For many Pakistani-Americans, home is not where the hearth is

By Zia Ur Rehman

---

The paradox is fascinating: on November 4, as America went to mid-term polls, Pakistani-American cabbie from New York City, Mustafa Hussain, was arguing that participating in the US votes is just a waste of time. In the same breath, he proudly boasted that he had, along with his three friends, participated in a September 27 protest organised by the local Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI) chapter in front of the United Nations when Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was addressing the General Assembly (UNGA).

Hussain’s case is associated with a large debate attached to the Pakistani Diaspora in the US these days, one that centres on whether they have integrated enough into their adopted country. According to different estimates, up to 500,000 Pakistani Americans live in the US, with the largest populations concentrated in New York, Houston and Chicago, followed by northern and southern California. With a near 100% increase in numbers since 2000, Pakistani-Americans are the second fastest growing Asian immigrant group in the US.

Despite their numbers, social scientists studying the Pakistani Diaspora in America believe that there exists a “myth of return” — that one day, they would leave their adopted country and go back to Pakistan. This notion is among the greatest challenges to integration and socio-cultural assimilation for the Pakistani Diaspora in the US.

“I have been working as a physician for the last 15 years and am settled with family here,” says a physician in the town of Alexandria, Virginia. “But it is also a fact that eventually we have to go back to Pakistan permanently as the US is not our country.”

M Asim Siddiqui, who works with a local Urdu newspaper for Pakistani community in Virginia, argues that after 9/11, Muslim populations in general and the Pakistani community in particular felt insecure and preferred to stay within their community. “Many Pakistani-Americans live in ghettos, mainly near the mosques or Islamic centres, and this is because of their social, cultural and religious culture,” he claims.

A section of analysts think differently.

“Those Pakistanis who are high-end professionals, such as physicians, IT engineers and scientists are easily assimilating in the American culture. But the issue is with low-income Pakistanis who are working as cab drivers or grocery store clerks, and especially with those who came to the US through illegal means or by seeking asylum,” said Pir Zubair Shah, a New York-based researcher, who had worked with the New York Times in Pakistan.

Some analysts believe that it will take time for the Pakistani community as a whole to be fully entrenched in the larger mainstream community. “Pakistanis like to live close to each other and socialise only among themselves,” declares Abdul Quayyum Khan Kundi, a political analyst and former president of the Pakistan Chamber of Commerce USA. “This cuts them off from the mainstream, and reduces contact at the cultural and community level. Their interactions [with others] are only limited to work.”

Integration in American society

Pakistanis are still a newer community in the US. The majority of them arrived in America in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Those arriving were well-placed professionals, such as physicians, engineers, software workers or scientists; many either came directly because of a demand in their profession or as students who stayed back after graduating.

Along with these professionals came their less educated relatives, who were either eligible for migration under immigration visa preference for relatives or through the visa lottery scheme. This demographic is largely working blue-collar jobs.

More than 80 per cent of Pakistani households are family-based, having taken advantage of the family reunion visa option.

Nadeem Hotiana, press attaché at Embassy of Pakistan in Washington, said that Pakistanis in the US form a vibrant social community, with dozens of community, cultural, as well as university-based student events. Local chapters of Pakistani political parties also frequently organise social and cultural gatherings in different parts of the country.

“Although it is true that the Pakistani community has been unable to create a distinct place in American society, the new generation has been active and joining the country’s prestigious financial and policy-making organisations,” says Hotiana.

Michael Kugelman, an expert on South Asia associated with the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars, argues that many Pakistanis have comfortably become part of American society — particularly the 35 per cent of Pakistani-Americans who were born in the US.

“If we want to talk about those that have struggled to integrate in American society, we’d have to draw from the 65 per cent that were not born here,” says Kugelman. “And even on this count, most of those I’ve met seem comfortable with their identity. They are well-versed in American sports and politics, but at the same time, deeply passionate about what’s going on back in Pakistan. Rare is the diaspora member who doesn’t have a view on what’s going on in Pakistan.”

