Tag: Minorities

Categories
نقطۂ نظر

دُہرا معیار

حلب جل رہا ہے، حلب جل گیا، حلب راکھ ہوگیا، شام میں مسلمانوں پر جراثیمی حملہ بھی ہوگیا، اور پھر امریکہ نے میزائل بھی داغ دیئے۔ کئی مسلمان شہید ہوگئے۔ پاکستان میں بہت احتجاج ہوا

 

یمن میں جاری اسلامی برانڈ کی لڑائی میں لاکھوں مسلمان بچے قحط سالی کا شکار ہو گئے، اقوام متحدہ پیٹ پیٹ کے تھک گیا کہ کچھ کرلو ورنہ یہ انسانی نسل کی سب سے بڑی تباہی بن جائے گی۔ اصلی برانڈ اور نقلی برانڈ کی انوکھی چپقلش پہ ہمیں بہت افسوس ہوا

 

اسرائیل مُصر ہے کہ وہ فلسطینی زمین پر یہودی بستیاں بنا کے رہے گا اور اسے اس کام میں اب امریکہ سرکار کی بھی شہ حاصل ہے۔ فلسطینیوں پر زمین تنگ کی جا رہی ہے، ان کو مارا جارہا ہے، ان کے حقوق کا استحصال کیا جا رہا ہے۔ ہمیں بہت تشویش ہوئی

 

صدر ٹرمپ نے سات مسلمان ملکوں کے باشندوں پر پابندی لگا دی کہ یہاں کے مسلمان دہشت گردی میں ملوث ہیں۔ ہم بہت تلملائے

 

برما میں روہنگیا مسلمانوں کا بُری طرح سے قتل عام ہوا اور لاکھوں کی تعداد میں مسلمان پناہ گزین بنگلہ دیش کی سرحد پار کرگئے۔ ہمیں اس پہ بھی بہت غصہ آیا

 

بنگلہ دیش میں شیخ مجیب الرحمٰن کی صاحبزادی نے کئی اسلام پسندوں کو پھانسی پر چڑھا دیا اور حکومتی ادارے باقی ماندہ اسلام پسندوں کی تاک میں ہیں۔ ہمیں پھر غصہ آیا

 

بھارت میں بابری مسجد کو شہید کرکے اس کی جگہ رام مندر کی تعمیر کی مہم شروع کی گئی ہمیں اتحاد بین المسلمین کی ضرورت شدت سے محسوس ہونے لگی۔

 

بھارت کی ہی سب سے بڑی ریاست اترپردیش کے انتہا پسند ہندو وزیراعلیٰ ادتیا ناتھ یوگی کے وژن پر عمل کرتے ہوئے گائے کی نقل و حمل میں ملوث ایک مسلمان کو پسلیاں توڑ کر قتل کردیا گیا۔ گوشت کے کاروبار سے جڑے لاکھوں مسلمان اور دلت بے روزگار ہوگئے۔ یوگی کے رومیو سکواڈ نے ایک مسلمان لڑکے کو اس بناء پر قتل کردیا کہ وہ ہندو لڑکی سے پیار کرتا ہے۔ ہمیں پاکستان میں بیٹھ کر بھارت میں مقیم مسلمانوں کی حالتِ زار پر بہت دکھ ہوا

 

ہم نے پوری دنیا میں مسلمانوں کے ساتھ روا رکھے جانے والے بُرے سلوک پہ احتجاج کئے، ہم بہت تلملائے، ہمیں شدید غصہ آیا اور آنا بھی چاہئیے تھا۔ امت کے درد میں ہم دن رات گھلتے رہے۔

 

