What's new

Mian Atif, PTI and Oriya Maqbol Jaan..

for all those idiots who claim Hazrat Esa AS is not coming back.
but i am sure they will still act like a patwari and deny the truth and will not except any logical argument.
first i thought to argue but then i give the links to some great scholars videos about the subject. these will be good enough for those who really want to know the truth but those who want to argue for the sake of argue will keep on with their rhetoric.
 
.
When you said internal stability and lack of tolerance my god you were right. What I heard is incredible. If this monster of extremism is not leashed I despair at Pakistan's future. I wish Prime Minister Imran Khan the best. He has incredible difficult job on his hand -
...PM IK appointed members to a economic advisory council. He cherrypicked some of the best brains he could. One of them is Atif Mian who is ranked among the top 25 young economists of the world...But instead of that being a plus point the matter is turning into political hot potato. All because of Mr Mian's faith being a Ahmedi. Perfectly educated people as in the media [OP has link to it] are crying hoarse and suggesting the most vile conspiracy theories and lambasting PM IK for having chosen a Ahmedi. *Despair*.
Any elation I had about PM IK winning is fast waning ....
114x114.png

Many Pakistanis with Ivy League PhDs support discrimination against Ahmadis

HUSAIN HAQQANI 12 September, 2018

GettyImages-77674720-e1523862245204.jpg

Islamabad, Pakistan | Warrick Page/Getty Images

Pakistan’s deep-rooted religious-nationalist prejudices will not disappear unless they are methodically confronted and opposed.

Pakistan’s recent controversy over the appointment of an Ahmadi economist to an advisory panel is emblematic of the country’s deeper psychosis of identity. Confronting ideological demons is more important for Pakistan than promises by the country’s best and brightest to provide it good technocratic advice.

Princeton University economist, Atif R. Mian, was first appointed to Prime Minister Imran Khan’s Economic Advisory Council (EAC) and then forced to resign on grounds that he belonged to the Ahmadiyya community. Soon after Atif Mian resigned, two other internationally respected economists of Pakistani origin, Asim Khwaja of Harvard University and Imran Rasul of University College of London, also resigned in solidarity.

All of them promised to continue trying to ‘help Pakistan’, probably with their wise economic counsel.

Also read: Insulting removal of Princeton prof shows Pakistan has forgotten Jinnah’s view on Ahmadis

But just as correct diagnosis is important before even the best surgeon can deal with cancerous growth, it is important for Pakistan’s great economic minds to understand why their expertise was valued less than their religious or sectarian affiliation.

Atif Mian attributed the campaign against his inclusion in the advisory committee to ‘opposition from Mullahs’. He ignored the fact that Imran Khan had himself made protection of Khatm-e-Nabuwat (Finality of Prophethood) – a code for anti-Ahmadi rhetoric and violence – a plank of his election campaign.

That religion became an issue in selecting economists best suited to guide Pakistan when it is facing an economic crisis was not surprising, given the political and ideological dynamics of the country.

While Atif Mian, Asim Khwaja and Imran Rasul might be among the best of the best that Pakistan has produced, Pakistan’s problems are not due to the absence of technocrats, economists, or other professionals.

Even those Pakistani governments that earned a reputation for poor governance often had at least some good technocrats available to them for advice or policymaking.

Pakistan’s problem essentially is an ideological and political one. As I point out in my book Reimagining Pakistan, much of Pakistan’s dysfunction is the result of its inability to answer questions bred by conflicting expectations, most of them relating to its national narrative.

How Islamic is Pakistan meant to be? What does it mean to be an Islamic state in modern times? What should be the balance of power between a central Pakistani government and the various provinces representing various nationalities and ethnic groups? Must Pakistan forever be at war with India to justify its existence as a separate state? If so, how can it avoid dominance by the military and militants?

Although ideological questions have preoccupied Pakistanis, theirs is not the only contemporary nation state that started out as an idea. It differs from others, however, in not evolving an identity beyond the grievances that fuelled the demand for a separate Muslim state in the subcontinent.

The combustible mix of religion and politics, the pursuit of nuclear weapons, the acceptance and encouragement of terrorism, and the angry tone in Pakistan’s relations with the rest of the world are all by-products of the indignation that helped create Pakistan and has since been nurtured by the Pakistani state.

The two-pronged approach of many Pakistani writers painting a sunny picture of their country is to insist that Pakistan’s accomplishments serve as both its justification and its potential while laying its problems at the door of historic injustices or current international malfeasance. Responsibility for collective failure or miscalculation can be avoided by lamenting the absence of good leaders.

