In December 2012, feminism changed in India forever. A girl, now known as Nirbhaya, was beaten and gang raped. She later succumbed to the injuries and passed away. The people of India took to the streets to protest against this horrific act against women, against humanity. The world stood with the women of India and unequivocally condemned this barbaric crime. However, in a country where, according to its own Crime Records Bureau, reported acts of violence against women are at an increase of 6.4%, the prime minister, Mr. Narendra Modi, chose to speak to Sheikh Hasina, Bangladeshi prime minister, that she was countering terrorism ‘despite being a woman’. I’m not even sure where to begin. Should I begin by talking about how being a woman, I, for one, feel deeply offended? Should I talk about how, as a mother, I have probably gone through more pain and physical toil than most men I know? Should I talk about how, as a woman, I have studied, succeeded, worked and earned my way – probably better than a lot of men I know? Should I talk about how, being a woman in the subcontinent, we have witnessed women like Malala Yousafzai, Benazir Bhutto, Indira Gandhi, Sarojini Naidu – the list is endless, and perhaps PM Modi would like to explain what he meant by his sexist, below par statement, #DespiteBeingPM? The idea of women being equal to men as human beings is not that difficult to understand. It’s a simple fact to me. It offers me no complications. It has no twists and turns in logic. If it doesn’t seem that way to you, maybe you need to look up words like misogyny and sexism. PM Modi, in his offhand way, has forgotten that premiership of a country like India does not mean that he can forget the meaning and implication of those words. The idea of men and women being equal is one of the basic tenets of human equality and all your efforts to prove to the world that you are a powerful, capable and liberal country can go down the proverbial drain if you choose to address a fellow premier like that. It would have been equally politically incorrect of Sheikh Hasina had she replied in kind,

“My, my, Mr Modi, you’ve come a long way in life despite being the son of a grocer.”

Last week, Malala Yousafzai appeared on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and the theatrical trailer for a new documentary, ‘He Named Me Malala’ was released. As always her appearance on the show led to universal support and acclaim. As always it also attracted massive amounts of vitriol from people in Pakistan. [fbvideo link="https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153385355801800"][/fbvideo] [embed width="620" height="348"]http://vimeo.com/131660825[/embed] I have been subjected to copious amounts of hate messages personally for posting messages supporting Malala on my Facebook page. I made an earnest effort to engage with all the Malala haters but none of their arguments held any weight. I have compiled the eight most popular arguments made by people who dislike Malala and I wish to address why none of them hold much logic. 1. Why just Malala? By far the most popular sentiment against supporting Malala is based on the opinion that she gets an undeserved amount of attention from the West. As per the masses,

“Hundreds of children die every day in Pakistan, why do they not appear on television shows?”

This past Monday, my mother asked me for the third time,

 “What colour kurta do you want for Eid?”

This article does not even come close to paying tribute to probably the best newsman of our generation. Although he is an American through and through, he was always there to point out the flaws and contradictions his country is full of. He had no qualms in putting those contradictions in front of whoever he thought was responsible for them. [embed width="620"]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2i0nub[/embed] Over the course of the last 16 years, Jonathan Stewart Leibowitz, popularly known as Jon Stewart, did so much, not just for his country, but for the students of politics and journalism, and everyone interested enough in the fate of their nation, and for that, we will remain indebted to him for our lives. https://twitter.com/facexit/status/629544133426704384 https://twitter.com/RabbiWolpe/status/629541097073717248 https://twitter.com/grryffindork/status/629533025995395072 Tony Burman of the Toronto Star wrote,

“The American cultural landscape will undergo a seismic change next week.”

“I agree wholeheartedly with Jon Stewart’s overall premise.”

August 14^th is right around the corner and I decided to share some thoughts to rejuvenate our love for Pakistan. Celebrating 68 years of independence, have you ever pondered about our love for this country and why exactly we love Pakistan? Have you ever thought about channelling this love into something more positive for yourself, your country, or in fact, all of us? As a young Pakistani female, I can say that the majority of us have this undefined patriotism, which reaches its pinnacle during a cricket match, quivers during a political debate, and dies when it comes to doing something practical for our country. This year, around the start of the month of August, Tourism Development Cooperation of Punjab (TDCP) arranged an Azadi (independence) walk, where I and a few other photographers went to visit the most memorable monument of Pakistan, none other than our very own Yaadgar, our Minar-e-Pakistan. Standing in front of the monument and capturing its magnanimity was an exhilarating event. Awe-struck and disconcerted, overwhelmed and yet thought provoking, the colossal history of this monument induced a rush of emotions within me. I realised that I don’t love my country because my father or forefathers were born here, although I have a lot of respect for the martyrs who lost their lives for the sake of our country, but my love for Pakistan is something more pure and deep-rooted than that. My love for Pakistan is for its entirety, for its people, whether living in bungalows or a slum. It’s for every inch of my country, be its  scenic lush green meadows, gigantic mountainous ranges or poverty stricken small villages. It’s for its culture, whether the colourful extravaganza of Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan or Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P). I love my country for being the place it is, because the connection with this soil is in my genes and it will remain there forever. I feel disconcerted and remorseful at times because there’s nothing we ever do out of sheer love for Pakistan. On one side, we defend our country from all the critique that comes our way, while on the other, we lie, bribe, cheat, and litter the streets, disgracing our own patriotism and spirit. We’re all the same. We all have committed these small sins and we all have that deep-rooted connection with our very own Pakistan. Our hearts melt when we see people dying in floods and natural disasters. We all have shed numerous tears and said hundreds of prayers for every Pakistani innings in the field. We share mutual respect for those who are protecting us at our borders, upright and relentlessly, from terrorist forces. We all have mutual admiration for a few admirable citizens who have earned worldwide recognition for themselves, such as Fiza Farhan, Abdul Sattar Edhi or Malala Yosufzai. It doesn’t matter if we inhabit place on this soil or not, our souls have an incessant love for this country and it will remain with us till the end of our lives. We have to rise above our petty issues, cultural differences, and political views in order to do something for our country. Be it promoting tourism through photography, entrepreneurship or innovation, or basic respect for laws, we can make a huge difference. Let’s make a promise to ourselves to share love and spread it through our goodness, kindness, innovation, and integrity. Let’s promise ourselves this Independence Day to do something out of absolute and unconditional love for Pakistan, out of pure and pristine intentions. All photos: Anam Saeed

A few days ago, I was sitting by the Indus River in Jamshoro, singing a patriotic song. Moments later, I noticed a fisherman who burst into laughter observing me. When I asked him why he was laughing, he said,

“Saeen where is this Pakistan this song speaks of? Here, I don’t have the money to send my children to school or even shop for Eid. That aside, women are continuously killed in the name of honour, children are raped and such brutalities are recorded then sold. People are murdered because they belong to different sects or religions, be it Shias, Ahmadis, Christians etcetera. There’s no tolerance in this society. Hindus can’t even build their temples on this land, plus their girls are kidnapped and forcefully converted to Islam. Then there’s our culture, which is constantly threatened by religious fanatics. When human beings are treated this way, then to no surprise, there is no such thing as animal rights either. Animals are killed, be it for pleasure or business, even I kill fish for survival. So the song you’re playing isn’t practical, it’s very far from reality. Perhaps Pakistan looks good only on Pakistani TV.”

