Hoping, Without Hope

Farheen,

This can only stop when General Musharraf stops talking and starts acting. I have beeen hearing for a number of years about General Musharraf`s vision, his enlightened moderation, but am yet to see any tangible action on his part. He backed down in 2000 when he was thinking of scrapping the blasphemy laws. Now he wants the parliament to look at the Hudood laws, knowing well that the parliament has no power. He gets things done when he wants, but as far as sectarianism is concerned, he hasn`t takien tangible actions.

He needs to CLOSE down ALL madrassahs that are sectarian in nature..and hopefully many others as well..A small number of madrassahs can be allowed to open because it may not be politically feasible to close down all of them...but we know the worldview of these people and that makes them a huge threat to Pakistan..today 16 more innocents have died in Karachi..this will not stop until the goverment takes action over Madrassahs and starts to resurrect its education system..Money needs to be pumped into education, but as Shahid Burki, formerly of the world bank has pointed out, the main problem is the flawed policy prescriptions which will have to be changed. But the education budget will have to be increased.

All this is tied together with decreasing the military budget, and making peace with India since confontation with India has severe economic effects.

But you can even leave the peace with India out of this and still have a major effect on sectarianism once the government starts to do something about these Madrassahs where innocent young minds are manipulated.

We have seen that there is a disconnect between General Musharraf`s words and his actions on the Madrassah issue, and somethind needs to be done abotu this. They also need to change Zubedia Jalal, who is ``proud to be a fundamentalist``. Also, an incompetet, irresponsible and corrupt person like Ijaz-Ul-Haq will have to be sacked from the religious affairs ministry since his father is the man who started this whole business, even though the anti-Ahmadi laws were enacted by Bhutto in the 1970s. But Zia was the one who is most responsible for all this sectarianism.

You live by the sword, you die by the sword.
Mufti Shamzai was one of the architects of sectarianism and terrorism in Karachi and Pakistan. He was a major supporter of OBL and Taliban. His Madarssa was the hotbed of fanatics, who spread out all over Pakistan and then to India and Kashmir in pursuit of their kind of violence.
He routinely provided shelter to murderers and some of his victims took him out. Too bad but he had it coming.

How this sponsor of terrorists can be called an “Islamic scholar” is beyond me. There was nothing ``scholarly`` about him. He masterminded killings. Do you become a scholar by preaching violence in the new Islamic Pakistan?
It is a pity that he was never booked by the law enforcement in Pakistan for masterminding murders, sectarian violence, and terror.

“These men were protesting against terrorism that led to the death of their spiritual leader.”

His killing is not terrorism at all. That is just an act of violence against a person who lived and breathed violence himself. He unleashed terror on innocent people. He was one of the major symbols of terrorism and sectarianism in Pakistan.

Lets see if there are answers to the questions raised in your essay in things other than machinations of a particular sect or religious system. Also lets note the obvious that depending on point of view all religions can be safely considered to promote `peace, harmony and universal love`, while at the same time the life of all major religions abound with examples of `hatred, killings and extremism`. Presently a burden is being carried by Islam due to understandable factors, and this has not always been like this as we all know. Lets identify one of those factors to be the results of the colonialism and ‘victors` peace’ from the wars of first half of 20th century and before.

Now we as humans have always killed other humans and in name of all things rational and irrational. This is one of those reactions instilled in us humans by nature, which exposes itself subject to conditions. So ‘human-condition’ in a particular moment of time may be considered a common denominator cause. `We` have always managed to convince ourselves with the help of right set of arguments to commit `sins` whenever our natural inclinations and instincts have come calling. Sacrifice of fellow humans is a case in point, which was practiced in the ‘advanced’ societies of fore. Are there any similarities in advancing an army to a war front? Do we see elements of necessary human sacrifice to notions of glory, defense of the nation, etc. etc. to which some kings or leaders convinced themselves to and in turn convinced their people to lay down their lives for, whether those conditions existed or not.

How is it connected to subject? Pakistanis, as other nations may or may not which again depends on set of conditions, have had convinced themselves to or were convinced by others to make reactionary decisions and then justify them in light of broader national interest. In recent past the Islamisation of society (needed for Afghan war?), the support to Kashmir freedom struggle (right when seen in light of morality? wrong when seen in hindsight due to unsuccessful result?), acceptance of Taliban (acceptable as instrument of peace in war torn Afghanistan?), abandonment of Taliban (post 9/11 necessity? who wants to side with losers? need to save its own ass?), abandonment of Kashmir cause (post 9/11 realities of world?). Ok, so now is it any wonder Pakistan has a disillusioned generation at its hands fed on doctrines of now abandoned initiatives and causes?

Believe me that the leaders and thus the followers of these sects at work in Karachi and elsewhere are fully convinced of their being on the ‘right’ side and thus are able to justify their actions. And if one thinks that Islam or for that matter any religion by default would guarantee peace, if not externally then atleast internally, then I recommend rereading history and using scholars which present more than a selective glorifying view.

As deplorable as the incidents in Karachi are, they are committed in rage and are results of a group’s mob-mentality. Can it be said that all of us might have done things in our group of friends which we wouldn’t have done alone. There is nothing more to them then a resultant reaction from a state of mind or from a human-condition. Ofcourse my objective is not to justify these ugly incidents but to try and throw light on background forces. Compare them to actions of ‘rational’ men; war in Iraq, abuse in Abu-Gharib prison, decision to allow honor killing or rape by so called jirgas. See as humans we continuously convince ourselves to do those things that for someone ‘not-convinced’ would be appalling. And also don’t forget Godhara & Gujarat, the problems in Ireland between Catholics and Protestants, Catholic witch-hunts of sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Inquisition and oppression of Jews and Muslims in the so-called civilized First World of today.

Now who will stop this? Leadership. Which is based on human values not in sentimental ideology, which takes decision in long term ‘one which satisfies the needs of the present generations without putting in jeopardy the satisfaction of needs of the future’ (i.e; sustainable development), so which works to remove disparity between rich and poor. What will stop this? Conviction. When we will increasingly and gradually convince ourselves that a human life perhaps is more important than the ‘protection’ of a certain notion.

Will it ever stop? Never, if you ask me. This is essential human nature like it or not. We will keep convincing ourselves to kill other humans in name of some obscure need, idea or notion. So personally I try and look for answers to such troubling questions in things other than morality and religion, which are just a state of our mind unless we convince ourselves to some things more beneficial in comparison.