A Moment of Silence for a Nation Without Conscience

Source: Sky News

The final verdict has finally been delivered on Asia Bibi case, or so we think. It has finally been established by the highest court of the land that the poor Christian woman accused of blasphemy around 8 years ago in an obscure Punjab village was innocent of any of the allegations. Interestingly enough, it was not Asia Bibi but the moral conscience of the entire nation which was on trial. All I can have is just a moment of silence for those who would have done anything to see her hang and are now silent in retreat. Just imagine if they would have been successful in hanging her.

We have seen some of the most disgusting and vile displays of brutality with which certain circles of the society have reacted to her case. While this case was far from the only instance where this trend has been observed, the case has effectively established how the cult of the Prophet in Pakistan has gone totally out of control. This case resulted in the murder of Governor of Punjab Salmaan Taseer, who was the only politician in the country who had the courage to defend her publicly. He was gunned down by his Barelvi guard Mumtaz Qadri, who was widely celebrated by the followers of the cult of the Prophet. It was partially this case that actually became the basis of the rise of arguably one of the craziest political movements in the country. The extremist Barelvi party called Tehreek Labaik Ya Rasool Allah or Tehreek Labaik Pakistan.

Fully backed by the Pakistani deep state to put the then popular PML-N of Nawaz Sharif out of power, the recent law enforcement operation against it could lead you to believe that they are a fringe group. This catchy yet vile anthem of the political party offers an insight into the mindset of a Tehreek Labaik Pakistan voter. There are dozens of fan uploads in which you can see the noose next to Asia Bibi’s photograph.

As a matter of fact, the line in this song about hanging Asia Bibi was covered by dozens of young boys and girls for a mobile video sharing platform. These indeed are no extremist clerics but regular, fun-loving, otherwise peaceful Pakistani Muslims whose conscience bears no guilt over this vulgar display of religious righteousness.

Today, many liberal optimists in Pakistan are saying that justice has been served by the eventual Supreme Court ruling by Justice Khosa. But before making such rosy statements, it must be appreciated how Asia Bibi had been ordered to hang to death even by the high court and the lower courts and how the entire nation had been out of her blood on the streets. Even the expression mass hysteria does not capture the violence and evil in this case. But perhaps they are right, even this ruling by the Supreme Court is nothing short of a miracle.

These are shocking realities that the Pakistani people are not willing to face. Until they address the darkness in their hearts which is at the center of their religious beliefs, until they abolish the atrocious blasphemy law, and until they are not willing to adopt a Secular Constitution, cases like Asia Bibi will keep on surfacing.

All we can hope is for them to surface instead of swept under the carpet.

Advertisements

What the Second or Ahmedi Amendment Means in an Islamic Republic

Source: The News

Most of the Sunni and Shia Muslim majority in Pakistan simply fail to recognize one simple fact of life. That an Islamic Republic is simply not compatible with secular democratic principles or, in other words, a fair social contract. They will simply refuse to even consider addressing the “settled” Ahmedi issue, the sort of vernacular that the Nazis used about the Jewish people during the Third Reich. The Ahmedi community, despite their absurd loyalty, to the state of Pakistan, has received little love from the people of Pakistan. However, recent incidents have even exposed the extent of bigotry to the staunch supporters of the Second Amendment that declared Ahmedi non-Muslims.

The Ahmedi community has actually been receiving punches from both sides of the aisle, as they have been the recipients of abuse during the oath amendment controversy during the final years of the PML-N term. Now in Imran Khan’s reign, the inclusion of Harvard economist Atif Mian has become a matter of dispute and the opposition, including many in the PML-N and PPP, are resorting to raising objections on the nomination of an “enemy of the finality of Prophethood.” Even Sindh Speaker Shehla Raza’s twitter account tweeted messages criticizing the appointment with caustic bigotry, as usual taking claim for the PPP for executing the Second Amendment, which she deleted and apologized for in a very messy way.