A Pakistani living abroad has to battle with numerous stereotypes. It has been a year since I moved to Australia and I still get heckled by people’s pre-conceived notions about where I’m from. It is not just because I am from Pakistan, a country plagued by terrorism and corrupt regressive regimes, but also because Pakistan is considered to be a religiously extremist country. There is a distinct need to set the record straight and inform the international community that Pakistan is a lot more than what they have assumed it to be. I want to address some of the questions that were thrown at me so that the rhetoric surrounding Pakistan does not remain strictly one-dimensional. 1. “Aren’t you a poor country?” Yes, Pakistan is poor. However, it is rich in certain domains. Pakistan is the first Muslim state to acquire nuclear arsenal. It has built the highest paved international road known as the Karakoram Highway. Pakistan’s deep sea port is included in the 100 busiest container ports of the world. It manufactures 60 million hand sewn footballs for the World Cup in a year. Pakistan has the world’s second largest salt mine that stretches to 18 working levels  and 40 kilometres of tunnels, and the fourth largest irrigated land area after China and the US. So, you see, don’t judge a book by its Gross Domestic Product (GDP). [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="533"] PHOTO: AFP[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="533"] A worker applies adhesives to the edges of a design on a football ahead of the FIFA World Cup 2014 in Brazil at a factory in Sialkot. PHOTO: AFP[/caption] 2. I want to visit Pakistan but I’m scared I’ll get killed Indeed the security situation in Pakistan is discouraging. However, once you visit, you’ll see for yourself how hospitable the people of this country are. This is because hospitality is tightly woven into Pakistan’s cultural values. Just ask Brandon Stanton of Humans of New York about his experience in Pakistan. 3. So Arabic and Urdu are similar, right? No, they are not. Urdu may borrow some Arabic words just like Japanese borrows some words from the Chinese language, but they are completely different languages. Urdu is a blend of Persian, Turkish, Arabic, and some Sanskrit words and is an amalgamation of Indo-Aryan languages. Pakistanis have a strong emotional attachment to Arabic because the Holy Quran is written in it. The language itself is more prevalent in the Middle East and South Africa. 4. How is your English so good? Pakistan was a part of the Indian sub-continent which was a British colony for a century. Although the subcontinent was decolonised 67 years ago, Pakistan and India have not been able to shake off the hold of the English language. There’s a strong emphasis on English in the education sector and in the professional arena. Islamic studies itself is taught in English in O’ levels. It has now become a representation of class. The educated and well-off section of the Pakistani population is closely associated with English while the uneducated and poor people of Pakistan do not have access to the language. 5. Was Osama Bin Laden actually in Pakistan? This is tantamount to a Pakistani asking Americans if they actually planned 9/11 with al Qaeda or were they in Bill Clinton’s bedroom with him and Monica Lewisky before they admitted to the relationship? Our knowledge of OBL’s presence in Pakistan is as good as yours – through the mainstream media. Off the record, Pakistan’s establishment would have known of his presence and kept it a secret just as America had the right to throw the most wanted terrorist’s body into the sea without sharing a single proof of this whole exercise. 6. Are women allowed to go out? Although there is a distinct difference between the lives of urban and rural women in general, not all women in Pakistan are suppressed. In fact, many women are not just allowed to go out but also drive, work, and have equal rights as men. Did you know that Pakistan has female fighter pilots? [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="533"] PHOTO: Reuters[/caption] Ayesha Farooq is one of the few brave women who are serving the nation as part of Pakistan’s Air Force. Women in Pakistan tend to the sick as doctors, fight for the right to education, win Nobel laureates like Malala Yousafzai, surmount the highest peaks of the world like Samina Baig, play their part in the civil society at the cost of their life like Sabeen Mahmud, uphold democracy like Benazir Bhutto, and are cultural ambassadors, artists and musicians like Noor Jehan, Iqbal Bano and Nayyara Noor. All this and they are the best mothers, daughters and sisters in the world. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="533"] Samina Baig and her brother Mirza Ali made history by climbing the world’s highest mountain Mount Everest without using supplemental oxygen. PHOTO: EXPRESS[/caption] In conclusion, I would encourage the international community to not look towards bigoted news agencies such as FOX News to gather information regarding Pakistan. In fact, you should get to know Pakistan without the shackles of mainstream stereotypes. Pakistan and Pakistanis have a lot more to offer than what is portrayed about them.

The statistics available on domestic violence and other forms of violence against women are startling. According to a NIPS survey, 37 per cent of those surveyed experienced violence – 57 per cent in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P). More than half of the women who have ever experienced physical violence have never sought help or told anyone about the violence. Forty three per cent of women stated that a husband is justified in beating his wife if she argues with him, neglects the children, refuses to have sex with him, goes out without telling him, neglects the in-laws, or burns the food. The stories highlighted by the media are enough to cause a nationwide outrage and protest– but they don’t. How deeply is women’s lower status internalised? How deep is our acceptance of violence towards women, girls and the weak? The terrible tales show up with regularity – a father beating his daughter to death outside the Lahore courthouse, a girl beaten to death and tossed aside for not making a round roti (bread), women assaulted for exercising in parks in Sahiwal, a police constable indecently assaulting a street child and threatening her brother, a father killing his daughter for honour. Lack of implementation While domestic and sexual violence against women and girls is not new to Pakistan, the state’s role in condoning it is.  Punjab and K-P have resisted enacting statues criminalising domestic violence, despite Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf’s (PTI) tall claims for positive change. Enacting laws are the first step towards recognising domestic violence.  Even though most forms of domestic violence would come within the ambit of existing offences, such as rape, manslaughter and murder. Specifically labelling these crimes as crimes of domestic violence through special enactments reflects parliament’s commitment to prosecute the offenders. Of course laws are not enough.  Any lay person can tell you that, we have the laws, but there is no implementation.  From living rooms to NGO offices, and corporate board rooms, you will hear this chant.  This incapacity to implement is rooted in the absence of effective mechanisms that would allow successful prosecution. These include free legal aid and support services including shelter for the victims. However, it’s never as simple as having a lawyer and a safe haven from abuse, as other states’ inadequacies kick in. Going to trial requires the litigant to aspire justice at a fundamental level to withstand docket delays, long waits, and unsatisfactory verdicts with patience. I once met an older couple at the Sindh High Court who had lost their daughter at the hands of her murderous in-laws, and had made it their life’s mission to come for every court hearing, despite the passage of years and without respite. Court should not be pilgrimage and symbolic homage for the victims. But there’s more. Having a committed lawyer who gets you a hearing is simply a pre-requisite to court justice. What’s harder is accessing support that would prevent your entire world from collapsing.  Adequate shelter is not readily available despite public or private efforts to improve this service.  If the abuser is a bread winner, then the victim jeopardises her economic wellbeing. The child beggar on Karachi’s street is even further removed from accessing justice and would perhaps depend on the benevolence of an individual or an NGO to manage and champion her case with all its social and economic outcomes. An NGO may only champion her cause if the media carried her story and humanised her. They would continue to champion her case if the media advocacy was fuelled up in parallel to keep the justice system in check, and maintain an interested audience. But that still does not account for the numerous cases that go unchecked and unreported. A girl in a rural village would be even more removed from justice where jirgas and parallel justice systems may or may not function with police complicity. Justice should not depend on heroes. Without vibrant state mechanisms, these are the stolen lives, robbed by an ineffectual state. Society’s attitude towards women But where does this entire concept come from? Why is it so easy for a father to thrash 12-year-old Aniqa to death? How is it that a father in Germany can murder his own daughter? What is hidden within our psyche that allows us to tolerate such violence against women and girls? Is it based in female’s lack of power in the society and the compulsory gender norms inflicted upon them of honour and service? It’s easy to, with impunity, batter a person who does not wield social and economic power. When a few women do show social power as in the case of Malala Yousafzai, people gleefully dismiss her as an agent of the West.  This is despite the fact that Malala has spoken up for Palestine and against drones, and continues to show agency and defiance in the face of cruel dismissals. Asma Jahangir’s name will elicit disapproving looks from elders, generals, and clerics. Mukhtaran Mai will get accused of procuring visas by talk show hosts. When rape is seen as a ploy for attention, rather than a crime; when strong women are scoffed at as too aggressive and given a condemning “F” on gender expectations; when women are dismissed for talking too much or nagging their husbands – we know misogyny is alive and well. As the Margaret Attwood quote goes,

“Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.”