مگر ہم نے ایک لمحے کے لئے بھی سوچا کہ پاکستان میں کیسی صورت حال ہے؟ اختلافِ رائے رکھنے والوں، دوسرے عقیدے کے لوگوں اور اقلیتوں کے ساتھ جو سلوک ہم پاکستان میں کر رہے ہیں کیا وہ ہمارا دُہرا معیار اور منافقت نہیں ہے؟ یوگی آدتیا ناتھ جو کچھ اتر پردیش میں مسلمانوں کے ساتھ کر رہا ہے ہم بھی تو ویسا ہی سلوک یہاں بسنے والے ہندووں کے ساتھ کر رہے ہیں۔ وہ بھارت میں مسلمانوں کی آبادی کی تیزی سے افزائش اور ہندوؤں کی آبادی میں کمی کی ایک وجہ یہ بھی بتاتا ہے کہ مسلمان ہندو لڑکیوں کو ورغلا کر ان سے شادی کرتے ہیں اور بعد میں ان کا مذہب تبدیل کرا لیتے ہیں تو کیا ہم سندھ میں ہندووں کے ساتھ مختلف سلوک کر رہے ہیں؟ کیا ہم آئے روز اس طرح کا واقعہ نہیں سنتے کہ وڈیروں نے کم سِن ہندو لڑکی کو اغواء کیا، زیادتی کی اور بعد میں زبردستی اسے اسلام کے دائرے میں داخل کر لیا۔ جو لڑکی ‘راہِ راست’ پر آ گئی اس کی جاں بخشی ہو گئی اور جو مذہب تبدیل نہ کرنے کی ضد پہ اڑ گئی اس کا سر تن سے جدا کر دیا؟ ایک مسیحی جوڑے کو ہم نے کوٹ رادھا کشن میں گستاخی کا ہتھیار استعمال کرتے ہوئے تندور میں جلا ڈالا۔ توہین مذہب کے الزام میں ہم نے گوجرہ اور لاہور کے بادامی باغ میں واقع پوری پوری مسیحی بستی کو آگ لگا دی۔ مردم شماری شروع ہوئی تو سکھ مذہب کا خانہ ہی نہیں دیا گیا فارم میں۔ اپنے فرقے کے سوا ہر فرقے سے ہم نفرت کرتے ہیں، احمدی برادری تو آئے روز ہمارے نشانے پہ ہے۔ کراچی میں اسماعیلیوں کی بس پر فائرنگ کرکے ہم نے کتنے ہی اسماعیلی صاف کر دیئے اور حالیہ واقعات میں پہلے تو ہم نے دوالمیال پہ ان کی عبادت گاہ پر حملہ کیا اور ایک درجن تک احمدیوں کو جہنم واصل کیا۔ پھر ہم نے ننکانہ صاحب میں ایک احمدی وکیل کو قتل کرکے ننکانہ صاحب کی سرزمین کو ایک شرپسند سے پاک کیا۔ پھر ہم نے لاہورکی سبزہ زار کالونی میں ایک احمدی کو قتل کیا۔

 

اختلافِ رائے جس حد تک اپنی اہمیت پاکستان میں کھو چکا ہے اس پر سوائے افسوس کے اور کیا بھی کیا جا سکتا ہے۔ کل ہم نے مردان کی عبدالولی خان یونیورسٹی میں ایک نوجوان کو محض مذہبی اختلاف رائے پر قتل کیا۔ گستاخی کو ہم نے یہاں بھی ایک ہتھیار کے طور پر استعمال کیا اور اگر پولیس ‘بروقت’ نہ پہنچتی تو ہم اس کی لاش بھی جلا چکے ہوتے۔

 

پوری دنیا میں مسلمانوں کو ڈرایا جا رہا ہے، دھمکایا جا رہا ہے، مارا جا رہا ہے۔ جن ممالک میں مسلمان اقلیت میں ہیں وہاں ان سے بدترین سلوک رکھا جا رہا ہے۔ برداشت نہیں کریں گے، اجازت نہیں دیں گے، سبق سکھائیں گے وغیرہ وغیرہ۔ میں مانتا ہوں مگر ہم اپنے ملک میں بسنے والی اقلیتوں کے ساتھ جو کچھ کر رہے ہیں وہ کسی تنقید کا مستحق نہیں؟ ہماری اس منافقت پر بھی کوئی پریس کانفرنس ہوگی؟ کوئی احتجاج ہوگا؟ کوئی مائی کا لعل اس پر بھی بینر اٹھائے گا؟ کوئی ہڑتال اس پر بھی ہوگی؟ اور کوئی اس کے خلاف بھی آواز اٹھائے گا؟؟ کیا ہمارا احتجاج کھوکھلا نہیں ہے؟؟
Categories
نقطۂ نظر

The Reappraisal of Our Worldview

As a birthday present on my 26th, Fazal and Ain, my two good and close New Jersey friends, showed me the Indian comedy-drama film, PK. Amani, their 5-year old granddaughter, accompanied us as well to the cinema. Born to an American-Pakistani Muslim mother and an American Christian father of Lebanese origin, Amani is a perfect and beautiful blend of Arab, American, Pashtun, Christian, and Islamic identity features.