There appears little willingness to consider that Pakistan might need to review some of the fundamental assumptions in its national belief system – militarism, radical Islamist ideology, perennial conflict with India, dependence on external support, and refusal to recognise ethnic identities and religious pluralism – to break out of a permanent crisis mode and move towards a more stable future.

Defining Pakistan’s nationalism through Islam exposed the country to the paradox of setting a national boundary upon a universalist faith. Consequently, Pakistan’s Islamists, and often the state apparatus, have sought to manipulate religious sentiment to bolster nationalist feeling without intending to establish the Islamic state they constantly talk about.

Islamic ideology not only sets Pakistan apart from India, notwithstanding many commonalities of history, culture and social mores; it also musters a diverse nation’s energies in pushing back policy pressures from major international powers. In some ways, it is a weapon amid weakness even if it is a gun held to one’s own head.

Constant indignation at real or perceived indignities against Islam is a useful device for Pakistan’s leaders. They distract from substantive economic and social issues. Quite often, religious rage is generated through falsehoods and rumours, which are systematically deployed as vehicles of policy.

I have run into many Pakistanis with PhDs, including some who work for the World Bank, who argue in favour of Pakistan’s constitutional discrimination against Ahmadis. “Why don’t they just acknowledge that they are not Muslims, then they can live in Pakistan, like Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and Parsis,” one of them once asked me.

Even their Ivy League university PhDs fail to help them understand that defining a religion in the modern era is a personal or possibly a social matter, not something that can be dealt with through the constitution or legislation.

Also read: Imran Khan sacking Princeton professor can invite EU censure, hit Pakistan’s trade ties

Thus, Catholics can consider Protestants as non-Christians and Protestants can think likewise about Catholics. Both Catholics and Protestants can consider the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) a religion outside Christianity. But there is not a single country in the world that has legislated on the matter of who is or is not a Christian, which is how it should be.

It is important to remember that such legislation also runs contrary to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Pakistan is a signatory. That declaration not only guarantees freedom of religion but also the freedom to change religion. Heresy is, therefore, now a religious concept, not a legal one.

By insisting on their religious sentiment being superior to the religious views or feelings of others, Pakistanis effectively end up separating themselves from the rest of the world. Pakistan’s international isolation will not end until Pakistanis can understand why the rest of the world finds their religious nationalism out of step with the 21st century.

Pakistani national identity is also deeply intertwined with negative sentiments about people of other religions, most notably Hindus but Jews and Christians as well.

When endemic prejudice becomes part of nationalism, economists, technocrats, and professionals can’t help overcome it.

Even if Atif Mian, Asim Khwaja and Imran Rasul help Pakistan’s economic growth through sensible policy recommendations, the deep-rooted religious-nationalist prejudices will not disappear unless they are methodically confronted and opposed.

Also read: Imran Khan shows his cowardice by dropping Princeton prof Atif Mian over Ahmedia identity

Nazi Germany, imperialist Japan and fascist Italy did not have a dearth of good economic planners, scientists, engineers, and doctors. They just did not have enough political and social activists who could resist the rise of extremism.

It is sad that some of the best Pakistani minds sitting in international organisations and doing great research in academia abroad tend to avoid political controversy that is inevitable when you challenge dogma and wrong narratives.

Confronting misdirected religious nationalism might be more important for Pakistan right now than simply setting state finances right.

The author is the director for South and Central Asia at the Hudson Institute in Washington D.C., was Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States from 2008-11. His latest book is ‘Reimagining Pakistan.’
 
.
I hate Husain Haqqani's guts for being a coward and sell out. But what he said in this article does sadly carry more then a grain of truth to it. But here is the rub that you are probably unaware of. It HH and his migrant community from India that originally planted and spread seeds of hate. This bas*tard before lecturning others needs to atone for his sins.
 
.
I would have never expected such an article from Hussain Haqqani. This can only come when you see Pakistan from a nuetral prespective, keeping the usual prejudice Pakistanis have, of being superior to everyone, on the side.
I dont believe I am saying this, because we always thought of him being a sell out, but the article shows pain for Pakistan.
Problem are the insecurities Pakistan has, makes them so stubborn and stick to same path. Its like cycles repeating over and over again
 
Last edited:
.
114x114.png

Many Pakistanis with Ivy League PhDs support discrimination against Ahmadis

HUSAIN HAQQANI 12 September, 2018

GettyImages-77674720-e1523862245204.jpg

Islamabad, Pakistan | Warrick Page/Getty Images

Pakistan’s deep-rooted religious-nationalist prejudices will not disappear unless they are methodically confronted and opposed.