Dear Fareed Zakaria, You are certainly a titan of journalism. Your CNN show, Fareed Zakaria GPS, is watched by countless worldwide, while your footprint can be found in publications such as Foreign Affairs, Newsweek, Slate, The New York Times, and the Wall Street Journal, to name a few. The career trajectory you’ve taken is nothing short of incredible. After leaving your home in Bombay where you were born to Rafiq Zakaria, an Islamic scholar and a politician associated with the Indian National Congress, and journalist Fatima Zakaria, a former editor at Mumbai Times and the Times of India, you eventually made your way to the US, where you graduated from Yale University, and later Harvard University. From here, you never looked back, striking one milestone after another. Considering your reputation, I was disappointed by your 800-odd word opinion piece on The Washington Post. In ‘The key to solving the puzzle of Afghanistan is Pakistan’ you laid the entire blame of the failure of the 14-year American military campaign in Afghanistan, on Pakistan’s double dealing with the Taliban. Your faulty cause and effect analysis was not only overly simplistic but granted far too much credit to Pakistan for Afghanistan’s problems. Yes, Pakistan carries a long list of issues, but to paint the nation as an all-powerful bogeyman dilutes the gravity of Afghanistan’s home-grown issues. Now, before I continue, I’d like to clarify, I am not another Pakistani nationalist peeved by a journalist who still maintains strong ties with India. If anything, I find patriotism to be an entirely stupid emotion. My recent blog, which was eventually taken down, questioning Pakistan’s blind love for a national hero during a war, where they were the aggressors, was received more negatively than a teetotaling dwarf would be at a Dwarven pub in Middle Earth. Yet even I was put off by your article. Let’s start with when you say:

“Why, after 14 years of American military efforts, is Afghanistan still so fragile? The country has a democratically elected government widely viewed as legitimate. Poll after poll suggests that the Taliban are unpopular. The Afghan army fights fiercely and loyally. And yet, the Taliban always come back.”

“Nearly three years after US-led forces launched the biggest operation of the war to clear insurgents, foster economic growth and set a model for the rest of Afghanistan, angry residents of Helmand province say they are too afraid to go out after dark because of marauding bands of thieves. And during the day, they say corrupt police and government officials bully them into paying bribes. After 11 years of war, many here long for a return of the Taliban. They say that under the Taliban, who routinely punished thieves by cutting off a hand, they were at least safe from crime and corruption. ‘If you had a box of cash on your head, you could go to the farthest part of Marjah and no one would take it from you, even at night’, said Maulvi Daoud, who runs a cubbyhole sized-shop in the town of Marjah. ‘Today you bring your motorcycle in front of your shop and it will be gone. Now the situation is that you go on the road and they are standing in police and army uniform with weapons and they can take your money’. Many claim the US-funded local police, a type of locally sanctioned militia, routinely demand bribes and threaten to accuse those who do not comply of being members of the Taliban. Good governance never came to Marjah, they say. Daoud, the Marjah shop owner, said there was more security under the country’s Taliban regime that was ousted by the US-led invasion in late 2001.”

“Sardar, a 23-year-old working in his brother’s barber shop in the northern Afghan province of Kunduz, said local officials had asked for bribes to resolve a long-running family dispute over land. When the backhanders failed to have their desired effect, he turned to the Taliban, the austere Islamist movement that has been fighting foreign forces since it was ousted from power 13 years ago. ‘They came to our home in Chahar Darah and took two days to solve the problem’, he said.”

“The Taliban has since charged that Afghan intelligence purposely gave the US the hospital’s coordinates. Even the possibility that such an accusation is true -- and the duration of the sustained attack suggests that something unusual happened -- points toward the reason that Afghanistan is headed back toward Taliban control: The government is thoroughly corrupt, and the US has been unwilling to take measures to address the situation. While a handful of civilian and military leaders identified corruption as an existential threat to the country, the problem remains unsolved.”

“Over the past few years, faith in the government and the warlords who were allied with the government, never strong, has rapidly diminished. Militias and Afghan Local Police forces installed by the American Special Forces were largely unaccountable. They extorted protection money from farmers, and committed rapes and robberies. But because they had guns and the backing of local strongmen close to the government, people’s complaints were ignored.”

“The reason we were here is because we heard the terrible things the Taliban were doing to people, how they were taking away human rights,” said Dan Quinn, a former Special Forces captain who beat up an American-backed militia commander for keeping a boy chained to his bed as a sex slave. “But we were putting people into power who would do things that were worse than the Taliban did — that was something village elders voiced to me.”

“Like it or not, there was better rule of law under the Taliban,” said Dee Brillenburg Wurth, a child-protection expert at the UN mission in Afghanistan, who has sought to persuade the government to address the problem. “They saw it as a sin, and they stopped a lot of it.”

“The answer to this puzzle can be found in a profile of the Taliban’s new leader, Akhtar Mohammad Mansour. It turns out that Mansour lives part time in Quetta, The New York Times reports, ‘in an enclave where he and some other Taliban leaders… have built homes’. His predecessor, Mohammad Omar, we now know, died a while ago in Karachi. And of course, we remember that Osama bin Laden lived for many years in a compound in Abbottabad. All three of these cities are in Pakistan. We cannot solve the problem of Afghanistan without recognising that the insurgency against that government is shaped, aided and armed from across the border by one of the world’s most powerful armies. Periodically, someone inside or outside the US government points this out. Yet no one knows quite what to do, so it is swept under the carpet and policy stays the same. But this is not an incidental fact. It is fundamental, and unless it is confronted, the Taliban will never be defeated. It is an old adage that no counterinsurgency has ever succeeded when the rebels have had a haven. In this case, the rebels have a nuclear-armed sponsor.”

“The Pakistani army has been described as the ‘godfather’ of the Taliban. That might understate its influence. Pakistan was the base for the US-supported mujahideen as they battled the Soviet Union in the 1980s. After the Soviets retreated from Afghanistan in 1989, the US withdrew almost as quickly, and Pakistan entered that strategic void.”

“Pakistan is a time bomb. It ranks 43^rd in the world in terms of its economy, according to the World Bank, but has the sixth largest armed forces. It has the fastest-growing nuclear arsenal, and the most opaque. It maintains close ties with some of the world’s most brutal terrorists. By some estimates, its military consumes 26 per cent of all tax receipts, while the country has 5.5 million children who don’t attend school. As long as this military and its mind-set are unchecked and unreformed, the US will face a strategic collapse as it withdraws its forces from the region.”