Most issues faced by Pakistani-Americans are immigration-related or manifestations of bilateral relations between the two countries. “When the relationship goes sour, Pakistani-Americans tend to feel the pressure. Conversely, when relations improve, they feel that too,” says Kundi.

Pakistani politics, not US politics

Background interviews with a number of Pakistani Americans suggest that they are more interested in the politics of Pakistan and do not take an equal interest in local politics or elections in the US. This trend was also observed in the November 4 midterm elections.

By contrast, many segments of the Pakistani Diaspora actively follow Pakistani politics in terms of running and joining overseas chapters of Pakistani political parties.

“When you ask them to attend a meeting to do with local elections or with local representatives or to contribute funds, they will make lame excuses. But when leaders of Pakistani political parties visit the US, all of them would not only attend the gatherings but also help organisers financially,” explains Siddiqui.

Almost all Pakistani political parties, especially the PTI, PML-N, Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) and All Pakistan Muslim League (APML), have their chapters and organisational structures in the US. However, political analysts believe that the PTI is possibly the most popular in the Diaspora.

“Most Pakistanis living in USA are from the educated middle-class, which is the constituency that supports the PTI,” says Kundi, before adding that the PTI’s inability to become an institution has also disappointed its supporters in the US.

While such political vibrancy is laudable to an extent, it compromises the Pakistani Diaspora’s position within the US.

Asad Chaudary, a Virginia chapter president of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and someone who formed the Pak-American Study Circle for the purpose of lobbying in Capitol Hill, explains that because of these “divisions” within the Pakistani community, it is very hard to show strength in matters of lobbying. This affects policymaking and working relationships with congressmen and other officials. He also claims that it is “very hard” to get Pakistani-Americans to exercise their voting rights during American polls.

Hotiana too was not enthused by diaspora attitudes. He says Pakistani factional politics had also divided the Pakistani-American community.

“In a recent visit of Pakistani premier Sharif to the UNGA, we saw a divided Pakistani community, protesting in favour of as well as against the government,” he says. “On the other hand, Indian Diaspora, despite their political differences, showed their unity in welcoming Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.”

Hotiana argues that their active involvement in Pakistan politics deters them from taking an active part in the politics of the US, their adopted country.

But perhaps, it is somewhat unfair to compare Pakistan’s diaspora to that of India’s, which is about 3 million strong.

“Both diasporas in the US are quite similar in the sense that they are relatively well-assimilated and are well-represented in both white-collar and blue-collar professions,” says Kugelman. “Where the difference lies is how they are organised. India’s diaspora in the US, despite its large size, is quite well-organised and is capable of speaking with one voice — which may help explain why it has a large lobbying presence in Washington and has been very successful in advocating for positions on Capitol Hill.”

Islamic radicalisation

In recent years, there has been a small increase in the number of terror incidents involving Islamic radicals who are American citizens, according to counter-terrorism officials and experts in the US. A number of US citizens have also been part of high-profile international and domestic terrorism; in some cases, such as that of Faisal Shahzad, Pakistani-Americans were involved.

A Pakistan-born naturalised US citizen, Shahzad attempted to bomb New York’s Times Square in May 2010 with a parked car full of explosives. He was allegedly inspired by Pakistani militants and told US authorities during interrogation that he was a “fan and follower” of radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, but appears to have planned the bombing alone. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

A research paper titled Muslims Americans, conducted by Pew Research Centre in 2011, finds no indication of increased alienation or anger among Muslim Americans, which includes the Pakistani Diaspora, in response to concerns about home-grown Islamic terrorists. But a majority of Muslim Americans express concerns about the possible rise of Islamic extremism, both in the US and abroad.

Arif Ansar, a security analyst associated with PoliTact, a Washington-based think-tank, is also of same view. He believes that Pakistani-Americans primarily display a liberal and peaceful outlook. However, he thinks that the danger of the lone wolf phenomenon is always there.

