FOCUS

MALALA YOUSAFZAI – 

THE UNLIKELY HEROINE

9th Oct. 2012, can go down as the most-memorable date in the history of movements for EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN, the world over, especially those among the Muslim fraternity.

On that fateful day, two gunmen stopped an open-backed van carrying a dozen girls to school in Mingora, the largest town of Swat region in Pakistan. The gunmen asked for Malala by name, ‘Where is Malala? Who is Malala?’But she was the only one who never covered her face unlike the rest of girls in the vehicle, and she said, as if to challenge the gunman, ‘I am Malala’, and the world around, for those school going girls, came crashing down. Gunmen shot Malala twice, at point blank range. It was mayhem. This attack was carried out by TNSM which is an Urdu acronym of Movement for the Enforcement of Islamic Sharia (Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi).

Stories of fundamentalism, many time violent, is as old as Pakistan. It has always been there in different forms and in different degree of intolerance. In initial stages of the newly formed Pakistan Islamic Republic, it was the minorities who were targeted to keep these fundamentalists busy from other mischiefs. Over the years Non-Muslim minorities became less and less, largely because, of forced conversion including forced marriage of girls from minority communities, to Muslim men.  According to available statistics, minorities who were about 30% just after 1947 is around 1% in 2012. These fundamentalists were even making these minority men and women, more often Christians, as targets of blasphemy, in trying to get even with West. Most of these Pakistani fundamentalists, are of Sunny denomination. After getting even with non Muslim minorities, they turned their ire on Shias and other Muslim minorities including Ahmediyas. Ahmediyas in Pakistan are living a vulnerable life, since, court in Pakistan has declared them as non-Muslims. There are smaller Muslim minority groups, who have been trying to cross over to India in apprehension of these Sunny fundamentalist turned militant groups. Bloodshed between Sunny-Shia intransigence is well known. Despite all these openly happening on a continuous scale, Pakistani civil society or the government has not been successful in reigning them as better humans.

Former Secretary of State under Bill Clinton administration, Madeleine Albright, was spot on, when she called Pakistan, an ‘international migraine’. Because of the failure of civil society and successive governments in Pakistan these fundamentalist groups, disruptive and armed, have been spreading mayhem, all around. While Pakistan probably suffers to a larger extent, the tentacles of these militant terror groups have spread all over the sub-continent, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Afghanistan, North West China. Operations of these groups increased many folds against India after Zia-ul-Haq became the President of Pakistan, who not only killed Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto, a former Pakistani President, but also vowed to wage war on India with ‘thousand cuts’. This was primarily an invite to militant terror group of Pakistan to attack India in small doses in different parts of the country. These militant groups, turned terrorists, did exactly that.

But unfortunately for Pakistan, the policy of encouraging terrorism against India–slowly became a Frankenstein Monster. It was a case of chicken coming home to roost. These groups, from being funded by the state, became self supporting by extortion and other intimidatory activities and slowly wriggled out of any government controls. While civil society in Pakistan was yearning for democratic reforms of the country’s socio/political life, it was these militant outfits who were truly enjoying the freedom.

Thus fundamentalists, who made a common cause with militants, started dictating the civil society, about the do’s and don’ts. Burqua was one of their first items of enforcement. While it may be true that Pakistan has far less people from civil society wearing a burqua or hijab, than their counterparts in India, these militant outfits targeted women, where civil society was not strong. Thus they started with boycotting and forcing banning of Indian Hindi films being shown in Pakistan. Cricketing world has not forgotten how Sri Lankan cricket team just got saved in time, when they were attacked by some terrorist groups. 

Pakistan, ever since its birth, was an US ally in the war against USSR. They remained pliant for all the demands of US under all administrations, of both Republicans and Democrats. Huge funding was the necessary corollary of such a working arrangement. However, ever since USA realised that Pakistan is indeed a terror hub with tentacles spread far and wide, and especially after 9/11, it tightened the screw around Pakistani government and forced them to play the ball as per U.S design. To fight terror, U.S. government pumped billion of $ into Pakistan economy. Over the years, U.S learnt of the double game Pakistan was playing while using some money as U.S wanted, rest went elsewhere. However the crackdown by the Pak Army on these militant terror outfits did see its backlash. It slowly became a kind of internal war between Pakistan military and different terror groups. Now it was, as if, the chicken came home to roost, after all. The monster it created started getting back to it.

Harold Gould, a visiting scholar at the Centre for South Asian Studies of University of Virginia is credited to have written, commenting on U.S. Afghan Policy. “Over the years Pakistani public allowed itself to be hijacked by Islamic fundamentalists as a buffer to “Hindu India” phobia. According to him “Islamic fanaticism, conjoined with military authoritarianism has ripped Pakistan to shreds and will provoke its eventual political disintegration”. Harold Gould is an American writing from his perspective. How Pakistanis themselves look at the problems facing their nation state?

Pervez Hoodbhoy, a Professor of Physics at Quaid-e-Azam University, is one of the bolder breed of liberal Pakistani thinkers, who has the gumption to take-on the extremists in Pakistan. Appearing in T.V., after the assassination of Salman Taseer, Governor of Punjab, Prof Hoodbhoy called Mullahs as the self-appointed ‘thekaydars’ (contractors) of Islam.

As the sub-continent is privy to the knowledge, that Governor Taseer, who demanded change in the ‘Blasphemy Laws’ of Pakistan, was gunned down by his own body guard. Reportedly he pumped 22 bullets into the man whom he was deputed to protect, and became a bit of a hero to a large section of Pakistanis, including college students. This is a very serious development in the evolution of Pakistan. It is obvious civil society represented by the likes of Prof Hoodbhoy and deceased Governor Taseer is slowly losing out to extremists in Pakistan. This is a matter of deep concern.

In the growing cacophony of radicals and clerics, usurping the reins of power by radicals, is the reality of emerging Pakistan. It is in this context that militant groups decided to hit the vulnerable section of the society. Girl students are the easiest to hit.

However, in the context of hit and run case involving Malala Yousafzai, it is very important to recollect her evolution as an activist.  Malala came into public attention, reportedly in 2009, when she wrote for the first time to the BBC Urdu service her collection of notings about life under Taliban. She was only 11 years old. Her father is the one who started a primary school in Mingora. He is an education activist. He along with his daughter were campaigning for girls’ right to education, which Taliban had opposed. For the record, Taliban militants had destroyed over 150 schools in 2008 alone.

According to UK’s Daily Telegraph correspondent in Pakistan “Malala Yousafzai was one of the few brave voices who spoke out”. She received support and encouragement from her parents, while recognising the risk involved in challenging Taliban dictats. Ziauddin, father of Malala, had received death threats from Taliban for his girls’ education activism.

Despite fear of Talibani reprisal, Malala started to appear on T.V. to publicly advocate female education. Pakistani government did a commendable job in publicly recognising her and awarded her with the National Peace Award in 2011, as soon as she was nominated by the Kids Rights Foundation for its International Peace Prize. Malala had indeed become a symbol of resistance to Taliban. For a 13 year old girl it was indeed incredible and highly inspiring. “Malala was the lone voice in that wilderness” wrote the local Express Tribune, commenting on Malala speaking live to BBC in Nov.2011.

Her shooting on that fateful day in October 2012 understandably shocked the entire nation of Pakistan. Writes New Statesman, “Her shooting has shocked the unshockable Pakistan”. “Malala rose to heights, few of us can aspire to” wrote Express Tribune. “Hers was the voice which made us consider that indeed, there can be alternative, and there can be resistance to all forms of tyranny” it continued.

Thus, the blood letting of Malala, her supreme sacrifice, of almost dying after being shot in the head, has given a credible life line for the surging hope, that Malala is being heard. Yes truly speaking, her valiant fight and fight back from her hospital bed in England is inspiring not just for Pakistani girls but the entire world for its sheer audacity in the face of extreme madness of Taliban.