Pakistan’s recent controversy over the appointment of an Ahmadi economist to an advisory panel is emblematic of the country’s deeper psychosis of identity. Confronting ideological demons is more important for Pakistan than promises by the country’s best and brightest to provide it good technocratic advice.

Princeton University economist, Atif R. Mian, was first appointed to Prime Minister Imran Khan’s Economic Advisory Council (EAC) and then forced to resign on grounds that he belonged to the Ahmadiyya community. Soon after Atif Mian resigned, two other internationally respected economists of Pakistani origin, Asim Khwaja of Harvard University and Imran Rasul of University College of London, also resigned in solidarity.

All of them promised to continue trying to ‘help Pakistan’, probably with their wise economic counsel.

Also read: Insulting removal of Princeton prof shows Pakistan has forgotten Jinnah’s view on Ahmadis

But just as correct diagnosis is important before even the best surgeon can deal with cancerous growth, it is important for Pakistan’s great economic minds to understand why their expertise was valued less than their religious or sectarian affiliation.

Atif Mian attributed the campaign against his inclusion in the advisory committee to ‘opposition from Mullahs’. He ignored the fact that Imran Khan had himself made protection of Khatm-e-Nabuwat (Finality of Prophethood) – a code for anti-Ahmadi rhetoric and violence – a plank of his election campaign.

That religion became an issue in selecting economists best suited to guide Pakistan when it is facing an economic crisis was not surprising, given the political and ideological dynamics of the country.

While Atif Mian, Asim Khwaja and Imran Rasul might be among the best of the best that Pakistan has produced, Pakistan’s problems are not due to the absence of technocrats, economists, or other professionals.

Even those Pakistani governments that earned a reputation for poor governance often had at least some good technocrats available to them for advice or policymaking.

Pakistan’s problem essentially is an ideological and political one. As I point out in my book Reimagining Pakistan, much of Pakistan’s dysfunction is the result of its inability to answer questions bred by conflicting expectations, most of them relating to its national narrative.

How Islamic is Pakistan meant to be? What does it mean to be an Islamic state in modern times? What should be the balance of power between a central Pakistani government and the various provinces representing various nationalities and ethnic groups? Must Pakistan forever be at war with India to justify its existence as a separate state? If so, how can it avoid dominance by the military and militants?

Although ideological questions have preoccupied Pakistanis, theirs is not the only contemporary nation state that started out as an idea. It differs from others, however, in not evolving an identity beyond the grievances that fuelled the demand for a separate Muslim state in the subcontinent.

The combustible mix of religion and politics, the pursuit of nuclear weapons, the acceptance and encouragement of terrorism, and the angry tone in Pakistan’s relations with the rest of the world are all by-products of the indignation that helped create Pakistan and has since been nurtured by the Pakistani state.

The two-pronged approach of many Pakistani writers painting a sunny picture of their country is to insist that Pakistan’s accomplishments serve as both its justification and its potential while laying its problems at the door of historic injustices or current international malfeasance. Responsibility for collective failure or miscalculation can be avoided by lamenting the absence of good leaders.

There appears little willingness to consider that Pakistan might need to review some of the fundamental assumptions in its national belief system – militarism, radical Islamist ideology, perennial conflict with India, dependence on external support, and refusal to recognise ethnic identities and religious pluralism – to break out of a permanent crisis mode and move towards a more stable future.

Defining Pakistan’s nationalism through Islam exposed the country to the paradox of setting a national boundary upon a universalist faith. Consequently, Pakistan’s Islamists, and often the state apparatus, have sought to manipulate religious sentiment to bolster nationalist feeling without intending to establish the Islamic state they constantly talk about.

Islamic ideology not only sets Pakistan apart from India, notwithstanding many commonalities of history, culture and social mores; it also musters a diverse nation’s energies in pushing back policy pressures from major international powers. In some ways, it is a weapon amid weakness even if it is a gun held to one’s own head.

Constant indignation at real or perceived indignities against Islam is a useful device for Pakistan’s leaders. They distract from substantive economic and social issues. Quite often, religious rage is generated through falsehoods and rumours, which are systematically deployed as vehicles of policy.

I have run into many Pakistanis with PhDs, including some who work for the World Bank, who argue in favour of Pakistan’s constitutional discrimination against Ahmadis. “Why don’t they just acknowledge that they are not Muslims, then they can live in Pakistan, like Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and Parsis,” one of them once asked me.

