Talibanization or the Turkish Model?

Upon completing Umra with my parents within the last days of Ramadan, I was waiting for the flight from Jeddah to Karachi to start boarding, in the PIA Business class lounge.

I happened to be exchanging views on the Indian Airline Hijacking drama then going on T.V, with a Sindhi businessman. Our conversation turned to the question of illegal immigration to Pakistan, and this gentleman, a longtime resident in Saudi Arabia, told me that the majority of the, "Pakistanis" beheaded in Saudi Arabia for drug smuggling offenses and other crimes that are reported regularly in the newspapers, were in fact Afghans, who had illegally acquired Pakistani National Id Cards (available for up to Rs.3000), and on this basis, Pakistani Passports (Rs.15,000) and citizenship. Naturally, when caught as drug traffickers, carrying Pakistani passports, they are dubbed "Pakistanis", and Pakistan gets a bad name.

We then discussed the influx of illegal Bangladeshi migrants to Pakistan. My father interjected that, PIA gets fined thousands of dollars by the (U.S) INS, every time someone travels to N.Y on a fake passport to N.Y on the airline. He then narrated an incident, in which 2 elderly Afghans traveled to N.Y from Karachi, as Mr. & Mrs. John Whitaker of Virginia, on U.S passports, which were such poor forgeries even an 8 year old could tell. They could not speak a word of English, only Pashtu. It was obvious that Pakistan's illustrious FIA had been paid off to let them on board. PIA was fined $6,000 at the time. And this was only 1 incident among countless such incidents that occur regularly.
Outraged upon hearing this, I stated that Pakistan is a poor country, with a low per capita income, whose bankrupt national carrier cannot afford such luxuries.

I opined, loudly and clearly to the Sindhi gentleman in the lounge, that all such Afghans, Bengalis, etc attempting to travel on forged Pakistani Passports should be sent directly to jail, and deported immediately to their national states.

I also stated that the cold war was long over, the Russians had left Afghanistan, and that therefore whatever was going on in Afghanistan was an internal matter for the Afghans to deal with themselves, and they should now return to their own country.

As for the Bengalis, they had embraced their Bangabandhu, got their own country, and therefore, they should not be allowed to settle in (West) Pakistan now. I also expressed some anti-Taliban sentiments, based on their well known (and anti-Islamic), retrogressive views and actions.

At this point, a gentleman with a long white beard walked across the room, and shaking with anger, addressed me in pidgin English. He was later joined by his wife in his emotional harangue. He said that he had been listening to my conversation, and that I should know that, "PAKISTAN HAD LOOTED THE AFGHANS".
Further, that Pakistan had received a lot of benefits as a result of the Afghan war, from the United States. Much U.S Aid meant for the Afghans was swallowed up by Pakistan. In addition, "Pakistan was created in the name of Islam, and therefore, the Afghans had every right to live there". Shaking his finger violently in my direction, he asked, "You know who Taliban are?"

As I attempted to tell him I certainly did, and that I knew they were the orphans of the Afghan war, he said, pointing to his son in the other corner of the lounge, "My son is a U.S Citizen, and he is going to Afghanistan to join the Taliban. We are proud of him."

I congratulated the, "proud" parents, and asked them in turn, "Why is he going to Afghanistan? To kill fellow Muslims?"

The reply I received was, "No, he is going to Afghanistan to wage JIHAD on the United States." Furthermore, I was told in conclusion, in pidgin English, that, "your grammar is very poor. Neither can you speak English, nor can you speak Urdu."

At this point my parents and I had a good laugh, and I gave the gentleman a rebuttal to set him straight.

Livid at the suggestion that, "Pakistan had LOOTED the Afghans," I replied that, Pakistan had provided them with food, shelter and humanitarian assistance for 20 years, and told these treasonous Afghan-Americans who wished to, 'wage Jihad on the U.S,' that Pakistan was bombed by the Russians in case they had forgotten, and targeted by the KGB & KHAD, and furthermore, was threatened by India on its other border simultaneously. Therefore, whatever Pakistan got from the U.S, it is still paying for dearly. U.S Aid ended over a decade ago, but the Afghans are still in Pakistan.

