One of General Zia's splendid ideas was to force feed Islamist doctrine on the nation's youth through an ambitious program of building madrases. This seemed a good idea in several respects. The emphasis on religious indoctrination was believed to be a sure way to bring greater social and political cohesion. The construction costs in the main would be borne by Saudi Arabia and thus indirectly by the US, Europe, and Japan. Finally, the madrases would provide a simultaneous means of keeping young men off the job market while providing willing personnel for Zia's far less than covert war against India.
A second Zia-made contribution to Pakistan's current world of hurt was his taking over the war in Afghanistan, first against the Soviets and then to assure a pliant tool gaining power in Kabul. That tool, Taliban, was a direct product of the madrass construction program. The US contributed mightily to this aspect of the developing evil stew in Pakistan by willingly giving money without restriction to Zia's regime and then blithely ignoring just what was happening in the post-Soviet withdrawal internal war period.
Even though General Zia long ago left the scene, the Law of Unintended Consequences which his actions necessarily invoked now drives the dynamic in Pakistan in all of its bloody and repressive features. As the slow-on-the-uptake Pakistani government, Army, and Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence finally came to realize, the growth of Islamism (or political Islam, if you prefer) came to be an existential threat to the status quo.
The actions taken by the government, army, and ISI as a result of this belated awakening have been a mixture of repression and placation. The army has launched a series of operations against Pakistani Taliban with mixed success. At the same time the government has made efforts to placate Islamist opinion.
In the most recent of these obnoxious genuflections to the very vocal adherents of political Islam, the government has ordered the banning of Facebook and YouTube. The reason given for this draconian action was, as is drearily expectable, the charge of "blasphemy."
More specifically, the Pakistani government alleges that it is in a royal snit over the Facebook site inviting one and all to "draw Mohammad." The specifics regarding YouTube's exercise in blasphemy are not so clearly delineated. However the Pakistani Ministry In Charge Of Protecting Muslim Sensitivities assures the world that the site is awash with videos which somehow or another deprecate Islam, the Prophet (PBUH), and whatever just makes Muslims all over go weak in the knees from the insults.
The Pakistani ministry has shown the sort of open minded attitude which one can expect from an official governmental protector of all things Muslim. The responsible(?) official has invited representatives from both of the offensive sites to send representatives so as to "resolve the dispute in a way that ensures religious harmony and respect."
Duh?
Is it credible that this Pakistani equivalent of the pope commanding King Henry to stand barefoot in the snow of Canossa will be taken seriously or that such will result in repentance on the part of the purported malefactors? Does this official exemplar of Pakistani sweet reason really, really believe that the Internet will genuflect before the alleged sensitivities of Muslims?
The answer, unfortunately, is, "Yes."
Pakistan has a record of blocking "offensive" Internet sites. Along with other Muslim majority countries such as Iran, Morocco, Indonesia, and Turkey, Pakistan has played the embargo game before albeit for short periods. Taken together, the record of Muslim countries rivals that of China in blocking access to the Internet on the part of citizens.
Driven by naked fear, these governments have done their dead level best to isolate citizens from the contemporary world. These are all governments which live in fear of social turbulence, political unrest, and the potential of violence on the part of citizens who come to realize just how much the government has suppressed, prevaricated, and manipulated perceptions for the sole benefit of the governing elite.
In the case of Pakistan the fear is prompted by the existence of Islamist jihadists who by and large exist because the government made them. The Taliban of Pakistan and akin groups are creatures of Islamabad. Now, like the fictional monster created by Frankenstein, they have escaped the control of their maker and threaten the continued existence of the men who manufactured them.
Of course, the restrictive efforts of the Pakistani government are assisted powerfully by the widespread hypersensitivity present in all-too-many Muslims. Unlike adherents to other monotheistic faiths, Muslims are routinely indoctrinated with fear. Fear that they are marginal. Fear that they are victims of discrimination. Fear that they are under constant attack.
A pervasive climate exists within much of the Muslim opinion molding community not only in Pakistan but throughout the Islamic majority societies. That climate can best be described by the word, "insecurity." There are too many opinion molders and thus far too many Muslims who are insecure in the worth and validity of their belief system. This is self-evident given the constant drive for censorship sponsored by Islamic governments.
A person--or a group--which is secure in fundamental beliefs need not seek the false security afforded by limiting free expression. Christians, Jews, even Buddhists, are repeatedly subject to critical, even insulting, expressions from people who do not share their community of faith. Yet they do not demand "respect for religion," particularly one which is imposed by legislation or fiat.
The government of Pakistan has been at the forefront of efforts to impose a global convention under the auspices of the UN which has as its only intent the "protection" of Islam against any criticism, any questions, any raising of doubts on the part of its adherents. It is an effort to protect Muslims which can be rooted only in the belief that Islam and Muslims alike are too weak, too insecure, too fear ridden to accept dissenting or disapproving views.
Of all the Muslims alive today, the most insecure, the most fear driven are those who subscribe to political Islam, Islamism. These people and the groups they comprise are so unsure as to the worth and validity of the faith to which they subscribe that they are more than simply willing to employ any and all methods including the most violent and indiscriminate to achieve their ends. Ends which include absolute protection against questions or criticism by world domination.
The equation is simple: free speech makes free people. Freedom is the most fear producing of all possibilities to an Islamist. These people can exist only in a society of complete submission as the word, "Islam," makes abundantly clear.
Ironically, the government of Pakistan is willing to submit to the dictates of the Islamists who seek the destruction of the government which bows before them. The only losers are those Pakistanis who seek to live a simulacrum of a free life, think and express ideas without the specific permission of a religious authority, that is Pakistanis who are secure in their identity and their faith (if any.)
No comments:
Post a Comment