“People espousing religious conservatism, and even liberals, have often taken on an ambivalent posture towards world affairs,” says Ansar. “What this means is that while they may despise US and western policies towards the Islamic world privately, they do not articulate them in public, nor do they adopt political activism as a means to address their concerns.”

Ansar adds that their attitude is that their activism was unlikely to produce any result or make a difference at a larger level, and this was in marked contrast to the culture of individualism and activism in the American system.

Shah, who had covered the Shahzad case extensively in Pakistan at that time, is of the view that the situation of Islamic radicalisation is more severe in Europe than in the US. “It was a case of economic frustration, not of a case of radicalisation through any organised network within the US,” he comments.

Pakistan’s private electronic media, which is very popular among the Pakistani Diaspora in the US, is playing a key role in shaping expat sensibilities and keeps them from integrating into American politics, he claims. “The majority of Pakistani-Americans watch Pakistani TV channels, that often demonise the US and glorify Taliban militants,” says Shah.

However, while many Pakistanis may remain aloof, US security officials are certainly keeping an eye on the community. US counterterrorism officers explain that in the backdrop of terrorist attacks, they instituted a program directed at the Muslim community, especially Pakistani-Americans, to develop informants and undercover agents. US law enforcement agencies have been working on this issue in collaboration with leaders of Pakistani community and religious clerics at mosques.

“If you compare the situation with Europe, where a number of young European Muslims, especially from France, have been joining the Islamic State (IS) in Syria, the situation is much better in the US,” says a law enforcement official in Washington D.C.

At the same time, PoliTact has noted how American and western policies, especially in the Middle East and South and Central Asia, will in the long run create home-grown challenges.

“If the foreign policies of western nations continue to divert too acutely from the sentiments of their Muslim citizens, which they often do not candidly express, it is bound to produce inadvertent long-term consequences,” says Ansar.

“To address this, the responsibility lies with both diaspora leaders and American public representatives. To be taken seriously, community leaders would have to generate genuine assessments of the risks and the situation as opposed to presenting recommendations based on wishful thinking, or by attempting to appease by conforming to mainstream thoughts.”

This article was first written during a six-week-long fellowship of the International Centre for Journalists (ICFJ), Washington. It has been re-edited for use in Pakistan. The writer tweets at @zalmayzia

---

Shaking off the First Generation Syndrome

It is now time for the second generation of Pakistani-Americans to come out and play, but before that, they have to set aside the biases of their fathers

By Adnan Rasool

“During the campaign I met with a wonderful group of Pakistani-American doctors and they told me this is the first time somebody had reached out to them to engage them in this process. And when I left, they said ‘you have given us hope and inspiration’.”

~ Michelle Nunn during her concession speech after losing the Senate race in Georgia.

Michelle Nunn’s comments during her five minute nationally-televised concession speech show how changing demographics in the US have made all minorities more valuable than they ever were before. Even in the Deep South, minorities, especially the affluent ones such as Pakistani-Americans and Indian-Americans, have seen a steady rise in courtship by political parties. And while Indian-Americans have taken this courtship in stride and ridden the wave to governorships in Louisiana and South Carolina, Pakistani-Americans seem to be slow in taking advantage of their potential political clout.

The US has about half a million Pakistani-Americans, with an average household income exceeding $70,000, according to the Pakistan Political Action Committee (PAKPAC) President Rifat Chughtai. The community is affluent and is highly educated. Now into its second generation, the community has included phenomenal success stories including that of Shahid Khan, the billionaire owner of NFL franchise Jacksonville Jaguars.

So why the success been purely economic? Why hasn’t the economic prowess of the community translated into political clout and influence?

Rifat believes this phenomenon is down to the “First Generation Syndrome” — a situation where the first generation never truly integrates into their adopted homeland and holds out for their motherland. The first generation seems more interested in Pakistan and its politics instead of refocusing on issues within the US and how they impact them.

