Illiteracy causes Terrorism--Wishful Thinking?

Every once in a while someone I know—not to mention a million others, often highly educated Pakistani expats and not a few caucasians both in Western governments and even progressive circles, but also people in Pakistan—will express the thought that what is really causing all this extremism and fanaticism is that Pakistan, for example, has an abysmal literacy rate. And all we have to do is start 3 million schools, and we "wild and wooly gentlemen" of those crazy parts will hold hands and chant Rumi, if not sing kumbaya. One do-gooder just a couple of days ago was saying on NPR that you could run a whole school for a year in the money spent on maintaining one foreign soldier in Afghanistan.

I am not sure I agree.

These are two separate problems. Illiteracy might be fueling extremism, but the ideology behind it is very much the product of literate brains. The inflexible, extreme attitudes we see in a lot of Pakistan's Youth--on Facebook, for example--is the product of the tinkering with the EDUCATIONAL system and society by Gen. Ziaul Haque and his regime, not of illiteracy. Making people literate--rather than enlightened--only gives them the means to read and absorb things like Farhat Hashmi, "disturbing" emails, and so on. [Which is not limited to Pakistan or Muslims; for every Geo TV there is a Fox News; for every Mullah Rocketi, a Franklin Graham. But I digress.] Just consider a few points:

• Who was it that was most enamoured of the Sufis that brought Islam to what is today Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India? (At least one or two of them literally students and friends of Rumi.) The educated elite of the day, or the poor, illiterate working folk?
• Who attends lectures by Farhat Hashmi and radical Western Muslim (like the Hizbut-Tahrir and some Americans I could mention) ? The taxi driver and the working class Muslim, or the professionals at some mosques in Silicon Valley and Toronto that I could mention?

The World is a Circular Firing Squad

There's a line in one of the greatest "Bollywood" classics, written by the scions of a couple of the greatest South Asian literary families—sons of Urdu poets, to be precise—and delivered by a minor but unforgettable character, "Soorma Bhopali" that goes "Yahaan hamaaree kya zaroorath hai; yahaan tho waisay hee aap kay naam ka warrant nikla huwa hai." [Who needs me? There's already a warrant out for your arrest.]

And that's the thought that's being going through my head as South Asia spirals downwards, some folks caution against jumping to conclusions, and others rally for peace. And I include the arguments over "Islamists did it. No, wait! Let's not jump to conclusions; it could be home grown! …" in that.

How is it realistic to look at everything as either-or? The mess South Asia is in--not to mention the rest of the world--there's enough blame to go around. Neo-purist fanatics (our Islamist/Jihadists; their Sanghis; our--speaking from North America—Christian and Jewish fanatics); civilizing imperialists; ethnic militants (Sena, MQM, racists of white and other hue); everybody's jingoistic nationalists; everybody's military-industrial-intelligence complexes…all feed off each other. In some cases, they work with each other. Just for example, Is it too much of a stretch to believe that what is happening in Karachi (in case either of you missed it) is being helped along by Indian Intelligence (and who knows who else) as a counterpoint to what they see as Pakistani Intelligence "doing Mumbai"? From where I sit, what's happening in the NW of Pakistan also has elements of a turf battle.

And as we all participate in this circular firing squad—including the agonizing over Muslims being targeted or profiled—the folks I list above make leaps and bounds in the struggle for the hearts and minds of their respective target constituencies…

And PS: how many noticed there were riots in the prettiest town in Africa's largest nation, too? Rally anyone?

---

Cross-posted on the iFaqeer, Wadiblog, ProgressiveIslam.org, Pak Tea House, Urdu ke Naam, Doodpatti (by Tohfay) blogs.
Technorati tags applicable to this post: Mumbai - Pakistan - India - War on Terror

South Asia on Fire...

As I have said before, I am not a Marxist, but do now identify as a progressive. But it has to be said. The last time Mumbai had a tragedy like this, it was the Pakistani Left that came out with the sanest statement I could find. And now they seem to have done it again:

CMKP Strongly Condemns the Terrorist Violence in Mumbai
CMKP strongly condemns the barbaric and heinous acts of planned murder and destruction carried out by terrorists in Mumbai India. We express our sincerest condolence with all the people who fell victim to this savage crime.

We also salute the entire Indian Left that is doing its utmost to reign in reprisals by Hindu fundamentalist forces against the Muslims of India.

