Pakistan

Romanticising violence

Tazeen Javed April 21, 2010

Ever since Arundhati Roy published her long article recently in favour of what the Indian government calls Maoist rebels, the Indian media and blogosphere has quite unanimously denounced Roy, labelling her naive admiration for the Maoists a proclivity towards “left-wing utopianism”.

Roy enraged a lot of Indians when she called very violent Maoists ‘Gandhians with arms’ adherents of the philosophy of non violence consider this sacrilegious. Just like Arundhati Roy, Pakistan has Imran Khan who supports the Taliban and is critical of army operations in Swat and Fata. Like Roy, Khan also believes that it is the circumstances that have turned peace-loving tribals into warring security threats.

If you hear their arguments, they are almost identical. They both question the legitimacy of a state to declare war against its own citizens, they both think the state policies are responsible for the creation of the Taliban and Maoists in their respective countries, and they both think that rebels are essentially good people.

The modus operandi of the Taliban and the Maoists are similar. Both are brutal and only believe in their own version of justice. Both conduct show trials and execute whomever they deem guilty. Both use explosive devices against government officials, police, army and common people. Both try to control the supply lines in their respective areas.

Both recruit under-age boys, at times by force, and brainwash them into carrying out operations. The situation in both the insurgency inflicted areas is similar. People on both sides of the border have legitimate grievances – 62 years into independence, their rights like access to water and sewerage have been neglected by successive governments.

The parallels don’t just end here. If President Zaradri calls the Taliban the ‘biggest security threat’ then Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has called the Maoist threat the ‘gravest national security crisis’ India faces. The Taliban in Pakistan and Maoists in India are lucky to find supporters in Khan and Roy.

If Imran Khan is a firebrand speaker who can get college kids to support his cause, then Roy’s reputation as a prize winning writer and activist lends credo to the Maoist cause. If he speaks at left- wing forums in England and regales them with tales of government atrocities against the Taliban, Roy portrays a romantic image of the Maoists fighting the big bad government and capitalism.

Imran Khan won the world cup for Pakistan in 1992 and Arundhati Roy won her Booker prize in 1997. They may truly believe in the cause of the Maoists and the Taliban or perhaps they always root for the underdog, but one must keep in mind that it can also be a case of keeping the adulation of people alive through taking up causes against the government.

Even though we live in times when non-state actors are considered responsible for most of the chaos and terrorism, being anti state is still considered cool. If you hear the arguments presented by Roy and Khan, everything is either black or white but in politics and more so in power politics, things are almost always grey.

The state has failed to address the issues of its people but even then, only the state has the legitimacy to change it. Romanticising violence may win Arundhati Roy and Imran Khan popularity, but it can never provide a long lasting solution for peace.

COMMENTS (14)

Bilal | 14 years ago | Reply looks like everything is black n white for ms javed ... anyone who opposes military action on the citizens is not a rebel or a militant

Bipin Trivedi | 14 years ago | Reply How Arundhati intellectuality and sincerity exposed in interview of Sagarika ghose When Sagarika Ghose asked that whenever state initiates development works on bridges or starts school; those are blown up by the Maoists. What a ridiculous answer Arundhati gives," Is it the case that there are hospitals, schools, low malnutrition and lot of development in poor areas where there aren't any Maoists?" and further she says, "When you go into the schools, you see that they are used as barracks. They are built as barracks so as to say that Maoists blow up schools and they are against development is bit ridiculous". But Madam that has happened many times, even not used as barracks then also, what about that? Government building basic infrastructure for their benefit and up-liftment, but maoist destroys it and Aundhati favors it. What a thought. But Maoists have AK-47 too? They have pressure bombs too? She says: They snatched it from cops. By snatching, they get very marginal quantity, but from where the huge quantity of arms come. She is fooling a small kids by giving such ridiculous answer. Arundhati believes that India is a fake democracy. Who told to stay here and if this country don't suits you, you are at liberty to go. One thing you forget that you are openly exploding your so called pro-maoist thought in Indian democracy only. Strangely when asked for alternative solution, she replies that she don't believe that imagination has brought the planet with no alternative solution. Other way she suggest that rehabilitation of the tribal will hopefully emerging solution. She is just hopeful, though she is counted as most nearer to them as the report says, she roamed in naxal affected areas many times, writes a full assay on it. But, she is just hopeful of solution. She wants 'operation green hunt' which is for infrastructural projects to be freeze, but such projects beneficial to local people only. When she is not hopeful of solution and could not suggest anything about it, she should co-operate the government who sincerely wants to do something for local people. Such attitude of her create doubts about her sincerity! She is not favoring mining industries allotted to private co. since iron ore mine owner pays Rs. 27 to govt. while they keep Rs. 5000 with them. I suggest her that run mine for few months and will come to know how it can be run, what expenses occur. Rs. 5000 does not go fully in the pocket of mine owner but they are bearing running expenses like wages, electric charges, land lease charges etc. Please note that mining industry provides huge employment their and their produce is key raw material for other industries in India. When asked the question that most of people hate your views and writing and believe your thought impractical. She replies, If whole of India hate me I have to believe I am wrong. Then why you waiting for, understand this and come back from your wrong belief now. This proves that she is just after negative and chip publicity, that's all !!! I think she is unaware or rather knowingly unaware that govt. tried earlier for rehabilitation, but they don't want to come out from their forest land. Even some of them don't want to change and remain to live as per their tradition. What can one do in the case. Even government want Arundhati to be mediator between the government and maoist, but she denies. This is also creates doubt on her sincerity. What I think, She wants just mere publicity out of this and wants to create a show that she worried of tribal! By that way, she wants to increase sale of her books and reader audience.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

Shaikh Rahman | 14 years ago | Reply Ditto Shahid Raza

Noreen | 14 years ago | Reply You have no idea what Roy is writing and speaking about, it requires a level of analysis and depth that is sorely lacking from this article. Speaking of people who believe in their own version of justice however violent, let's talk about your implicit support for state violence as it fits your distorted version of reality.