Sometimes it is easy to forget the bond between Pakistan and India. Growing up in the Middle East, I had a number of Indian friends, and there was never an ounce of animosity between us, except of course, during a Pakistan-India cricket match. During one of these events, the passive aggressive jokes were as bare knuckled as they could get. We took great pleasure in beating the Indian cricket team during matches at Sharjah, while they enjoyed returning the favour at World Cup events. But even during these hot moments, empathy somehow found its way. After Pakistan was decisively beaten by India at the World Cup quarterfinal at Bangalore, where Aamir Sohail lost to his arrogance after dominating the run chase in a batting extravagance, I, like so many of my Pakistani classmates in Saudi Arabia, was deeply disappointed. That evening, I barely touched my dinner and even skipped breakfast the next morning before school, where the atmosphere amongst Pakistani students was gloomy to say the least. Later that night, as with every other night, I was dropped off by my father at my math tutor’s home. This tutor taught at a local Indian high school by day, and gave private lessons to mostly Indian students by night. When I walked in, I expected to see gloating faces; after all, the match had been talked up for days. Instead, the Indian students were very sporting, while the tutor himself tried to cheer me up by blaming Venkatesh Prasad for rattling Aamir Sohail’s cage. I found the relationship to be similarly healthy while studying in Canada. Indians and Pakistanis shared a special affinity; they hung out together, dated each other, and were more like separated relatives than bickering siblings. The most recent story I have to share is of a vacation in Nepal. The sun had set after we had walked a good 40 minutes from our lodge to an elephant training ground. Although Chitwan is a safe city, walking back with family in utter darkness did not seem like a bright idea. Unfortunately, there wasn’t a vehicle in sight. Here, an extended Indian family had no hesitation in inviting a few Pakistanis to hitch a ride with them on the back of their jeep. At the risk of revving up the cheese, there was little room on the jeep but plenty of room in their hearts. Our trip to the country was made more memorable after we befriended an Indian trekker visiting the country from Singapore. We all gelled over the mutual distaste for our governments and the Bollywood film industry in general. With such camaraderie on neutral ground, the friction between India and Pakistan contrasts sharply at home. There are, real issues, of course. Kashmir is one of the most glaring ones. Other religious issues are so vast; one can see why partition was necessary, especially in the light of recent events. The fundamental difference is that the Muslim majority in Pakistan likes consuming beef, especially during Eid. Meanwhile, the Hindu majority in India considers the cow a scared animal. One side believes it is commanded to protect the source of beef, while the other believes it must be consumed. It is impossible to satisfy one belief without insulting the other and is the sort of comedic difference you’d find between two roommates in a sitcom. No, the writers of Perfect Strangers couldn’t have written it any better. As the people of both nations take their beliefs less seriously with each passing generation, you can expect the frostiness to thaw out over time. Until then, there are roguish elements on either side of the border ready to fan the flames. In India, of course, there is Shiv Sena, which is considered a bit of a national embarrassment. The political party, with all the petulance of a spoiled toddler, has had a disruptive presence. They’ve dug up their own cricket pitches, damaging their own World Cup trophy, and attacking their own film stars. Recently, they’ve turned their sights towards Pakistanis in India. The victims have been film stars, theatre actors, plays, cricket board officials, and our favourite umpire, Aleem Dar. I suppose this is why Shiv Sena’s open invitation to Nobel Prize winner, Malala Yousafzai, was all the more unusual. In their view, Malala is the only Pakistani worthy of setting foot on Indian soil. Malala spoke for education, survived a headshot from the Taliban, delivered a rousing speech at the United Nations, raised a small fortune for charity through the Malala Fund, won the Nobel Peace Prize, was interviewed on dozens of shows across America, and did a magic trick which confounded American humourist Stephen Colbert. It is a tall ask to expect Pakistanis to emulate her feats just so that they can see the Taj Mahal. So, what gives? Is Shiv Sena really a fan of the bravest girl in the world, or are they playing more mind games? As Pakistani entertainer Junaid Akram puts it, Malala’s mixed reception in Pakistan isn’t a secret. While most are proud of her, a very vocal minority attacks her on social media at every opportunity. It isn’t difficult to spot the commonalities between her detractors. For one, the complaints against her are written in barely decipherable English. Ironically enough, the haters of a girl who is taking a stand for education could do with completing school themselves. There is no doubt in my mind that whenever one of these trolls rambles on Facebook or Twitter about Malala, an English teacher somewhere cries softly in a corner. Then, there are the conspiracy theories. While these very Pakistanis would not hesitate to target anyone who questions Pakistan’s Army, they, without realising it, are accusing the nation’s military of singlehandedly leading the country’s biggest conspiracy when they claim Malala’s shooting was orchestrated, considering how the army had a major role in shuttling the injured little girl out of the country, and senior ranking soldiers themselves came on international media to narrate the miraculous story of Malala’s survival. If these jingoistic Pakistanis had enough brain cells to comprehend the full meaning of their claims, I am guessing they would react like the robot from Lost in Space and dance around with their arms flailing, chanting the words, “Does not compute… does not compute… does not compute…” Their final argument, of course, is to say that no one can survive a gunshot to the head. Funnily enough, this is the only miracle they don’t believe in. They will ignore the fundamental laws of physics to defend a fraud who claims his car can run on water, but won’t accept Malala’s story. Is it so extraordinary for a person to survive a gunshot to the head? This report examines 66 patients who were shot in the head. Of those, 34 per cent, yes three out of 10 patients survived. More comprehensive studies though, suggest the survival rate is closer to 10 per cent. While it is far from common, it is certainly more likely, than say, a car that uses water as fuel. Those still not convinced, can read about other survivors by clicking here, here, or here. A simple Google search shall only reveal more stories to you. Of course, some right-wing Pakistanis will never be persuaded, and it is these nationalists Shiv Sena targets when it sings praises of Malala. As soon as the news broke, Malala’s haters across social media ranted about the Nobel Prize winner being an agent of Shiv Sena. It must be said, Malala is perhaps the world’s best agent. According to some Pakistanis, she has worked with the American CIA, the Israeli Mossad, India’s RAW, Pakistan’s Taliban, and a few other groups we aren’t aware of. These very Pakistanis will say that the only institution fighting for Pakistan’s integrity is its army, and is completely trustworthy, except of course, when it tells you Malala was actually shot in the head by the Taliban. Shiv Sena, surely aware of how this girl is received in her home country, has sided with her in an effort to rile up some Pakistanis. This would be like the Indian drama where the handsome villain, intent on breaking up an edgy marriage, fakes friendship with the wife to provoke the idiotic husband. The husband, idiotic as he is, doesn’t realise the wife isn’t responding in kind, and proceeds to damage their relationship further. Maybe we should stop being idiots, or perhaps some of us don’t deserve Malala. Thankfully, social media users on both sides of the border have taken a stand against this ridiculousness the best way they know how: by posting a selfie with messages of peace. The initiative was started by activist Ram Subramanian. His hashtag has now taken Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram by storm. https://twitter.com/vikaskyogi/status/657590397544214528 https://twitter.com/arshi_yasin/status/657511228923777024 https://twitter.com/Ali_Faraz87/status/657482842222407680 https://twitter.com/june_aid/status/657603115185754112 https://twitter.com/zahaibnabeel/status/658171719656558592 https://twitter.com/Shahbaz_sMs1/status/657515588496039936 The popularity of #ProfileForPeace is further proof of the tie between Pakistanis and Indians. It is a connection that refuses to be broken, even during cricket matches, even when Shiv Sena acts up, even when Indian viewers have to endure Humsafar, and even when terrible Bollywood movies flood Pakistani cinemas.

Ismat Chughtai is universally regarded as one of the four pillars of Urdu fiction in our time, apart from her contemporaries Saadat Hasan Manto, Krishan Chander and Rajinder Singh Bedi. This year is being celebrated as her birth centenary year. While in India, she and her legacy is being feted and commemorated.   In Pakistan, this unrelenting and daring champion of women’s rights and feminism, who anticipated by a few decades the heaven-stormers of the 60s powered and pioneered in the West by Simone de Beauvoir, has been consciously ignored. Perhaps firstly, owing to the controversy she created with one of her earliest short-stories Lihaaf (The Quilt) which was banned in 1942 for its erotic and lesbian undertones, and overshadowed almost the whole of Chughtai’s subsequent work, much to her chagrin. Chughtai subsequently won the case and went on to write many masterpieces in short fiction as well as in the longer form, of which the most notable is Terhi Lakeer (The Crooked Line). It stands out among her six novels with its Joycean, largely autobiographical heroine ‘Shamman’ (Shamshad) who matures from a precocious, rebellious independent-minded girl to a politically-conscious feminist activist involved in the Indian independence struggle. For a writer routinely nicknamed as the ‘female Manto’ (owing to her rebellious and daring persona) by some and ‘Lady Changez Khan’ (she traced her descent from the family of Tamerlane) by others, her life and legacy are surprisingly ignored and marginalised by scores of middle-class girls here in Pakistan, who are glued to pop-schlock television serials and Bollywood films advocating female submission and stereotyping. Not for nothing then are the achievements of courageous icons like the 2014 Nobel Peace laureate Malala Yousafzai scorned and belittled by a section of our own ‘liberal’ elite. The second reason why Chughtai could never become a household name in Pakistan may have to do with the controversy regarding Chughtai’s burial rites; she was cremated rather than buried as per the orthodox Muslim tradition. Critics have unfairly stereotyped Chughtai as a spokesperson for the respectable women of the Indian Muslim middle-class owing to her unmatched knowledge of the inner lives of the middle-class Muslim zenana. Some even refuse to regard her as a great fiction writer. On the occasion of her birth centenary and more recently, her 24^th death anniversary on October 24^th, I have translated one of Chughtai’s lesser-known essays ‘Woman’, (also titled as ‘Half Woman, Half Dream’) which provocatively lays bare the hypocrisy of the male champions of women’s rights and the myths they have constructed about women, and then proceeds to invent nothing less than a new language for the women of our own time. I hope it will aid a much-needed understanding of Chughtai and her work, away from vilification and hagiography, especially for the new generation of readers in our own still-young century.