The focus in the first generation of Pakistani-Americans, according to Rifat, is purely on securing an economic future for themselves and their children. Once they are able to achieve that, instead of focusing on US politics which the first generation seems out of touch with, the first generation tries to buy into the politics back home to fulfil their emotional attachment to Pakistan. Simply put, they wish to give back and wish to fix what is broken according to them in Pakistan.

As Pakistanis were late comers to the US, mostly arriving in late 70s, 80s and then the better part of the 90s, the current generation is still the first generation. The second generation is now finally coming to the fore and that is where dynamics are supposed to change. Latinos, specifically the Mexican and Cuban diasporas have undergone the same shift over time.

The first generation was slow to integrate and stayed out of the US political system. Once the second generation came into play, things start picking up for them politically and now the Latino community has representation at all levels of US government, except the Presidency.

Rifat believes that the Pakistani-American community is at the cusp of this demographic shift, and when that finally kicks in over the next few years, Pakistani-Americans would be more visible in political circles. Based on this belief, PAKPAC is hedging its future with the second generation of Pakistani Americans by paving the way for them in DC.

Discussing their long term plan, Rifat argues that the trajectory PAKPAC wishes to take the Pakistani-American community towards will result in at least one senator and three congressmen/women position within the next 20 years.

Albeit an ambitious plan, Rifat insists that the founders of PAKPAC, along with Pakistani professional organisations such as the Association of Physicians of Pakistani Descent in North America (APPNA) and Organisation of Pakistani Entrepreneurs of North America (OPEN) are finally in a position to realign themselves to work as a single unit for a targeted aim of improving the influence of Pakistani-Americans.

Rifat is betting on the second generation youth leading the charge, backed by the financial resources provided by the first generation and the knowhow of how crucial lobbying and policy input are in US political culture. This is the realisation that had been missing within the community for the last couple of decades, and now that it is finally being acknowledged, the effort is to make the numbers count.

Additionally, with the worsening political conditions in Pakistan, the diaspora is starting to get exhausted after donating generously over the last 15 years in hopes of a cleaner political system, as they blame endemic corruption in Pakistan in part for their decision to move out of the country.

Psychologically the first generation blame the inept political culture as being the reason why they had to leave their families and friends to migrate thousands of miles away to secure an economic future. For a lot of them, involvement in Pakistani politics is a way to wash away the guilt of leaving their homeland.

But as the new generation takes charge, their set of concerns are more localised and invested in the American political system. For them, who runs Pakistan is secondary to who their congressman/woman is and what can their representative do for them.

This change in focus can potentially put the Pakistani-American community on the same trajectory as Cuban-Americans or Indian- Americans, where they are in a position to contest elections or at least run in the primaries and carve out space within political parties for themselves. There is a change coming to the US political culture and the next election cycle in 2016 will be the first true test of the political clout the Pakistani-American community believes it has gained over the years.

With a fully functioning political action committee and outreach programmes aimed at Pakistani-American communities across the US, the hope is that finally, Pakistani-Americans can arrive at the greatest exercise in democracy that dictates the fate of not just those who live in the US but also for rest of the world.

---

The lone star

Meet Dr Arjumand Hashmi, the mayor of Paris, Texas, who hails from Karachi, Pakistan

By Ibrahim Sajid Malick

On January 7, 2015, when terrorists slaughtered 12 journalists at the Paris offices of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, my mind wandered off to Paris, Texas — a town often referred to as “the second largest Paris in the world.”

Why?

Because the mayor of Paris, Texas — a conservative Christian town — is a Pakistani-American Muslim man named Dr Arjumand Hashmi.

A seemingly apolitical student when he was in Dow Medical College in 1980s, he is best known in Pakistan for being the cardiologist of former president, Pervez Musharaf. He grew up admiring Mohammad Ali Jinnah, but after making America his home, he quickly found new role models: George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.

