Tricks of the Taliban
BARBARIC and bumbling, leaping over boulders in sockless high top sneakers, their faces hidden behind black cloth, the Taliban of yesteryear seemed a scruffy lot with sinister intentions.
When Pakistanis first heard of them, long before Sept 11, 2001 and long before they showed up in Swat or recruited allies in Sialkot, they appeared incapable of orchestrating anything more than the random attack.
This was accomplished not because it required planning or support or strategic sense but because it was inordinately easy to throw a bomb into a crowd of unarmed civilians.
The war-weary Afghans may have let them roll into their streets, gather up and burn their CDs and take apart their cellphones but this would never happen in Pakistan.
Pakistanis would not let their schools be burned down or the faces of women blackened on posters on their street corners. Pakistan was not the hinterland Afghanistan had become, some said. Pakistanis were moderate, another echoed.
Years passed and the picture of the Taliban as a ragtag, amateur terrorist group in Afghanistan remained stuck in Pakistani heads.
Few questioned their image; after all, how could any group want to appear illiterate and even inept or wish to cultivate a barbarous anti-intellectualism built on the bonfires of books?
In the rest of Pakistan of the late 1990s, at least the members of the flat-renting, hatchback-driving middle class lining up for admissions to English-medium schools and cramming for exams they hoped would lead to jobs could not quite fathom such a thing.
The Taliban with their school burnings and floggings seem to belong to some netherworld, real but not quite touching the consciousness of the urban Pakistani mired in the task of trying to get access to water, electricity and a job all at the same time.
In the meantime, as the 1990s wore on into the millennium, the Taliban continued to develop their brand. Halfway through the first decade of the new century, the Pakistani brand emerged. They, the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, made their sales pitch to those at the bottom of Pakistan’s social strata.
In remote villages where the poorest of Pakistanis were having trouble imagining a better life, they sold the story not of an existence improved but of an order imposed.
A large number of groups came to be united under the ‘Taliban’ label. This simultaneous unity and disunity meant that a single umbrella could encompass all.
It was not the only contradiction they embraced; while burning books and torching schools they kept their name, ‘Taliban’ or ‘students’, never once betraying a self-consciousness at what would seem an unwieldy burden eluding justification.
Critics and analysts relished these incongruent directions, forecasting that an illiterate bunch including 16-year-old soldiers and with a fetish for floggings could never take over the hearts and minds of a country for any sustained period.
In the meantime, from a branding perspective, the Taliban’s capacity for inclusion gave even the most derelict and hapless young boy from the most remote and forgotten region the power to be a part of something big and powerful.
The recruits from Miramshah and Mingora and Malakand lined up and were taken in. If their lives lacked hope before, they now had meaning. If they had felt inadequate before, the inspirational aspects of an organisation that called all its members eternal ‘students’ absorbed them.
The Taliban always knew that Pakistan has far more of these — the forgotten, the rural and the constantly marginalised. They did not care what the others thought and it did not matter.
It was a ruse perpetrated on those who thought that the existence of democratic institutions — however flailing — and religious moderation — however silent — would save the country from being overtaken by those who did not believe in them.
In the wake of the attacks on PNS Mehran and Kamra airbase and many, many others, having witnessed the suave alacrity with which Taliban ‘spokespersons’ issue press releases and media communiqués claiming responsibility, we can see that the joke was on all those who underestimated them.
At the core of the Tehrik-i-Taliban’s success then lie some sharp and sophisticated calculations about Pakistan, human nature and the desires of the disenfranchised. If those that supported liberal democracy in Pakistan remained focused on the future, on the idea that education would deliver and democratic institutions represent, the Taliban focused on the people too crushed to see education as an option, too daunted by the prospect of fighting for seats in schools that barely offered an education in the first place.
If quota systems in Pakistani universities and government institutions asked for domiciles and required favours and connections, the Taliban practised open recruitment and took everyone. If liberal democracy and progressive ideas relied on what is good and hopeful in mankind, the Tehrik-i-Taliban relied on what is despondent and dark; the part of us that obeys from fear and follows from cowardice.
A poem, quoted by James Caron in an essay on the Taliban, goes thus “Once more my poor heart breaks out into naras/ The Taliban come to my memory like flowers/ Oh Lord, what happened to those red and white birds/ The Taliban come to my memory like flowers/ Much time has passed my dear since our meetings ended/ The Taliban come to my memory as flowers”.