Woman….woman….woman… Bad, good, disloyal, loyal, this-that and God knows what else. In every country and era, great thinkers have always established some opinion about woman. Someone is emphasising on her beauty; another insists on her purity and decency. One person thinks that “Woman’s status is second only to God”; another is hell-bent on making her the devil’s “maternal aunt”. One person pontificates, “A deceitful woman is more dangerous than a deceitful man”. As if someone says that a dark woman is darker than a dark man. What a wonderful thing to say, one feels like dancing with joy; and had I not been a woman myself and these aphorisms (not) taken me aback, I would have kissed those uttering them. The problem is that these foolish aphorisms have made one totally lost. And the interesting thing is that the extent to which men have claimed to understand women, the latter have never made any statement about the former to that extent by using their brains. Men said, “Man is cruel.” The women quietly began to suffer the cruelty. Men said, “Woman is a coward.” The women began to shrink even from a (female) mouse. It was pronounced, “When the time comes, women put their lives at stake.” And pop! The latter put their lives on stake. The whole world acknowledges motherly love. No one cries for fatherly love. Woman’s honour can be defiled, but not the man’s; maybe man doesn’t possess honour which can be ravished. Woman gives birth to a bastard or legitimate child, but not the man. For centuries, thinkers have been trying to bamboozle women by ascribing such absurd accusations to them; they either praise them to high heaven or throw them in the mud. But they are at pains to put them on the same pedestal with themselves. They will make a woman a goddess or heavenly creature, but will be ashamed to call them a friend or comrade. I don’t understand whether this is an inferiority complex or a misunderstanding. After all, why do they fear equality of women? She is also a human being. Why do men become nervous having women on an equal footing with the former? Can’t a man forget for a moment that equality doesn’t necessarily mean inferiority? Everyone knows that a woman can only become a mother, daughter, wife and sister; but not a father, son, husband and brother. Then why say repeatedly that she was born for the former purpose? Doesn’t a woman even know that she is a woman, which is being repeatedly told to her? Or do the men know that being a mother and wife is to chew on iron gram; that is why the latter are hammered into a woman’s brain as if she is born for this use. She should be proud of this interesting status. Is there anyone who can make these men understand as to which accursed woman ever denied this? Who is inviting the former to come bear children and breastfeed them? Then why such a need to repeatedly make a show of it? When a woman becomes a widow, her bangles are broken. No one thinks about breaking a man’s watch, spectacles or hookah. A widow is also forced to change her dress. People’s hearts would burst were she to wear a coloured dupatta or bangles in her hands; it’s only the men who go about in their achkan, angarkha, all suited-booted.  Such a pitilessness that he doesn’t even pretend to be mourning, although the way women feel for a dead husband, a man feels for his dead wife. Many women and men do not feel it. But the women have to put on a false show. A person pronounces, “The glory of the woman lies in that the world should be unacquainted with her. The husband’s love is her abundant treasure and small household (is) her world.” Why sir, if a woman achieves fame, she is not wresting it away from your own share in it. It is Allah’s gift. Why do you feel hurt by it? What cheapness! Woman or man, if he or she does something worthwhile in the world, how would it blemish anyone’s glory? If a man’s honour is not reduced by his fame, why would a woman’s fame affect her greatness? If the wife is crass illiterate, it makes no difference. If the husband is less educated than the wife, there will be darkness; since some great thinker’s aphorism will be dishonoured. When Dr Naidu was referred to as ‘Mrs Sarojini Naidu’s husband’, he used to act all embarrassed.  Millions of women throughout the world happily live as wife of their husband, not suffering from an inferiority complex. The moment a man is born, his superiority is blown into his ear; and his innocence is such that he actually believes that he is higher than the world’s most brilliant woman. Just for the reason that he is a man. Then when he finds a woman more educated and wise than himself, he hates her, because at that time he cannot deceive himself. Can my cook be superior to Madame Curie just because he is from the male race, which is generally regarded as being above women? But if you don’t believe, ask your cook or washer man. He will say, that a woman can never be equal to a man! Another person pronounces, “If a woman’s heart is pierced, it will contain nothing but perseverance, patience, hidden sacrifices and unseen qualities.” Well this is the limit. I asked a male doctor, he said, “This is all nonsense. The structure of the male and female heart is exactly the same and nothing frivolous comes out of it.” Furthermore, listen to this; the same doctor says, “A woman is not more large-hearted than a man. It depends upon temperament. Education and training affects men and women equally. ” Another person commands, “When a child is breast-fed for the first time, the mother goes red with happiness, and starts trembling.” Women must have anticipated that the commanding personage is a man, and whatever he has written is based on hearsay. He has undoubtedly never fed a child himself and does not know how painful it is when a child is breast-fed for the first time. The mother who goes red and trembles definitely does not do so in love and mirth; her colour must have changed owing to anguish. I am saying this because men coin these so-called proverbs for no reason. They don’t even think that according to them, even women are now not mere women anymore. They have started to obtain a lot of information. They will not be lured by these well-worn sentences. Please address them with plain judiciousness. It is better not to claim to understand women more than the women themselves. Your secret will be out for free. Wherever did you get the leisure to waste your time getting involved in arguments about superiority and inferiority? Discrimination based on gender, colour and race is disappearing at a rapid speed. The world is progressing in the fields of industry and the arts with great speed. Now there is increasing demand for workers; women have to share the work in every sector. The Western woman is forced to earn a living despite domestic machines of a thousand kinds. That is why men have to share equally in helping with domestic work and rearing children. If the wife washes the dishes, the husband does the brooming. The wife sets the beds; the husband feeds the child by preparing his milk bottle. Both prepare the breakfast and meal together, ready the children, and then go to work. The woman who doesn’t go to work doesn’t sit idle, gossiping; she does the washing, ironing and brings the domestic provisions. Much of the time is saved, that is why she also works part-time; but despite this, manages to make do with difficulty. But our men here are leading on the flock of women using the staff of long-winded, unwieldy aphorisms. However straitened the circumstances, the wife will stay at home adding to its embellishment. The husband will grow rickety but at least his honour will be saved. The woman will remain at home with her basket of femininity intact. However embarrassed their children might be due to non-payment of fees, and the moneylender make life difficult for the husband with his incessant demands, but because some old man had died saying, “A woman’s world is her home”. So the women will remain confined to the house on the lines of their ancestors. The most golden aphorisms have been ordered about the decency and purity of women. It is ordered that, “Nature has made woman such that she loves, and dies for, one person alone.” And men? Man’s nature has variety. He turns towards a new woman every instant. Why sirs! Who has given you this news? The woman’s nature has also been adapted to your requirement, so that you can proceed with your whoring with abandon, blaming “nature”; and use it to chain the wife’s feet lest – by going against nature – she seek out the neighbour, and lose her feminine delicacy in the process. Over and above this, the men have even shoved in nature into this conspiracy; although this tactic has never been successful. Whenever women sought to attract men, the men never even knew. They believed that women are virtuous and decent, this is their nature. Then why to fear? But someone please ask them, who has told you that women only love once? This is all artificial talk. The times are changing, and cannot be stopped by these aphorisms. The values of life will change good or bad directions, however much we mourn, rack our brains. The circumstances will not let women remain at their homes in peace. We should think what sort of training we should impart to our sister, daughter, mother and wife when we are forced to send them to work alongside the men.  Whether we should advise them according to the ancient aphorisms to maintain their shame and modesty and to drown themselves within the feelings of femininity at all times; or that when you go to work, do not take your femininity and airs with you. Do your work there on the basis of your labour, not on the basis of your femininity. It is better that your colleagues do not feel that you are a woman; rather they should mind their own business by treating you as a fellow worker. After all, they are men, you are a woman. Do not knowingly make a show of this to him, so that both of you can keep your mental peace, and instead of being attracted to each other, you are inclined towards work. In Western countries, women work alongside the men, but blow the trumpet of their femininity rather more than is required. They will use make-up every hour, do their hair and will use every air and grace to get a date (or invitation) which has reached them via newspapers and magazines. Thousands of products and perfumes are advertised in their magazines merely to lure men as bait. It has also been ingrained in the heart of their woman that their life has only one purpose, which is to be loved by someone, who marries them and bestows upon them the gift of progeny. But how many girls are there who can fulfil these life dreams by using the prescriptions given in magazines. The majority consists of those who lure men and then become the latter’s victims; and spend their entire lives waiting for the prince of the fairies. A country where women are so unfortunate and their thoughts so distracted, no wonder their boys become teddies and the girls forceful regarding their femininity. I saw women working is every field in (Soviet) Russia. No one had any make-up on their faces, neither the hair had been done. Most of them were uniformed like the men so that it was difficult to identify them. They seemed absolutely like men. I thought ill of this murder of femininity. I inquired and my (Soviet) comrade told me that, “We don’t want anyone displaying their femininity or masculinity during work.” “Why? In that case won’t they become machines?” “That’s even better… so you think machines are something insignificant? The hand-made machine is only a little less sacred than the idol carved from stone. If stones listen to us, these machines too are our overlords; more beloved to us than cows and oxen, because we ourselves have made them with great love. Now if we become like them and work with as much nobility and honesty, the purpose of our life will be fulfilled. There are neither women nor men among these machines; similarly their operators too do not have a gender. Everyone is a worker and machine.” But at the night’s banquet, I saw these machines had come alive, and the rights of life and humanity were being duly accorded in full. In the factory, there was a machine to melt iron here, one for shaping it there; here was Masha, there Natasha. On one side were machines for shaping the (machines) parts and on the other were Yuri and Vera. But in the Bolshoi Theatre Yuri’s arm was around Nadya’s waist and Natasha was busy driving the arrows of her intoxicating eyes in Romanov’s heart. If a woman shows her womanhood at the right opportunity, it befits her. But what is this that she goes on gathering the basket of femininity in colleges, offices and departments. When we know that women will indeed have to work with men tomorrow, if not today, we will have to construct new aphorisms, forgetting the present ones: 1. In college or school, you are neither mother nor daughter; nor beloved, just a student; and the others are professors and students. 2. In offices, you are neither loyal nor disloyal in love; just do your work properly and forget your airs. 3. The people who are around you are all human; neither men nor women, they are either officers or clerks; here is a table, chair and peon. You are neither weak nor strong, neither the delicate sex nor the harsher sex. Your work is for what you get paid until you change your profession. You have been created by nature for this same use; you are here not for luring a husband or wife but only for work. Neither take advantage, nor damage anyone with (your) physical or mental strength or weakness. 4. Your destination is not just marriage; because marriage is not reaching your destination, rather negotiating it is actually the long road. But Gurudev (Rabindranath Tagore) used to say, “O woman you are half woman, half dream!” Had someone asked for his wife’s opinion, she might have said that Gurudev himself was a total dream as well as the most beautiful interpretation of a dream too! But “women are not messengers”…..”women are not prophets”….”women are not spiritual”. Then why doesn’t anyone stand up and say that “Women are not women!”

