Are we tormenting and truncating Pakistan?

Are we a nation? Do we really mean patriotism when we play to the gallery? Or, are we working on a divisive agenda? The intention of this piece is to look at the bigger picture of the threat with which we are all confronted with as a nation-state. It’s ‘us’ versus ‘us’. Ever since the inception of Pakistan, a tenuous system with perfunctory mind-sets has prevailed over the civic sense of nationalism. The ethnic divide among Punjabi, Pashtun, Balochi, Sindhi, Kashmiri and Gilgiti has come as a blow to our collectivity.

To elucidate the big question on national cohesion, we have seen a plethora of events ubiquitously galvanising the youth using both soft and hard power. The divisions that erode us are in the form of confused public opinion, placing self-interest over national interest, malfunctioning the national strength and using ethnic divide as a tool for hybrid warfare. Have we learnt from our past? The answer is ‘no’. The separation of East Pakistan was owing to a charged environment, under the grey zones, with ethnic divide acting as the fulcrum.

It was used as a major tool for appeasing vested political interests. Unfortunately, we are still not ready to take any lessons. Likewise, we did not stop for a moment to ponder over the injustices that the Baloch have suffered. The sub-divisions among the Punjabi and the Pashtun culture are still more important than their well-being. We fell prey to target killings and the indiscriminate use of force against Sindhis and Muhajirs.

The agonies and social frustration of Kashmiris and Gilgitis have shaken the core existence of our national unity. Marginalised ethnicities are more vulnerable to foreign intervention. Pertinent examples of such settings can be seen in the Balochistan insurgency. Whereas in K-P, Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) was of remarkable importance, exploiting the grey zones under the influence of foreign meddling. In Pakistan, ethnic expressions have long been used as a tool for political monopolisation.

Political parties have been manifesting their agendas blatantly by exploiting ethnic tension between masses. Authoritarian regimes have further attenuated the situation in terms of persistent socio-economic injustices. The inequitable distribution of resources and opportunities serve as an impetus to exacerbate the young minds that have already succumbed to ennui and despair. This ethno-political tool has been actively operating at the grass-root levels in our domestic affairs. Stretching the bar from educational institutions, grocery stores, and playgrounds to our social platforms, a dark web of ethnic clusters has besieged our perspectives and decision-making capabilities.

The sense of civic-nationalism has just been limited to our national days, or when dealing against a foreign acrimony. Pakistan — a multi-lingual, multi-racial and multi-ethnic state — has multiple diverging standards for each ethnicity. Nonetheless, these factors, engendering the sense of ethno-nationalism, have an adverse impact on our social fabric. But certain measures at the individual level can abate the risks. Strategies to end ethnic and racial prejudice must be chalked out with confluent ideas from all segments of society.

Policies should seek to influence the behaviour of individuals, including their motivation and capability to influence others, and not be limited to increasing knowledge and awareness. Some cardinal steps like increasing quota systems at educational institutions, workplace and other social platforms need to be introduced and implemented effectively. The Higher Education Commission should initiate student exchange programs across different provinces to bridge the multi-ethnic mosaic of the country. Recreational festivals must be organised by the state in each province to spread a sense of nationalism and oneness.

In a religiously-inclined state like Pakistan, the clergy, which holds sway over the masses, should be effectively used by the government to inculcate ideas of tolerance and acceptance. Putting forward the state narrative, the clergy can help in decreasing tensions rather than provoking extremism and radicalisation. Subsequently, ethnic diversity should be our strongest asset, not our weakness. All these measures will be futile if not implemented in a strong, well-organised manner.

The recently introduced National Security Policy emphasises the same to achieve national consensus. Protecting the rights of one ethnic group must be made a duty of another. National unity is the steering wheel of the nation. If regulated in the right direction, the ship will brave winds, break waves and sail towards a brighter future. But if left unattended, ruination is inevitable.