanity once again.
On a separate note I see so much wonderful writing coming out of Pakistan. There is much feeling, passion, and anguish. If this voice is stilled, then I would really fear for the future of Pakistan. But while it lives, it gives Pakistan hope. To hear the human voice of Pakistan is the best hope of all.
Posted by Ratnam | 08. Mar, 2011, 9:35 am@Mosharraf Zaidi
You have written two articles on the assassination of Shahbaz Bhatti, which you seem to equate with the killing of Governor Taseer by the fanatic Mumtaz Qadri. Murder by terrorists and murder by fanatics are two very different things. The fanatics – the “underclass” in your terminology – can be reformed through provision of justice, education and equal opporturnities in life. Not so the terrorists.
The terrorism that has engulfed Pakistan has its source in Musharraf’s decision to prostrate himself before the Americans. The pattern of terrorism in Pakistan has followed similar outrages in Iraq. In particular, the establishment of “Pakistani Taliban” by the CIA was a “master stroke” in the latter’s plans to terrorise Pakistani society and to gain entry into Pakistan as its “saviours”. The arrest of “Raymond Davis” has brought home to gullible Pakistanis the close link between the Pakistani Taliban and the CIA.
We must learn to distinguish between out and out terrorists and Muslim fanatics such as Mumtaz Qadri and the ignorant hordes supporting him. The fanatics tend to act on the spur of the moment, with minimal planning. The clever planning behind the murder of Shahbaz Bhatti points to the involvement of people who knew well about Mr Bhatti’s movements. The circumstantial evidence appears to point towards the CIA-Pakistani Taliban-Interior Ministry collusion.
The culprits made one extraordinary blunder when they carelessly tossed around leaflets – apparently, some time after the murder – with Rasul-Allah’s name printed on them. No Muslim fanatics would ever do a thing like that – getting Rasul-Allah’s name trampled underfoot would be inconceivable. The other mistake the USA government has made is to cave in to CIA’s pressure and continue to claim “diplomatic immunity” for the CIA’s asset “Raymond Davis”. Once his trial gets under way – if it does – we may learn the hideous truth behind a lot of terrorist acts carried out in Pakistan in the recent past.
You are on firmer ground when you say, “ Pakistani society is bitterly divided. It is time to attempt the bridging of this divide.” Indeed it is high time to bridge the divide for the consequences of not doing so would be terrible.
A fundamental reason for the widespread injustice is Pakistan’s colonial system where English-speaking “brown sahibs” ape their erstwhile masters in ruling over the “natives”, whose lingua franca, Urdu, has been assigned a relatively lowly place. In response to a comment at my blog, I made the following comment:
The essential problem is one of gross injustice inflicted on some 97% of Pakistan’s population, which is denied equal opportunities. George Fulton has written eloquently about the selfishness of Pakistan’s privileged class, which has erected a linguistic “Berlin Wall” around itself. He says about the privileged class he belonged to in Pakistan:
“Despite enjoying unprecedented levels of wealth and education, we no longer believe it is our duty as the best educated and most privileged in society to contribute to its development. The English language has created a linguistic Berlin Wall between us and the rest of the country. We remain cosseted inside our bubble.”
We may be heading for a bloody conflict between the “brown sahibs”, those who have inherited and sustained the British colonial system, and the dispossessed Pakistanis whose dream of a free and independent Pakistan has been so brutally shattered.
Posted by Sakib Ahmad | 08. Mar, 2011, 10:42 pm@Sakib Ahmad… I fully agree with you when you say we ‘inherited and sustained the British colonial systems’; This is the root cause of our problems in Pakistan. We got independence but continued with the same colonial systems. No one, not even Mr. Zaidi, talks about it. We need a Reform Commission that includes University professors in political and economics subjects, NOT any of the bureaucrats, generals, judges or IGs. These professors should meet once a month and analyse every governing system and suggest binding solutions. They can discuss the problems in the class with young minds. That is what we need, not constantly lament over prevailing conditions.
Posted by Walayat Malik | 09. Mar, 2011, 6:51 pmI appeared on a TV Show Tafteesh on SAMMA. The IG Police while discussing was alluding to issues like Canadian Visas, calls to Italy albeit Vatican, donations etc. All these lead to a trail of corruption and misappropriation. Knowing Bhatti, This was never the case.
Someone is trying to demonize a good person. The special assistance lawyer Mr. Nathanial Gill is a punter in Lahore circles.
Posted by samson simon sharaf | 14. Mar, 2011, 7:35 pm@Sakib Ahmad and @Walayat Malik;
Thank you for being regular and committed readers. Even when we seem to disagree, you are civil and you choose to engage. I could not be prouder to have readers like you. I read your comments with a keen interest and am always trying to make sure that I use them to improve whatever piece I am writing next. Just a small note to say thanks!
@samson simon sharaf
Delighted you wrote. I really enjoyed your piece in the Nation. In my only in-depth interaction with the departed soul, I was struck by his intense sense of integrity, his honour and his deep and abiding patriotism. Pakistan is poorer without him. As for the nasty attempts to demonize someone who is no longer with us–what can be said that hasn’t been said. It is against my values, my faith, my culture and my humanity. It is sad and it should be condemned.
Posted by Mosharraf Zaidi | 15. Mar, 2011, 10:57 pmWhat proof is there that TTP was created by the CIA? I would like to know.
Posted by Aftab | 26. Apr, 2011, 12:02 pm