Mockery of words

Have you ever felt ‘chill’ running through your spine? I do; specially when I see people making mockery of history, and distorting truth by using beautiful words. But why any such incident is so dreadful? Well, because those people are considered to be very reliable, honest and influential. People believe in them and follow them. I would write about three most recent experiences.

Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan a well known and controversial figure, admired rather worshiped by Pakistanis wrote in an article published in daily Jang (http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/jun2009-daily/03-06-2009/col1.htm, viewed on 04 June 2009), the largest circulated newspaper in Pakistan :” Tamils belong to Hindu religion which is a fundamentalist religion”. He further says that “ Sri Lankan (Sinhalese) are soft spoken, calm, and non violent people, which is also the education of Buddhist religion”. What is the problem in these statements? Both of these statements distorts the truth, are unrealistic and cause false hatred or sympathy. He wants to mould the opinion of masses against Hindus and Tamils, and he wants to create sympathy towards Sinhalese by projecting a false impression of both.

Not only that but by saying this that ‘Hindu religion is a fundamentalist religion” he is alienating whole Hindu population of Indian Sub Continent from the rest of people. Moreover declaring Islam a fundamentalist religion is same mistake, others made and try to alienate Muslims from rest of world. Where this behaviour is leading us? Of course War and Blood Shed is the only objective of all such people who try to destroy the truth and realities. Matter of fact is that religion whichever it is; is always promoting peace and tolerance, religious teachings always advocate harmony; an essential for existence of humans. One of prime objectives of any religion is to save us from ourselves; how come any religion can be violent? It is us, the people who are after other people for what so ever be the reasons. Yes, there can be bad and good anywhere, in any cadre and any society, in any community or group of people. But not all can be attributed as bad, if some of them are bad. That way we destroy the good, we discourage those who believe in peace and harmony. I am not sure if Dr. Qadeer can not understand the basics of human behaviour.

Second one is a column from Mr. Hamid Meer in Daily Jang (http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/jun2009-daily/04-06-2009/col4.htm, viewed 4^th June 2009); in this column he writes about black mailers working against Pakistan under the disguise of a secular and liberal agenda. The way he has written it, it seems that ‘Secular’ and ‘Liberal’ are some very negative terms, like they are a poison for Pakistani society. Again I am not sure if he understands what does it mean by secularism or liberalism? He does not know that the very newspaper and media he is writing for is ‘secular’, the masses he is addressing are also secular, here I am not trying to advocate any of these ideas, but I just want to emphasise on creating awareness about the right concept, having a clear understanding of the idea, before one can start writing. By wrong interpretations, we create misunderstanding which results in more misdoings.

The third example is from a mail I got from a friend ( It can be posted if required, it is however saved with me and can be presented anytime), this mail is a forwarded mail containing an article. Title of article is ‘Asal Sikandar-e-Azam kon hai?’ (Who is the real Sikandar-e-Azam?). It is a comparison between two personalities in history, Alexander the great and Umar Bin Khattab the second Caliph. Writer is asking again and again who is real Sikandar-e-Azam, and he never seems to realize or understand what does this title means? ‘Sikandar-e-Azam’ is urdu translation of ‘Alexander the great’. Sikandar in Urdu or perhaps Arabic is substitute of Alexander; similarly ‘Azam’ means ‘The Great’, just like Akbar the great (Akbar-e-Azam), or Ashoka the great (Ashok-e-Azam). The writer might not know that but I have read the same title for Umar i.e. Farooq-e-Azam, as he is also known as Umar Al Farooq. This linguistic mistake makes the whole article he wrote a joke. And I feel pity about people who are forwarding that article after thinking very admirably about the arguments put forward by the so-called writer to make Umar a Sikandar-e-Azam.

Perhaps now it is understandable why I feel a chill running through my body? This mockery of words, this distortion of minds and this abuse of history will only bring more hatred, more short-sightedness, more aloofness and more destruction for us.

Swat--- A Perspective

I was watching a documentary on situation in North West Pakistan, it includes mention of Swat, in news and in a war since last few months. Reportedly a strong centre of Taliban, inhabited by people who want nothing but Sharia rule.

Few days back a friend was telling me that in areas like Swat and Mardan, the support for Taliban is local population; locals, as per his information, did not resist the Talibs, and welcomed them. His opinion is that the Local people are aligned with Taliban. More drastically, he said that Taliban faced resistance only by Shias and Ismailis, on contrary Sunnis welcomed them.

I think these two points, that Swat is a stronghold of Taliban and that the Sunni population is supporting them, are the key points to understand the situation. The least I can say is that both shows a deliberate fabrication to distort the truth. Here I will concentrate on the first point first.

I have been to Swat twice, it was the place where we went for our honey moon, I still remember the white palace, old palace of the former rulers of Swat. I remember the people, and no one ever can make me believe that those people supports Taliban. They were the most progressive and secular people I met in North West Pakistan. We entered into Swat via Malakand, and there was a noticeable difference in the outlook of people, Swatis were more sophisticated, educated and entrepreneurial. I still remember and very dearly remember the first image of Swat I got, and that was of young children going to schools, a university on our way to Mingora, and groups of girls clad in school uniforms. I can not believe that this image can be changed within four years, it is unbelievable.

I can not believe those people were so weak that they gave way to extremist just like that. There must be other factors, factors which are important to be considered.

Here my first objective is to correct the image of Swat we have been forced to perceive, to correct the image of those beautiful places, Mingora, Saidu Sharif, Manglour, KalaKot, KhuazaKhela, Malam Jabba, Bahrain, Kalaam, Ushu, Utror; and to correct the image of people who live here.

Swat has a history which goes back to ancient times, Swat has been mentioned in Rig Veda, it was once a centre of Buddhist education, it was traversed by Alexander the Great, it was an important part of Mauryan empire, then of Kushans. Can we believe that once Sanskirit was the major language of Swat? That it is thought to be the origin of Vajrayana Budhism. The region came into contact with Islam in around 11th Century, and went under influence of Afghans most of the times. History tells us that people of Swat fought bravely against Mughals. State of Swat was found around mid nineteen century, and it existed till1969.

The people are mostly Pushtoons or Kohistanis ( also called Kaafirs), well two totally different blends to say the least, but this distinction (or difference as Pushtoons and Kohistanis speak different languages, they have different customs and traditions, even different believes) creates a more tolerating and open society which you can not imagine for example in Dir or MaalaKand, which are purely Pashtoon. Another distinction Swat has, is its history as an state. Because it was a state, the population was starkly poor, less tribal and more open towards external influence, though most of Pushtoon population belongs to YousufZai clan, still as people of the Wali of Swat, their outlook was less tribal. We can see similarities with the state of Kabul, as compared to the so called tribal areas of today’s Pakistan. As Swat became a tourist attraction, this distinction became more and more remarkable, because of external influence people of Swat were exposed to.

I do not have statistics in hand, but I believe that education standard in Swat was much better than any tribal area. Communication facilities were better, as Swat is a tourist attraction, hence more transport, more trade and more links with rest of country, even links with the rest of world. Malam Jabba is the only Ski Resort in Pakistan, people in thousands were supposed to visit Swat annually. Due to trade and tourism, people from other areas of Pakistan were doing jobs in Swat. All together it means a continuous influx of ideas from rest of world. And this is what makes Swat different than for arguments sake Waziristan or Bajod, and that is what makes more difficult for me to understand what went wrong here? And the doubt I have on the theory that people of Swat actually supported Taliban.