Malala Yousafzai’s He Named Me Malala, a film based on Malala’s life and her struggle for girls’ education, has been released all over the world. Emma Watson, actress and United Nations’ Goodwill Ambassador, who also spearheads United Nations #HeForShe movement that involves men and boys to work towards gender equality, met Malala and these two extraordinary women sat down and spoke for a few minutes. Their discussion encapsulates how the discourse on gender equality should move forward. Malala and Emma speak at length about the problems with the word ‘feminist’ and how this word sometimes has negative connotations. Malala speaks about her father who has been her biggest supporter in her long and difficult journey. What is extraordinary about Malala’s film is that it depicts her as an ordinary girl. Malala stresses,

“I’m still a 17-year-old girl.”

A flurry of recent incidents involving Islamic extremists – the latest being the shooting in California involving a couple of Pakistani descent – has put Muslims under the critical spotlight in much of the developed world. Such incidents, due to their visibility and shock value, often end up getting a tremendous amount of negative media attention. This has resulted in xenophobic reactions from some political and media quarters. Many do not understand that Islam is not a monolithic faith and not every Muslim is identical. To view the entire Muslim world through the prism of extremist organisations like Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which is a fringe organisation, is unfair and even logically flawed. However, unfortunately, such a tendency prevails in the West and has resulted in negative stereotyping and over generalisation. Let me admit upfront that this is wrong and condemnable and entails real negative consequences. In recent times, there have been incidents involving harassment and discriminatory behaviour towards Muslims ranging from a kid being arrested for a making a clock to shooting of three Muslims at Chapel Hill. Outcry from the Muslims over such incidents has obviously always been really enormous. In fact, when the 14-year-old Ahmed Mohamed was arrested for making a clock (mistaken for a bomb), outcry from the Muslim community was really huge. I lost counts of Facebook statuses of my friends, criticising the so-called US discrimination against Muslims. Our electronic media also lapped up the story further enhancing our collective sense of victimhood. Yes, what happened to Ahmed was wrong, but what happened to him in the aftermath of his arrest is worth noting. He was invited to White House, offered admission by Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and there was also an expression of apology from many in the US. If his arrest showed xenophobia (which no doubt exists to some measure), the aftermaths also revealed the other side of the US. However, many of us who had been fuming over his arrest simply overlooked the subsequent developments. While we certainly reserve the right to protest over the discriminatory treatment meted out to some Muslims, what concerns me is our own constant denial and utter lack of condemnation of Muslim extremism. Whenever an incident involving Muslims as perpetuators happens, all of us are either stunned into silence or start trying to deflect or even worse, trivialise. After the Paris attacks, instead of condemnation, our major focus was on proving the so-called hypocrisy of the West due to their “selective outrage”. The fact that western media would obviously be covering their own tragedy was lost on us. We also overlooked the fact that France was a western country attacked by Muslim extremists and hence it was natural that this fact would be reflected in the media coverage. Thus, even a clear aggression against the French, instead of drawing condemnation, actually prompted us to lodge complains and reemphasise our collective sense of victimhood. This in fact has become an established pattern that we complain when even something minor happens targeting Muslims and yet try to deflect and trivialise when our own indulge in hideous acts. And unfortunately, it is apparently the so-called moderate Muslims who display such behaviour. I still remember the way Pakistanis displayed immense hatred towards Malala Yousafzai rather than towards those who shot her. This kind of denial and trivialisation is deeply problematic as it hinders self-introspection and worse ends up giving “soft” support to the extremists. The problem of extremism can only be countered if the opposition comes from within, but our present collective behaviour is, unfortunately, completely counterproductive. In fact, our collective behaviour also ends up lending support to those who are xenophobic in the West as they are able to claim that the problem of religious extremism is not restricted to a minority of Muslims, but in varying extent and form, affects a substantial majority. It allows them to say, and with some credibility, majority of Muslims due to their lopsided reactions and constant denial, are actually complicit. The latest incident in California involves a couple of Pakistani descent and the emerging details unfortunately reveal at least some role of Islamic radicalisation. At this point, we as Pakistanis should wholeheartedly condemn their act. Condemning does not mean that we have to apologise, it merely means that we are outraged and do not endorse such behaviour. A few days ago, when there was a story that a Pakistani taxi driver was shot, the entire country was outraged and called it a shameless hate crime. Our newspapers and electronic media gave it extensive coverage. And yet, I witness a strange silence and lack of condemnation when we find that a Pakistani is involved in similar kind of hate crime. We are ready to feel angry and in fact display that anger when a Pakistani is attacked and yet when a Pakistani is involved in extremist behaviour, we feel that it is unfair for the West to expect us to even condemn it. We need to condemn it wholeheartedly and without any ifs and buts. Silence in these highly volatile times will be construed as complicity. We also need to condemn it because the latest incident has put Pakistani Americans and for that matter American Muslims in precarious situation and they feel extremely vulnerable. Politicians like Donald Trump are going to lap up this opportunity to whip up further hate against Muslims and Pakistanis, and our lack of condemnation will only give them further ammunition.