Information and Broadcast minister Fawad Chaudhary has dismissed the bigotry and has condemned people citing the Ahmedi faith of the advisor as a problem as far as his appointment is concerned. However, the same minister was pretty much silent about the anti-Ahmedi bigotry that had become his party platform this election. I am sure his public opinion about the Second Amendment must have still remained unchanged as well. So will be the case with the rest of the socially conservative and pro-Islamic Republic followers of the pro-establishment party.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Even the twitter account of Speaker Shehla Raza of PPP criticized the appointment, citing the “great achievement” of the Second Amendment materialized by her party. However, where the opposition is stepping up to bash Imran Khan for appointing an Ahmedi citizen, probably some of the staunchest supporters of the Second Amendment are coming to defend the appointment. The pro-military blog Defense.pk, which usually stands with all the filth that Pakistan stands for, also criticized the basis on which Atif Mian’s appointment was being objected to.

What we miss in the middle of Ahmedi citizens getting crushed in the political clash of PTI and PML-N is that this bigotry surfaces unabated because the state has legitimized it on a legislative scale. This is what the Second Amendment or the Ahmedi Amendment really means in an Islamic Republic, other than the murders of the members of the community and their mosques destroyed and burned.

Until and unless we face this reality as citizens of Pakistan, we will never be able to make progress.

Another Victory for Islam in Pakistan

Source: @Ehzan

The religiosity of the devout Muslims in Pakistan is a remarkable phenomenon. On one hand, the religious conservative Muslims maintain that people of other faith cannot possibly have a safer abode than a Muslim society and yet they will insist on further cornering marginalized community. They will openly express their hate and while this must not be the case with fringe liberal Muslims,

To remind the bigotry of a regular orthodox conservative Muslim in the holy month of Ramadan, a mob in Sialkot destroyed an Ahmedi mosque, which according to Ahmedi pages was 150 years old. The video of the aftermath of destruction is shared by people whose posts are full of derogatory slurs against Ahmedis.

According to American Ahmedi activist, Kashif Chaudhary, the mob consisted of the members if the extremist Tehreek Labaik Ya Rasool Allah. While they are the usual suspects ideologically, the word on twitter, at least as per Rabwah Times, local PTI leader Hafiz Hamid Raza was also involved.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

The news will not be found anywhere in the mainstream Pakistani news media of course, which preaches faux tolerance when it is not spreading hate and bigotry or is calling people to report instances of blasphemy. A more substantial footage of the incident was shared by the Ahmedi page The Rabwah Times. It is immensely important to both report and record incidents such as these because most of the time you will find Pakistani social conservatives even denying their occurrence altogether.

In Pakistan, a lot of fuss is made about security, justice, and law and order. As evident from the speech of the leader of the mob, the members of the district administration were not only present at the site of this incident but were apparently supervising the demolition. But if the federal government accepted defeat on the very same issue to the goons of Labaik Tehreek Ya Rasool Allah after the sit-in protest about six months back in November 2017, this is a small violation in comparison. Ideologically, the Government of Pakistan and its law enforcement backs this religious bigotry.

It is important to point out that this incident is committed by a community that is outraged to this day by the demolition of an obscure Babri Mosque in Ayodhya in India. That incident was undoubtedly a clear example of Hindu extremists in India and resulted in their strained relations with the Muslim community. However, you would expect some level of understanding from the orthodox Muslim groups. Not the case in Sialkot.

But it is also liberal naïvety comparing it to Babri Mosque incident. You need to see the incidents from the eyes of Sunni Muslims too. The mosque belonged to a community which is not supposed to have a mosque according to the Pakistani law. They have only done justice in their eyes.

Again, in the proud history of justice in Pakistan, this incident will shine as yet another example of the exemplary state of civil rights in the country.

How could things possibly be wrong in an Islamic Republic?

This was just another victory for Islam in Pakistan.

People Who Want to Impose Sharia Should Be Socially Isolated By Now

Source: Shahbaz Malik/Express Tribune

Are you not tired of hearing people screaming on TV talk shows that we have not learned our lessons in the war against terrorism? Hearing people ask why we need a military operation every one or two years.