For the local Parisian of Texas, Dr Hashmi is just their mayor, and of course, their cardiologist. But as the maddening violence of Paris, France reverberated around the globe, I wondered how the people of Paris, Texas, who had elected a Muslim mayor, have reacted to the violence.

Why did you choose to run for public office?

A number of reasons. Like many other residents, I was not satisfied with the performance of the local council. We were losing jobs, and the local leadership was not appropriately addressing the attrition. In 2010, Sara Lee had shut down their production and 700 people had lost their jobs. In a town of 25,000, that’s big. Besides economy, there was a general decay that was obvious from the appearance of this town. Our infrastructure was old and falling apart. I had lived here and had a successful practice. I felt a sense of obligation. I owed it to the community, so I offered to serve.

What type of obstacles did you have to overcome?

I am a Pakistan-born immigrant living in Texas, and people were concerned about my intentions. Some even asked if I would build a mosque or implement Sharia.

But the great thing about America is that people here are willing to listen. You can reason with them. For example, I explained to my fellow citizens that just like we don’t build churches with public funds, we cannot build mosques with public funds either.

I told them that I lived in America because I love this political system. This system is working so why would I want to change it? I also explained that if I wanted to live in a country with Sharia, I would migrate to Saudi Arabia. We adopted this country and nobody forced us to come here. I follow my religion, I say my prayers, but we live in the very same town. This is our town.

Why are there are a limited number of Pakistani-Americans engaged in public service?

Normally Pakistanis stay occupied within their groups. We are active in our communities and participate in activities such as the Association of Physicians of Pakistani Descent of North America (APPNA). We are interested and engaged in the politics of Pakistan. We are all working for our own personal financial growth. So our priorities are different.

But I believe the main reason [Pakistani-Americans] don’t run for office is a fear of failure. They do not want to lose an election.

They do not want to step out of their comfort zone. But it needs to change. This is our country, this is our community. We must participate in politics, ensure positive change for posterity.

My wife and I have raised our kids to be socially responsible. They are encouraged to participate in local politics. Of course, they need to pursue academic and professional studies, but that should not preclude them from being part of public service.

Do you think being a cardiologist helped your electability?

I am sure it helped. Because I have a practice in town, people already knew me. But as a health care provider, I had a different relationship with the constituency. Patients came to me for assistance. But when I was campaigning, I was going to them seeking their support. Different dynamics.

What have you managed to achieve for Paris, Texas?

My goal and campaign promise were to empower individuals, increase people’s participation in local government, and practice an open-door policy. My administration has been open and completely transparent.

People were welcome to every council meeting even when it meant opposition to my point of view. I wanted to create the environment of inclusion. Under my admin, the local fire department was able to procure state-of-the-art fire trucks. We also secured a bond of $45 million to modernise our water and sewerage system.

I am proud to say that under my administration we were able deliver on our election promise of health, safety and quality of life.

Texas is at the centre of the debate on hydro-fracking. Where do you stand on environmental issues such as fracking and Keystone XL that can potentially go through your town?

I am for green energy; wind, water and solar.

Does that put you at odd with conservative Republicans? What will you do if Keystone XL pipeline has to go through your town?

I will study the health impact and also economic benefits. There has to be a balance. I will make sure that the citizens of this town are involved in any decision.

If you were the mayor of Paris, France how would you have responded to the recent massacre? Do you support freedom of speech unconditionally?

Well, I am not the mayor of Paris, so it is hard for me to respond. But the ruthless and senseless murder is extremely sad and must be condemned unconditionally. When Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) took over Makkah, he pardoned everyone. I don’t know at what point these extremists took over Islam. This is extremely distressing, and it is very sad that moderate Muslims are being held hostage by these fundamentalists.

So are you saying that you completely support freedom of expression and not the concept of blasphemy? Do you support the 1st Amendment in its entirety?

Yes, absolutely. I support the 1st Amendment. No doubt.

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, January 25th, 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play