Mohammad Faisal Baloch said to reporters that according to the doctors, had his daughter Bisma received medical attention only 10 minutes earlier, her life could have been saved. Instead, she died because of the delay caused by the security measures taken to protect the visiting Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) chairman, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, at Karachi’s Civil Hospital. The tragedy has resulted in plenty of backlashes towards Bilawal and VIP culture in general. But curiously enough, there has been some backlash towards the backlash… a backlash’ception if you will. This has come not only courtesy of Bilawal’s own camp, but from PPP sympathisers and neutral members of the public as well. I think it would be sensible to address some of these comments, but before we get started, let’s acknowledge that both Bilawal and his father, former president of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari, have not only been empathetic, but have had the good grace to avoid insensitive excuses. https://twitter.com/BBhuttoZardari/status/679638559779893248 Sadly, the same can’t be said for others.

1. “Nothing is more precious than party chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari”

2. “While we are all talking about Bisma, other children across Pakistan dying in tragedies have not been making the news”

3. “Mohammad Faisal Baloch may have been delayed at the hospital, but he is to blame for arriving so late”

4. “Why didn’t Mohammad Faisal Baloch go to another gate?”

“Dr Qureshi clarified that the security officers deployed at the gates were not theirs. The hospital management does not close doors on patients at any time, he said.”  5. “Bilawal’s visit did not cause any traffic jams… his visit merely lasted 20 minutes,” Bilawal House,

6. “VIP movements are necessary and everyone uses them.”

While the US presidential nomination circus is going on in full swing, people back in Pakistan ought to wonder who the best man or woman would be for Pakistan. Let us be very honest, Pakistan does not figure very prominently on the radar of most of these presidential candidates. However, the fate of these presidential elections is very important to Pakistan. The amount of aid we receive to the approval of our ever growing nuclear program and the continuous supply of and upgrades to our military hardware depends very much on the man or woman at the oval office. On the Republican side, there are a total of 12 candidates, half of whom know nothing about Pakistan. The Democratic side is paltry, made up of only three candidates. While discourse in Pakistan is saturated with Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, many of us have not really considered the efficacy of other candidates. I’m here to rectify that. Let’s explore which candidates would work in Pakistan’s favour. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Reuters[/caption] I believe that the best choice for us would be Senator Marco Rubio, from the Republican side. Hear me out before you start shaking your head. I know that Rubio hasn’t really won the hearts of Pakistanis by saying that he would like to have a beer with with Malala Yousafzai when he was asked which political figure he would like to informally meet over a drink. But the fact is that he is the only one who has visited Pakistan and Afghanistan, besides Hillary Clinton, during his time as senator. He met with Ashfaq Parvez Kayani who was the Chief of Army Staff at the time. This indicates that he is more familiar with the political climate of the country than his counterparts. In addition to that, he is one of the few American politicians who can pronounce ‘Pakistan’ right! Besides Rubio, there are three other candidates that could prove useful to Pakistan. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="574"] Photo: Reuters[/caption] John Ellis Bush (Jeb Bush), the 43^rd Governor of Florida, is also one of the better choices. He is touted as the smarter of the Bush brothers, which is honestly not much of a compliment to the man. Jeb once opined that the US should provide support, such as trade concessions, rather than give aid to countries like Pakistan because giving aid “never wins friends”. This illustrates that he would be a shrewd leader and would make decisions that would benefit in the long term. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="540"] Photo: AP[/caption] Jim Gilmore, the 68^th Governor of Virginia, is also considerably knowledgeable about Pakistan, and thus would be quite a decent choice. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="572"] Photo: Reuters[/caption] Senator Rick Santorum could also be favourable for us. He once censured Texas Governor Rick Perry for being too hostile towards Pakistan, saying that “allies work through their problems”. While there are candidates who could be good for Pakistan’s future, there are some who could prove quite hazardous for us. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Reuters[/caption] Let’s hope that Ted Cruz never sees a day in office. The Republican first time senator, is a particularly strong candidate, but he is belligerent when it comes to dealing with issues and non-Americans. He will not be gentle with Pakistan. Another hardliner is Rand Paul. The Kentucky Republican lawmaker said last year that all aid to Pakistan should be cut off because it persecutes Christians and women, giving the examples of Asia Bibi and Malala Yousafzai. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Reuters[/caption] The Republican front runner so far is of course the grandiloquent Donald J Trump. His views about Pakistan, as expected, are not very positive. Donald Trump is quoted to have said that Pakistan is not a real friend and believes that the US should use India as a checkmate to Pakistan. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Reuters[/caption] Chris Christie, the 55^th Governor of New Jersey, one of the bigger boned of the Republican contestants, is unfamiliar with Pakistan beyond the usual news headlines, yet his website credits him with obtaining an indictment against the kidnapper of Daniel Pearl, disregarding the fact that the trial took place in Pakistan. Ben Carson, the only African American in the whole race, and Carly Fiorina, the only woman on the Republican side, have too sparse a knowledge of Pakistan to merit a real mention. John Kasich, the 69^th Governor of Ohio, and Mike Huckabee, the 44^th Governor of Arkansas, too, can be similarly dismissed, as can Martin O’ Malley, the 61^st Governor of Maryland, a Democratic presidential candidate. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Bernie Sanders.
Photo: Reuters[/caption] There are two other democratic candidates. Senator Bernie Sanders may seem like a pacifist liberal of yore, but he would not be in any hurry to end Barack Obama’s drone program in Waziristan if elected. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Reuters[/caption] The erstwhile Secretary of the State Hillary Clinton knows Pakistan as well as any non-Pakistani can expect to. Despite this, I believe that Hillary Clinton is very cynical about Pakistan. She understands Pakistan, sympathises with the people, yet is very doubtful of the military regime. She essentially distrusts the Pakistani establishment. Thus, her policy towards Pakistan would be more aggressive than Obama’s, notwithstanding her genuine concern for the stability and prosperity of Pakistan. All said and done, no matter who comes to power in the United States, Pakistan has to fend for itself. Not one of these potential presidents would be friends of or partial towards Pakistan, they would only be interested partners whom Pakistan has to evaluate and deal with in its own best interest. However, it would be much easier to deal with the right man or woman.

Due to frequent media images of violent anti-American protests as well as repeated travel-safety warnings from the State Department, most Americans avoid visiting Pakistan. However, Todd Shea, the founder of Comprehensive Disaster Response Services (CDRS), has adopted Pakistan as his home and is running several welfare projects there. I learnt about Todd Shea on Facebook several months ago when I was browsing through a list of ‘People you may know’. Pleasantly surprised to learn about the humanitarian work he was doing in Pakistan, I began to closely follow CDRS activities on social media. The 2005 earthquake and the great need to help its victims brought Shea to Pakistan but he ended up finding various other ways to help. I deeply admire his courage to work in areas which we associate with the Taliban and terrorism. He stayed in Bannu for over a year, as well as in the Swat valley and other far-flung mountain areas in order to help internally displaced people. [fbvideo link="https://www.facebook.com/CDRSPK/videos/741821545840600/"][/fbvideo] I finally met him in Washington DC at a CDRS fund-raising event for recent earthquake victims which struck Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P). My friend, Sarish Khan, Miss Pakistan-USA 2015 and a humanitarian social activist for CDRS had invited me. I was determined to attend the event even though it meant I had to drive 600 kilometres of clogged roads on the busiest travel weekend of the year. Air and train tickets were sold out several weeks ago because of Thanksgiving holidays. Having said that, the evening was worth all the hassle I had to face to get there. Todd Shea was friendly, lively, humble, and full of energy and compassion. With his hipster beard and wide grin, he was wearing a Superman T-shirt. This suited his personality perfectly since I felt he was a strong character helping those in need. He mentioned that his concern for humanity brought him to Pakistan and in return he has received love, respect, care and admiration. While rubbing his Buddha-like belly, he jokingly mentioned that food was also in the list of things he has abundantly received. His son, Justin Shea, was present at the event as well. I learnt that he had joined his father’s mission to help needy individuals as well. He led a campaign in Tharparkar, Sindh to aid victims of famine and malnutrition. With the help of photos and short videos, Todd Shea talked about different CDRS projects. The list included mother-child health, education and empowerment projects in Swat as well as major projects to help internally displaced people in K-P, to name only two. Todd Shea spoke very highly of Abdul Sattar Edhi for his contribution towards humanitarian efforts. He regards Edhi as his role model and feels he should be honoured with a Nobel Peace Prize, just as Malala Yousafzai was. This fund raising gala on CDRS’s 10^th anniversary was a successful event. All seats were sold out and the Washington-area Pakistani American community contributed generously to the cause.