In addition, in 1979, there was not a single heroin addict in Pakistan, today there are over 3 million. The Kalashnikov culture that has destroyed the fabric of Pakistani society, is another legacy of the Afghan war. These social costs are not quantifiable.

Furthermore, Pakistan may have been created with Islam as the rallying cry, but its raison d'etre was the fully justified fear of the Muslims of the subcontinent, of the economic hegemony of the Hindus in Akhand Bharat. However, Pakistan, in the Quaid's vision, was never intended to be a theocratic state in which religious minorities stand reduced to 3rd class citizenship.

Finally, I told the Afghan-American, that he had some nerve standing on Saudi soil, impliedly espousing principles of Universal Islamic Brotherhood & Unity, and on that basis, suggesting that Pakistan should accommodate all Afghans because it was, "created in the name of Islam."

Frankly, I suggested, they should try overstaying their Umra visas illegally, and see what the Saudis did to them. I told them that, "You can't even become a 2nd class citizen in Saudi Arabia after 30 years of residence, or own property here, so where are your principles of Universal Islamic Brotherhood & Unity now?"

To me, the real Jihad lies in confronting fanatic, misguided, religious bigots like these Afghan-Americans, wherever I bump into them. Who do some people have a problem withthe ideal, "One nation, under G-D, indivisible with liberty and justice for all?" (From the American pledge of Allegiance) And if they have a problem with that, why choose to live there, after taking this oath?

In the last 52 years, instead of following the Quaid's creed of, 'Unity, Faith, Discipline', Pakistan has instead followed the creed of, 'Bigotry, Intolerance, Sectarianism'. This will continue, until the divisive influence of religion is removed from the political sphere. It is simply, not the business of the state. Freedom to practice Islam can be guaranteed in Pakistan, without the relegation of non-muslims to 3rd class citizenship status.

'Separate but equal', is an untenable principle of citizenship, long ago discarded in the U.S. The 20th century has ended, and people in Pakistan are still killing each other in the name of religion. The world has moved far ahead, and Pakistanis are still concerned about the need for a man to be able to marry 4 wives without the consent of the wives first in time, as if this is the solution to all the problems facing Pakistan.

In the U.S, where there exists legal equality of citizenship, the Constitution is the national religion. Here in Pakistan, people are out to make the majority religion, the national Constitution. This course can only lead to bloodshed, and institutional legalized discrimination, as it already has. Pakistan does not need an ideological justification or excuse for its existence, rooted in religion. It exists, therefore it is. That is enough. As for the misguided notion that Islamic ideals are the glue that holds Pakistan together, the only times this supposed ideology of national integration has been put to the test, it has failed miserably; both in 1971, and the Baluch uprising in the 1970s.
Pakistanis obsession with the need for religious justifications for the existence of the state is a symptom of a national psyche, that still harbors an insecurity complex vis-à-vis India. It is time for Pakistanis to shed this insecurity complex, especially now that Pakistan has become a nuclear power.
What Pakistan needs to do, is focus on the welfare of its citizens, an area in which in all leading indicia of social progress, it has fared miserably since its inception. Results, not rhetoric, are what the masses want. The politicians have given them too little credit, in misusing religion to manipulate their sentiments. They are not fooled by such simplistic, meaningless slogans scratched as graffiti on the walls as, "Islam is the solution." As if the label of Islam alone, can change what is in the hearts of men overnight.

However, the process of so-called 'Islamization' in Pakistan has led to its logical culmination; the brazen attempt by Would-be-Khalifa-Pious-Nawaz, to amass all the power of the state within his person, and destroy even the mere husk of democracy in Pakistan. Either Pakistan can be a democracy, or a theocracy, for both cannot co-exist. The choice must be made unambiguously, between Talibanization, or the Turkish model.

Will General Musharraf have the courage and foresight of Ataturk to lead the way, to face down the relatively small, vocal, unrepresentative, armed religious groups that constantly fan the flames of religious hatred, violence, bigotry, and pose the greatest threat to National Security that the state has ever faced?


Pakistan deserves a new deal, and a fresh start on the basis of the principles of tolerance and equality of citizenship, espoused by the Quaid-i-Azam.