One of the biggest reasons Pakistan has not been fully able to eradicate the tumor of terrorism, and probably never will, is because we speak from the both sides of our mouth. We probably never would be fully able to control the menace of Islamist terrorism because let’s face it, we actively support the ideals of the Taliban, whether good or bad, in Pakistan.

We speak of madrassah reform and guarding the Afghan border, but what do these abstractions really mean if you are silent about allies of terrorism within your borders? What are you going to do about people actively aligning themselves with the ideology of the terrorists?

Have we not implemented the Will and the Law of God by establishing the Objectives Resolution and declaring Pakistan an Islamic Republic? Since then, have we not established the Shariah Courts, as well as the Islamic Ideological Council?

So what is this “Sharia” that these people speak of? Surely, they are referring to the atrocious system that the Taliban have been imposing in Afghanistan and the Northwestern parts of the country, and currently practiced by the menacing Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. This system involves women locked inside their homes and not leaving them without an acquaintance and wrapped in face veils, as well as cruel and inhumane penalties such as stoning to death and public floggings.

Perhaps, you could argue that they are free to do so under their constitutional right of the freedom of association, if not out of pure religious obligation. If this is what freedom of religion is going to protect, then we should have nothing to do with that constitutional liberty.

But here is the question that we all must be asking. Why should such people be treated any less harshly than the way the Communist party workers were during the Cold War years? We had the luxury to malign them socially for allegedly being atheists, as many of them would have been. But how to counter the hardcore Islamist who thinks that the common Pakistani, always busy dodging the label of kafir, is an infidel?

The Pakistani military’s periodic and desperate outbursts against Islamist militants ironically branded by fancy Arabic names are not going to achieve anything lasting. Because probably they are scared enough to even address the Islamists within their own rank and file. It is because they are not even there yet to address the madrasahs at home, which are virtually sanctuaries for Islamism.

We live in a country where people get away with issuing amateur fatwas of death against just about anyone they please. Especially, when these legal opinions are considered established verdicts. Let that sink in. That is the state of morality of our nation at the moment. So, of course, we are not going to hear anyone challenge the authorities of the assets of Islamism in the country. Everyone is too scared.

Islamist terrorists around the world, from Al-Qaida and the Islamic State to Hezbollah and Muslim Brotherhood, are sadly united by one battle cry. Their local ally Jamaat-e-Islami is no exception. All of them are pan-Islamists at heart and support global domination of theocracy by belief and practice it under the guise of practicing their mystical version of “Sharia.” A doctrine that brutally destroys humanities, arts, and culture, whether secular or religious. Sometimes even taking refuge in democratic systems to drive their undemocratic totalitarian agenda.

The fact of the matter remains, and our civil and military leadership should realize it, that supporters of Taliban terrorists are present throughout the country. A suicide bomber does not reach Sehwan from the Afghan border in a day. Every single person who wants to “establish Sharia” despite living in an Islamic Republic happens to be one for starters. Because clearly, they have more sinister designs in mind which are threatening to the way of life of the cultures of the Indus.

Considering the latest in news, you can safely estimate that the security establishment is focusing its attention on, if not taking sadistic pleasure in, persecuting the perfectly wrong elements. Of course, this sort of behavior would be absolutely unacceptable in a parallel universe, but since we are condemned to be stuck in this one, let us hope that they amend their focus to the real threats faced by the nation.

However, it is important to get some perspective in order to achieve that. By the way, the imposition of Sharia as these people see it would not just be an ideological defeat to a handful of harmless secular bloggers isolated in their respective bubbles. It would be as great an inconvenience to the obscenely lavish and Westernized lifestyle of our honorable politicians, generals, and bureaucrats. A group of people who have colluded to force their subjects to live by very different rules.

As long as the state does not correct its focus, the pointless firefighting drills against the real enemies of the state would never end.

And it is about time we reject and isolate those around us demanding “Sharia” ourselves because our leaders do not have the guts to take action.

The post was originally published in The Nation blogs.

Sectarian Diplomacy to End Sectarian Terrorism

Source: Times of Israel

Source: Times of Israel

This September, the New York Times featured a surprising piece from the Iranian foreign minister. Reading the article, you would find that he has curiously coined a new term for Islamic terrorism: “Wahhabism.” But sadly, it is not as clear as it sounds.

