Launching I am Malala and the
ideological division of the society
Recently, Malala Yousafzai’s controversial
endeavor – I am Malala- was prevented from being launched in a university in
Peshawar through government interference. The incident represented the alarming
level of polarization rooted in the society and its grievous implications. The
provincial information minister, Shah Farman, interestingly apprised the press
that this book is irrelevant to the curriculum of university and hence, the
launching of this book was not necessary.
Apart from the fact that his argument was flawed, misconstrued and
insensible (since any book possesses academic importance), there is a more deep
and more crucial matter aligned with it.
The chairman of the reigning party in
the province expressed his surprise and grief over the issue as soon as media
got hold of the issue. Nevertheless, this incident explains a fundamental and
critical dilemma. While it was clear that the launch of the book was discouraged
and not supported because government succumbed to the local beliefs and
sentiments which strongly resist (what popular belief goes as) “the so-called
story of Malala,” the incident depicts the disarray and be wilderness and the
lack of a clear philosophy or ideology that exists within the party whose
slogan was –and is- change. This is not the first time this confusion has
arisen: the firm stance of Khan upon MQM which became lenient, the coalition
government with a party whose manifesto was quiet contrary to that of PTI, the
differing statement related to former Punjab Governor Salman Taseer by Imran
Khan and another party member respectively are a few examples which demonstrate
that something went amiss while the leaders for the party were elected through
a democratic process.
If applied on a broader scale, it is
apparent that this confusion has inhibited the progress of the civil
government’s policies in KPK. Terrorism is, perhaps, the most apt example where
Khan wanted talks with the extremists for the purpose of giving peace a chance
and alienating the terrorists from the local support that they draw and heavily
rely upon. However, Khan was so bent upon the idea of having an office for
Taliban and negotiating with TTP that he and his party lost the main essence or
purpose of the negotiations somewhere in the middle of the road. Besides, the
main component of any truth and reconciliation process –the active
participation of civil government- was never paid heed to. Meanwhile, the party
steadily lost its support because of the sharp rise in the activities of TTP
while most of those who still support this policy do not understand the gravity
of the issue and the effective methodology of implementing this policy.
Coming back to the current topic, I have
read some parts of Malala’s book and I do find some of her ideas controversial
and instigating but this should not prevent the use of the book for academic
purposes; only a critical approach to this book –or any book- allows for an
accurate critique of that piece of writing.
University is a place where new ideas are explored and more
controversial ones are researched upon by the students so that they can be
answered aptly and promptly.
To conclude, the KPK government needs to
take a decisive step regarding what it represents, what it believes and what it
wants to do and devise the policy accordingly; it needs to get its ideological
priorities straight. Furthermore, urgent action is imperative if these pressing
and critical issues are to be solved; waiting for the extremists to respond to
the message and, meanwhile, sitting idle after addressing the media that
government is interested in talks is not sufficient. Active participation of
civil governance and a serious attempt to enforce the policy is what the
circumstances are urging the authorities to do. It is of immense importance
that this issue is addressed or else, the government will again succumb to
public pressure on many-to-come occasions.
|