Following is the full version of the article that appeared on The New on Sunday today, January 15th, 2017. The TNS article can be accessed here.
In the past one week three bloggers went
missing in Pakistan. No one knows their crime but everyone knows why they have
disappeared. Reports are pouring in that there might be several other bloggers
and activists who are missing. Those missing seem to share a few common
characters. They either ran blogs or contributed to ones that criticised religious
bigotry and the security establishment’s heavy involvement in the state’s
political affairs. Their political activism seemed to focus on spreading
progressive or liberal ideas and a desire to make Pakistan a more democratic
state where its institutions are accountable to its elected civilian
representatives. How do we make sense of their disappearance? For the longest
time the liberals and the progressives thought that the state’s security
apparatus won’t touch them simply because they didn’t count too much. That
remains true today. One can see the same 20 faces that have appeared in every
protest organised by the liberals and the left wing political groups in this
country. This remains true for protests being organised in Lahore, Karachi, and
Islamabad. You see the same faces appear in front of the press club; chanting
slogans and making the same kind of demands. Nobody bothers to stop and ask
them why they are there. Nobody cusses at them while sitting in the car because
they are not even a traffic nuisance. Why would the security agencies pick
someone of this ilk? What danger these individuals posed to the national
security apparatus that warranted such an action?
News report suggest that these were vocal
critics of the military and the ISI. Some people suggest that they may have
criticized CPEC as well. They did all that through various social media
platforms (Facebook pages, Twitter accounts, etc.) with some really odd
sounding names like Bhensa, Molbi, or Mochi. We don’t know who took them seriously other than the people
who have picked them up. I must admit that I only searched them online after
these people went missing. I have seen Bhensa
memes floating around the internet; some of them were funny others not quite
so. But who really cared? Does the list include people who liked them? Or
shared them? Or commented under them? Or tagged their friends? Are they all
suspects? We wouldn’t know. We do know one thing for sure, however. Those who
abducted them got really upset by their satire. This is not the first time
progressive activists have been picked up. Nor has it been the first time
people have disappeared mysteriously in this country. Balochistan has seen
hundreds and thousands of its activist gone mysteriously missing in the past 10
years. Two weeks ago, the Human Rights ministry admitted that 936 people have
been found dead in Balochistan in the past five years. In a ‘normal’ country
this would have been enough for at least the minister to resign. Or enough to
order a high-powered committee to do a serious investigation of who did this
and why. But we know that nothing like that would ever happen here so why
bother with all such detail.
Analysts suspect that these activists,
whether four or five in number, were picked up by the security establishment. One
can say with some level of confidence that these people were picked up because
the security establishment does not like being criticized. It would take it to
an extent but the moment it feels that the criticism is becoming ‘popular’ or
commonplace it swiftly moves in to curb it. Why do certain people criticize
this security establishment so much? And why can’t it seem to grow a thicker
skin? In the past 70 years of the sordid history of this county, the security
establishment has single handedly achieved the status of the most obdurate
institution that keeps this country from developing into a functioning
democracy of any kind. What kind of influence has it had on Pakistan’s polity?
Pakistan’s security establishment faces
one big challenge in ruling over Pakistan (whether directly or indirectly). How
to homogenize a multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, and multi-cultural society? This
has been the bane of their existence from day one. How do you make everybody
the same when everybody is different? It’s important to do that as a
homogenized society is easy to mould in its own ideological leanings. Islam
became an easy tool to do that. Yet it would be unfair to say that military is
the only one that has used Islam. Politicians have also used it to pander to
their voters. But where the latter’s use of religion is only to plead their
case to a conservative vote bank, military’s use of the religion has turned out
to be more sinister. It institutionalized it within the state structure and
used it to expand its writ. It also then used it to advance its foreign policy
objectives by establishing and training jihadi organizations. Whenever
necessary it has not shied from using these jihadi organization to tame
political opponents. Religion is an easy tool for homogenization if that is the
desired outcome. A homogenized society is easier to control by dictatorial
forces because you have just scared away all the dissent. Once you get the
monopoly over setting both the agenda and the discourse, it’s only a matter of
time before public opinion gets shaped a certain way. Our security
establishment does not like any challenges to such agenda setting power. Even
when it comes in the form of social media pages that identify themselves as Bhensa, Molbi, or Mochi.
The military’s world view has been unable
to see beyond its own narrow interests. It sees plurality of opinion as a
problem. It wants to see only a certain kind of Islam that accepts its
obsession with India, USA, and all others who are constantly conspiring against
its rise to the top of the world. It wants everybody to have the same
interpretation of Pakistan’s history. There cannot be any questioning of Jinnah
or Iqbal or any of the other great leaders that did or did not help form this
country. Some people just out of sheer boredom or curiosity want to ask; but
why? It finds it distressing that people
don’t want to readily accept this. On top of all this, it also wants to keep a
big chunk of resources to itself and doesn’t want any one questioning it. It has
an economic empire, which, among other assets, consists of empty residential
plots to be sold to civilians desirous of nice residential plots. So, it needs
nice civilians who desire only nice plots developed by various DHA’s that keep
popping up like social media pages criticizing military’s desire to produce residential
plots. And then it wants to keep expanding its economic empire and influence
over the country’s economy. It has recently discovered that something like CPEC
can also be used to homogenize the country and expand its own business empire
at the same time. So, it is now in a tug of war with the government to claim
its stake in the supposed economic benefits of CPEC. So much so that it has
agreed to raise a whole division to protect this route at all costs. It also
doesn’t like anybody criticizing its role in this project because it should be
obvious to everyone that this project will transform Pakistan completely into
an economic power house; no questions asked. Its high ranking serving officers
address public gathering and openly invite India to join this fantastic project
and benefit from it. They can also pronounce that Pakistan’s destiny is to be
an Islamic welfare state and this is what our enemies want to deny us. Pray
tell, who asked for your opinion on this matter in the first place? But questions
like these are – especially if they accompany a meme with a Bhensa in the corner – forbidden because
they challenge the national interest, which is defined and protected by them. So,
the security establishment eventually picks up or harasses all those who try to
criticize it persistently; particularly when the criticism focuses on the its
desire to consistently define and protect the national interest.
Is there any way to reform this military?
Well, I think, yes there is. But that path is full of several social media
pages with memes with Bhesnas or Molbis or Mochis in the corner. That path also consists of writing
consistently against the security establishment’s desire to set, define, and
defend the national interest. That right belongs to the people of this country
alone and no one can take it away from them. So, voice your criticism openly
and without fear. Do not hide in fear. The security establishment has
totalitarian pretentions; it neither has the capacity or the will to abduct all
of us when we speak with one voice. And for this reason alone, the absence of
Salman Haider and others should only strengthen our resolve to fight for a
pluralist, progressive, and a democratic Pakistan.
Fahd Ali is assistant professor of Social
Development and Policy at Habib University, Karachi. He can be reached at fahd.ali@ahss.habib.edu.pk
and @alifdaru
on Twitter.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteWell documented reality, Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
ReplyDelete(Martin Luther King Jr.)