I grew up hearing conceited claims that Heaven is only for Muslims. And that non-Muslims will be burnt in Hell forever.

Sitting beside Amani and eating popcorn while watching the movie, a thought from my past struck me: In childhood, my religious mentor taught me that Muslims are the best people on the planet Earth. I grew up hearing conceited claims that Heaven is only for Muslims. And that non-Muslims will be burnt in Hell forever. Does not matter who. Nelson Mandela? Mother Theresa? All of them. Their virtuousness and humanity does not count at all because they don’t believe in ‘our’ God and our religion, Islam. I was told. I was also taught that non-Muslims could never be friends with Muslims. And that we can never share meal with them as they are not pure like us (Muslims).

Absurd lessons such as these imply that non-Muslims must immediately convert to Islam in order for them to be good human beings and on par with Muslims. It seems as if human dignity is inherent in Muslimness only. However, I have successfully escaped this trap through my own reflection, and through appeal to reason, love, and compassion.

I admit though that I am neither a scholar of Islam nor of religion in general. I have no authority, like everybody else, to certify who is superior and who is inferior in the sight of God. But I do believe that the universality of a religious ideology (Islamic or else) does not mean its uniformity, as there exist a variety of popular religious beliefs with relative strength, potential, and their acceptance by humongous populations. Therefore, they all deserve equal protection and space for an unrestricted and independent practice.

But I also believe that human beings are hard-wired for virtuousness. Which means they are inherently empathetic without believing in any form of religion.

As my train of thoughts continued, I looked at Amani and wondered: What religion does she belong to? Islam or Christianity, a blend of the two, or something in the middle? Or, does her religious identity, if anything, matter at all? Then I wondered what religion does her family as a single whole belong to? What religion does the feeling of love, which bound her parents together, belong to? The answer is that there are no clear divisions due to the complex and crosscutting nature of human identities that interlink us all in multiple and unbelievably varied ways.

But my country Pakistan is the complete opposite of what I believe in and hold dear to my heart. It does not even remotely resemble a place where people of diversity could live in unity and harmony. Far from accepting people of other religions, extremist groups and their sympathizers among masses are at daggers drawn with their coreligionists. Shia Muslims, Ismailis, Ahamdis, Christians, Hindus, and pagan communities in the farthest north of Pakistan have been perpetrated violence against by extremist groups for quite too long. As there does not seem any change in the exclusivist thinking of the people and policies of the state, religious violence is on a rise.

There is no one prescribed way to enjoy, live, and understand life in order to be at peace with it.

Since the beginning of 2015 only, there have been some large-scale attacks against religious minorities. While the irreparable wounds of Shikarpur and Youhanabad attacks against Shia Muslims and Christians respectively are still fresh in our memory, yet on May 13 another horrific episode of violence was unleashed on Ismailis in Karachi. 43 people including 16 women were murdered in cold blood. I am sure that as some are lamenting the brutal killing of Ismaili Shia, there may be many others who live indifferently in its face as they are led into make-believes that eliminating such ‘heretics’ from the land of Islam and Pakistan is the responsibility of ‘true’ Muslims. And such is also the popular public narrative at homes, in social gatherings on streets, in Islamic education classes at schools, and on loudspeakers in mosques. And this kind of religious hate and exclusivism boils down to one simple but dangerous idea that sectarian killing is necessary for purifying Islam from ‘apostates’. Our collective silence and inability or unwillingness in the face of such murderous ideologies has created a huge void filled in by the preachers of violence and murder in the name of faith.