While you would occasionally come across the term used by Shia social media warriors every now and then, it certainly has not been a part of the mainstream with such political connotations. But now that it is, it effectively condemns an entire school of Islamic thought and apparently calls for its annihilation, correct me if I am wrong please. Imagine the outrage among our progressive liberals had the Saudi foreign minister made such an appeal to get rid of Shiite Islam.

Either the Iranian foreign minister is extremely naïve or wants to instigate divisive sectarian action from Muslims on purpose. While you could argue that the complaints against the Wahhabi school of Islam are not completely without substance, what about his verdict? If the Saudis are doing so with their action, such rhetoric surely would contribute to the problem. And I say this while appreciating that Iran needs its fair share of public relations to improve its image in the western world as well.

It is hard to interpret anything else from the term “Wahhabism” and “getting rid of it from the world,” which sounds a touch too sectarian a solution to end a sectarian problem. Unless it is really a new expression for Saudi foreign policy or radical Islamic terrorism as practiced by ISIL, Boko Haram, and Al-Qaida, instead of the theological school. Especially because like all Shias and Sunnis, not all Wahhabis must believe in militant and expansionist Islam apparently. At least not openly, like the rest.

I don’t recall if ever before a high-ranking diplomat has ever called for the annihilation of an Islamic school of theology. Either that or the title of the opinion article is terribly misleading. I find it shocking that a prestigious publication such as The New York Times would provide a platform to such outrageous ideas. But then again, it is also an effective way of publishing an insight into how the Iranian regime sees the world.

The main point in the article was much needed though that the Western world should wake up to the excesses of the Saudi foreign policy around the world. There is no doubt that Saudi Arabia has been a disgraceful ally of the West due to the kingdom’s regressive and even malicious policies in the region. Saudi Arabia also needs to be called out for its anti-Iran aggression. Even arguing for sanctions against Saudi Arabia for its human rights violations makes perfect sense, but probably not what the title of his article suggests.

The point about the correlation of Islamic militant activity with the presence of Saudi funding of theological schools abroad is interesting, but does that mean that the very theology of Wahhabism is exclusively responsible for it? It is possible but consider this. Are Islamic militancy, expansionism, and enforcing of theocracy exclusive to Wahhabi Islam? Furthermore, are Wahhabism and the Saudi regime one and the same? More importantly, are all Wahhabi Muslims extremists and militants?

In my opinion, the Koranic literalism and strict monotheism of Wahhabism have done more harm than good in terms of tolerance and harmony in more diverse and almost pluralistic Muslim societies such as Pakistan, but I am not sure if it should be banned as a theology or if we should “rid it from the world.” We are well aware that this has been a standard of freedom of religion in the Islamic Republic of Iran, or even in Saudi Arabia. But why should the free world follow those undemocratic values?

In making his case, the Iranian foreign minister pretends as though Islamist tendencies are absolutely absent in schools other than the Wahhabis. Sadly, the regime he represents deny that assertion. Furthermore, Iran also regularly backs Palestinian and Lebanese terrorist organizations that target Israel, if not other militant and political activity in the region. Especially, when Mr. Zarif speaks of the brutalities of the Syrian rebels while defending the sociopathic policies of the Assad regime, which is probably still using chemical weapons against its citizens.

At the end of the article, the Iranian foreign minister graciously invites the Saudis to join the fight against “Wahhabism.” What a joke. But this probably implies that by “Wahhabism,” he actually means radical Islamic terrorism instead of the Wahhabi school of theology. Though I am not sure if that means that either of the countries is in a position to reject Islamic militancy, which remains to be their weapon of choice.

In the very same article, the author declares Wahhabism a “theological perversion.” How terribly confusing. However, Mohammad Javad Zarif, the apparently cheerful Iranian statesman who does not dress like an Iranian cleric, does not come across as such a confused man by any means. He has a successfully negotiated nuclear deal with the United States under his belt, resulting in the lifting of some economic sanctions.