A poem in praise of those who have killed poets and flogged musicians cannot but sting. But in its unapologetic embrace of contradiction it shows exactly the recipe employed by the militants who have harnessed the darkness in Pakistan’s soul, appropriated its poetry and its patriotism and brought Pakistanis to consider a conquest they could not, even a short 10 years ago, have imagined.
The writer is an attorney teaching constitutional law and political philosophy.
How can you comment on historical events about which you such poor knowledge?
Contrary to what you say, the Taliban appeared in mid-nineties as internal conflicts were raging among various mujaheddin groups in Afghanistan who had finally succeeded in pushing out the Russian invaders from their home land. They, as the name suggests, were children of Afghan refugees who had come to Pakistan during the eighties after the Russians invaded Afghanistan, and had studied in madrasaahs in the refugee camps of Pakistan. They came to prominence during Benazir/Nawaz governments in MID-NINETIES, and were able to take over Afghanistan and.bring some order and peace to Afghanistan after three decades of conflict, using brutal tactics at times. This happened with the full support of Pakistan and the US governments, and in broad day light. Just read through the press of that time and it will be obvious. Real problems in Pakistan started after 9/11 and the wrong policies adopted by these governments, in response to that tragedy. These policies have been continued to this day, and in fact enhanced, and consequently things have gotten from bad to worse; generation of a serious anti-Pakistan militancy in FATA is one of these consequences.
So let us keep the facts straight before we start building theories on foundations that are rather weak. The fanaticism in Pakistan does have some connections with the situation in Afghanistan; Russian invasion of Afghanistan and the consequent struggle to defeat it did strengthen these tendencies. However, they predate the Russian invasion, and primarily have been created by rulers of Pakistan over the past six decades. It would take a lot of hard work, patience and perseverance to bring them under control, i.e., if we are really serious.
Riza, I truly hope you live in Pakistan and spread your wisdom.
Pakistani Talibans and Afghan Talibans are different. Swat operation was against Pakistani Taliban. They did not come from Afghanistan. Afghan Taliban are not very active here because they are fighting in Afghanistan. Pakistani Taliban were manufactured much later by the foreign military in Afghanistan, to carry out terrorist activities in Pakistan to keep its military busy and destabilize the country. There is a difference between them.
A very clear and chilling analysis of the appeal of the Taliban.
It is unlikely that the situation in Pakistan is going to improve anythime soon. Killing in the name of religion is the worst type of violence anyone can imagine. Harping about the past, on how taliban was created as part of the US policy is not going to resolve anything…….! Pakistan was and has always been part of this decision. Lastly, breeding, nuturing and encouraging such elements will only bring misery, pain and sorrow…..!
The Flowers of the Forest are all Weeds of War.
Tabilan were encouraged in 80s and are being encourage since 2001 to serve and play their role in great game.Hidden hands are supporting them and without them they are nothing.
Good article. Writer is trying to make Taliban the Robin hood of poor. Someone is paying them and training them to gain power and hurt the resources of Pakistan. A car cannot run on “Water kit”.
Capt Khan: Talibans are not robbing ‘Peter and giving Paul’ but infact robbing peter and killing paul – they are cancer to the humanity
Could not agree more with Capt. C M.
What is this? What does she want to prove?
improve your english. re-read the article.
This story started in 1947 & first chapter written by ZAB when he declare Ahmedi as non Muslim.
Love it
The most appalling feature, which if not rectified, will eventually result in the destruction and annihilation of civilized society inside Pakistani borders; is the silent support of educated masses to these killers in the name of religion. They are perhaps satisfied that taliban are killing Christians, Ahmadis and Shias but they are not realizing that one day the Frankenstein will gobble them up too. And then there will be no opportunity for any revival and solace.
I played with clay and made pellets. Then things became exciting and I created toys. In those toys I embellished life. They grew and did as I said and loved. They grew taller as tall as me and it was fun as it could be. But soon enough, I grew shorter and he looked down at me into my eyes and said, I am here to stay and now you listen to what I say.
Well said
excellent allegory. wonderful
Yes Raina. In other words if you are a host of someone and allow him to stand in your place, he makes place to sit down. If you allow him to sit down, he occupies a bed and lies down. Later, I gues he will throw you out of your house or Afghanistan or Pakistan etc.