Daily Times

Even though the first 12 days of Naya Pakistan have been somewhat disappointing, one is willing to heed the Prime Minister’s (PM) call that judgment on the government’s performance should begin after the first three months are over. Teething problems can be overlooked.

There are of course good things too and these must be mentioned and applauded. For one thing, the government has decided to appoint Dr Atif Mian of Princeton on the Economic Advisory Council. Given Dr Mian’s religious background, which had become a major focus when Imran Khan had famously declared that he would be his Finance Minister, PM Khan’s decision to call upon his expertise is not just good for Pakistan’s economic planning but also as a strong symbol that merit will trump bigotry in Naya Pakistan. This is all one wants really and if Imran Khan can ensure this, he will win back even those people who had become disillusioned with him.

The second good thing that the government has done is to immediately attack the climate change problem by starting the 10 billion tree plantation initiative. There is no greater threat to our collective future than climate change. Every citizen of Pakistan, no matter what political opinion or affiliation, must put in their 100 percent in ensuring that this initiative is a roaring success. All of us might not have voted for Imran Khan, but it is in our self-interest as Pakistanis that he succeeds.

The third good thing was the handling of the Dutch cartoon crisis. Though this problem is going to get worse in the coming years, at the moment the government deftly handled the situation. It is not clear what ultimately prompted Geert Wilders to back off from his distasteful cartoon competition, but it is clear that Wilders and Khadim Rizvi are two sides of the same blasphemy coin. They thrive on offence and actions that seek to shock and awe. I am personally a supporter of freedom of speech modeled on the US first amendment, but even that model is not necessarily without exceptions. You do not scream fire in a crowded theater. Ridiculing the Holy Prophet (SAW) who is held in the greatest esteem and regard by 1.8 billion people on this planet, many of who believe it to be their religious duty to avenge any such insult by resorting to violence even, is highly irresponsible and wrong. For me personally, no insult or crass insinuation against the founder of Islam can lower his esteem and therefore, I have always tended to ignore any such provocation with the contempt it deserves, but that is clearly not the case with a great majority of my co-religionists. Wilders’ intent was not just to question the status of the Prophet alone but to excite racial and ethnic hatred against Muslim immigrants in Europe. In this way his actions are analogous to that of holocaust deniers. Just as Holocaust denial is indicative of deep seated anti-semitism, deliberate provocation such as what Wilders does amounts to Islamophobia. Even from a secular angle, Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is perhaps the most influential historical figure in our collective past. Academics of all backgrounds have studied him and no Muslim has any qualms with any honest study of the life of Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAW). What is problematic however, is deliberate offence designed to rile up emotions. That is where such acts go beyond freedom of speech. It also thwarts any chance of progress in the Muslim world towards fair laws and conduct. Pakistan’s Blasphemy Law, for example is misused to settle personal scores but with this kind of provocation, is it any wonder that those who try and reform it face intense opposition from within the Muslim ranks?

What we need now more than ever before, is courage and hope, something which Imran Khan gave us in 1992 as Pakistan’s World Cup winning captain

One does not call for blasphemy laws to be placed to counter such insults. Such laws have no place in the Twenty-first century. However there should be a collective effort to formulate a legal framework that should seek to deal with those mischief-makers who use emotional issues to create public disorder and chaos. It is hoped that the new government of Pakistan will come up with a rational proposal for an international framework to deal with this issue. One is reminded of Sir Zafrullah Khan who had, as Pakistan’s representative in the UN General Assembly, strongly objected to the use of the phrase “Mountain must come to Muhammad” as being objectionable to the feelings of Muslims. The presiding officer who had used the phrase had immediately apologised. Perhaps it is time that humanity collectively distinguished between freedom of speech and the freedom to insult and cause grave offence to an entire people. All the same, academic freedom and bona fide criticism of all religions must also be safeguarded but caricature contests and provocations should not be included in freedom of speech. This is not a religious proposition but simply a rational one. The protection must be a narrow one limited to the founders, icons and master signifiers of various religious and spiritual communities and the insults should be defined as only those that are calculated to cause grave hurt and do not serve any academic purpose or fall within the purview of bona fide criticism. Pakistan’s PM is in an excellent position to draw this fine line and bring much needed balance to this discourse to a position, which would be acceptable to all sides of the debate.

There are of course other foreign policy challenges intertwined with our economic well-being. Most important of these is our placement vis-a-vis the undeclared economic war that is being waged between the US and China. China is an emerging super power. Its objective behind the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), of which CPEC is a central part, is to project its power globally and encircle its potential rivals and competitors. A Chinese military base in Pakistan might look like a loss of sovereignty but it is also great insurance for stability. China has also secured a base in the Maldives and will probably end up getting a base in Sri Lanka as well. What is absolutely important for Islamabad though is to maintain a relationship of parity with Beijing in this new great game. To this end, we cannot and should not become victims of the debt trap. Our priority should be to build up Gwadar on war footing as a new international metropolis that can help us pay back all loans to China. To do this we would have to give Gwadar all the exemptions necessary and to govern it in a manner different from the rest of the country. It should be made into a free trade zone and exempted from the usual concerns and hang ups that plague the rest of Pakistan. A prosperous, modern and tourist friendly Gwadar would be an invaluable asset. The boat that Karachi missed in the late 1970s has now docked in Gwadar. Let us hope that the government has the foresight to undo the mistakes of the past. What we need now more than ever before is courage and hope, something which Imran Khan gave us in 1992 as Pakistan’s World Cup winning captain. One prays that he can do the same as our PM.

The writer is practicing lawyer and was a visiting Fellow at Harvard Law School in Cambridge MA, USA. He blogs at http://globallegalforum.blogspot.com and his twitter handle is @therealylh

Published in Daily Times, September 3^rd 2018.