There is nothing to feel
happy about this, not least because despite the overwhelming evidence of
Pakistanis and the Pakistani political-military establishment being involved in
global terrorism, there are a vast number of Pakistanis who are appalled by
jihadi violence and have been forthright in disowning and denouncing those of
their own who have blood on their hands. The mullah is not exactly an object of
reverence in polite, decent, educated Pakistani society. To get an idea of what
Pakistanis think of those who continue to fetch infamy for their country one
just needs to read the editorial and op-editorial pages of the Dawn and the
Nation.
An
example should suffice: While media in India went into throes of ecstasy over a
bogus Deobandi ‘fatwa’ against terrorism, in which everything but Islamist
terrorism had been criticised and declared un-Islamic, Dawn had the gumption to
call the bluff of Deobandis in Pakistan when they recently tried a similar
sleight of hand. Based on my interaction with young Pakistani journalists, I
would vouch for their opposition to savagery in the name of Islam. Stereotyping
all Pakistanis, therefore, would be wrong and grossly
unfair….
Mohammed
Atta, who flew a passenger jetliner into the World Trade Center, was not a
Pakistani but an Egyptian. His fellow terrorists were of Saudi origin. In recent
times, the underpants bomber who panicked when he saw smoke emanating from his
crotch after he pulled the string, did not carry a Pakistani passport; Umar
Farouk Abdulmutallab alias Omar Farooq al-Nigeri is a Nigerian.--
Kanchan Gupta
By Kanchan Gupta
Those who abhor instant coffee, even if it’s a designer brand with a
fancy prize tag marketed by Nescafe, would also have a distaste for instant news
analysis. As with instant coffee — you take a spoonful, stir it into a cup of
hot water, add some sugar and milk, and voila, your coffee is ready — so also
with instant news analysis dished out by 24x7 television news channels: Get a
self-proclaimed ‘expert’, make him sit in the studio with a couple of smug
journalists who obviously have too little to do and a lot of time to kill, ask
the most banal questions, get some bovine replies, and presto, you have news
analysis!
The day after FBI agents and New York Police detectives grabbed
Faisal Shahzad as he tried to board an Emirates flight to Dubai at JFK Airport
and the Pakistani American admitted to having planted the car bomb at Times
Square, which was spotted by a vendor and defused before it could cause death
and destruction, television channels here in Delhi were tripping over each other
for a piece of the ‘breaking news’. One channel had a former senior diplomat
along with a Pakistani journalist on its prime time show, analysing what the
anchor described as a “shocking” and “astonishing” disclosure — by the FBI
agents and the would be Pakistani bomber with an American
passport.
What’s so ‘shocking’ or ‘astonishing’ about the entire episode? Why
should we in India be at all surprised or amazed or taken aback that a Pakistani
(or an American of Pakistani origin, if you prefer) got caught trying to bomb
Times Square? After all, Islamist jihadis of Pakistani origin have bombed other
places and targets in other countries in the past and have not been particularly
merciful (which is quite contrary to what the religion of peace and mercy is
believed to teach its followers) towards fellow Pakistanis either. Nor should we
forget that Faisal Shahzad is not the first Pakistani American jihadi; that
distinction must go to David Coleman Headley alias Daood Gilani, shared with
Tahawwur Hussain Rana, a Pakistani Canadian who ran the Chicago cell of
Lashkar-e-Tayyeba.
Much as Pakistanis living in denial would love to believe, it would
be absurd to suggest that extra-terrestrials are to blame for the daily
bloodshed in that benighted country. The suicide bombers on the prowl in
Pakistan, looking for places crowded with women and children to blow themselves
up, are not from Mars (or Venus, for that matter). Of course, like Pakistan’s
Interior Minister Rehman Malik, who we are now told fled with Benazir Bhutto’s
stand-by car and security personnel minutes before she was assassinated, they
would insist that Pakistanis who kill Pakistanis are not Pakistanis but Indians
in disguise. But then, as an exasperated Pakistani journalist once told me, Mr
Malik would have no compunctions about blaming India for his wife begetting
children.
Recall the London Underground bombing of July 7, 2005 which was
masterminded by Pakistanis based in Pakistan and executed with the help of
British citizens of Pakistani origin living in Britain. Three of the Underground
bombers were of Pakistani origin who had spent time at terrorist camps in
Pakistan, seeking and securing guidance for becoming true soldiers of god,
before they embarked on their deadly mission to further the cause of jihad. The
fourth was a Muslim of Jamaican origin.
Recall also the repeated terrorist strikes in India, including the
26/11 slaughter in Mumbai (for which a Pakistani has just been sentenced to
death), which were plotted in Pakistan and executed by Pakistanis, admittedly
with the help of those Muslims in India who believe loyalty to the ummah and
fidelity to faith necessitate treachery; our desi rage boys are known to justify
their traitorous deeds by citing manufactured grievance. It would also be
instructive to remember that in countries across the world Pakistanis have been
either arrested for links with terrorist organisations or are under
surveillance.
Ironically, most Islamic and Muslim majority countries either despise
or are suspicious of Pakistanis. The ikhwan is reluctant to extend membership to
the exclusive club to the legatees of Mohammed Ali Jinnah. While the ‘bad’
Taliban may find the ‘good’ Taliban useful allies in their war on innocents, it
is doubtful whether they would relish the idea of breaking bread together.
Variants of ‘Paki’, a term of abuse in Britain of the 1960s and 1970s popular
among White racists who nursed a visceral hatred towards immigrants from the
Indian sub-continent, have been adopted by Arabs in the Maghreb and Mashreq.
There is nothing to feel happy about this, not least because despite
the overwhelming evidence of Pakistanis and the Pakistani political-military
establishment being involved in global terrorism, there are a vast number of
Pakistanis who are appalled by jihadi violence and have been forthright in
disowning and denouncing those of their own who have blood on their hands. The
mullah is not exactly an object of reverence in polite, decent, educated
Pakistani society. To get an idea of what Pakistanis think of those who continue
to fetch infamy for their country one just needs to read the editorial and
opeditorial pages of the Dawn and the Nation.
An example should suffice: While media in India went into throes of
ecstasy over a bogus Deobandi ‘fatwa’ against terrorism, in which everything but
Islamist terrorism had been criticised and declared un-Islamic, Dawn had the
gumption to call the bluff of Deobandis in Pakistan when they recently tried a
similar sleight of hand. Based on my interaction with young Pakistani
journalists, I would vouch for their opposition to savagery in the name of
Islam. Stereotyping all Pakistanis, therefore, would be wrong and grossly
unfair.
Which brings me to what the former senior diplomat had to say during
the television programme hosted by the anchor who found it “shocking” and
“astonishing” that a Pakistani should have been found planting a bomb in Times
Square. According to him, the world should ask, and the Pakistanis should
contemplate on, why all terrorists and potential bombers are from that country.
Apart from being factually incorrect, his assertion also suggests that the root
cause of jihad is the Pakistani identity, which is way off the mark.
Mohammed Atta, who flew a passenger jetliner into the World Trade
Center, was not a Pakistani but an Egyptian. His fellow terrorists were of Saudi
origin. In recent times, the underpants bomber who panicked when he saw smoke
emanating from his crotch after he pulled the string, did not carry a Pakistani
passport; Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab alias Omar Farooq al-Nigeri is a Nigerian.
If we must look for a reason, then we should go beyond nationality
and delve into theology. A lazier option would be to stick labels and be done
with it. Just that this won’t help deal with the menace of Islamist
terrorism.
Source: Pioneer, New Delhi, India
9:22 PM
Sultan Shahin
0 comments:
Post a Comment