Daily Times

It was not a security lapse. At least not all of it. Neither was it a planned conspiracy. Perhaps not all of it. As investigators, security analysts and armchair activists would undoubtedly discuss each and every angle of it, I remain dumbfounded and scared. For me, it was the death of tolerance. Voltaire said, “I disagree with what you have to say but will fight to the death to protect your right to say it.” In Pakistan today, there is no room for dissent. We all have to subscribe to one ideology, one religion, one national identity and one language. It is as if we abhor diversity. Are constantly challenged by it. There is a dichotomy here. We subscribe to a religious belief that urges us to constantly seek God in nature, marvel at His creations of different colours, sizes and shapes. Yet, we kill in the name of a Being and a Prophet (PBUH) whose tales of tolerance are rote learned in every school of this country. If it were not so tragic and dangerous, it would be quite despicable to see what we have become. Self-loathing is what comes to mind at a time like this.

My mailbox is full as I write this. There are those who are outraged at the tragedy and then some who look upon it as another terrorist attack. The lucky ones are those who, as a defence mechanism in my opinion, busy themselves with the details of the particular attack. Was he sitting or standing? Was he hit from behind or from the side? How many bullets? Scared of the implications of the bigger picture, they try to find God in the details. Personal friends urge me to stay muted in my writings. Then there are those who see this as an act of Muslim faith, are congratulating Qadri and warning of other such attacks. When the cleric of Mohabbat Khan Mosque announced rewards for those who kill the so-called blasphemers, I was reminded of the words of Akbar Bugti who asked, “What use have I of a God who needs me to defend him?”

There are two Pakistanis as the Kohsar attack and my mailbox have reiterated. One who is made up of the wishy-washy liberals like myself who have secular and tolerant views but selectively articulate and practice them. Privately, I will express the need for a secular Pakistan, but when I am conducting human rights training for police personnel all over the country, I would not engage directly into a discussion with them on whether Pakistan should be secular or not? I would perhaps write in support of de-radicalisation but when I publicly stand up I would try to measure my words. Rationalising this hypocrisy, I would tell myself that there should be a difference between public and private speaking and hence the choice of words. However, to be honest, is this the only reason?

The other part of Pakistan comprises the majority that seem to be tied to the glorious days of Islam and their perceived place in the world. They announce rewards for people who kill. They organise themselves and then openly declare that anyone who stands up against them will be wajib-ul-qatl (worthy of murder). Widely reported in the media, the Barelvi Jamaat-e-Ahle Sunnat, in a written public statement, has declared, “No Muslim should attend the funeral or even try to pray for Salmaan Taseer or even express any kind of regret or sympathy over the incident.” The statement went on further to state that anyone who expresses grief over the assassination could suffer the same fate. ‘The same fate’ is actually a death threat. Thus, this Pakistan speaks and threatens openly while the part I hail from cowers down in fear. Those of us who do speak out openly are then, in a way, if we were to believe a media militant, actually inviting trouble ourselves for, like Salmaan Taseer, we should not touch upon ‘sensitive topics’. This Pakistan runs website (http://www.ahlesunnat.net/), operates in Bazm-e-Raza, Memon Masjid Muslehuddin Garden and openly threatens and terrorises. Their public statement has names such as Professor Syed Mazhar Saeed Shah Kazmi, Allama Syed Riaz Hussain Shah, Shah Turab-ul-Haq Qadri, Allama Zamir Sajid, Pir Khalid Sultan, Pir Ghulam Siddiq Naqshbandi, Allama Syed Khizr Hussain Shah, Alhaj Amjad Chishti, Allama Ghulam Sarawar Hazarvi, Allama Syed Shamsuddin Bokhari, Pir Syed Ashiq Ali Shah Jilani, Mufti Muhammad Iqbal Chishti, Allama Fazal Jamil Rizvi, Agha Muhammad Ibrahim Naqshbandi Mujaddidi, Maulana Muhammad Riaz Qadri, Maulana Gulzar Naeemi, Allama Syed Ghulam Yaseen Shah, and over 500 other ulema and honourable muftis attached to the Jamaat-e-Ahle Sunnat, Pakistan. Should they not be arrested for issuing written death threats and incitement for violence?

This is the face of another Pakistan. At Kohsar, the two Pakistans met and the more violent one prevailed. Violent and the more rooted. The security guard was the result of the increasing space that the Islamist jiyalas (zealots) occupy in Pakistan. Every day, whether one looks at the drawing room seminars of Al Huda and Farhat Hashmi, the philanthropic service delivery model of militancy adopted by Lashkar-i-Jhangvi or, what is extremely lethal, the teaching and working of the Hizb-ul-Tahrir, one sees their presence. The Hizb-ul-Tahrir has made inroads across every strata of Pakistani society. They are militant in their message and sophisticated in the message delivery tactics. It is, therefore, not surprising that their adherents range from various educated circles of society using the uneducated as cannon fodder. Working with police personnel from all over the country, I frequently find them to be voracious readers of ‘deeni literature’. When probed, it usually transpires that this ‘deeni literature’ is actually free jihadi literature propagating a conservative, militant, myopic worldview where non-Muslim Pakistanis are not really citizens but owe their existence to the magnanimity of the Muslim Pakistani.

Public space for such organisations, networks, literature and their followers is growing. No, it was not a security lapse. It was a triumph. Yet another victory for the militant, Islamic jiyala who enjoys the freedom to exercise his/her intolerant view and label anyone wajib-ul-qatl. It is ironic that they play God every day, yet they are against blasphemy. They declare people to be liable to live or die, which are Godly decisions. According to them, anyone who expressed sympathy over the death of a blasphemer was also committing blasphemy. Let me commit it then. Salmaan Taseer, may you rest in peace. Aasia Bibi may you count me as one of your supporters.

The writer is a development consultant. She can be reached at coordinator@individualland.com