Islam Bibi, mother of three sons, has already lost her two sons to extremists and is now searching for her third son who is in the custody of the Pakistan army. “My youngest son was only 12 years old when I lost contact with him,” she said. She is grateful to God that her sons did not harm anybody. Because of the conflict in Swat, she migrated to Peshawar, but after becoming a rolling stone in the provincial metropolis she has again settled in the once troubled Swat valley.
Plagued by internal conflict, lagging economic development and increasing violence, the name ‘Pakistan’ has become synonymous with insecurity, lawlessness and terrorism and we have become a laughing stock among the comity of nations. We are at a crucial juncture of history as we have to contain rising extremism, achieve political stability and uphold the rule of law.
The concept of ‘strategic depth’ has done more harm than good to us. Needless to say, the Pakistan army has already admitted that the country is more prone to internal than external threats. The people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and FATA, in particular, have been the worst victims of extremism and terrorism. The consequences of this crisis have seriously undermined any effort to ensure long-term stability, prosperity, human rights and gender equality in these areas.
Such lawlessness and terrorism has been unheard of in modern history. There has always been a link between a perceived feeling of weakness and the need for strong symbols of power. This is why black slaves in the USA found solace in Christian symbolism while the untouchables in India found redemption in the Islamic and Christian faith. A gun generates immense power in the hands of those who themselves have remained victims of oppression.
The need is to analyse the situation from three angles: social, political and constitutional. Society, in general, is in a state of self-abnegation and a conspiracy mindset that has done us more harm than good. Our own sons and brothers create mayhem due to lack of a clear cut vision and direction and we blame’ infidels’ or the ‘foreign hand’ for being behind subversive activities. Suicide bombers are now available even on payment who can give their lives for the sake of a few hundred thousand rupees. The tribal mindset governs society and the tribal mindset is all about using force. Use of force seems to have become ingrained in our society. Mullahs are calling the shots just because they are in a position to point at the governance, nepotism and corruption of the government and the missed opportunities. The pulpit is available to mullahs, and they propagate constantly how badly we are surrounded by vices and not virtues. They present themselves as the role model.
In the troubled Malakand Division, women were influenced by the rhetoric of Sufi Muhammad and doled out cash and jewelry to militants who were engaged in the so-called jihad in Afghanistan. Uneducated, illiterate people are basically simple and gullible to propaganda rhetoric and they remain vulnerable in the face of any incitement in the name of religion.
The second dimension of extremism is political in nature. Ziaul Haq’s Islamisation programme was pursued within a rather complicated ideological framework. He changed the popular culture of ‘personally’ religious to that of ‘political’ religious that ultimately brought havoc within society since it was imposed with parsimonious interests to lengthen his own illegitimate rule. The state dictated to its own people and assumed the role of deciding what was Islamic and what was not. As a result, Islam itself could no longer provide unity because it was then being defined to exclude previously included groups. When Islam lost its capacity to become the binding force, all sorts of ethnic and sectarian differences emerged, which were then shrewdly exploited by the governing class. More profoundly, the Zia rule will also be remembered as it tried to depict an ideal image of woman that had absolutely nothing to do with the popular sentiment and acceptance of the prevalent female image.
The single biggest threat to the Family Laws Ordinance 1961 came in the form of the so-called Islamisation programme that threatened to endanger the reforms of the Ordinance. This dimension is attributed to the nexus between the state institutions and non-state actors. Besides putting the general public in a miserable position, the state started patronizing the fanatical elements directly, which had a direct bearing on society as well. When Islam was used as the state religion in 1979 it gave the state liberty to apprehend people on the basis of what was considered ‘sin’. Regrettably, our politicians have not done enough to purge the constitution of its aberrations and take a bold stance against Islamisation of the state. It is also painful to see members of al Qaeda and other extremist organisations taking shelter in the homes of leaders of religious outfits.
The third dimension of this conflagration is constitutional in nature. How many countries in the world have raised their constitution on the basis of religion? None, with the exception of Israel and Iran, and both are a sordid tale of internal chaos and international condemnation on several counts. We have faith-based laws in the country and, as a result, the state discriminates against its own people. Why an Ahmadi, Christian, Hindu or Sikh cannot become the president, prime minister, chairman of the Senate or speaker of the National Assembly when she/he is able to do the job? Why FATA, PATA and special zones exist constitutionally? Why more than half of Balochistan is still the ‘B’ area that is ruled through the Sardari (tribal chiefs) system with no police presence?
One wonders how our law enforcement agencies (LEAs) can apprehend a person who flees to FATA or PATA after committing a crime in the settled areas. The country is bleeding profusely due to overt politicisation of the LEAs, rampant corruption, an indifferent oligarchy and lack of good governance. Independent courts and an increasingly free media has reined in the ugly anti-state actors to some extent but it is upon the people of the state to rise up to the occasion and safeguard their own future and ascertain their rights in Westminster-style democracy. Rights do not come to the people themselves, they are to be fought for. Every single right that one sees in the USA or Europe is the right that is struggled for and such rights have been taken from those who denied them.
The writer is a freelance columnist