I have a dream

Dreams of a better future are an essential part of human life. The words of Martin Luther King that “I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit together at the table of brotherhood”, still energise those espousing human rights in their societies. Indians and the black majority in South Africa had the same dream when they were under the yoke of apartheid and not treated as equal citizens. Those dreams caught the imagination of many in India culminating in the struggle for independence.

The morning of August 14, 1947 brought independence to our country, but Faiz woefully complained that “this stained tainted light, this night bitten dawn that we were waiting for, this is not that morning”, as our dreams were shattered under religious extremist priorities. Charges of treason and disloyalty became the fate of those who stood for personal liberty and basic human rights. Despite the commendable sacrifices of these selfless freedom fighters, the country still finds its print and electronic media strangled, with little tolerance for any dissenting voices.

In order to fully understand the mental makeup of any segment of a society, we need to investigate the sources of inspiration of the young belonging to that section. The youth in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa draw their inspiration from history as well as from poets like Khushhal Khan Khattak and Ghani Khan. For instance, Ghani Khan addresses the Pakhtun youth, “Oh bulbul, the garden of the Pukhtun lies in ruins, the name of the rival adores each branch of Majnu’s garden”. No wonder we see the youth of the area very vocal in making their inspirations known to the wider world.

Like Martin Luther King, tribal youths have also shared their dream with us. A dream of a society where they are to be treated as equal citizens, where their cultural identity would be respected, where their life, property and honour would be protected, and where they will have chances for human development. Their demand for an independent commission to find out the truth about the atrocities committed during the Afghan conflict is not an unreasonable one. What is needed is to follow the golden rule of the British government in India, as all our institutions are also of British origin. In their dealings with the tribesmen, known as the Frontier Policy, the British would always use their civilian officers for negotiations while the military would remain readily available to them in the background.

In all countries, some national institutions, for example the monarchy in the UK, are given great importance and are highly revered by the masses. Pakistan is no exception. This respect is, however, concomitant with the self-restraining duty of institutions to steer clear of policymaking and avoid any public display of interference with the work of an elected government. When any institution takes on a political role, it is bound to attract criticism as politics is the arena of public accountability and the notion of sanctity is foreign to the workings of politics.

The history of imposing political correctness or strategic unity from above is an unhappy one in our country. The thunderous declaration in the early history of Pakistan by Jinnah, “Let me make it very clear to you that the state language of Pakistan is going to be Urdu and no other language. Anyone who tries to mislead you is really the enemy of Pakistan” did not go well with the Bengali youth and was instrumental in creating an atmosphere of distrust and perceived injustice. We should, therefore, avoid issuing statements of who is loyal and who is not through press statements or conferences. One can argue that not all demands or activities of a certain segment of Pashtun youth can be defended and like any other political entity one can have a love-hate relationship with them. But bashing a section of the educated class is not something that well-wishers of a democratic Pakistan expect from their institutions. Unfortunately, even in the past we have seen that we, instead of diagnosing the real problem, opted for the easier path of declaring those traitors who voiced grievances of the people.

What has happened in Pakistan, particularly in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, is the product of the forty-year-long war imposed by the international players, in which our own state, unwillingly or willingly, was also a partner. The war brought the people of K-P misery, death, destruction and displacement at the hands of characters that were used to facilitate the great game of international players. The brutal cold-blooded murder of Naqeebullah Mehsud and the subsequent brazen denial of justice in the case of a functionary of the state ignited the already simmering combustible material of hatred against those whom they considered responsible for making their abode a hell. Socioeconomic conditions were thus responsible for the upsurge in voices that are unpleasant to our ears. What is needed is not to hurl accusations at them and instead after some soul searching we should help them in chasing their dreams.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 22^nd, 2019.

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