With a diplomat as brilliant and capable as Zarif, I think he knows perfectly well what he is writing about. In any case, it is a desperate attempt to counter the Saudi PR offensive he complains about.

The confusion that the article produces seems to be a case of deliberate ambiguity that could make the most out of the general ignorance of Islam among Western audiences. However, it needs to be called out for the nonsense that it really is. Not to take away from the fact that the credibility of the messenger ruins whatever traces of sincerity could be found in the message.

Probably the Iranian foreign minister should stop confusing everyone and join the rest of the world in referring to Islamic terrorism with the word that everyone understands. Terrorism. After all, you are not going to fight “radical Islam” unless you say the words.

A version of this post was originally published in The Nation blogs.

The Chabahar Deal Reveals India’s Double Standards on State Terrorism

Source: indiatoday.in

Source: indiatoday.in

Mumbai attacks not only devastated India to its very core but has also shaken the conscience of the world, including many in Pakistan. The attacks were undoubtedly one of the most shocking since 9/11 anywhere around the world, but were significant due to India’s findings that the Pakistani state could have been involved.

Since then, India has maintained a principled stance of holding Pakistan accountable for letting Islamist militants, if not its citizens, use their territory to harm Indian people and state assets. While there is a long history of such attacks and allegations, including the attack on the Indian Parliament, the recent attacks on the Pathankot airbase have opened the old wounds that have destroyed relations between India and Pakistan.

However, India’s high standards of fighting state terrorism go down the toilet drain when it comes to its relations with Iran. The recent Chabahar Deal points to a partnership that goes far deeper than just bilateral trade. This does a little disservice to the great stance adopted in fighting the resistance from Pakistan to acknowledge its shortcomings, if not crimes.

Other than North Korea, Iran is the only country that openly calls for the death and condemnation of the Western civilization, as well as openly threatening the annihilation of Israel. Not to mention, a nuclear Iran could pose the sort of dangers for the Middle East that are unprecedented. Again, Israel being the focal point of all the threats.

Furthermore, Iran also has a dubious history of backing Shia militias all over the Middle East, orchestrating an attack on the Saudi ambassador to the United States and has grown tremendously in terms of influence following the fall of the Saddam regime. A recent report from the State Department finds Iran as the top sponsor of state terrorism in the world.

There is nothing about these findings that India is unaware of. India ignores the awful diplomatic stances of Iran, which has almost made the Islamic Republic a pariah in the international community.

There is no doubt that Pakistan has lost face with awful and unacceptable state policies such as allegedly sheltering Osama Ben Laden and backing certain factions of the Taliban and other anti-India militant groups. However, even Pakistan cannot even imagine to take the kind of disastrous and self-destructive diplomatic lines that Iran is known for.

It is shocking that most countries in the world would even remotely be comfortable with a state that openly intimidates more vulnerable targets such as Israel. What is even more shocking is the lack of protest over the Chabahar Deal from Israel, Gulf Arab states and other Western countries concerned about growing antisemitism around the world. However, that is just as baffling as Arab countries and Pakistan not standing behind Israel against the Iranian threat.

India has many strategic and political reasons to partner with Iran. For many, the discussion ends just there. Many are seeing Chabahar as Iran’s answer to Pakistan’s development of the Gwadar port, partnering with China, which is something India should invest in by all means. So while the pragmatist would immediately dismiss any moralist criticism on the Indian foreign policy, the viewpoint is not entirely irrelevant when it comes to Iran’s relations with several of India’s other friends.

While Pakistan and China sound like the perfect recipe of evil, Iran and India are as odd in terms of the moral perceptions of the states as fire and water. However, India has hardly ever explicitly condemned Iran’s irresponsible state stances and has turned a blind eye to several of its dubious activities in the region, including the support of Hamas and Hezbollah.

Probably no other state officially adopts violent rhetoric as a part of its foreign policy than Iran. North Korea is the only other that comes remotely close.

Of course, Iran’s diplomatic irresponsibility should not divorce it from the international community. The recent US-Iran nuclear deal is a part of the second chances being offered to the Islamic Republic. However, Iran needs to mend its own ways for its perception to improve. With the development of ballistic missiles, Iran’s threat to Israel is as real and dangerous as ever.

