Ideas should define power, not interests

Listen to article

In an orientation session for the new students at the university, one of my colleagues mentioned that the children today don't play the games that we used to play in the past. An example she gave was of climbing trees. I agree that the subjective reality is the disappearance of a popular activity of the children climbing the trees, but seen objectively, the activity has become unpopular, not because the children no longer want to climb the trees, but only because the trees they would have wished to climb are not there.

In urban areas and cities like Karachi, trees have just vanished. This example shows that historical events disappear when the peculiar conditions that give rise to them are eliminated. In the developed world, autocratic rule and autocracy ended when the conditions giving rise to such a rule ended.

Similarly, when the conditions changed, we saw the end of the bipolar world, which was substituted by a unipolar world. In the 21st Century, the conditions have further changed and the digital revolution has created a digital world with its unique challenges.

For a long time, we lived in a world divided by the iron curtain, now the iron curtain has almost disappeared and has been replaced by a silicon curtain that has divided the world into digital and non-digital worlds. In the Cold War era, we were afraid of weapons of mass destruction, but in this post-colonial, post-imperial and post bipolar world, we are more afraid of the weapon of social mass destruction – information.

The two forms of information, misinformation and disinformation are slippery terms used interchangeably. Misinformation could be false communication of a fact that was not deliberate and for which one could later apologise, but disinformation is a deliberate act to misguide and mislead.

The purpose of disinformation is to harm and damage the reputation of an institution, organisation, or even a public figure. In the age of cyber warfare, it is being used to create uncertainty. If aggressively applied, a disinformation campaign can convert a political and military victory into a defeat.

The big powers that are now the hub of the digital world are using the big data and AI techniques at their disposal to utilise the benefits of executing disinformation warfare. The big wars are being fought now, not in the battlefields, but in the digital space. Networks of all sizes are being controlled by information, which is acting like a glue that is holding the audience together.

People have no time to separate fiction and fantasies from reality, and thus are being driven away from the objective truth. Proliferation of disinformation is creating a deeply polarised society. The effects of such deep polarisation are no different for a country like ours. So, what is it that we can do to offset the onslaught of disinformation warfare on our society? Start believing that what is impossible is doable?

The world has moved forward to benefit from the third industrial revolution – the digital revolution – and is now producing microchips, smartphones and electronic devices, but we have not even mastered the art of producing what was manufactured in the first and second industrial revolutions.

If we have to progress, the starting point is to respect and work to create the autonomy of spheres in society for all stakeholders. There can be no political or economic progress without prudence. Policymaking is one thing and understanding the policymaker another. There is the intellectual ability of a policymaker and he or she must have the ability to comprehend the challenging dynamics of a particular policymaking. Even when the policy is made, a credible government is needed to translate that policy into a political action. Do we have both?

All leaders carry two bags on their shoulders – a bag of 'official duty' and a bag of 'personal wishes'. When leaders allow their wishes to dominate the subjects of their official duties, it results in a huge imbalance in what is desirable and what can be possible. We have seen the creation of this imbalance in the preceding ruling eras of General Ayub, General Yahya, General Zia, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and even General Musharraf.

Should the wishful thinking and personal wishes and preferences of leaders be allowed to create a painted portrait of this country that never matches its realistic photograph? Our leaders were not willing to share with the outside world the realistic picture of our country in the past, and even today they are trying to sell the portrait of this country that has been brushed with all the colours of their preference and their wishes.

The capitalist world didn't buy what we tried to sell them in the past and the digital world of today will also not buy what we are trying to sell to them today. We are still trying to sell the painted portrait of our country to the outside world, whereas in the digital world, the realistic photographs of what is hidden even beneath the rocks is well known.

For far too long interests and not ideas have defined power in Pakistan. Application of universal moral principles is an idea. So is liberty, equality, fraternity, justice, human rights and emancipation. The goodness and application of these ideas remained a dream and power was defined in the country in terms of interests.

First it was the interest of joining the American bloc to offset the insecurity we felt from India. Then it was the interest of becoming part of SEATO and CENTO to fight the war against communism. Then we served the American interest of fighting a covert war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. After 9/11 we served the global interest of fighting the war against terrorism.

We have a history of serving global interests. What we have lacked is the prudence to know how, when and where to back and serve our own national interests. Most of those have been in the ideas that I mentioned and which we never implemented.

Is it then no surprise that twenty-five million children in this country who should be going to school are out of school? Legislators who won elections are out of assemblies and those who lost elections are in the parliament. Public figures that people adore are behind bars and those who had corruption charges filed against them are outside.

As stated at the outset, the problem is not with the children who no longer climb the trees. The problem is the disappearance of the peculiar condition – trees. Non-implementation of ideas and serving national interests based on a given leader's preference has been the peculiar problem from which we have suffered and which needs to change.