You want a picture? With me?

When I was asked to attend Pakistan’s first ever social media summit earlier this month, I jumped to it. Because not only it gave me a chance to visit the old country (for me, Karachi would always be old country), it also gave me the opportunity to meet some old friends and make some brand new ones.

VJ Mathira (Baji Online) with one of her admirers

The organizers held an informal dinner for the participants to mingle and get to know each other before the summit. Though stand up comedienne Saad Haroon made us all laugh, the star of the show was VJ Mathira who was there in all her sartorial glory including blue contact lenses and leopard print wedge heels. Most men wanted to get their pictures taken with Mathira and she graciously obliged. (The men must be all be silently thanking Tristram Perry for inviting Mathira over)

The summit started next morning and during the opening session, US Consul General in Karachi William Martin said Pakistan is one of the fastest-growing Facebook- and Twitter-using nations in the world but he also lamented the fact that a lot of Pakistanis love to come up with conspiracy theories implicating US in all kinds of wrongdoings in Pakistan which makes his job a tad more difficult.  

The opening session was followed by 3 panel discussions on ‘Education and Good Governance: Going Digital’, ‘Women and Social Activism in the New Media Era’ and ‘Monetizing your Social Media Space.’ Knowing that no matter what I do, learning to monetize my social media space is something I won’t learn in an hour and half, I decided to attend the panel on Education and good governance because it has some relevance to my day job.

There were several breakout sessions following the panel discussions on various topics. One of the sessions that I was looking forward to attend to was on “Humor in cyberspace” but the speaker pulled a joke on us and decided not to show up. As we were waiting for the speaker to show up, Jahanzeb Haque of Jay Toons got up and decided to talk about how he started his xkcd inspired stick figures cartoon strip. When he introduced himself, there were audible gasps among the female audience with “OMG, you are Jay Toons guy?” He drew a couple of his strips, including one of his self censored cartoons for the participants and discussed whether art should be created just for the sake of art or does it has to have a higher message. Jahanzeb Haque, or Jay Toons are he was called during the session, was obviously the rock star of the summit. At least I have not heard girls gasping and going breathless at the mention of any other name.

What did I take away from the event? Even though I have been blogging for 4 years now, I never took my blog seriously; for me it was a place where I vent without any editorial guidelines and delays. But the response by some of the participants at the summit made me realize that there are people who not only care what I write, but they do attach a lot of importance to my opinion and I am truly grateful to all of you guys. I am still reeling from the fact that a very smart and intelligent young reader of my blog wanted to get his picture taken with me. I now know how Meera feels and can empathize with her.

PS: Must thank Raza and Tristram publicly for inviting me and giving me an opportunity to feel like a celebrity. 

PPS: A special shout out to @pishipotty for his twitter handle.

PPPS: I made it to the Tribune's twitterati of Pakistan but they called me brainchild behind A Reluctant Mind. I thought A Reluctant Mind was MY brainchild.

Find the complete version on The Friday Times

The space for secularism in the national narrative

Pakistan is a strange country; the people who garner maximum news coverage are often shady. If January was the month of Mumtaz Qadri, then February and March definitely belonged to Raymond Davis and the man who hogged all the headlines across the globe in May was Osama Bin Laden. Last but not the least was Illyas Kashmiri who was killed in a drone strike in June.

It is even stranger that though all four of them were shady characters – murderers to be precise – the response of the popular media to their deeds, lives, and reasons have ranged from high praise to utter ridicule. While Davis was lynched by our media for killing two Pakistani men, Qadri was praised by a certain section of media as the saviour who, by shedding blood of another human being, has somehow restored balance in the universe and saved the religion, humanity and galaxy. The kind of debate bin Laden and Kashmiri spark is the stuff of legends. People have called them terrorists, warriors, messiahs and everything in between depending on their ‘ideological’ and ‘idiological’ leanings.

But the strangest common factor in all the cases is that the popular media has developed the narrative and catered to the incidents surrounding these characters on the basis of religion. All the discussions and responses on the subject have been based, not on the news worthiness of the issue, but on the perceived religious reasons for the actions of the perpetrators and on the basis or lack of their religiosity.

Qadri was hailed as a hero because he was defending his faith. Even his critics were at pains to point out that he was mislead because the religion was not interpreted in its true spirit by who so ever was inspiring him. The only person, Sherry Rahman, who actually said that this law needed to be amended, had to stay cooped up in her house for the fear of her life. The fact that a man was killed was either ignored or the victim was blamed for his own death. The focus of the discussion stayed on religion and religion inspired laws and how essential they are to the survival of this society. The condemnation of that murder was subdued because vociferous denunciation would have challenged the religiosity of the narrative. Even before the death of the slain governor, one anchor decided to act as the prosecutor, jury and the judge and held a public trial of Governor Salman Taseer. With media pandering to the dictates of the overtly religious groups, presenting secular arguments in mainstream media is neither desired nor is considered safe.

