Why should people come out on the street and protest against the
killing of innocent security officials, who have nothing to do with
erroneous policies of the top leadership, when they are being
constantly brainwashed to comply with authority, even in the face of
highly questionable decisions?

In his article ’Whose war is this?’ (Daily Times, October 30), Rasul
Buksh Rais raised a pertinent point about the apathy of religious
parties in not protesting the deaths of innocent security personnel
and the rise of Talibanisation in the country. However, he is not the
only one protesting. Recently, eminent civil society activist, Pervez
Hoodbhoy also talked about the silence of civil society in protesting
the obvious crime of the religious extremists. In both cases, the
gripe is that in their rage against General Pervez Musharraf,
politicians and members of the civil society are no longer
considering the ’clear and present danger’ to Pakistan posed by
terrorism. This is not just the state of the politicians but applies
to common people as well.

Let us consider why ordinary people do not have the ownership of this
war on terror and why we don’t see protests against suicide attacks.

Criticism levelled against religious parties for their complacency is
understandable because not only are such parties silent but also
because of the uncertainty regarding their continued partnership with
some militant groups. This partnership dates back to the Afghan War
that these parties and militants had fought together. Moreover,
religious parties would have little problem with the political agenda
of the militants which is the imposition of sharia in the country.

Of course, there is the problem of the problem of innocent people
being killed, but then religious parties find an excuse to remain
silent - the terrorists have not really started a battle against the
general public. Security forces remain the terrorists’ main targets.
This is also one of the reasons that common people have not really
stood up against the killing of police and military officials. The
security forces are the terrorists’ main targets. This is also one of
the reasons that common people have not really stood up to the
killings of police and military officials. Why start battles against
violent people, especially when there are old and deep connections
between government agencies and the militants? After all, how can
ordinary people stand up against forces which were nourished and
nurtured by intelligence agencies? The government has not even used
all its efforts to stop Maulana Fazlulah’s radio channel. So, why
blame the people?

There is something even more sinister in the silence of the civil
society. It denotes apathy and cynicism. People are not only afraid
of taking action, but they also believe that they do not have any
capacity to change anything. Policies are either made at the top in
Islamabad or in Washington. Such a perception is obviously ridiculous
but then why blame the general public when the country suffers from a
dearth of leadership or people are made to believe that there is
nothing beyond pragmatism and realpolitik.

Ordinary people are afraid of the terrorists and are scared to take
risks when the top leadership or the elite wants to play it safe. Can
people forget the fate of three mullahs from the frontier who were
killed for the sin of sticking their necks out and condemning
honour-killing, leave alone suicide bombing?

Why should people come out on the street and protest against the
killing of innocent security officials, who have nothing to do with
erroneous policies of the top leadership, when they are being
constantly brainwashed to comply with authority, even in the face of
highly questionable decisions? The state of apathy and cynicism in
society can be ascertained from another incident that took place in
Islamabad recently. Reportedly, Professor Khwaja Masood, who is a
teacher to many in the country, was recently insulted during a
literary gathering in a government institution. He was called names
by a federal minister and an army officer for talking about hypocrisy
in the society.

The tragedy is not that a retired brigadier and a serving minister
insulted him public and asked him to get out of the hall, but the
fact that the audience failed to react to the old professor’s
humiliation. There was no one except one brave young woman, Samar
Minallah who got up and tried to cajole the conscience of the people
that included retired bureaucrats, military officers and other civil
society activists. Instead of letting her be, some government
functionaries tried to ask the brave woman’s contact probably to
harass her for committing the sin of annoying an arrogant minister.

Has this society come to such a sorry state that people will not walk
out in protest against the insult of a respectable educationist?
Where is the sense of honour and self-respect of the people? Most
probably, most of the people sitting amongst the audience just sat
there out of fear of not spoiling relations with a serving minister
and a retired military officer. After all, Khawaja Masood is a
retired professor. A serving minister and that too a favourite of the
president is a more important figure. Others might have said to
themselves: why should we stand up and fight? As long as our honour
is secure and we are not being insulted, why get up and fight.
Unfortunately, today this is the mindset of most people. Everybody
wants to secure his or her own space without bothering to stand up
for the other.

I am reminded of the story of a king who ordered all his subjects to
bring a pail of milk and empty it into the pond in front of the
castle before dawn. Next morning when the king woke up, he found the
pond filled with water and no milk. Everyone thought that others
would bring milk so a bucket of water would suffice. This is pure
realpolitik and pragmatism. People are encouraged not to fight for
norms, values and principles but to save their interests. Power is
the name of the game and people are meant to respect that.

How, then, can we expect a society, which could not snub two
extremely arrogant agents of the state for insulting an educationist,
to stand up against terrorists that kill innocent security personnel?
This is not to justify the society’s complacency but an effort to
understand the sickening apathy. Both the individual and the society
he lives in do not have the strength to stand up to often violent
humiliation at the hands of all sorts of rogue elements.

The underlying lesson of pragmatism that is being taught to the
people says that they should not protest against anything wrong for
the sake of creating limited opportunities. People must not condemn
corrupt politicians and should support deals condoning corruption
because those at top believe this to be the only way to stabilise
politics and return to democracy. However, such short-term stability
is at the cost of the honour and strength of a society. Then why
blame the people of this very society for not standing up against
terrorism? After all, isn’t this also an aspect of pragmatism face of
pragmatism that people are afraid of standing up to the brutal force
of the terrorists?

The ordinary people are afraid of further victimisation at the hands
of the terrorists. The good and honourable people in Waziristan or
other parts of the country have systematically been silenced through
the killing of those who opposed the terrorists or protested against
such forces. The militant, on the other hand, either has contact with
some segments of the state or is getting strengthened due to the
inefficient policies of the state. For years, powerful agencies have
created rogue elements that have later turned into local heroes and
are now propagating their version of Islam. Such people are the
result of a policy that aimed to use the militants as a tool of
security and foreign policies. While creating these characters the
state did not think about the long-term costs.

Unfortunately, the state still does not think of long-term costs of
terrorising people at the hands of militants or its functionaries. A
fragmented and terrified society cannot have the strength to stand up
for itself or its martyrs.