Read the rest at: http://reddiarypk.wordpress.com/2008/11/29/cmkp-condems-mumbai-attacks/

The other thing worth reading, I think, is Sandip Roy's piece, "Guns and bombs in booming India", in Salon over the weekend. It is very, very trenchant and could have been written--should have been written--about a lot of what's happening in Pakistan--or off the coast of Somalia today. In a globalized world, the issue of who is at the table and who feels left out and aggrieved is now globalized. This is not to diminish or dismiss the role of ideologies, nationalist jingoism, or political manipulation--of which there has been much in all the comments, news, and reaction about the Mumbai tragedy (a lot of people are making a lot of noise about Pakistan being a big factor in the story--but where are the people that know Pakistan first hand and can discuss it on the talk shows, amongst the experts and on NPR, one wonders). But as Sandip puts it:

I don't know who the young man in the Versace t-shirt was. But I can't shake his image – a gunman in five-star Mumbai.

He might be an Islamic militant from Pakistan or Britain. He might be a frustrated small city boy shut out of the IT economy. He might be a village boy who trained in a terror camp somewhere.

Whatever his motive, his message was loud and clear.

Pay attention to me, he and his young partners said to booming India.

And then these mysterious young men pulled the trigger.

Boom.

Sandip says "India"; I'd say we all need to listen to that message.

As Gandhi would have put it...

I apologise for the hit-and-run post, and though I have great respect for the man, I am not a Gandhian. But following everything over the weekend, I am left with a thought this morning that channels Gandhi; A War on Terror would be a great idea--if either the West or Muslims choose to take up the idea.

---

Technorati tags applicable to this post: War on Terror

Kabul; Britain; Putting a Face on Blogging and Civil Society in Pakistan...

Sorry I have been MIA for a bit. A couple or three things jump out from the New York Times, NPR and the 'Net this morning.

Firstly, there's an op-ed in the NYT this morning by the country director for the Institute of War and Peace Reporting providing his personal perspective about the bombing of the Serena Hotel in Kabul, a watering hole (and just a place to hole up) for expats, particularly. And there have been other stories about Afghanistan in The Times, on NPR, other places in the last few days. It seemed to hit me; is it a coincidence that the Western Media and Zeitgeist is sitting up and noticing--or should I say acknowledging, since some information has always been around--that Afghanistan is down the tubes because the Taliban, as Mr. McKenzie tells us, have now started a policy of targeting westerners?

The other thing that jumped out at me was from a series that NPR is doing on Muslim Women in Britain.

As I have said umpteen times, until we sit up and notice that the folks who are adopting the niqaab in Britian today are not adopting the traditional ways of Muslims, but something new, we are only going to continue headlong towards the abyss as a planet. After all, does it make any sense to, on the one hand, say that the radicals are a throw-back to medieval times and that "[o]ne meets an increasing number of British Muslim[s]... who are saying … you should go back to the veil, you should go back to our traditional ways" on the one hand and then admit that, for one, the "Hizbut Tahrir's goal is to promote a global Islam, cleansed of all ethnic or cultural traditions." I mean, think about that!

As I have acknowledged before, it is good to see folks (including Muslims, especially in Britain--the US is a generation or so behind in these matters, but what can one do about that? some things just have to run their course) finally engage with the fanatical tendencies within Muslim communities in a more detailed way. But until and unless we all--both outsiders and within the community--stop framing the discussion as, how did Sylvia Poggili put it? being the discussion between people who are "secular" and those who are "devout"; between those who think Sharia is a good idea and those who are against it, we are doomed to have the "Clash of Fundamentalisms" be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Until we start to think about what parts of the Muslim Ideological landscape--like the equivalents in other faith communities and ethnic groups and so on--are the ones from which terrorism and militant, inflexible fanaticism stem and until even us Muslims stop saying this is just about Islam versus the West or that this modern neo-purist strain that is so dominant today is the same as "traditional Islam"--or, worse, The One True, Pure Islam as practised by The Prophet--we're up the wrong creek without a paddle.

And lastly, a shout-out to my peeps, so to speak. There's a clip on Google Video today of an interview with two of Pakistan's most prominent bloggers on an English-language breakfast show. Well worth watching, what with Pakistan in the news in such a big way.



[Original at The Teeth Maestro's blog.]

---

Cross-posted on the iFaqeer, Wadiblog, ProgressiveIslam.org, and Pak Tea House, blogs.
Technorati tags applicable to this post: Pakistan - Muslims in Britain - Afghanistan - Sylvia Poggioli - Bloggers - Teeth Maestro - Jamash - Hizbut Tahrir - Islamism

Mujahideen, Jihadis, and Other Afghans

In discussions on Afghanistan, it is distressing to see even serious academics with a background in Pakistan conflate all of the resistance in Afghanstan to the Soviets under the "Jihadi" label. Ahmed Shah Masood, for example, was very much one of the Afghan Mujahideen, but was no "Jihadi"...most of the warlords in that war were nowhere near the Taliban, Al-Qaeda or Pakistani Jihadis in ideology. Of course, the US and Pakistani governments had a weakness for Jihadis like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and later found they could best do business with the Taliban, but that's another story.

Technorati tags applicable to this post: Afghanistan - Islamism - Mujahideen