Even their Ivy League university PhDs fail to help them understand that defining a religion in the modern era is a personal or possibly a social matter, not something that can be dealt with through the constitution or legislation.

Also read: Imran Khan sacking Princeton professor can invite EU censure, hit Pakistan’s trade ties

Thus, Catholics can consider Protestants as non-Christians and Protestants can think likewise about Catholics. Both Catholics and Protestants can consider the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) a religion outside Christianity. But there is not a single country in the world that has legislated on the matter of who is or is not a Christian, which is how it should be.

It is important to remember that such legislation also runs contrary to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Pakistan is a signatory. That declaration not only guarantees freedom of religion but also the freedom to change religion. Heresy is, therefore, now a religious concept, not a legal one.

By insisting on their religious sentiment being superior to the religious views or feelings of others, Pakistanis effectively end up separating themselves from the rest of the world. Pakistan’s international isolation will not end until Pakistanis can understand why the rest of the world finds their religious nationalism out of step with the 21st century.

Pakistani national identity is also deeply intertwined with negative sentiments about people of other religions, most notably Hindus but Jews and Christians as well.

When endemic prejudice becomes part of nationalism, economists, technocrats, and professionals can’t help overcome it.

Even if Atif Mian, Asim Khwaja and Imran Rasul help Pakistan’s economic growth through sensible policy recommendations, the deep-rooted religious-nationalist prejudices will not disappear unless they are methodically confronted and opposed.

Also read: Imran Khan shows his cowardice by dropping Princeton prof Atif Mian over Ahmedia identity

Nazi Germany, imperialist Japan and fascist Italy did not have a dearth of good economic planners, scientists, engineers, and doctors. They just did not have enough political and social activists who could resist the rise of extremism.

It is sad that some of the best Pakistani minds sitting in international organisations and doing great research in academia abroad tend to avoid political controversy that is inevitable when you challenge dogma and wrong narratives.

Confronting misdirected religious nationalism might be more important for Pakistan right now than simply setting state finances right.

The author is the director for South and Central Asia at the Hudson Institute in Washington D.C., was Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States from 2008-11. His latest book is ‘Reimagining Pakistan.’

A traitor to his Nation cannot be True to his Religion either.

Unless Ofcourse Religion is a deeply Personal issue or the most pressing issue in societies where colonialism failed or flourished.

The diaspora faces other issues rather than Religion and its rather a cheap tactic.

This is just religious blackmail in part of deen i ilasts

I hate Husain Haqqani's guts for being a coward and sell out. But what he said in this article does sadly carry more then a grain of truth to it. But here is the rub that you are probably unaware of. It HH and his migrant community from India that originally planted and spread seeds of hate. This bas*tard before lecturning others needs to atone for his sins.

Lol
 
.
A traitor to his Nation cannot be True to his Religion either.
Expand on this thought, please.

...here is the rub that you are probably unaware of. It HH and his migrant community from India that originally planted and spread seeds of hate. This bas*tard before lecturning others needs to atone for his sins.
So in your opinion it isn't H.H.'s own sins he has to atone for but sins committed by others who migrated from India?
 
.
So in your opinion it isn't H.H.'s own sins he has to atone for but sins committed by others who migrated from India?
No, I don't expect him to atone for sins of others. But please read this about HH, your super dooper liberal that now feeds on the American system like a parasite and in doing so sells his country -

Haqqani started his political career at the University of Karachi, where he joined Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba, the student wing of the Jamaat-e-Islami and became president of the student union.[17][15][16] Haqqani explained his association with Islamists as a student in an article in the Asian Wall Street Journal. "Over the last three decades, I have alternated between being attracted to and repulsed by political Islam."[18] In recent years, he has emerged as a staunch critic of radical Islamist groups.[19][20]

So this SOB once was a foot soldier of JI. You know the type who go on the streets burning and rioting in such causes as spreading 'kill a Jew' and if you can't find one 'kill a Ahmedi' and if you can't find one 'kill a Christian' and if you can't find one 'kill a Shia' and if you can't find one 'kill a blasphemer'.

Jamaat-e-Islami, (Urdu: جماعتِ اسلامی‬, "Islamic Congress"), abbreviated JI, is a socially conservative and Islamist political party based in Pakistan. Its objective is the transformation of Pakistan into an Islamic state, governed by Sharia law, through a gradual legal, and political process.[2] JI strongly opposes capitalism, communism, liberalism, socialism and secularism as well as economic practices such as offering bank interest

Expand on this thought, please.
Don't have time. I will address this later.
 
