Power game where disruption of hetero-normative Sunni rule is anti-state? Just my midnight ramblings.

“Politics Among Nations” in Karachi

During my undergraduate studies in Karachi, we had a small photocopy shop that breached every stipulation of copyright law. Students and teachers alike had books and articles printed in that tiny cemented cabin. The photocopier’s ink would stain our hands. It smelled like a packet of fresh balloons. You could buy a book worth 5,000 rupees for 500 rupees- a photocopied version that resembled our local newspaper جنگ Jang1. It bled black ink, had crooked binding sometimes, but was readable- and affordable.

That’s where I met Hans Morgenthau, in his book, Politics Among Nations. In the book, let me reiterate- I met him through his ideas, not in person. NOT IN PERSON.

Thinking outside the box- thinking inside Pakistan

It isn’t odd to apply Morgenthau’s power-realist framework within nation-states rather than among nation-states. Anarchy exists in many spatial and identity contexts. It exists within countries, among people who are supposed to share a common national interest. Citizens in a country usually see other nation-states as competitors and players in an anarchic system. But what if we discard this concept, better yet- let’s reimagine it in a local and insular context. Power politics or politics among “nations” can be applied in Pakistan to observe “politics among each other”. There is a power struggle and a push and pull to confirm the status-quo hegemonic power of a heteronormative Sunni Muslim society. What does this mean?

Tracing back to Pakistan’s attachment to the two-nation theory of building a separate Muslim state- we gauge the country’s need for distinct Muslimness. What qualifies as Muslim enough? What about non-conformists, are they a threat to the state and treated as anti-state entities? I don’t have the answers, but I have ideas that I keep stumbling across.

1- Pakistan’s majority Muslim Sunni rule is an indicator of Sunni preference. Sectarian violence and mistreatment of minority communities and/or religious groups re-establishes Zia’s Sunnification sentiment during the 1970s-1980s. This sentiment erupted during the month of Muharram and uncovered the deep-rooted dislike and exclusion of Shias. It still happens. The news is covered in sectarian violence and a strong moral obligation to exclude, minimize, and overpower Shia Muslims. Pakistan presents itself as a pious Sunni man with a heteronormative standpoint- he tries to erase the atrocities against Shias and other minorities. Need I mention how blasphemy is used against minorities- or how Hindu girls are being forcibly converted?

2- Morally policing bodies of non-men. Controlling and monitoring bodies is the norm in Pakistan. Any kind of discontent or protest towards this policing is seen as a threat. Zia’s era saw the solidification of having four male witnesses to a rape. This pre-requisite threatened the bodily autonomy of women and diminished the voice and testimony of women. Women need permission on how to dress and navigate public and private spaces from him- Pakistan, the militaristic man. He’s a man on a mission.

This endorsement of violence against women continues today and was seen in the uproar against the Women’s Domestic Violence Protection & Prevention Bill. It was met with uncomfortable statements because it was an encroachment on Pakistani values, systems, and ways. The Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) is a body that monitors bills like these to check whether they align with the Islamic way of life. These religious bodies act as qualifiers to determine Muslimness that fits (or does not fit) the Pakistani framework.

If women ask for more rights or “different rights” that don’t suit thefancy of these higher-ups- they’re seen as lawful outlaws who want more than the status quo. Whether it’s the park rape case or the motorway gang rape case, women are mistreated with irresponsible and sexist remarks from authorities that are supposed to protect them. This shows the inherent misogyny and power politics in a patriarchal society where women’s bodies and their public movement are considered a threat to the fragile, unstable, and controlling disposition of “statesmen”. Women are treated as a threat and their bodies are weaponized to dispel chances of creating safe spaces and unviolated and unmonitored autonomous bodies. If you ask for justice as a woman, this is what you’re met with:

“Don’t try to find American solutions for Pakistani problems”

– (Jamat Islami Senator, Mushtaq Ahmed)

3- The khwajasira (transgender) community is facing discrimination, mistreatment, and violence. The right-wing religious parties in Pakistan feel it is their obligation to police their bodies and identity cards. Right-wing thinkers have hijacked the independent narratives of the khwajasira community by branding them as a Western homo-sexual agenda rather than a community of people with their own rights, say, and demands as citizens. By branding a vulnerable community under “Western” labels that risk life threats and further mistreatment- the khwajasira community’s safety is compromised. They are treated as an enemy state that threatens the fragile ego of a paternalistic state like Pakistan.

To survive as a state, Pakistan feels the need to sustain its status quo and guard its power. It sees any change to this as a threat. The malady is not always imported or exported terrorism coming from the outside. It is terrorism inflicted on our own people by us.

To understand power struggle and the evil of power, we don’t need to look outside. We just need to look within ourselves. We are the enemy of our own people. The national interest is not to safeguard the country as a whole- but to maintain and amplify a hetero-normative Sunni man’s rule.

1 Jang is a Pakistani, Urdu newspaper. https://jang.com.pk/