Pakistan had taken sides in a foreign war at the behest of a military dictator. We offered our proxy support, on behalf of America and financed, radicalized and trained a group of mostly poor and ignorant men. Armed with weapons and a reason to fight they were successful in achieving a military objective. For us any reason they had to fight was welcome as long as it helped us in winning the war. In the words of Sarah Humayun, ‘We might not have believed in their brand of Islam, but we could ignore the gulf between it and the variety commonly practiced in the larger interest of fostering a sense of solidarity between the puppets and the puppeteers’.
When the warriors came home with a war in tow, naturally, they expected to be greeted with garlands. Instead they were branded terrorists and put behind bars. Understandably, the warriors were dismayed. This was altogether too confusing. Disgruntled by the attitude of their former patrons, they bred another generation of warriors that was more militant and more devout in the cause of jihad.
A number of political analysts see terrorism as a reaction and as an outcome of a flawed foreign policy rather than as a complex problem arising from multiple causes with a meticulously created jihadi culture not the least important among them. Analysts advocate different strategies to deal with the current situation. Some argue that madrassas should be replaced with modern schools; others recommend negotiations with the militants on a give and take basis. Still others advocate a holistic strategy of employing a broad based economic and political reform agenda. But all of these are long-term strategies that even though essential, still leave the militants in possession of a dangerous theology getting more toxic in the process of being transferred to the next generation of militants.
Most of us are not ready to acknowledge or debunk myths associated with an ideology that helped win the Afghan War against the Soviets and is one of the key factors that is feeding extremism in Pakistan. The task is easier proclaimed than done as is obvious by the murder of whoever has initiated it: government officials, journalists, political leaders, tribal maliks and elders. As written in a Daily Times editorial, ‘The fear that besets the political parties is expressed through the reluctance of the coalition partners to take the ministry of interior at the centre because it is most targeted by Al Qaeda. The trend is apparent in the general tendency to ignore the news pointing to Al Qaeda’s involvement in incidents of terrorism in the country. The TV channels discuss them little because they can’t get discussants who will speak the truth fearlessly. The newspapers now put such news on the inside pages.’
The situation is compounded when in the interest of a particularistic point of view, truth takes a back seat and impartiality is abandoned in favor of whatever suits a narrow and one sided view best. An ethnocentric and simplistic approach resorts to ‘our- people- being- killed- rhetoric’ (in the words of Ata-ul-Musawir), that targets one party in the conflict and positions the other comfortably and dangerously on an undeserved moral high ground. This process of assigning a moral high ground is even more baffling in view of the fact that the side thus elevated believes in a Muslim killing a Muslim in a ‘jihad against a third party’.
Even replacing dictatorship with democracy may not bear fruit in the short term as the militants do not particularly care for a democratic system. The militants want abolition of the draconian tribal laws because they want them replaced with an equally draconian Sharia Law. In Pakistan, Baitullah Mehsud and Maulana Fazlullah are not alone in preaching the merits of Sharia, the evils of female education and the worth of jihad. There are scores of others who subscribe to similar views. Posters outside shops in Lahore sponsored by Hizb-ul-Tehreer proclaim, ‘Jamhooriat ke liye vote dalna haram he. Khilafat sahi Islami nizam hai’ An ‘expert’ in a television program, Brass Tacks, on TV One, expands on the benefits of jihad against Israel and India on a weekly basis, with solemn ferocity and righteous dignity. He even supports his line of reasoning by regularly quoting Quaid-e-Azam in connection with Jihad.
It is not just the suicide bomber who is in a position to tear the fabric of our society apart, nor is bombing the only manifestation of an extremist bent of mind. Extremism often manifests itself by killing, maiming and torturing women in the name of honor. Crimes against women, although not always religious in nature, derive sustenance from a distorted view of religion. Hadood punishments are enforced throughout the Islamic world taking advantage of the silence of millions of Muslims thus perverting the very principles of justice that form the basis of moral action in any great belief system. There are patriotic Pakistanis, not even of a fundamentalist ilk, (the term is relative and the meaning depends on who is defining it) who see the moral vigilantism emanating from Lal Mosque as a reaction to ‘shahadat’ of mosques in Islamabad. They would like to bring the facts of the Lal Mosque operation to light (rightly so) but are reluctant to investigate the illegal actions of the clerics and their followers including the burka clad guardians of morality.
Years of money, madrassas and indoctrination have created a Frankenstein’s monster and equally great efforts at de-indoctrination are required to disassemble it and this is where the role of the people comes in. The public can pitch in for the aid of the politicians by speaking in unison against extremism of all kinds. The political leaders are likely to remain apologetic and a target of terrorists’ attacks until supported by the people at large. Silence or sympathy on the part of the people inadvertently aids the militants in their agenda of spreading mayhem, anarchy and chaos.
The fight against extremism will entail policy adjustments on multiple levels but the support of the people will be a vital factor in winning it. Those who are unhappy about the erstwhile jihadis being branded terrorists must come up with an alternative strategy that involves communicating honestly with the militants. Our-people-turned-terrorists need to be told that even though war can sometimes be justified, it is too momentous a decision to be left to the whims of an irregular army. The only legitimate way to fight a war is through the consensus of a democratically elected government. The militants must be told that they have been blatantly manipulated and the whole philosophy of their epic struggle of the last two decades was false, concocted and plainly bogus. It is time to expose all mythical doctrines that endorse barbarity in the name of Islam.