Pakistan’s Swat Valley: Lest We Forget
February 2nd, 2009I saw a news report recently on ABC News, about a little known place called Swat Valley in northwest Pakistan. It used to be a tourist haven not long ago, a ski resort, but has been transformed of late into something quite different. The news video showed a father carrying his son’s limp body in his arms, after a mortar attack. The boy would not survive, nor would his sister. Masked men could be seen dumping mutilated bodies in the town square. One of these men was beating a man with a wooden rod for reportedly being a drug addict.
What had previously been considered a more developed district has been overtaken by the Taliban over the last 18 months. Approximately 184 schools were destroyed by the Taliban, 120 of which had been girls’ schools. Women who had come to know progressive reform were now threatened with death for shopping alone.
Swat used to be called the “Switzerland of the East” but is now referred to by the people as “the land of the terrorists.” The economy has collapsed, and parents don’t feel safe sending their children to school. The Taliban have targeted politicians, police, and reporters with a hit list, and 47 local politicians, leaders and activists have been ordered to appear before the Taliban court, or else. Dozens have already been killed. The local police have been systematically wiped out, their numbers shrinking from 1700 police officers down to 300.
There is widespread belief in Swat that the Pakistani military has struck a deal with the militants, and is therefore not going out of its way to defeat them. However, military officers point to the difficulty of fighting militants who position themselves among civilians. Some question the military’s commitment in the face of the ferocity of the Taliban’s fight. Yusufzai, the Peshawar editor of The News International says that “…these militants are willing to die while the soldiers are trying to save their lives.” Political activists accuse the military of supporting camps in tribal areas where militants receive training. The Awami National Party’s Gohar says that in her opinion, “If we want peace and prosperity in Pakistan, we cannot go around killing people in other countries, or sending in extremists and militants from our soil.”
Why is any of this important to the rest of us? We don’t live in Swat Valley, do we?
In the wake of 9/11, U.S. foreign policy has focused on regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq. All sorts of justifications have been offered for these policies, some of which have been proven to be false. But in the meantime, these two brutal wars continue to rage on, with no clear outcome in sight. And the conflict between Israel and Palestinians continues unabated as well. The recent military campaign in Gaza is just another case in a long string of military volleys back and forth.
America and Israel have faced an onslaught of international criticism as a result of their military activities, and the suffering such activity brings upon innocent civilians. And it is fitting that a world which calls itself civilized, should be repulsed by violence, and should be able to speak out against the brutality of military action, and in favor of justice for the innocent. After all, what does it mean to be civilized if it is not justice we seek? All this is true. And it is true as well that both America and Israel, who do share a strong connection based on common values, similar circumstances, and mutual interest, have gone overboard at times, with regard to excessive violence, and have wavered with regard to strategy, and with regard to their ultimate goals. In a very real sense, I doubt whether either Israel or the U.S. has a clear picture of what their ultimate goals really are.
But in the midst of all this uncertainty, one thing is pretty certain; the ideological extremists do indeed know what they want, and are emboldened by ideological conviction to get it. It is easy to get so wrapped up in criticizing the U.S. and Israel, that we lose sight of that. And yet, much as we hesitate to admit it, confronting the extremists is absolutely necessary, if we don’t want our countries to delve into the hell that is Swat Valley.
Context is important. For example, stealing is wrong. That’s true. But a mother stealing bread to feed her starving children is less wrong. Isn’t it? Killing civilians is wrong. That’s true. But killing civilians unintentionally in defense of one’s freedom is less wrong. Isn’t it? There are certain questions which have to be answered, and certain decisions which have to be made, even if they bring into question the very moral fiber of our being. Is there a threat to Western civilization posed by ideological extremists? Is this a threat we choose to confront? Do we use the means to confront this threat, even if it means that innocent people will be killed in the process?
These are hard questions, and the answers will be even harder for many of us to stomach. It goes against the grain of who we are. Many of us are idealistic, caring people, and it is exceedingly difficult for us to accept the profound nature of the evil we face, and the injustice that will be necessary to defeat it. And yet, the evil still stands lurking in the shadows. It will not go away quietly into that good night. It will remain and grow until we find the courage and the wisdom to confront it head on, with the same tenacity that emboldens the extremism we face.
I, for one, happen to believe that there is a great deal we could do, short of violence, to weaken the hold of extremist thinking. I believe in speaking to the man on the street with common sense and with a sense of personal dignity. I believe in investing in him; in giving him a place at the table, a stake in his future, by creating good paying jobs: jobs which grow the economy, jobs which protect the environment, and jobs which help to neutralize an ideology of hate. I believe in inspiring him with a Vision of Hope. I believe in sustaining the hope with public diplomacy.
All that is fine and good, but it will not be enough in and of itself. We will have no choice but to fight. Unfortunately, this is the sad state of affairs in which we find ourselves. We will have to fight because the enemy will not be moved otherwise. And therefore, since we have to fight, and fight hard, we owe it to ourselves to position the fight within a Vision of Hope; to raise the fight on the ground to a higher moral plain by giving the fight a moral clarity of purpose. People will fight harder once they know what they’re fighting for. We are not fighting a “war against terror.” We are fighting a war to realize a Vision of Hope. There’s a big difference.