“I have an old beat-up, mid 90s car and a guitar as my only possessions and I wore my best outfit for the occasion today. So be sure that your money will be spent at the right place,’’ he added before he sang “Dil dil Pakistan” for the audience.

As I am watching the attack on Bacha Khan University in Charsadda unfold on live television, I am forced to relive the horror of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s Army Public School (APS) attack which took place approximately a year ago. For the millions of Pakistanis who witnessed that attack on live television, APS is a scar that is not going to heal. I can only pray for the students at Bacha Khan and their families. Vehement protest, which perhaps is the best emotion to represent our feelings, will fall on deaf ears like the hundreds of similar protests across Pakistan following other terrorist attacks. Unfortunately, flowers and hollow words cost political officials a lot less than actual bullets and manpower. A question that lingers in the minds of the general populace is, why schools, colleges and universities? If the war is against the State and its armies, then why are the terrorists attacking schools and universities? Government pundits easily divert this towards the propagandist line of thinking – the terrorists are the enemies of education. I am sure we have all heard of the following statements,

“They are against education”, “They don’t want girls to be educated”, “Students are the frontline against terrorism” and so on.

We Pakistanis have many trigger points; many things irk us and many leave us disgruntled. Some moments make us sing with joy while others leave us simply bewildered. Therefore, in line with all things Pakistani, here are 24 Pakistani reactions that can very aptly be explained via Disney Gifs. 1. When it rains, anywhere in Pakistan [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 2. When Shahid Afridi hits the ball in the air… [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: MermaidConga[/caption] And it lands in the fielder’s hands [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Disney Wiki[/caption] 3. When Pakistanis come across #ThankYouRaheelSharif [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 4. When a Pakistani is recognised internationally [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Pinterest[/caption] 5. When it comes to Malala Yousafzai [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Giphy[/caption] 6. When the scheduled load-shedding does not take place [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Pinterest[/caption] 7. When Pakistanis manage to get tickets for a new blockbuster, without booking in advance [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="480"] Photo: Giphy[/caption] 8. Whenever Meera tries to speak in English [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="410"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 9. When we saw Ayesha Sana’s infamous video [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 10. When guests are about to come over [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 11. When ammi asks you to go fetch yogurt/vegetables/fizzy drinks from the nearby store [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="443"] Photo: Gifmania[/caption] 12. When ammi threatens to go and buy the items herself [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 13. When Pakistani students realise what they have done in their exams [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 14. When there is a wedding at home and you have to do all the work [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="540"] Photo: Giphy[/caption] 15. When there is a wedding at a relative’s home and there is a lot of drama to look forward to [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 16. When there is a strike [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 17. When Pakistanis are told tabdeeli aagayi hai (revolution is here) [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 18. Whenever Altaf Bhai holds a press conference [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 19. When Pakistanis were introduced to KitKat Talcum Powder [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="480"] Photo: Smosh[/caption] 20. Whenever Zubaida Aapa comes on TV [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="320"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 21. When a game show is being aired [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Giphy[/caption] 22. When we see Mamnoon Hussain on TV and realise that he still exists [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] 23. When we hear the roti, kapra aur makaan (bread, clothes and shelter) drill... [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="500"] Photo: Photobucket[/caption] 24. When the Mere Aziz Hum Watno moment arrives [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="480"] Photo: Tumblr[/caption] There are so many more instances where Pakistanis have peculiar reactions. If you have some in mind, do share them with us in the comment section below!

Last night I had the good fortune to attend the first Pakistani public screening of the Oscar winning film A Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness. I also conducted a Q&A afterwards with the film’s director Sharmeen Obaid Chinoy, who’s been dealing with a lot of controversy in Pakistan for the film’s subject matter and its global success. [embed width="620" height="348"]https://vimeo.com/153547504[/embed] The movie’s about a young woman who survived an honour killing and lived to take her would-be killers – her own father and uncle – to court. Did Sharmeen make this film for western consumption, as a “transaction” as feminist writer Rafia Zakaria puts it, or to gain western fame and fortune? Or did she do it to hold up a mirror to Pakistani society and to get a difficult conversation going about a societal sickness that kills at least one thousand Pakistani women a year? Only watching the film can truly answer these questions. And within the first five minutes of its start, you’ll know exactly why Sharmeen made this movie, which is surprisingly lacking in judgment, in preaching, or in overarching pledges to end this horrific form of gender-based violence. Instead, the film unfolds, frame by frame, to tell a searing story of love, murder, survival and redemption: the stuff that many lives are made of, no matter where they’re lived. It’s Shakespearean in its perspective, starkly told, yet filled with many unexpected moments of beauty. We first meet 19-year-old Saba, as she’s on an operating table, being treated for the gunshot wounds to her face that were inflicted on her by her father and uncle. We learn that she earned this punishment for leaving her father’s house to marry a man she’d already been engaged to for four years, who her father had approved of initially. He bowed to the pressure of his own brother, who announced that Saba should instead marry his brother-in-law, and forbade Saba from meeting her fiancé, Qaisar. Saba did not listen. She was firmly attached to Qaisar, and wanted to be with him – as is her right according to the laws of Islam and of human rights. But tribalism and ‘honour’ reign supreme in this backwards part of Gujranwala, where poverty doesn’t stop a neighbourhood from being run by its ‘influentials’. Saba defied them all to marry Qaiser in a court of law. When her family found out what she’d done, they swore they wouldn’t harm her if she returned home, so that she could be then sent to her in-laws’ house in a respectable manner. In the dark of night, her father and uncle took her from her in-laws’ house, to a nearby river. They held her by the neck and put a gun to her head. Saba turned her head at the last minute, which saved her life, but she was still grievously wounded when her uncle pulled the trigger. Then they put her into a bag and threw her in the river. Saba’s survival from this ordeal is incredible enough. But the journey that follows, to the courts, where Saba wants to see her father and uncle jailed for the crime, is even more incredible. Because in Pakistan, if a man murders a woman for ‘honour’, the victim’s heirs can ‘forgive’ him and he will be set free. Saba is one of the rarest cases: a woman who survives an attempted honour-killing. Her heirs cannot set her father and uncle free; only she can make the decision. As family members pressure her and her husband’s family to set her relatives free, we get to know Saba: a vivacious 19-year-old who is filled with courage and determination, and an unshakeable belief in justice. Her young husband, Qaiser, is full of tenderness and love for his wife, which provides a necessary counterpoint to the ugliness and hatred of Saba’s father and uncle. These men insist they have done nothing wrong. Indeed, they have acted ‘honourably’ to save their family’s pride. They insist, even from behind bars, that they would do it again, that they would serve their lives in jail for having shown the community that they are men of honour. The end of the film is a betrayal of Saba and everything that she is fighting for. But even in the midst of this betrayal, there are seeds of hope; Saba is pregnant with her first child, who she wishes to be a girl so that she can be brave, and stand up for herself. It makes one think of Malala Yousafzai, who also survived being shot in the head by men who wanted to control her, and brings up the question, why must Pakistani girls be so brave in the face of so much hatred? I put this question to Sharmeen in the Q&A session afterwards. Was she expecting the controversy?

“Yes,” said Sharmeen emphatically. “In a society where there is so much misogyny, I was expecting it. You should see some of the comments that are being left on social media about me. But I wanted everyone to be uncomfortable when watching this film. You should be uncomfortable by what I’ve presented here.”

“Now I’m getting proposals left and right for my other daughters. They’ll be too terrified to even think of doing what Saba has done.”

“Mummy, I can’t find an emoji of a female architect or ski-instructor online,” said my confused daughter.