Daily Times

Is independence a concept of geographical demarcation? Is independence a concept of territorial sovereignty? Is independence a concept of political democracy? There are many other questions that come to mind when we think of independence. Independence is also synonymous with freedom. Human beings are the most superior creation of the Almighty. This superiority is due to their ability to think and choose. Thus, freedom of choice is the most fundamental principle on which humanity is based. However, the interpretation and application of this principle is still a choice people make selectively and selfishly.
Starting with individuals, the run-of-the-mill interpretation of independence is that you have definite opinions and you assert them in most situations. However, this is a very narrow definition of independent people. Take the opposite of independence: dependence. Both are complete mindsets. The author Stephen Covey says that mindset drives our behaviours and these behaviours in turn determine our results. Allama Iqbal also says that whatever results we get are because of what we do. The truly independent human being is the one who acknowledges that whatever good or bad is happening in their life is due to the good or bad choices that they have made in life. Normally we have a tendency to attribute all good things to our own efforts and choices and all bad things to our luck or circumstances. This selective attribution of results prevents individuals from really achieving outstanding results as they feel that in many cases they never had any choice and circumstances forced them to behave in a certain way. This dependent mindset entraps them regardless of whichever independent place they live and work in. To many others such a person has so much going for them but the individual feels victimised and restricted. This is being entrapped by a mindset that refuses to accept responsibility for its own flaws and, consequently, the ability to do something about it.
At a national level, independence is the freedom of a nation to make national choices that represent and benefit those living in the country. Western societies have perfected the art of democracies that serve the majority in a beneficial way such that the process of human development continues. However, many of these very countries feel that independence is a zero sum game. For them to be independent some other nations have to be dependent. For their own freedom, other nations have to be subjugated. For their values to flourish, the values of some other nations need to perish. The US superpower concept is based on how its power can make many other nations powerless. Typical examples are the US’s invasion of countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, US attempts to put its stamp on Middle Eastern countries and, of course, Israeli aggression against Palestine. This desire to resist being dependent but loving that others are dependent on you creates a strange divide in the world. Wars are all about control and imposition. At the end of the day, whether it is at the individual or national level, it is the divide between haves and have-nots that defines the ability to dominate and impose on others. The economic and military might of the superpower has given it the capability to attack smaller nations with impunity. The pretext is always self-defence or saving the world from extremism but the real reason is the mentality of win-lose, i.e. for them to remain independent, somebody has to be dependent, for them to be powerful, somebody has to be powerless. Their own definitions of freedom are then used to justify their pretence on issues like women’s or human rights with little respect and patience for the local complexities and customs prevailing in other (dependent) countries.
The interpretation of independence and freedom has narrowed to what one wears and says. From our religious scholars to western liberals, the right to cover oneself or not cover oneself has become a defining meaning of independence. While we condemn the imposition of decrees by our religious leaders to cover the face, we should be equally harsh about western countries declaring covering the face punishable. If one is extremism, so is the other, if one takes away freedom of choice so does the other. While the Muslim world reacts to speeches against its religious tenets, the west goes hyper on anti-Semitism. Thus the desire to define how to live, what to wear and what not to say is not based on the principle of ‘Live and let live’ but on the principle of ‘Live like me because I have the power to punish you if you do not.’ That is what religious extremists say and that is what politically greedy superpowers say.
The major difference between independent and dependent countries in the east or west is that in the west public comforts are a priority even if they come at the cost of other nations, while in the east personal comfort of leaders is the priority even if they come at the expense of the people. That is why the people of these countries feel that they have gained independence from other countries but are trapped by local power brokers with no freedom of choice to make their leaders accountable. In such countries, so-called democratic traditions are in name only as rule of law is overtaken by the rule of rulers. The right to ask for their rights is also not considered right. Fundamental rights like asking for free education, security, health and the sanctity of their vote is never given due importance, with the result that people become disenchanted with this ‘freedom’. This gives space for extremism that is religious, or some rebellious ideology, or becoming the liberal who believes most values are to be mocked and dismissed. Both these are states of dependence, both are mindsets that are trapped by their inability to fight within, both are failures to restore balance and then fight outside to exercise your freedom of choice. True independence thus is not dependent on political labels, economic might or social standing but the ability to create a balance within, in line with basic human values and then fight to create the same balance in one’s surroundings. It is only when each individual starts thinking that, regardless of circumstances, I can and I will live by these universal principles and values, that the spirit of independence becomes free to achieve its chosen destiny.

The writer is an analyst and columnist and can be reached at andleeb.abbas1@gmail.com