It is precisely because we have to fight, that we also have to invest. Our willingness to invest in the man on the street will give us, and people who choose to partner with us, including moderate Muslims, a good measure of credibility, and will embolden us to sustain the fight until the fight is won. The alternative is Swat Valley, an alternative that most of us cannot even afford to consider.
For more information, please visit our website www.sellingavisionofhope.org
I
Loading ...
Loading...
Hey Nissim, Good post.
We’ve already touched upon this over dinner. How do you get business and world leaders to care enough to invest in people who come from totally different cultures? A lot of people just don’t care as much about the region as you and I might do. The only people who are “investing” in the Palestinians, are those of the same extremist mold of the Taliban such as Ahmedinejad and Nasrallah; and they aren’t doing it for job growth.
Another group that you could say that care about the Palestinians, such as those that protested against the Gaza war, call for boycott, sanctions, and divestment against Israel. Some in this group, the Isolationists, want to pull out all American interests in Israel. Fortunately this movement is very weak. The last thing the region needs is economic divestment.
Then you have the people who “care” about the Palestinians who advocate for “tough love”. I’m talking about the ultra-right parties in Israel who want to expel the Arabs. Fortunately as well, their movement is weak too.
Then you have those among the Palestinians such as Fatah and Hamas. Fatah corruption is well known and Hamas, with its own evil desires, took advantage of that in 2006. I don’t think anyone here thinks that Hamas has the Palestinians interest at heart. This won’t be solved till the Palestinian political atmosphere improves dramatically.
Asma Agbarieh-Zahalka’s, leader of the Israeli Da’am party as reported in Haaretz said, “Our greatest enemy in Arab society is despair. More than 50 percent of the Arab public will not vote at all. They have lost all faith in the parties and in politics, and this is a faith that is hard to restore. And in any case, in recent years, Arab society has not been voting ideologically but rather by clans, and therefore, it is impossible to learn anything from the vote in the Arab street about political trends in this population. To my great regret, the establishment reinforces the clan structure of Arab society by not strengthening the economy of Arab society. When the extended family becomes the economic bulwark, anyone dependent on the family has to pay the price politically, and his vote is determined by the head of the clan. Therefore, the same people can vote for the Islamists in one election and for the communists in the next.”
A businessman might be able to invest in Israeli-Palestinian economic cooperation projects but that might not necessarily translate into political progress. The Palestinians need a political Renaissance where political determination isn’t established by armed political parties. They need community organizers that can help their ideas to take hold – empowerment. What made American democracy so strong is that people, such as the Founding Fathers, could garner support for their ideas such as “unalienable rights”, religious freedom, and church-state separation. The Palestinian political atmosphere just isn’t anywhere close to the political atmosphere of colonial America.
Palestinians need to be “conditioned” and trained in community organizing and social advocacy. They need to learn that their cause can only materialize when the people with the guns (Hamas) don’t dictate how the cause operates.
Michael, I couldn’t agree more with most of what you have to say.
You are painting a dark picture, but one that honestly portrays the situation at hand.
There are a number of players in the dispute between Israel and Palestinians, and each player has his own agenda, and often the welfare of the Palestinian people is nowhere to be found on the agenda.
You enumerate the players pretty well: Iran, Hizbullah, ultra-right Israeli parites, Fatah, Hamas, Western protesters, and family clans.
The recent history of the Palestinian people, since the founding of the state of Israel, has included many instances in which their plight was used for political purposes, even at the expense of not helping them to achieve a state, an economy, and a decent life with dignity and justice. There are players out there who opt to continue the suffering for the sake of political adavantage. There are people who cannot even fathom the possibility of peace, and these people exist on both sides of the conflict, and in many countries outside the conflict altogether.
You are right to say that the people have “lost faith.” You are right to suggest that economics has a lot to do with it. When you’re not making a living, it’s hard to hold on to anything, much less faith. You are right to call for a “political Renaissance” and for community organizers.
I realize that the obstacles confronting the peace makers seem to be insurmountable. But I still beleive that there is hope. Sooner or later, no matter how bizarre things may get, people will seek to make sense of their lives. All things flow, eventually, in the direction of what makes sense. We have to encourage that in every way possible. We have to empower people ideologically, economically, spiritually, diplomatically, and yes, at times militarily. If we do this, not just with words, but with deeds, and with jobs, then the man on the street may come to imagine the possibility of hope. The extremists will not be able to capture the public’s imagination, once people begin to imagine a better life for themselves.
Ask yourself this: Where will peace come from? To my mind, peace will come from the heart and the mind of the man on the street. We can win his mind by speaking to him with common sense and with a sense of personal dignity. We can win his heart by investing in him; by giving him a place at the table, a stake in his future. And we can win the peace by selling him on a Vision of Hope. Give the man on the street a sense of hope, and you will have turned the corner on world peace. Nothing more is needed, and nothing else will suffice.