.
So this SOB once was a foot soldier of JI. You know the type who go on the streets burning and rioting in such causes as spreading 'kill a Jew' and if you can't find one 'kill a Ahmedi' and if you can't find one 'kill a Christian' and if you can't find one 'kill a Shia' and if you can't find one 'kill a blasphemer'.
Sounds like a good reason for leaving the J.I., doesn't it? Of course, if he took the course of immediately denouncing his past associates he would hardly have been able to succeed as a smooth-talking diplomat, right? H.H. took a different path in life: rather than direct confrontation, to research from inside and outside to observe and understand cause-effect and motivation while serving his employer-of-the-moment.

You're not happy with this opportunistic approach. Neither am I; I feel he could have made more of an impact on Pakistan by loudly resigning from high-ranking posts and moving into politics on his own. That doesn't mean Pakistan didn't benefit from his services as a state official. Nor, I think, should it mean we should reject his analyses just because H.H. isn't the kind of person we wanted him to be.
 
.
Sounds like a good reason for leaving the J.I., doesn't it? Of course, if he took the course of immediately denouncing his past associates he would hardly have been able to succeed as a smooth-talking diplomat, right? H.H. took a different path in life: rather than direct confrontation, to research from inside and outside to observe and understand cause-effect and motivation while serving his employer-of-the-moment.

You're not happy with this opportunistic approach. Neither am I; I feel he could have made more of an impact on Pakistan by loudly resigning from high-ranking posts and moving into politics on his own. That doesn't mean Pakistan didn't benefit from his services as a state official. Nor, I think, should it mean we should reject his analyses just because H.H. isn't the kind of person we wanted him to be.
People like him lit the 'fire' in Pakistan. Then when saw the mistake did nothing. And now run off abroad in cushty Washington and flail their arms at the fire they lit that has now turned into raging inferno. I am not one bit impressed by that. At least the ignorant farmer. The illiterate truck driver. They never had understanding. They never lit the fire. But HH should have known better. As member of the small educated elite he chose to spread hatred. Now he has ran off to Washington. My smpathy is with poor illiterate farmer etc who have to bear the consequences in Pakistan of what elite like HH did.
 
.
People like him lit the 'fire' in Pakistan.
"People like him". Not H.H. himself? My guess is that H.H. would dispute your accusation about doing "nothing" to quell the fire of religious extremism. Both H.H. and the U.S. Congress credit H.H. with stopping an IJeT mob from burning down the U.S. consulate in Karachi back in 1979. (H.H. writes that his motive was selfish: he was using the consulate's library to research a term paper.)

...At least the ignorant farmer. The illiterate truck driver. They never had understanding. They never lit the fire. But HH should have known better. As member of the small educated elite he chose to spread hatred -
He thrived in the pit of hell, then decided to dig himself out and try to pull his country out with him. He's still doing that, even after the "Memogate" smear that felled his political prospects, using the knowledge and insight he gained by the experience: he's trying to convince Pakistan's political and military leaderships to change their minds about supporting intolerance as a prop of the State.

My smpathy is with poor illiterate farmer etc who have to bear the consequences in Pakistan of what elite like HH did.
Can you be specific?
 
. .
no-img-fb.jpg

The deafening sound of silence



Kamila Hyat

September 13, 2018

There has been an outcry in the country over the PTI government’s decision to effectively withdraw Atif Mian, one of the world’s 25 most influential young economists according to international analysts, from the Economic Advisory Council that he had been nominated to just days before.

The PTI’s reversal on its insistence that Atif Mian, who is Ahmadi, would be retained came amid one of those now-familiar protests from the religious right, led by the TLP, which has apparently walked out of its nightmares and into the mainstream of our politics.

As the debate continues, what is alarming, however, is that the protests against his removal either exist only on social media and the mainstream media or are voiced by major economists based outside the country. Within the boundaries of Pakistan, no mainstream political parties, including those who position themselves as liberals or defenders of a more moderate Pakistan, have made any move to stand up to the TLP. The fear of the group and others like it may be a factor. But this lack of courage has also allowed the religious right to dominate space and take control of propaganda and opinion-shaping in the country in recent years.

The PPP has joined the sinister silence that we see everywhere else. Though to its credit it didn’t sign the Senate resolution pointing out that Atif Mian was Ahmadi – a fact that is completely irrelevant to his appointment under the constitution.