Therefore, it is high time that we reappraise our thinking by developing a pluralist thought and hence a tolerant society. Accomplishing such pluralism requires challenging individuals, groups, and institutions that desire to impose their extremist narrative on others through violence regardless of their choice in faith. We also need to educate our younger generation which is being, and will continue to be, trapped into make-believes that I experienced myself once. But doing so is not easy when parents forbid their children from reading books antithetical to their beliefs. An educated friend of mine, who is pursuing a master’s degree in the US, was stopped by his ‘educated’ father from reading a book on secularism. Much harder as it is, I suggest it is through trust with our family and friends that we can make pluralist mindsets popular and acceptable among them, in our immediate social circles, and eventually in our communities.

Moreover, with our world coming much closer together than ever before, we have much in common to unite than fight for. I am aware of the fact that religious boundaries can’t simply cease to exist, and certainly for multiple practical reasons and purposes. But, I believe, we can still be accepting of others by thinning our self-created thick and impenetrable walls of religious and cultural identities. Doing so is possible by appealing to our human identity, which is the strongest, the most transcendental, and above all else.

All this may seem too quixotic but still possible and appropriate. And idealism for peace is more than worth trying for. I believe that it is only love for humanity that will counter religious biases and violence justified on their bases. I am not against religion. But its criticism does warrant merit when loathsome and dangerous ideologies associated with it are promoted at the cost of humanity. I do acknowledge that religion does have conspicuous and valuable contributions in providing hope to the hopeless and helpless, in disciplining society, and in reinforcing ethical and human values but it has also limited the scope for practicing humanity.

But I also believe that human beings are hard-wired for virtuousness. Which means they are inherently empathetic without believing in any form of religion. And it is no surprise that many smile at me. I feel loved by thousand others. Million others accept me without any discrimination, no matter where I am in the world. And I see them on my side. On the side of humanity.

PK, released in December 2014, also makes a solid and timely plea for deconstructing millennialist religious narratives propagated by religious “managers” (as rightly called in the movie). On reflection, in the real world, these religious entrepreneurs and their franchises are engaged unabashedly in presenting differences of faith as an existential struggle for establishing transcendental and eschatological truth i.e. their brand of religion is absolutist and superior to all others. It is at such critical juncture that the film strongly demands from us the reappraisal of our thinking about the world and our fellow humans on the planet Earth.

Finally, we need to look at life as a much bigger and richer entity than religion. Religion is just a tiny part of it, not the other way around. There is no one prescribed way to enjoy, live, and understand life in order to be at peace with it. There are in fact million ways to look at it and to live it. Religion, among others, is one way of looking at life and the world. The solution to our problems lies not in aggression but in introspection. In inclusiveness and acceptance of others. Not in Muslim exclusivism. And we must understand that every person has inherent dignity in them, and must strive to act in ways that reaffirm the inherent dignity of every person regardless of faith.

Categories
نقطۂ نظر

Pakistan’s Responsibility to Protect

The deadly assault on central Imambargah in Shikarpur on January 30, allegedly by the TTP splinter Sunni militant group Jundullah, which killed more than 60 Shia Muslims and left as many severely injured, is not the first of its kind on the Shia population of Pakistan. It is a continuation of hundreds or perhaps thousands of large and small unstoppable and seemingly inevitable attacks, for last couple decades now, on the Shia community in the country. The recent blast and the havoc and destruction it wrought on the people of this community clearly shows that the Pakistani polity has expressly failed so far in its responsibility to protect its civilian population in general and religious minorities in particular.

According to previous studies by the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (GCR2P), Pakistan’s religious minorities, particularly the Shias, are at risk of potential mass atrocity crimes due to sectarian attacks by outlawed Sunni militant groups like the TTP, Sipah-e-Sahaba aka Ahle-Sunat-Wal-Jamat, and Lashkar-e-Jangvi in the country. Although the GCR2P has been a bit light-handed and generous in its analysis and scrutiny, I strongly believe that Pakistan certainly comes in the loop of countries, not implying the ilk of Libya or Syria, who have failed so far in their primary responsibility to protect their populations from genocide and mass atrocity crimes.

