Paths of violence

There have been lame excuses made on behalf of this government for the events of September 21 — the autumn equinox — as many as there have been condemnations. But regarded dispassionately, there can be no excuses for the killing of a country’s citizenry by its own citizens (or for that matter, any killings) or for the destruction wreaked upon private properties in the main cities of the land.

Now, if the ordinary citizen was aware — as soon as the public holiday had been announced — that there would be rioting and mayhem during the day, then it is not conceivable that the government, no matter how moronic or selfish, was also not aware. So, it was a purposeful incitement to the religious right, to the unemployed youth, to the bigots and the militant mood and probably to those that exist on a daily wage, to make merry in their own way — and that way as violent as all in this country, including its leadership of all hues, have experienced countless times in the past.

When taking this particular government to task for its irresponsibility, contempt for the people at large and its quest for self-survival, that is not to say that it is vastly different from the governments this country has put up with for most of its life. Which government in the past was mourned when it fell? Which government has delivered to the nation? Is there one that can be objectively singled out?

Karachi’s May 12, 2007 incidents were government-inspired, as was the September 21, 2012 of the main cities of Pakistan. The government must shoulder the blame for the lives lost and the damage done. The propensity for unleashing violence on one pretext or another is nothing new. That it took a largely unseen video to create a storm in various Muslim-inhabited lands is not at all surprising. But did none of them look to the cradle of Islam, to the Kingdom, from where no reaction was visible? How come the Saudis were able to exercise restraint in the face of fierce provocation?

The problem with Pakistan and the Arab Spring countries is that now they need very little prodding to get them going along the ‘death to America’ path. On the slightest excuse, on the slightest pretext (not that this latest one was slight in any way), a violent uprising can be arranged if it has any connection with the sole superpower. This is not to say that there are and have been incidents and occasions that call for protest. But do protests have to claim lives? Must they be violent? There are no excuses for violence and its consequences and governments of Pakistan, more than others, know well how violence simmers close to the surface on a daily basis.

All governments since the 1950s have provoked and condoned violent reaction to matters involving religion. Strange, in light of the fact that Islam defines itself as a ‘religion of peace’.

The head of state, President Asif Ali Zardari, in his address to the UN General Assembly on September 25, bemoaned the lives lost in his country without mentioning the fact that the majority (leaving aside the drones) were lost at the hands of their fellow citizens, including that of his wife. In his long moan, he cited examples of violent deaths suffered in Pakistan, all of which were home-grown. But he forgot the busloads of Shias who have been massacred in the name of religion, the Ahmadis blown up in their places of worship in the name of religion, the daily targeted killings in Karachi, politically and sectarian-wise motivated, the daily toll of schools blown up in the north in the name of religion, the church set ablaze in Mardan, the sporadic killings of Christians and countless other acts of violence, including September 21.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 29^th, 2012.