Shockingly, the ANP – a party that still calls itself secular – did sign the resolution as did the Pakhtunkhwa Milli Awami Party (PkMAP) and almost every other mainstream group. There is then simply no one left to stage visible protests against Pakistan’s continuous rightward slide or the discrimination against groups within the country.

It is unrealistic to expect what we call the ‘civil society’ to take a stand on its own. This group, made up essentially of NGOs and activists advocating the rights of women, minorities and others, have consistently staged their small vigils and protests after similar outrages and have done so again. But the gathering of an odd 50 to 100 people – perhaps a few more – is almost irrelevant in a situation where we know forces such as the TLP can bring hundreds, if not thousands, of armed zealots to the streets. There has to be someone to stand up to them.

Unfortunately, those who could do so have been demolished over the past decades while political parties that should be taking a stand apparently lack the spine to even issue a statement. We haven’t heard from Bilawal Bhutto, Asfandyar Wali or any other major leader from any political group in this regard. In such a situation, the Right has an open path to the victory stand. It is currently joyfully making its way down it.

Things in the past were somewhat different. In 1955, the Democratic Students Federation and its militant wing, the openly leftist Red Guards, took to the streets on numerous occasions, physically tackling the police and pro-government student groups with knuckledusters, chains, knives and rods. The DSF, linked to the Communist Party of Pakistan (CPP), was banned in 1954 as part of the action against the CPP on charges of attempting to overthrow the government and the hard-line Left Red Guards vanished with it.

But even after this, the National Students Federation of Meraj Muhammad Khan, who later joined the PPP, continued to defy Ayub Khan’s dictatorship and take on the Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba at institutions across the country. Despite its division into Maoist and Leninist blocs, the NSF remained a force to be reckoned with. The People’s Guard, set up during the 1970s to defend PPP rallies against IJT workers, also acted against the Right, as did other pro-PPP groups established after General Ziaul Haq assumed power in 1977-78. The politics of these groups are further complicated by the role played by Bhutto’s sons. Nevertheless, liberal outfits were present on the scene.

The Black Eagles, formed in 1979 at various universities and colleges in Lahore as an anti-Zia student outfit, continued this tradition of taking on elements who defended right-wing policies until all student groups were banned in 1984. Thirty-four years later, we have been unable to restore student unions, which are so central to change in countries around the world.

The first Benazir government in 1988 made an effort to do so, but the order was struck down by the Supreme Court. Former prime minister Yousaf Raza Gilani after the 2008 election also pledged a revival, but this never occurred. The result, of course, is that only groups from the extreme Right have become visible as space was opened up for them to spread out, even as those ideologically opposed to them were crushed and cornered, and many of their leaders were forced to flee the country.

This factor has also contributed to the changing public mindset in the country. As analyses of Election 2018 come in, it is clear that the TLP and also other groups with a right-wing, religious orientation won an enormous number of votes, even in major urban constituencies dominated by the more educated and, we would assume, liberal sections of society.

Clearly, there is a huge support base for the opinions that now exist, pitching Ahmadis as villains and denying even a man of Atif Mian’s global stature an opportunity to serve the country that he vows to give all he can to now and in the future. The two resignations from the EAC we have seen following the decision against Atif Mian don’t mean very much. At least 10 other members of the council, including leaders of the top educational and business institutions in the country, have opted against even a symbolic protest.

It is difficult to see then how change will come. We have no groups equipped to take on the forces of the Right. They have their madressahs from which cadres of young men who truly believe that the cause they have been taught is the righteous way, and can literally pour into the streets and bring life to a halt. We saw this happen in 2017 in Islamabad and on many occasions before this.

Yes, the expected statements and press releases have been issued by organisations that bravely continue to fight the hatred and lack of logic raging through society. It has also been pointed out that the law has been violated by denying appointments on the basis of belief. However, we will need to rejuvenate active elements to make more obvious displays of resentment against what is happening.

The country’s major political parties need to accept responsibility for this. The PPP, the ANP and other groups must join hands and, in the first place, instil a common voice among their leaders. PPP leader Shahla Raza’s unsavoury tweet about Mian Atif was unfortunate. In fact, given the havoc they have created in politics, too much hasty tweeting should be discouraged. We need to consider why we are becoming a society where only one kind of opinion can prevail. This is akin to a fascist situation. We need far greater pluralism and far greater opposition to the voice of hatred.

The writer is a freelance columnist and former newspaper editor.

Email: kamilahyat@hotmail.com
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom