In the wake of the controversy caused by WikiLeaks regarding the safety of the Pakistani nuclear program and the Pentagon’s suspicions about rampant terrorism, the ever-sensitive Pakistani protesters took to the streets to collectively deny the revelations. These protestors left no stone unturned as they ardently blamed the United States for spreading havoc in our blessed motherland, whilst unaware of the fact that the individual revealing all of this ‘authentic’ privileged information happened to be an Australian. It’s time we stop blaming others for our problems and turn the lens around to point it at ourselves as we try to figure out where we went wrong. Pakistan’s political and economic situation obviously explains the population’s need to vent, but it fails to justify the inaction of its people, who choose to remain silent despite being engulfed in such desperate circumstances. Why is it that the people who have the power to enact change refuse to bring it about? In an extremely polar society split between the radical Islamists and the leftist liberals, it is us, the moderates who have the ability to understand the voice of reason. However, despite being aware of our responsibility, we actively shy away from it. It’s not that we aren’t aware of the problems we face on a daily basis. I’ve been part of innumerable discussions in school, at home, and in the community that make me believe that the Pakistani moderates are cognizant of the problems at hand but they fail to accept them on a public forum. I consider myself a part of these “moderates” that are a minority within my society. Yet, despite being aware of the problems that exist, I often fail to act to change the status quo. Why didn’t we moderates do something when Malala Yousafzai was shot? I’m aware of the pain and sympathy all of us felt for the fourteen-year-old when she was shot by Taliban gunmen. I’m also aware of the fact that most of you believe in rights for women and have enrolled your daughters in school. I also recall how ecstatic we were when we saw Malala on television for the first time as a brave girl from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa trying to stand up against injustice. However, why did we accuse her of portraying Pakistan in a negative light when she won the United Nations Human Rights Prize earlier this year? Isn’t it a fact that only twelve percent of Pakistani girls have access to education? Isn’t it true that despite having made significant progress we still have a long way to go to make women feel safer and equal within society, particularly in our rural areas? Thus, isn’t Malala an accurate representation of most young Pakistani girls who wish to be educated and free, but aren’t allowed to because of the shackles extremist elements within our society place on them? Why didn’t we do something when governor Salman Taseer was gunned down by his own bodyguard for supporting an innocent Christian woman wrongly accused of insulting the Prophet of Islam? Don’t we also believe that the present day blasphemy laws have failed to prevent religious hate, and that they incite hatred against minorities? As I recall from the conversations I had with some of you over dinner and in school, we were sympathetic towards Aasia Bibi, the innocent Christian woman whom Taseer was trying to defend against the court’s ruling that declared her a blaspheme. The truth is that most of us felt remorse at Taseer’s assassination, yet only a select few of us chose to come out and aid his cause of defending her and millions of innocent men, women, and children accused of blasphemy every day in our country. Will we wait till the last Ahmadiyya Muslim is persecuted? If no, then why did we silently observe the persecution of Ahmadiyya Muslims for over three decades? Didn’t we see them being stoned to death on the streets because of their religious beliefs that happen to be largely similar to the Sunni Muslim majority? Did we react when we saw some of our closest friends being afraid for their lives, not knowing when they would be killed by the extremist factions? Didn’t we all feel disgusted when we heard that our country’s only Nobel Prize Winner, Dr. Abdus Salam had to exile himself to the United Kingdom to protect his own life? However, whenever someone brings up the bright idea of justice for the Ahmadiyya community, we conveniently hedge it off and explain that the members of the Ahmadiyya sect brought this abominable treatment upon themselves when they decided to call themselves Muslims. This mindset and the inaction that spurs from it is resonant with the mindset and inaction of the people Dr. Martin Luther King described as the “white moderates” in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail”. The white moderates felt sympathetic towards the African Americans and agreed with their plight for racial equality, but did nothing to help their fellow oppressed countrymen. King was “disappointed” to know that the white moderates felt sympathy but did not act on it. The problem with Pakistanis isn’t only that we behave like white moderates, but it’s much more deep rooted. Yes, we felt sympathetic for Malala, Taseer and the Ahmadiyya sect and agreed with what they stood for, but we failed to accept that we felt sympathy and agreed with them when we were asked. What we did instead, was deny that such problems even existed. It is here that the protests against the WikiLeaks becomes pertinent. Aren’t all of us aware of the threat terrorism presents to our country and aren’t we all aware that our government spends approximately 2.5 billion dollars annually trying to protect our nuclear arsenals against the omnipresent terrorist threat? We are aware and we accept it in each other’s company, but whenever an external entity like the WikiLeaks (supposedly funded by the Americans) identifies the same problem, we vehemently deny it. For us, being Pakistani means denying all of our problems and being patriotic means justifying all wrongs. Well, it shouldn’t. Being Pakistani means being concerned. Being Pakistani means accepting the problems we face and doing something to rectify them. In his letter, Dr. King suggests “nonviolent direct action” as a means to end racism. King, through “nonviolent direct action” hoped to create a “crisis packed” situation that would compel the white moderates to fully aid his cause, eventually forcing the government to enact laws against racism. For the American civil rights movement, “nonviolent direct action” worked because the people weren’t afraid to fight for what they believed in. It’s time we find the courage to act and congregate. Although the threat of terrorism exists, it shouldn’t continue to prevent us from unifying and using “nonviolent action” to solve our dilemmas. To begin the process of fixing our problems, we, the moderates, need to become activists. But, in order to do that we need to first understand that public recognition of the problems at hand is the first step towards recovery.

Yours sincerely, Alhan Fakhr

This article was written by Alhan Fakhr. Send an email to [email protected] to get in touch. Photo Credit: Flickr