Davis, an American guilty of the same crime homicide, was labelled the devil incarnate because he was an infidel who killed two Muslim men in the land of pure. The fact that it was Federal Shariat Court supported Qisas and Diyat Law that saved him in the end was again ignored. No one either wrote or spoke against the law in the popular media. The fact that perpetrators of the same crime can have different punishments depending upon their social standing and the amount they are willing to shell out to stay out of the prison and that the law actually supports the criminal with a sizeable bank account are largely ignored by our esteemed media persons and anchors.

Apart from these cases, the television debates usually centre on the quest of making the country a “true’ Islamic state instead of a working state. How many times have we seen sanctimonious anchors and so called experts discussing whether a legislation or a verdict by the courts is religious enough or not. Hardly have we seen any debate on whether a course of action is workable or not, which basically gives all the governments the license to do as they please irrespective of the consequences of the bad governance practices they employ.

There can be two probable reasons for such glaring omission of the secular content in any news debate in Pakistan. The country was created on the basis of religion, when the raison d’être for a country is its official religion, then any ideology contesting it kind of gets lots in the narration. The other is that there are some secular voices but they either submit to the views of majority for the fear of retaliation or they think that their voice will get lost. In either case, secular voices end up ceding political space and jeopardizing their own long term future.

This is not limited to the fourth estate. The other three pillars of the country – Legislators, executives and judiciary are as much to blame as the media for it. Last year, the Chief Justice of Pakistan expressed ‘concern’ about Parliament’s ability to redraft the constitution in such a manner that it will make Pakistan a secular republic. It was painful to note that the secularity of the constitution was seen as a threat by the man presiding over the most august court in Pakistan. The chief Justice’s concerns were obviously unfounded because the parliament is housed with likes of Shiekh Waqas Akram, Maulana Fazlur Rehman and Rehman Malik who have repeatedly vowed to deal with anyone who dare speak against legislation based on theology.

In addition to them, the armed forces, perhaps the most powerful group in the country, owe their acceptance and popularity with the people on their stance as the defenders of not only the geographical boundaries of the country but also as the defenders of the faith. People are willing to forgive the armed forces for gobbling up the lion’s share of the resources in the country as long they stay vigilant against the threat of the infidel. That is why Pakistani nuclear capability is sold to its people as “Islamic atomic bomb” – a pan Islamic achievement rather than a national one.

Secularism cannot be pulled out of thin air like a genie. Just like fruitful discourse needs secular input, secularism cannot survive without debate, political space and social acceptance. It will not germinate in a vacuum but will arise out of liberal interpretation of theology and questioning the dogma which are not possible in current Pakistani milieu. Liberal research of the religion is virtually nonexistent. A few random liberal scholars like Dr Farooq Khan and Ghamdi were either killed or had to relocate to stay alive. If the country has to survive as a viable entity in future, its political, judicial, military and bureaucratic leadership must realize that giving space to dissenting voices is as necessary as bowing down to the wishes of majority.
Religion, in whatever way, has always been part of the discourse. Apart from Madrassah students, Islamic studies have been an integral part of the syllabus everywhere in Pakistan, from elementary school to degrees courses. The concept of secularism, on the other hand, has never been formally introduced in academia. We cannot move forward if this disparity is not addressed.

Originally written for Dawn

Our cataclysmic descent into chaos

 

Yet another young man lost his life in what has become a norm in Pakistan – extrajudicial killings – and chances are that like previous incidents of such killings, the perpetrators of this crime will go free as well. It is not just a random speculation of a bitter citizen, there is hard evidence supporting this claim.

Before Sarfaraz Shah, the 19 year old who was shot point blank by soldiers of Sind Rangers, a paramilitary force, in Karachi on June 8^th, two teenage boys Mughees and Muneeb were lynched by a mob – including policemen in uniforms – in Sialkot last year. 17 men were arrested, with most of them out on bail. It must be noted that before the video of this gruesome murder came out, Sind Rangers claimed that Sarfaraz Shah was killed during an encounter with the Rangers after he was caught red handed while snatching cash from visitors in the park. When Rangers officials entered the park, the young man fired at them.

On the contrary, the video footage showed an unarmed young man being shot dead at a very close range by one of the five Rangers personnel who all have a weapon of some kind in their hand. Sarfaraz was seen pleading for his life and was shot at in full public view.

Mr Rehman Malik was at pains to point out that Shah was a petty criminal – as if it justifies the cold blooded murder – likewise, brothers Mughees and Muneeb too were accused of committing robberies. The District Coordination Officer (DCO) Sialkot, Mujahid Sher Dil, later confirmed that the lynched youths had no criminal record. With exception of the cell phone theft case and attack on Sindh rangers personnel case filed against him on the day of his death, Sarfaraz Shah, too had no criminal record. Even if he was a thief and was apprehended by the law enforcement authorities, why was he not taken to a local police station, why was he shot dead? Surely the law enforcement agency personnel must know that theft cannot be penalized by death in Pakistan penal code.