While India has the right to establish the sort of relations that it deems fit with any nation, ties such as those with Iran undermine its moral authority to lecture on state terrorism.

Not to mention an insult to the memory of the souls departed in the Mumbai attacks.

The post was originally published in The Nation blogs.

The Most Tolerant Nation on Earth

Source:  bosnewslife.com

Source: bosnewslife.com

Pakistanis are by far the most tolerant nation on earth.

They are easily the most tolerant considering how much shit they put up with. I am not even sure why are they accused of intolerance in the society, considering their loving, forgiving nature.

Want to try it? Ask the person sitting next to you about the possible hanging of Asia Bibi. Or even the YouTube ban, which is so embarrassing, that it makes you wonder if you should ever say that you are proud to be a Pakistani.

But enough of the elitist first world digital age problems.

Just look at all the tolerance that has been going on all this time. We have been tolerating and forgiving every single atrocity. From the Gojra riots to the Joseph Colony arson, and from the murder of Christian couple in Kot Radha Kishan to the Gulberg Park bombing, all is in the natural order of things.

The recent episode has been the condemnation of the entire community of Christians in Mandi Bahauddin in the name of the honor of the Prophet. We have had such cases several times, in which a person’s loose tongue has warranted the collective punishment of a community. Won’t be the last because we are too tolerant to be moved by such horrors.

Perhaps the only way to survive is to convert to Islam once and for all. Because somehow that makes the rioting majority love the “janitors” all of a sudden.  Though think about it, who would remain a janitor if everyone converted to Islam? Perhaps that thought could ignite some intolerance among the forgiving majority.

I must say, these Christians and Hindus in Pakistan are either too brave or too moronic. And don’t even mention the Ahmedis. They are a special, incurable breed of crazy.

Things like that usually do not happen in most countries, and when they do, it is usually a big deal. But no, it’s just business as usual for Pakistan. Just shut up, look the other way. Hey, harmony and inner peace are important. At least, that’s what my shrink tells me.

We can still question considered outrageous in a parallel universe called Planet Earth, and ask our fellow citizens for their reaction. Only to be met by a silence, by looking the other way.

We privately do question these atrocities, but would seldom do it in public. With the exception of a few nutcases such as Sabeen Mahmud, Jibran Nasir, Taimur Rehman and Farzana Bari, who are so passionate in their activism that it honestly makes me nauseate and feel ashamed at the same time. That is why they remain constantly under the attacks of extremists and nationalist conservatives.

And I wonder if they make a hypocrite like me feel ashamed, what about folks with much higher moral standards? At least to not look the other way.

But do these handful really represent the majority of our society? While they are acting on the logic of the attendance of the Islamic funeral alright, but is their tiny participation enough to make a difference? Perhaps not, because these drivers-of-foreign-agenda are far outnumbered by more tolerant, more patriotic, nicer people.

The tolerance of our moralist political commentators on the television is particularly praiseworthy, who would constantly babble sermons against financial corruption day in and day out. While their passion for mourning the stolen wealth of the nation is exemplary, they would also look the other way when atrocities against non-Muslims, or even the peasants of Renala Khurd, are brought up.

Perhaps, it is time that the educated, civilized Pakistan become a little intolerant in order to discourage, if not put an end to, atrocities against the cornered. Too much to ask?

But then again, it’s probably propaganda funded by foreign NGOs anyway, for which I have thanked these mysterious organizations several times before.

It is probably wise not to care for the sheep and steer clear of the shearer. Because that appears to be in the self-interest of those who have not gotten to the position of the vulnerable yet. Besides, it’s safe.

Granted, but should we be doing that and claim moral superiority for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and its great, true national faith? Because God knows that claim is true.

That still raises some serious moral questions of a population pious enough to go to great lengths not to miss a fast on even a single day in the scorching, dehydrating heat of June.

 

Too bad God only cares about those who really believe in him and those who fast during the month of Ramadan.

 

A version of the post was originally published in The Nation blogs.