by Emi Foulk
The swelling power of the Taliban in Pakistan - or "Talibanistan," as The Nation so pithily put it - has caused much alarm amongst American politicians, journalists, and coHuffington Post mmentators; and in Pakistan, too, the educated classes condemn the Taliban's repressive and violent policies.
In both countries, so-called champions of democracy are quick to cast blame. The majority cite the efficacy of ruthless intimidation - a sort of gunpoint diplomacy forcing women to stay indoors and DVD stores to shutter - unchecked by Pakistan's weak civilian government. The United States exacerbates the trend, some say, by pushing the Taliban further into Pakistan's heartland with their ill-conceived drone attacks in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, simultaneously rallying support for those who oppose the "evil Empire."
Others point to the Pakistan military, still seeking to wield the Taliban as an asset against rival India, as progenitor and promoter of the country's militant jihadism. On at least one point, these proponents of Western liberalism agree: As Parag Khanna of the New America Foundation recently wrote on nytimes.com, "Only a democratic Pakistan can reduce the Taliban threat."
Oddly, then, the question of what constitutes democracy in Pakistan has been almost entirely neglected. A New York Times article reporting the ways in which the Taliban "exploit class rifts" came close, but shied away from highlighting what is glaringly obvious to anyone who has spent time in Pakistan: if democracy in Pakistan implies the status quo, the Taliban is here to stay.
Socio-economic disparities run rampant, and corruption, classism and an entrenched feudal system all but ensure that the poor - more than 30 percent of Pakistan's 170 million citizens, according to the World Bank - remain poor and marginalized.
Nine percent of Pakistanis lack access to clean water, according to the UN, and 38 percent of Pakistani children are underweight. Bonded labor continues unhindered in the most densely populated provinces of Punjab and Sindh.
Given the little that Pakistani governments, both civilian and military, have provided by way of land reform, education, health care and equitable justice over the past few decades, it's not entirely surprising that an alternative - any alternative - holds appeal for Pakistan's lower classes and peasantry. The Taliban in Swat have forced wealthy landowners out, and, in an ersatz land reform, passed the abandoned plots to the tenants who manned them.
The swelling power of the Taliban in Pakistan - or "Talibanistan," as The Nation so pithily put it - has caused much alarm amongst American politicians, journalists, and coHuffington Post mmentators; and in Pakistan, too, the educated classes condemn the Taliban's repressive and violent policies.
In both countries, so-called champions of democracy are quick to cast blame. The majority cite the efficacy of ruthless intimidation - a sort of gunpoint diplomacy forcing women to stay indoors and DVD stores to shutter - unchecked by Pakistan's weak civilian government. The United States exacerbates the trend, some say, by pushing the Taliban further into Pakistan's heartland with their ill-conceived drone attacks in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, simultaneously rallying support for those who oppose the "evil Empire."
Others point to the Pakistan military, still seeking to wield the Taliban as an asset against rival India, as progenitor and promoter of the country's militant jihadism. On at least one point, these proponents of Western liberalism agree: As Parag Khanna of the New America Foundation recently wrote on nytimes.com, "Only a democratic Pakistan can reduce the Taliban threat."
Oddly, then, the question of what constitutes democracy in Pakistan has been almost entirely neglected. A New York Times article reporting the ways in which the Taliban "exploit class rifts" came close, but shied away from highlighting what is glaringly obvious to anyone who has spent time in Pakistan: if democracy in Pakistan implies the status quo, the Taliban is here to stay.
Socio-economic disparities run rampant, and corruption, classism and an entrenched feudal system all but ensure that the poor - more than 30 percent of Pakistan's 170 million citizens, according to the World Bank - remain poor and marginalized.
Nine percent of Pakistanis lack access to clean water, according to the UN, and 38 percent of Pakistani children are underweight. Bonded labor continues unhindered in the most densely populated provinces of Punjab and Sindh.
Given the little that Pakistani governments, both civilian and military, have provided by way of land reform, education, health care and equitable justice over the past few decades, it's not entirely surprising that an alternative - any alternative - holds appeal for Pakistan's lower classes and peasantry. The Taliban in Swat have forced wealthy landowners out, and, in an ersatz land reform, passed the abandoned plots to the tenants who manned them.
(Courtesy to The Huffington Post)
No comments:
Post a Comment