Some of the apologists were at pains to point out that the soldier was right in shooting at the victim as he was trying to touch his gun and he is legally permitted to shoot at anyone who tries to get hold of his weapon during a confrontation. They also said that the Rangers official did the right thing and shot the victim in the leg, as stipulated in the law. But one must ask under what law they left him to bleed to death when he was begging them to take him to the hospital.

Those who cite the rights of the paramilitary forces should also remember that ordinary citizens, those who do not wear any uniform and actually pay for the salaries of the armed forces personnel also have some rights – at least the most basic right to live.                             

Just like these two incidents, five Chechens were killed in Kharotabad Quetta last month. Officials initially claimed the five were suicide bombers, but they turned out to be unarmed and video of the shooting further undercut their claim. So far no one has been apprehended and the inquiry is still deciding if it was the police or the Frontier Constabulary that opened fire at the Chechens who were traveling with just bottles of shampoo in their bags. 

New York based Human Rights Watch has documented the extrajudicial execution of up to 300 alleged Taliban supporters and sympathizers in Swat. Despite the fact that several videos have come out detailing those brutalities, no action has been taken against the armed forces to date.

The less said about Balochistan, the better. Parts of the province have become killing fields of late. Not a day pass by when one or two bullet riddled bodies are found on the roadsides.  Since 2010 approximately 140 political activists, journalists, academics and students were killed in extrajudicial killings.

Citizens have what social theorists call a social contract with their governments. Under that social contract people form states and maintain social order. The notion of the social contract implies that the people give up some rights to a government or other authority in order to receive or maintain social order. The citizens pay taxes with which government is suppose to finance their security and provide them with an environment which is conducive to their well being and ensure systematic access to livelihood. Forget about other rights, this incident shows that every day in Pakistan, the right to life of the people is made a mockery of by the people who are supposed to keep them safe.

Civilian government is apathetic to the woes of the people, armed forces have learned nothing from the fiasco of Bangladesh and are carrying out atrocities against their own citizens and supreme court judges are busy taking suo moto actions against actresses for possession of alcohol and dishing out verdicts on tv channels and their broadcasting right, access to justice has become an unattainable fantasy for most citizens of the country. The incident got so much coverage because it happened in Karachi. Imagine what goes on in Balochistan where there is no one to challenge or raise voice against such carnage. This continued deprivation of justice will expedite our cataclysmic descent into chaos and the killing fields of Pakistan will remain bloody because some animals are more equal than the other. 

Originally written for Dawn

Rehman Malik is not alone ...

For those who flinch every time Rehman Malik makes an outrageous statement like terrorists being some kind of celestial beings in Star Wars (or was it Star Trek) sartorial finery, flinch no more as other government officials make gaffes at par with his proclamations. We already have Donald Rumsfield’s ‘Known unknowns” and the latest one to join ranks with Malik sahib is Foreign and Commonwealth office (FCO).

Yes, as part of their counter terrorism activity, the FCO has commissioned an anti terror cartoon film (what an oxymoron) “Wish you Waziristan.” The film’s target audience is young Muslim wanna be terrorist boys. I just wonder how receptive a wanna be radical boy – someone already inclined towards violence – would be in an animated story about perils of jehad in the wilderness of Waziristan.

Although the makers of the film claim that they have been working on it for past two years – it was commissioned by Labour government back in 2009 – it is quite obvious the film has used all possible clichés and popular references on the topic. The first overly simplistic cliché is that those who face racism will become terrorists. It is like Dr. Phil declaring that Osama Bin laden became a terrorist mastermind because he was the 17^th child and did not get love and attention from his father. So if you are suffering from the 17^th child syndrome or have latent anger over childhood insults, chances are, you will end up in Waziristan trying to blow up random shit.  The failed bombing in Waziristan and the use of the word Bro are all from Chris Morris’ hilarious jehad satire Four Lions. Wish you Waziristan (I cringe every time I type this name) film-makers should know that when you are working on a serious project, your point of reference should never be a satire.

The film has two main characters, a young boy of Pakistani origins (he has relatives in Pakistan) with jehadi tendencies names Abu and his younger- not-interested-in-jehad-but-accompanying-big-bro-because-that’s-what-you-do brother. If they had researched it properly, they would have known that desi boys are not named Abu. The inspiration for the name is obviously someone like Abu Hamza a.k.a Maulvi Hook who is an Arab.

Though the film deals with the issue of racism, it makes a mandatory reference to a Muslim/Pathan jihadist’s inappropriate touching – in the guise of body search – of a teenager.

The FCO has been accused of wasting tax payers’ money on this film. I am sure whosoever came up with this idea must have had some linkages with Pakistani bureaucracy as they too come up with one asinine idea after another. Just like we declared 2007, the year everything went haywire in Pakistan, the year of tourism, FCO came up with this gem. While we spent a fortune on ads printed in Urdu newspaper promoting tourism, this film is made at a relatively low cost of £33,000. Looks like our former colonial masters are not as good at the art of squandering public money on frivolous pursuits.

Originally published in Dawn