War by other means

War is a fascinating thing. Its nature is constant and is branded by violence. Its character, however, keeps changing. So do the ways in which it is waged. The state of Pakistan has been at war for the past 16 years. It may be just short of a full-blown war but no less violent. War, as the 19^th-century military theorist Carl von Clausewitz famously put it, is simply the continuation of politics by other means. In our dear motherland, however, it seems politics is the continuation of war by other means. Politics here is dirty and demeaning. It is always egocentric and on many occasions downright destructive for the state itself.

The abduction of certain social media activists lately has become the talk of the town. Nawaz Sharif in a rare statement, over his party’s official Twitter account talked of upholding the freedom of expression and demanded the immediate release of bloggers who were allegedly whisked away by the Federal Investigation Agency for apparent denigration of the armed forces and the judiciary over social media. The statement itself is blunt evidence of the Nawaz League’s ownership of the missing ‘intellectuals’ who indulged in unabashed vilification of sensitive state institutions in support of Nawaz. While the deposed PM calls the acts in question a direct attack on the freedom of speech, the interior minister seems to have dropped the pretense and agreed that the concept must not be exploited and used against the state. The conflicting statements are a surefire sign of diverging interests and divisions within the party.

The concept of absolute free speech is intrinsically defective in theory. In practice, it is even more blemished and highly politicised. Pakistan is a textbook case study. Anyone and everyone can say just about anything about anyone and get away with it on the pretext of freedom of speech. Nowhere in the world is the concept practised in such unbridled manner. Even the most liberal of countries have constitutional provisions to protect the sanctity of cardinal state institutions which invariably include the armed forces and the judiciary. Throughout the liberal world there are libel laws, laws for defamation and sedition, journalistic standards and rules that govern the social media. In the land of the pure, ironically, freedom of speech is probably the only thing that is absolutely pure.

Supporters of the PML-N, it appears, chided state institutions through an organised social media cell run by the ousted PM’s daughter herself. The social activists were no ordinary citizens but in fact ran their well-planned narrative in lieu of salaries paid to them by the PML-N as per reports coming out of various sources. These stooges were willing to wage war against their own armed forces to seek vendetta for their leader’s dismissal at a time when they are preoccupied with internal and external threats. Is it not exactly how the fifth column operates: weakening defence lines by spreading disinformation and clandestinely sympathising with enemy? How long do they believe the common man would not take notice? Is this not treason? Is this not war against the state? After all, it was the interior minister who explained the phenomenon terming social media a weapon of fifth-generation warfare being used for spreading anarchy and chaos in the country.

The political mood in Islamabad is fast changing. The Senate has apparently repented its previous sin and adopted a resolution that prohibits a disqualified person from heading a political party. According to Punjab Law Minister Rana Sanaullah, the former prime minister would give up party leadership if a similar resolution is passed in the National Assembly. With surfacing of such reports highlighting flagrant anti-state behaviour of the ruling party’s top leadership, it is becoming increasingly difficult for even their staunchest supporters to stand for the father-daughter duo who seem to be arbitrarily calling the shots and disregarding the saner voices in the party. Ahsan Iqbal’s refusal to make a statement in favour of the missing PML-N social activists despite Nawaz Sharif’s overt support for them is a stark reminder of this fact.

It is often said that paid intellectuals and rented bloggers are using the medieval principles of prejudice and hate in the garb of the liberal principle of freedom of speech. We need legislation to rein in such ‘anti-social activists’ and teach them that the right to insult individuals or subjugate state institutions is not unconditionally free. The case here goes beyond the defence of law-enforcement agencies, armed forces and the judiciary. Unrestrained speech has the capacity to generate great social upheaval, stoke sectarian hatred, promote religious intolerance and fuel ethnic prejudices. It is evidently the most lethal existential threat to the state. We must remember that peace and order are not build on self-enforcing principles. They need to be organised and guarded with fervour. Are we passionate enough?

Published in The Express Tribune, November 1^st, 2017.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.