Defining the responsibility to protect

The responsibility to protect, often termed R2P, principle grew out of the failures of states to protect their populations and the inaction of international community in the face of tragedies of mass atrocities during the 1990s. After the mass atrocity crimes in Rwanda and Srebrenica, the then Secretary General of the UN, Kofi Annan recalled in his 2000 Millennium Report, “If humanitarian intervention is, indeed, an unacceptable assault on sovereignty, how should we respond to a Rwanda, to a Srebrenica, to gross and systematic violation of human rights that offend every precept of our common humanity?” Acting on his call, subsequently, in 2001, an independent Canadian-led International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), tasked with devising an alternative concept and strategy for preventing conscience-shocking crimes against humanity, came up with the idea of R2P which was later unanimously endorsed by the General Assembly in 2005. Broadly speaking, R2P is based on three large pillars: Firstly, building up on the idea also expounded in the Geneva Conventions of 1949, it is every state’s responsibility to protect their populations from four crimes i.e. genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing. Secondly, other states should assist a failing state in its responsibility to prevent or halt mass atrocity crimes. Thirdly, if a state is manifestly unable or unwilling to do so, it becomes the responsibility of international community to prevent a conflict through its full and active engagement, including the use of military force. The cousin concept of humanitarian intervention, R2P is a more complex, multidimensional, and comprehensive principle, which offers an exhaustive toolkit of diplomatic and non-military measures for halting crimes against humanity, with, of course, the use of force as a last resort.

“If humanitarian intervention is, indeed, an unacceptable assault on sovereignty, how should we respond to a Rwanda, to a Srebrenica, to gross and systematic violation of human rights that offend every precept of our common humanity?”

How Pakistan has failed in protecting its citizens

I am not, by any means, implying an intervention of any kind in Pakistan’s case, which may be precipitated if it does not rise up to the protection of its religious minorities, as some international human rights organizations have already raised their concerns about Pakistan’s failure in this regard.

Pakistan, since its birth, has not been generally conducive to religious minorities. The violent Lahore riots of 1953 against Ahmedis claimed the lives of hundreds of members of their community. That was the start, which has expanded to other sects over time, and there does not seem an end of hate against and slaughter of religious minorities in sight yet. The Ahmedis were then constitutionally declared non-Muslims in 1974 under Bhutto regime due to pressure from religious right wing, and have since been perpetrated violence against.

Similarly, 50 families, all from Balochistan, of Parsis have left the country from fear of persecution and kidnapping for ransom of high profile members of their community. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan’s (HRCP) report confirms this fact. Hindu women in interior Sind have been compelled on forced marriages and unwilling acceptance of Islam. Similarly, pagan communities in the Kalasha Valley and adjoining areas have also been threatened with violence. In the same vein, Christian community has been harassed, particularly over the last decade, through black (blasphemy) laws where justice is dispensed in the public court run by mindless, violent, and extremely reactionary mob. Attacks have also been perpetrated on most of the important Sufi shrines of the country.

Since 1980s when Zia let the genie of religious extremism and sectarianism out of the bottle, according to the HRCP, over 4000 Shias have been killed in Pakistan.

The worst of all, the Shia minority group, which makes about 15-20% of Pakistan’s total population, is the main victim of sectarian violence in the country. Among Shias, particularly, the Hazara Shia community, comprising about 500,000 members in Quetta, has suffered the brunt of sectarian attacks chiefly because they are an easy prey due to their Mongolian facial features to whom their descent is traced. Moreover, Karachi, Lahore, Rawalpindi, Chilas, Para Chinar, and Gilgit have also remained the hotspots of anti-Shia sectarian violence.

Since 1980s when Zia let the genie of religious extremism and sectarianism out of the bottle, according to the HRCP, over 4000 Shias have been killed in Pakistan. Patterns of sectarian violence against religious minorities over the last decade show that the perpetrators have mainly targeted churches, Shia Imambargahs and mosques that belong to the Ahmedi community. Some other popular patterns of sectarian violence have been the targeted killing of professionals, shopkeepers, businessmen, zairin (Shia pilgrims) traveling to Iran and Iraq, and religious leaders of the Shia community. The Shias have also been at times reactive but largely peaceful.

