ABDULLAH MUSTAFVI
PM looks forward for a counter narrative from religious scholars as evident from the headlines of newspapers. Obviously, the proposed narrative is expected to counter the multiple narratives being followed by various terrorist groups. How very thoughtful of you, Mr PM! May it so happen that the desire for narrative prove to be a genuine thought instead of a random paper crafted by some speech writer. Interesting points appear in mind while thinking about the narrative. The quality which we seriously lack on this important issue, like many others too, is the clarity. The word ‘narrative’ is being discussed quite frequently in the specific context of the fast spreading violence or terrorism. To a great extent, connectivity of ongoing terrorism with misinterpreted religious concepts is relevant. Here we definitely have a fault line. Misinterpretation of Quranic concept of Jihad emerged in mid 70s after Russian invasion in Afghanistan. Purity of Afghan resistance movement against Russian invading forces was compromised with involvement of American hand . Pakistan, under military rule, preferred to establish alignment with America amid serious concerns from Russia which in those days was all tilted towards India. Russian role in East Pakistan tragedy must be kept in mind as it sufficiently helps in understanding the reasons of Pak inclination towards USA. Leaving aside the debate on past Pak alignment with USA, let’s refocus on the real issue. Religious slogan of ‘Jihad’ had enormous attraction once mixed with the validity of Afghan resistance against Russian invaders. It was all fine for USA at that time and we, as usual, could not comprehend the future implications. Dangerous mixture of ‘misinterpreted religious beliefs’ and ‘ruthless pursuit of interests’ by global players gave birth to the deadly version of terrorism which haunts a major part of the region till today. Our follies persistently contributed in enhancing the crisis, but in reality it was all conceived and patronized by USA. We jumped into the well without assessing the depth because it was desired by the USA. Any worthwhile consultancy or collective brain storming might had saved us from many undesired outcomes. We viewed the problem with American lens and kept pursuing our wish list too which was obviously not acceptable to the rest of the players. Now we are again all set to commit similar mistakes with a different drum beat. Our recent quest for a counter narrative is one relevant example. Is’nt it true that we are desperate for a counter narrative because it is primarily required by America. Asking for a counter narrative from religious scholars only sufficiently adds an obvious dubiousness to our intent. It is true that terrorism in Pakistan is being perpetuated though misinterpreted religious concepts. But it is wrong that only religiously overcharged or subverted groups are involved in terrorism. Urban Sindh has been witnessing worst form of terrorism since mid 80s and major political parties were found involved in patronage of militant wings. Primarily this form of terrorism has roots in linguistic and racial prejudices. Don’t we need a counter narrative to deal with poisonous political themes based on linguistic hatred. Foreign sponsored militants, active in Baluchistan, too follow subversive violent ideology revolving around linguistic hatred and inter provincial disharmony. How do we categorize the hardcore terrorists of MQM, Peoples Aman Committee, BLA, and many such look alike groups operating under patronage of well established political parties. We are not ready to formulate a counter narrative against ideology of these groups who brutally killed hundreds of innocent citizens, challenged the writ of the state and openly ceased the fundamental rights of masses at gun point. State definitely needs a counter narrative against all forms of terrorism. Restricting the focus only on religiously motivated terrorism is not correct. We are again following the wish of ‘old masters’ blindly. We should form our own reasons to develop a holistic narrative. A counter narrative on religious grounds must be formed by seeking due input of authentic scholars from all over the Muslim world. Organizations like AQ, and ISIS address the audience at global canvas and have roots spread in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and many unfamiliar African territories. An attempt for narrative at an equally broader spectrum will definitely prove better than an isolated localized narrow based endeavor. While receiving PM’s call for a narrative in full optimism, one can’t find a reasonable justification for traditional lousiness of state on this particular issue. A genuine person like Dr Sarfaraz Naeemi Shaheed bravely stood fast against the terrorism by issuing a decree (Fatwa) on suicidal attacks and paid the price with his life.
Is’nt it strange that state neither made a serious attempt to formulate a counter narrative nor it could save the brave ones like Dr Sarfaraz Naeemi. It appears really strange, once PM asks again the religious circles to formulate a narrative, that too while addressing the anniversary of the icon who can be rightly termed as the victim of state’s non – seriousness. Despite all optimism about the proposed narrative, one cannot overlook few questions. Will any body dare again to stand fast like Dr Sarfaraz Naeemi Shaheed ? Is state ready to patronize the idea of counter narrative at global canvas ? Are we going to counter the narratives of non- religious terrorist groups too ? Lastly, why religiously motivated terrorism perpetuates in poorly governed areas destroyed by USA and why the religious and non religious terrorist groups operating in Pakistan always enjoy active sponsorship of India ? Without exploring appropriate answers to these questions, the lengthy tale of narratives will remain unfinished .