Josephus P. Franks | 14 years ago | Reply There are many other parallels Tazeen could have mentioned, but did not. Both the Maoists and the Taliban use rifles, many with bullets of the same caliber. Both wear similar clothing in that their respective garments are both colored so as to blend in with the surrounding environment. There may be similarities in the fabrics the two groups use as well. Furthermore, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that members of both armed groups have exactly 46 chromosomes! Naturally, Tazeen, there will be many parallels between guerrilla groups operating out of the poorest and most neglected parts of two countries that used to be one. But in order to accurately compare, you must also discuss things the two groups do not share. Since the very raison d'être of the Taliban is to institute a theocratic government for Pakistan, and the raison d'être of the Maoists is to institute a communist government for India, this might be something you want to mention when comparing the two. Particularly when the vision for daily life for men and women is so radically different between the two. To illustrate the importance of making an accurate comparison, imagine if I were to follow your example, and compare the contents of two plates, one containing rice and the other containing nuclear waste, in such a manner: both are composed of atoms, both can be swallowed, both are heavier than air, both will require their respective plates to be cleaned after eating, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

Vishnu Sharma | 14 years ago | Reply This is a timely piece by the author. Yes, indeed Imran and Arundhati would like to complete each others sentences. They are both individuals who champion criminals who are hell bent on bringing chaos to society. Such people would do a great service to society by keeping their mouth shut and their pens idle.

Saira | 14 years ago | Reply The article started off well....yet I've read plenty of Roy's work and somehow I don't think she would agree to the parallels drawn in this article.

Tanzeel | 14 years ago | Reply ROFL!! I agree with Salaar.

Shahid Raza | 14 years ago | Reply I have read many of the books and essays written by Arundhai Roy. Apart from being a literary giant she is apolitical and a good soul with the good of Humanity at heart. Does not aspire for any political office or any political acclaim.She is what she is and has reached where she stands now by being true to herself and her convictions.How can one compare her with the show boy of past Mr.Imran Khan who has ridden on the shoulders of a British Jew tycoon and above all has a problem for every solution. Launching a hospital(a good deed) or captaining a cricket eleven and having a go on the destiny of our nation are two different ball games.Please do not dishonor Ms Roy ( just because she lives beyond our eastern border )with a playboy in quest of Power.Thanks God he failed to attain his wish in the previous regime.Let us grow up and call a spade a spade.

Sadia Hussain | 14 years ago | Reply The romantic notions of violence are centuries old, with songs and slogans that glorify the acts of violence by associating them with a bigger cause. The apologists are readily available as they would go to any length to seek populist support. They want us to believe the the end goal of Taliban is right and the means are wrong but neither the goals nor the tools are in line with Pakistan’s ideology.

Salaar Faisal | 14 years ago | Reply This is the most absurd article. "Here are two things that I will now force a connection between!" Imran has a heart, two lungs and a kidney, Roy has a heart, two lungs and a kidney. Imran was once a baby. Roy was once a baby. What was the point of this piece? It shouldn't be in the opinion section, but in a new section titled "no-opinions".

Nadir El Edroos | 14 years ago | Reply While the similarities in both situations are glaring there is one important difference. While the Pakistan Army has taken a lead in domestic security matters, the Indian Army chief under pressure from the home minister refused to deploy the Indian army for domestic operations. Instead he argued that the parliamentary and police forces must be strengthened to tackle the maoist. If only we had had the same sentiments here a decade ago, then perhaps the frontier constabulary, levies etc, armed with world war two weapons and poorly trained would have been able to fight off the initial threats of the militants. Instead the local police force for example in Swat, melted in the face of the local Taliban, and with it adequately displayed to the people of Swat that the government did not have the capability to enforce the law. Today large swaths of the North West are militarised. The military is essentially stuck, if it withdraws it will face criticism for allowing militants to return. On the other hand if it remains it will face criticisms from local leaders for not allowing the local police and civilian administration to develop independently. On the point of Imran Khan and A. Roy, Imran Khan is a one man show who has fallen the same way as George Galloway. He says all the things we like to hear, however he has little chance of actually governing. A. Roy is perhaps internationally more recognizable than in India, she may be a literary giant but how much political influence does she really exercise?

ashrafgandhi | 14 years ago | Reply probably arundhati rai has not been properly understood. she is the one who has supported the liberation movements in the world including kasmis.she is the who has opposed the construction of dams at the cost of poor people

temporal | 14 years ago | Reply how can you compare imran (asghar khan lite) with arundhati? one has convictions the other flip flops

Replying to X