Friday, October 17, 2014

On bearing with a Noble Malala......

We have to bear with Malala whether we like it or not. There are lapses in her story, so are controversies associated with the prize. But the fact is that neither the controversy associated with politicization of noble peace prize can undermine Malala’s heroic deeds nor can the lapses in Malala’s story destroy the prize nor her own internationalized charm. What circumstances actually convinced the jury to choose her, as the rightful recipient needs a deeper insight.
She has got it, and no one else from Pakistan did it this time. Long live Abdus Sattar Edhi and his untiring love for humanity, Imran Khan’s service to cancer patients, Mukhtaran Mai for voicing against Mubashir Luqman or Junaid Jamshed for his line of kurtas, but so did Mahatma Gandhi. The list of omissions is quite long and the selection process itself is potentially not free of biases and errors. So, move on Pakistanis, or live with it, she is the one.
Her father choose to publish her diary by the pen name of Gul Makayi, then chose to disclose her identity which potentially put her life in danger. She suffered an eventual attempted murder and had to undergo surgery, survived but living in exile. She vows to come back and partake in politics, a potential future candidate for the premier slot… Quite a long way to go..
So what projected Malala that high is interesting to dissect. Although there are many similar stories in the war torn region that made highlights, only one of them could be taken to the highest praises. There is a particular psychological reason behind that. The horror stories that describe one person with an identifiable name and identity make greater impact on people/audience when compared to a mass horror story with no names. The reason that such an impact is needed is because it lends legitimacy to the wars and adventures going on in a country. As published elsewhere that no wars are fought to bring peace, democracy or prosperity to a country. Wars are meant to capture resources, widen the area of influence in international politics and impose one’s economic policies. All wars, thus, are said to be bankers’ wars. These goals are, however, not out rightly stated in public. What is told in public is picked up carefully and narrated in a telling way in order to win support for the wars. The definitions are bent, or broken, in order to suit one’s own narrative. In our case it is Malala. In another case, it was Barack Obama.

Next time it may be Narendra Modi, Bashar-al-Assad or Benjamin Netenyahu, depends upon who serves the cause, who serves it better, or perhaps best. For the moment, it is our own Malala Yousufzai, a swati school going child who braved the brutal and oppressive terrorists (don’t mentions anything about their impact on American benefits in the area) who grow beards and hang people in public, eventually meeting the supreme drone justice enforced from another time zone.

Malala, a young and aspiring kid, needs all our love and affection. She is our pride and a national asset. Her international persona will inspire many parents to take brave decisions to send their daughters to schools. Her friends will always feel good for having her company. She rises, and touches glory. May the acknowledgement that she received be translated to the real change and conspiracies hatched under the shadow of distraction caused by her prize never materialize.