Engaging in self loathing has taught me not to take myself too seriously. But the young female journalist I met one summer afternoon last year had no such issues. She seemed sure of herself in all ways troubling. She claimed to be disturbed by the state of affairs in the country so I probed on. Curse the false hope that raises expectations of an engaging discussion. The issue that she had with the media was that ‘it is too pro-America and that our media does not value the national interest’. I do remember thinking which planet she was on. More importantly, being a stickler for definitions I asked how she defined national interest. She had no answer to this, at least none worth remembering. National interest is that perfect umbrella term for anyone to use in furtherance of their own agenda without any nuanced analysis of what constitutes the ‘national’ or ‘interest’.
Imran Khan of the ‘Ghairat Brigade’ persuasion has also now taken it upon himself to define national interest. After my column last week regarding the US drone attacks (their necessity as well as efficacy in tackling a pernicious threat), I read two pieces in other papers which laid bare how not only our military officials anonymously concede the efficacy of these attacks but also how dissent is being manufactured to further, for the lack of a better word, ‘national interest’. Mr Khan may be a man who has achieved many a heroic feat. However, his ramblings as a politician merit further scrutiny and indeed criticism. For months he has derided the drone attacks, without ever engaging with the question of their efficacy. He has been loath to condemn militants and relentlessly paints terrorists as ‘misunderstood’.
He is now in the process of, rumours say with the help of the real powers that be, stirring up anti-US sentiment virulently to gain political mileage. He has also come up with the idea of blocking the routes used by oil tankers supplying fuel to NATO forces. This is disappointing at many levels as the proposed actions will seriously harm our standing and perception of our collective character in the comity of nations.
Mr Khan’s proposed plan seems to rest on a willful blindness to the consequences of his actions by challenging the writ of the state, intent to jeopardise lives and ultimately to force the government’s hand. Worst of all, he has betrayed his own words. Till now he has sold himself as a man who believes in living life by aggressively tackling challenges. He spread the message that shirking from an issue was not the way to deal with it. Yet today he is doing the exact opposite. Instead of engaging with the efficacy and necessity of drone attacks, and adding anything worthwhile to a debate he is relying on raw emotion and base tactics of stirring up xenophobic nationalism, religious bigotry and hysteria.
The summer of discontent is being manufactured and it can get really ugly. Make no mistake, we as a country stand to lose and suffer the most. By refusing to even engage with an argument and relying on ghairat, Mr Khan is doing an enormous disservice to this country and the future of our children.
The very basis of this country was an argument and a willingness to engage with what the other side had to say. Today, the list of ‘unthinkables’ in this country is growing every day. We are depriving ourselves of the chance of questioning the limits of our own imagination. Progress is seldom possible without challenging the conventional wisdom and almost impossible by being bigoted. If he claims to be a representative of this country’s youth and its potential, then Mr. Khan needs to think again; right now he is exactly what this country and its youth need to avoid.
Rumour also has it that our messengers have been advising the Afghans to repose their faith in the Chinese rather than the US. That confirms that we don’t have Afghanistan’s good at heart. China’s growth model troubles me greatly. The message from that country is clear: give up your civil/political rights and be content with a growing economy that will offer opportunities (if you are lucky enough to get a permit to work in the city). For countries that are ethnically diverse, nay divided, and where disillusionment is rife the Chinese model represents a recipe for disaster not progress. Neither Pakistan nor Afghanistan can afford to expect their populations to compromise on political rights if sustainable growth is to be achieved. A country that hangs conscientious dissidents, bans Google and strangles free flow of information may sound familiar to us but is not worth emulating.
You are free to not take me seriously. But Mr Khan and our messengers to Afghanistan through their ideas represent a bigotry that is going unchallenged. We have so far been found wanting while the likes of Mr Khan grow in strength by hoodwinking the people. And that is something that none of us can afford to dismiss if we give two hoots about ‘national interest’.
The writer is a Barrister of Lincoln’s Inn and practices in Lahore. He has a special interest in Anti-trust / Competition law. He can be reached at [email protected]