The good news is, Malala is recovering. There has been a surge of enthusiasm among all average Pakistanis. They do hope that she can become the beacon of hope for girl’s education. There has been even talk of nominating Malala for Nobel Peace Prize. 

But what is important is, the life of average girl in Pakistan’s interiors should change for better. Post Malala episode, can it happen? is the question that cannot be entirely answered. While it is true that efforts are afoot to ensure that this bloodletting by this young girl counts for something, whether it is Hollywood’s Angelina Jolie, or former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown who suggested that 9th Oct. be declared “Education for Girls Day”, or even Madonna dedicating a song etc. But these are from western countries and unfortunately these responses are being taken in Pakistan negatively, to portray Malala as ‘Western Agent’, and is giving ‘Pak a bad name’. That, if  true, is indeed very tragic. Hope the sacrifice of Malala is not wasted, but kept alive in the Pak media by the Pakistani civil society for the larger good of Pakistani women at least. “One girl stood upto the Taliban. Will the rest of the Pakistan join her?” asked Krista Mahr from Islamabad. This is a good question. And Pakistan must attempt to answer it with courage and conviction.

OBAMA’S RE-ELECTION &

 LESSONS FOR INDIA

So, whatever the poll pundits have been saying, Barack Hussain Obama has made it to the White House for the 2nd and the final time. It was indeed a bit of dream run for the beleaguered first non-white Chief Executive Officer of the world’s most powerful country. The narrow margin predicted all along turned turtle by giving Obama a  margin of 130 votes more than Romney’s, at 336 as against 203. Yes, despite all the negatives, Americans have voted for continuity. They gave Obama one more chance. And come to think of it, he is only the 2nd Democrat to have made it for the 2nd time to the White House since World War II. And all have tried to help him make it, American people, American media besides global opinion makers. He made it despite unemployment, price rise and recession being the serious problems of the country. Of course his opponent Mitt Romney tried his best to upstage Obama, by blaming him for all the economic ills of U.S.A. It is true Obama did not have answers to all questions. He could only partially address some of the problems. It is also true he did not perform well during his first 4 years, not because he is incompetent, may be because he inherited these problems. But sincerity, integrity and honesty are the qualities American’s value in public life. Obama is sincere, honest with impeccable integrity. That saw the day thru' for Obama.

So for four more years, ups and down of electoral politics, popularity charts, or writing balance sheet of the government in power, shall be consigned to the cold room, as far as Barack Obama is concerned. Of course next time round, past three years, there will be a talk about the next man getting elected by the parties and it will go on and on, in its relentless time bound cycle.

Coming to Indian elections, unlike U.S. presidency where ‘Two terms’ is the limit. In India, it is infinity. Putting limit to elected office is a very healthy practice. A practice Indians would never agree, despite knowing it fully that continuity of one person indefinitely has always eroded the fairness in the whole exercise.

A sitting Karnataka MLA sharing a platform with an activist, boasted of his 5 victories already completed and was contesting for the 6th time. The activist questioned the MLA, ‘what about those who toiled day in & day out to ensure your victory? When shall they get their turn to stand for election?’ was his articulated question. The question was very relevant. If our developments, both political and economic, do not make available, opportunity of growth and advancement, then there is something seriously wrong with it.  Of course it is another matter that the MLA, in question above, felt very very angry. His dark face had turned red. He was deeply upset, as his applecart suddenly faced challenge from unexpected quarters.

This change of restricting every person to an-X-number of   opportunities to contest should be nationally debated in the media and in legislative houses-both state and federal-for the fair play to be the norm, as it is in U.S. and some other equitable societies.

