|
on February 20, 2010 @ 10:32 pm
I attended your event, Lessons from the Holy Wars. It struck me how in speaking about militant Islam and the "Pakistani perspective" in regards to the war in Afghanistan, you did not speak much on three crucial factors that especially demand attention to understand the present day issues. Those are:
1) Zia-ul Haq's military dictatorship in the late 70s and into the 80s and his aligning himself with the religious far-right,
2) the lack of an affordable alternative education system,
3) the power of large landowners who keep their populations enslaved and illiterate.
Pakistanis themselves have begun addressing some of these issues on national television, which is a wonderful progress for the country. When speaking on religion and society in Pakistan today, one cannot ignore especially the effects of those years. And by your responses to one of the questioner's in the audience, you proved yourself well-aware of those issues. When one knows about them, then why leave them out?
Meanwhile, the lion's share of the time was spent on the Hollywood movie, "Charlie Wilson's War"--which is substantially inaccurate. My friend commented to me afterwards that the intention of the talk had nothing to do with the people whose lives are in question.
However, Id like to give you the benefit of the doubt and am interested in hearing what you had to respond to that.
on February 20, 2010 @ 10:56 pm
Well, I don't want to hide anything so that you can give a more substantial response. So let me explain in more detail my friend's comment...
He spoke on the irony that in the 1970s-80s, the CIA provided the massive funds and weaponry, and Pakistan, via an expanded madrassa system supported by far-right religious groups with whom the military dictator in power aligned himself, provided the children to fight the war in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union; and now in 2010, in front of an audience of Americans who are hardly knowledgeable of the complexities of US=Pak relations, a Pakistani-American is using that story to promote a book about himself.
on February 21, 2010 @ 7:19 pm
Thanks, Asif. I imagine you're the young man who stood up and made some of those points during the Q&A. I don't believe that "the lion's share of the time" was spent on Charlie Wilson's War; it seemed to come up in passing. Yet you and I are both in agreement on most of your points, Asif! And I believe that it's clear, not just from Charlie Wilson's War but from thousands of other sources, that the CIA did work with Zia to fight communists in a way that caused later problems. My point about Charlie Wilson's War is that, when Wilson says "We F-d up the end game," it shows that Americans must be careful about the manner in which we *think* we're solving problems, only to see unintended consequences later.
You seem quite bothered by my perspective. Yet in a sense, you prove that there is no one perspective involving events in Pakistan -- but there are a LOT of angry people who are upset that their own nuances are being lost in the discussion. Please do feel free to challenge me on whatever issue here, though. Thanks, Asif.
on February 22, 2010 @ 11:37 pm
lol!-no, young man was me.. Firstly, Id like to commend you for coming out against the war -- not an easy thing in front of an American audience, but it certainly needs to be heard. And I think a gem that the audience was able to take away from the talk was a reminder of the dramatic political culture of the region. (Ex: Should we really take seriously this 'Death to America!' chant we hear so often?)
I agree that Asif and my points of view do indeed coincide with yours. I'd say we were more annoyed with the opportunity you did not avail to elaborate on the root causes, as talented a speaker as you are. It would help support your argument for withdrawal. But most importantly, at the heart of the story -- which to our dismay was out of the spotlight that evening -- is the plight of Pakistan's poor.
In the past year, my mother received a poor woman and her son at the front gate of our home in Islamabad. This peasant woman was not there to beg for money or food; she was there because she wanted her child to have a different life. When asked by this woman for directions to a nearby madrassa, my mother winced: “Why do you want to send him there? Don't you know that upfront these religious men offer to feed, clothe and educate your sons, but what they don’t tell you is that one day, they may send him off for jihad?” The woman was startled. My mother immediately offered her an alternative: that she admit her son in the nearby public school and in return, all of his expenses would be paid for. It was a done deal. In fact, it was one of many.
You see, Charlie Wilson and "F-ing up the end game" introduces the American audience to the idea of unintended consequences, but what, as far as I recall, you were not providing were strong alternatives to war.
When discussing jihad and militant Islam, I think it is more appropriate to bring to life their stories -- stories involving the poor, whose lives are really the ones that are affected by our (America's) decisions (whether we act or choose not to act) -- than of our more privileged "cross-cultural" lives.
But mullahs and religious men in Pakistani society must be brought in perspective: they are not solely the creation Zia just as far-right religious groups in the West are not the creation of a single figure. But they may certainly ride on the back of a single figure and thus affect entire generations of children in the absence of social institutional alternatives.
on February 23, 2010 @ 11:28 am
Thanks, Fareed. The problems in Pakistan are indeed complex, and while we agree on much, I doubt any two persons can agree objectively on the exact "root" causes. I think many of the root causes are both internal and external. Pakistan never made much of an effort to reform its feudal land system, and that's set the stage for much of the later political and poverty problems. I don't know if you've read Steve Coll's Pulitzer-winning GHOST WARS book; it's another book that some would criticize as "incomplete" (no book about Pakistan could ever be "complete" -- but at least his aspires to be objective, whereas mine is hopelessly subjective), but it does an amazing job of surveying how the US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistani governments together bungled things in their zeal to knock out the Soviets. I think that sort of book reminds us that there are no heroes in this sad saga.
Best,
Rob
on March 2, 2010 @ 10:20 pm
It was a pleasure to have lunch with you last week, Rob. The points I have made above and in the Daily Trojan are in fact taken from a more elaborate critique I have written, which you are now welcome to view if you search for yourself on Facebook (It appears as a note, and there is plenty of feedback gathering there). You may now also view it on my blog:
http://fareedbutt.blogspot.com/2010/03/socal-chameleon-rob-asghar-and-his.html
Hopefully, by the end of the piece you it will become clear that the reason why you could not find any "heroes" is not because there aren't any, but that you have been looking in the wrong places.
Best,
F
on March 2, 2010 @ 10:39 pm
I say this because by your response, I have understood your logic to be that since the situation is too "complex," you do no think it is worth exploring serious alternatives to the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
on March 3, 2010 @ 3:33 pm
I commend your mother for her efforts. Likewise, my parents spent much of their life savings to set up quality, alternative education for 1,000 schoolchildren in my father's village in rural Faisalabad. We do believe education is a key long-term issue, and we have moved actively to continue this work despite my father's passing last year. Beyond that, I do not believe I'm able to address issues to your satisfaction, but I wish you the best.
|