Similarly, attacks have also been directed at the Hazara Shia students, especially in Quetta. The Hazara Shia Students aboard buses in the city have been targeted. Among many, one such horrible attack was at the bus of Sardar Bahadur Khan University in Quetta in which more than 30 undergrad and grad female students were killed. Fortunately, on that same day, my sister who was also a masters student of English literature at the same University, had been absent. It could have been her too.

Due to fear from attacks, hundreds of Hazara students dropped out from colleges and universities in the city. In the wake of the attacks, the non-Hazara students declined to share buses with them, as buses carrying Hazara students were threatened by sectarian groups.

Moreover, thousands have been forced to migrate, both legally and illegally, mainly to Australia and Europe. Hundreds died in the sea when old, inexpensive, and overloaded boats carrying poor migrants, capsized several times. Sectarian violence and Shia massacre and persecution of other religious minorities are the specifics of blatant violations of human rights and international human rights law in Pakistan. Over 60, 000 Pakistanis, both civilians and security personnel, have been killed in terrorism related incidents over the last decade.

Since Pakistan is a member of the United Nations (UN) and a party to human rights declarations, treaties, conventions, and covenants such like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), and International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (1966), it becomes its utmost responsibility to uphold both national and international law. There has to be a quick and robust action to defeat sectarianism, mainly against the Shias and generally against religious minorities. Though there seems some consensus and action in government’s policy in the post-Peshawar school attack, it is not sufficient.

Steps for fulfilling the responsibility to protect

In this regard, first and foremost, Pakistan has to disown and distance itself from the Saudi-led-and-run notorious Wahhabi war against its Shia competitor, Iran, for Sunni ascendance in the region. Secondly, extremist and militant Sunni groups created by the state for strategic purposes in Kashmir, India, Afghanistan, and occasionally against the west, must be disbanded. The ban should mean, like Huma Yusuf asserts, the arrest of the leadership of the banned groups and ways to stop the recurrence and resurgence of these groups under different names, which has repeatedly happened in Pakistan. No group should remain out of state’s control. The state has to reclaim its independent and sovereign power. It can if it wants to defeat religious terrorism and sectarianism.

Thirdly, the financial support of these groups from Riyadh and Gulf monarchies must be cut down. Fourthly, the culture of impunity for the terrorists must end, as it has been precisely the reason that has failed us so far in defeating this evil. If the Sharif brothers are afraid of Asmatullah Muawiah and want to cut a deal with him after his involvement in terrorism for a long time, they must rethink their policy or step down. They are elected to save the nation, not Raiwand or only Punjab. Hafiz Saeed, Malik Ishaq, and their ilk must be declared as terrorists and put in jail for life time.

If the Sharif brothers are afraid of Asmatullah Muawiah and want to cut a deal with him after his involvement in terrorism for a long time, they must rethink their policy or step down.

Fifthly and most importantly, at least on the issue of religious terrorism and sectarianism, all political parties must take a united stance, as it is a serious common threat to the nation’s survival. Short of a unanimous national policy standpoint and concerted efforts against extremism, all party conferences do not mean anything. What matters the most is what all political parties do together for defeating religious sectarianism and terrorism. In this regard, the Sharif’s conservative PML-N, in disregard of the fear of losing its vote bank to the Imran’s ultra-conservative Pakistan Tehrek-e-Insaf (PTI) in Punjab, must generally change its attitude and policy towards extremist groups in the province. The PTI leader, Imran Khan, must also reframe his thinking towards religious militants. The religious political parties such as Jamiat-Ulema-e-Islam Fazalur Rehman (JUI-F) and Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) must give up their culture of denial and hypocrisy. The right wing religious political leadership must either side with the state in its narrative and action against religious terrorism, or step aside and face the consequences. Much commendable in this regard though, has been the role of Awami National Party (ANP), Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), Pukhtunkhwa Milli Awami Party (PKMAP), and Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP).

Sixthly, Madaris (religious seminaries) that spread hate must be closed down. Generally, Madaris must be strictly scrutinized and brought under state’s control. The Madaris’ leaders who fail to act in line with the state’s national policy on terrorism must be put in jail for there can never be a state within a state. Finally, the Operation Zarb-e-Azb must continue. The judiciary, police, and other security institutions must utilize their full strength and resources to bring the perpetrators of violence to the book. The security of judges of civilian courts must be ensured for fairly and judiciously deciding terrorism cases.

(Continued)

Categories
نقطۂ نظر

Waging Non-Violent Action in Violent World

Imran Khan

non voilence

We live in an extremely violent world. States and transnational non-state actors use violence to achieve their political and strategic objectives, believing that use of violence is the most effective way to do so, notwithstanding that it does not work most of the time. Only the last decade (2001-2011) saw 9/11 terrorist attacks, a protracted and bloody war in Afghanistan, the American invasion of Iraq, Israeli aggression against Lebanon and Palestine, 7/7 bombing in London, terrorist attacks in Mumbai in 2008 and so on. Literally hundreds of thousands of people died in these violent conflicts and terrorist attacks. For that matter, the 20th century was perhaps one of the most violent centuries in human history, witnessing two world wars responsible for the deaths of millions of people.

Talking about Pakistan, we are used to violence in this country. In the weeks and months leading up to the creation of Pakistan, the sub-continent witnessed mass killings of both Muslims and Hindus in communal riots. In 64 years of Pakistan’s history, we fought four wars against India. We launched at least four military operations against our Baloch brothers because they offended the state elite by asking for their legitimate rights. Although we haven’t fought any war against a foreign enemy during the last ten years, more than 35,000 Pakistanis were killed during this period in hundreds of terrorist attacks carried out by fellow Pakistanis led by terrorist organizations.

Being an activist, a student of history and a Pakistani, I was carrying a baggage of violence when I went to the Fletcher International School to attend a course on Strategic Non-Violent Action (June 21-24). The people I met, the stories I heard and the ideas I was exposed to showed me the other side of the picture.

Even now as I write, Karachi – the biggest city of Pakistan – is burning due to ethnic-cum-political violence perpetrated by the armed gangs of mainstream political parties. They use violence in Karachi for their political ends. More than 100 people have died in target killings during the last two weeks. Not long ago, we witnessed the assassination of Salman Taseer, the then-governor of Punjab, at the hands of his own bodyguard for criticizing draconian blasphemy laws. Later, the Federal Minister for Minorities Shahbaz Bhatti – the only Christian member of the cabinet – was brutally assassinated under the same pretext. And yes, how can I forget the mysterious abduction and gruesome murder of the journalist, Saleem Shahzad.

Being an activist, a student of history and a Pakistani, I was carrying a baggage of violence when I went to the Fletcher International School to attend a course on Strategic Non-Violent Action (June 21-24). The people I met, the stories I heard and the ideas I was exposed to showed me the other side of the picture.

While I thought that 20th century was a century of war, bloodshed, suffering and genocide, it was also a century of strategic non-violent action, I was told. A century that witnessed many successful non-violent movements waged in different parts of the world.

I did not know about the role Gandhi’s philosophy of Satyagraha and the civil resistance movement played in the Independence Movement of sub-continent. I was not aware of the strategies anti-apartheid activists used in South Africa to bring down the brutal and repressive Apartheid regime. With my class-mates at Fletcher, I studied the strategies which pro-democracy activists used in Chile and Serbia to bring down the ruthless dictatorships of Augusto Pinochet and Slobodan Milosovic respectively. I heard about the non-violent Solidarity Movement against the repressive communist regime in Poland. These stories convinced me that non-violent action as a political strategy has always had better chances of victory than violent action.

Erica Chenoweth, the author of Why Civil Resistance Works and an assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University, previously a fellow at Harvard University, told us in her talk that empirical evidence from history proved that non-violent movements had twice as much chances of success as violent movements.

Erica Chenoweth, the author of Why Civil Resistance Works and an assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University, previously a fellow at Harvard University, told us in her talk that empirical evidence from history proved that non-violent movements had twice as much chances of success as violent movements. More than anything else, I was inspired by the great people I met at the Fletcher Summer Institute. People like Reverend James Lawson, a veteran of American Civil Rights Movement and a close associate of Dr Martin Luther King. Dr King once said: “Revered Lawson is the leading theorist and strategist of nonviolence in the world”. The volunteers Rev. Lawson trained in waging non-violent action launched a desegregation movement in 1960s in Nashville, a city in the US state of Tennessee, which eventually led to the desegregation in other parts of the US. The humble and soft-spoken reverend shared with us his experiences as a leader of civil rights movement.

It was a very enlightening experience listening to Jack DuVall and Dr Peter Ackerman – the founders of the International Centre on Non-Violent Conflict that hosted the course for us. Both Jack and Dr Ackerman have devoted their lives to the study and propagation of knowledge about strategic non-violent action. Identifying the elements required for the success of a movement, Dr Ackerman told us: “A civil resistance movement must unify the wider spectrum of society – young and old, all ethnic groups, religious groups, all economic strata – around a limited set of achievable goals. The second thing that is required is planning. There has to be the capacity for the leadership to look objectively at what its capabilities are, who it can mobilize, what tactics it can use, how to sequence those tactics that it has biggest negative impact on the opponent. The third element is non-violent discipline.” According to Dr Ackerman, these three elements are pre-requisite for the success of any civil resistance movement irrespective of the cultural and political context.

A civil resistance movement must unify the wider spectrum of society – young and old, all ethnic groups, religious groups, all economic strata – around a limited set of achievable goals.

While Dr Ackerman taught us the strategies of non-violent civil resistance, I was thinking about Pakistan. I was relating what he was saying to Pakistan. Our lawyers’ movement for the restoration of the deposed Chief Justice of Pakistan had all three elements. Different segments of society were united under the leadership of lawyers, who immaculately planned their every move, organizing long marches and using the traditional and digital media very effectively. Non-violent discipline was also there. No matter how much force Musharraf regime used against peaceful lawyers, civil society and activists, the latter did not respond with violence.

Dr Ackerman told us during his talk that the conditions under which activists work are always difficult and dangerous. However, he said, we witnessed during the Arab Spring that the conditions can be changed by the skills of the activists. Since the activists were successful in mobilizing hundreds of thousands of people because of their superior skills and planning, it was no longer as dangerous to protest against the tyrants as it was before. The dictatorial regimes had become weaker, whereas the people had become stronger.

My friend Ayman Qwaider is a Palestinian activist, who has witnessed the brutality of the occupiers while working for various humanitarian organizations in Gaza. However, he still strongly believes in non-violent civil resistance.

I made many amazing friends at the Fletcher Summer Institute. They are the people whose lives are an epitome of non-violent resistance in the face of oppression and tyranny. My friend Ayman Qwaider is a Palestinian activist, who has witnessed the brutality of the occupiers while working for various humanitarian organizations in Gaza. However, he still strongly believes in non-violent civil resistance. He thinks that brutality against brutality is not the solution. Born, raised and educated in Gaza, Ayman got a scholarship a few years ago to study in Europe. However, the Israeli Army refused to allow him to leave the strip because of their blockade. An undeterred Ayman launched a personal advocacy campaign on the social media, eventually forcing Israel to issue him a permit to leave Gaza. Mashallah Ayman has now completed his M.A in International Peace, Conflict and Development from a university in Spain and he is planning to continue his peaceful struggle for the liberation of Occupied Territories.

While India and Pakistan are archrivals, the people of two countries do not have innate hatred for each other. Far from that, we have so much in common. This is what I realized when I met Ayushman Jamwal, an Indian student from Cardiff University, at the Fletcher. We immediately became friends and spent most of our time together during the course. We discussed the history and politics of Indo-Pak relations. Ayushman criticized the atrocities Indian state has committed against Kashmiris and I castigated Pakistan for supporting non-state actors against India. Thank God neither of us was jingoistic, which made a constructive discussion and friendship possible. We discussed the curriculum taught in Indian and Pakistani schools and realized that both the states were teaching a pack of lies, a perverted and distorted interpretation of history to its future leaders. We concluded that whilst both states might continue their past policies, the people will have to come forward to make South Asia peaceful and prosperous.

263809_2074908586739_7933832_n

Imran Khan is a peace activist. He is currently working as Civil Society Campaign Manager at Alif Ailaan.