Around 2005, two representatives of a very prominent newspaper walked into my office and asked “Sir you must read our daily” I said “I stopped reading it, since you are very subjective.” “No-No things have changed at the helm, we are better now” was the ready reply of twosome. To take my argument further I said “this government at the center is only an year old, the last government worked for 5 years. Every govt. does some good and in some they fail to bring positive result. No govt can be accused of complete failure or negative.  You didn’t write anything positive about the NDA, which lost power” “We hate BJP” was the quick riposte of one of the guys. I had to remind him of my statement that 'your paper is subjective', which he himself emphatically proved by stating “We hate BJP”. No media member, either print or electronic should have any bias in reporting the truth. Bias in judgement is bad, and media, prima facie loses its relevance. Of course two gentlemen left my office having failed to convince me to buy their paper.

Now in India this ambivalent or partisan stand is the fact of life, something, in U.S. it may not be found. Because media’s treatment of issues is fair, the fight in the hustings was so much closely fought, yet the electorates gave another chance to Obama. This shows, the innate goodness and honesty of the candidate,  became a rallying point for Americans to give him continuity, thus another chance. Coming to Indian result of 2004, when NDA was given thumbs down, it was definitely felt that they should have been given another chance for the positive work they did. They were there only for one full term, and to say that they have done nothing good, except put all blame ostensibly for Gujarat violence, was an unfair judgement. One of the best projects of free India has been the Golden Quadrilateral Road Connectivity. This was a project deserved to have been taken up in 1950s & 1960s, when Congress was in power for all 45 years or so. Added to that are 10 more years that it got in 2004 & 2009. All have acknowledged the multiplier effect of this mega project which truly opened up the country as never before and affected most Indians all across the country. There have been other positives as well, but also there were negatives, including the Gujarat violence. And most media gave NDA thumbs down even before the election of 2004.

However one more chance in 2004 to this NDA govt. of full 5 years could have been the better barometer of performance, which our electorate, influenced by different quarters did not give. But Americans being certainly more educated and fair did give Obama another chance, despite his colourless performance, for his innate goodness and the hope that he ignites.

Another game changer is the unaccounted black money that, in India, is allowed to play its pre-eminent role in election spending, unlike U.S. elections, where all contributions are open and accounted for. So, greater is your money power, black or blacker, better the chances of winning in India.

Then there are religious diktats by Temples, Churches and Masjids in India, who appeal to voters to vote according to the agenda of vested interest, which is not the case with the United States. People who voted for Obama were not just his black compatriots, but also Indians of all religions, not just Christians, since Obama is a Christian or even Muslim, since he is born half Muslim to a Muslim father, but all Indians cutting across the religious divide besides other Asians. And of course Hispanics and even Anglo Saxon Whites. His being a Christian, was never an issue in getting so emphatically elected with over 62% seats. This shows the innate maturity of American’s in voting for a person of integrity and value rather than his irrelevant baggage of the past. 

Look at the way Obama spoke at his victory rally. Mark his words. Quote “I just spoke with Gov. Romney and I congratulated him and Paul Ryan on a hard-fought campaign. We may have battled fiercely, but it’s only because we love this country deeply and we care so strongly about its future. From George to Lenore to their son Mitt, the Romney family has chosen to give back to America through public service and that is the legacy that we honor and applaud tonight. In the week ahead, I also look forward to sitting down with Gov. Romney to talk about where we can work together to move this country forward”.

This is what a leader is expected to say, when it comes to his opponents. What do we witness in India! Running down the opponent in a wholesale fashion! Our leaders even condemn them while on a foreign soil. Aren’t we privy to such utterance by a Prime Minister against opposition and its leaders! This is out and out negative politics. The bonhomie which American politics offers is a lesson in co-operative co-existence, which India seriously lack. This is an important lesson for India. Our leaders need to update their learning in the larger national interest to improve the working relationship across the political spectrum.

This is not an attempt at surmonising. There will always be guys who will brush aside all these remarks with a ‘as if we do not know it?' syndrome. Hope all concerned take this in appropriate spirit for the national goal of Sarvodaya of Mahatma Gandhi or the Sarve Janaa Sukhino Bhavantu of our scripture, rather than the 'Greatest Good of Greatest Number' of John Ruskin, certainly not the 'greatest good of smallest number' as is the norm in India of contemporary times. 

J.Shriyan