Terrorized Tigers

Today Pakistan is cornered again, its tigers terrorized. But in some ways, so are the tigers of Princeton. In different ways, both are falling prey to the specter of terrorism.

A recent art exhibit in the Bernstein Gallery of Robertson Hall has sparked a dose of controversy. The artwork depicts terrorism and war in the world today, highlighting instances of the Middle East and South Asia, as well as the War on Terror in general. Depictions of Arabs and Muslims as terrorists have caused controversy all over the world. Members of the Muslim community on campus also found the content of the exhibit disagreeable. Our depictions of terrorism, our dialogue surrounding it and our responses are things we need to look at deeply.

In the exhibit, the depictions were stereotypical, at least in most cases. For example, no Arab or Muslim was shown as a victim of terrorism. Some people did have justified reason to find the exhibition mildly inappropriate, even offensive. I personally didn’t find the lack of Muslim victims seriously offensive. It was artwork, not an election ballot, and as such was not required to be representative. Whether the artist’s responsibility entails representing the facts is a question all of us may answer personally, and I don’t think any opinion would be unfounded.

We are a community of minds that might go on to become future world leaders, be it corporate, academic or political. But much of the talk surrounding such issues is clouded by the mystique of the term “terrorism.” Unfortunately, solutions are yet to be found, and confusion abounds in any dialogue. All of us need to be ready to be face the threat of terrorism in a more direct manner.

People are often surprised when I tell them that Pakistan is in a state of civil war. I am an eyewitness to entire populations becoming numb to the threats of terrorism, so prevalent a threat it has become. Much of Lahore now treats another suicide bombing as a semi-routine occurrence: There is sadness, a little outcry, and life moves on. The threat of being caught in crossfire or just plain madness is no longer out of the ordinary. If you find this inhumane, you should. For people who live with it, though, it’s not so much inhumanity as it is resilience. They have no choice. There is no monument to honor the dead, no more spirit to start another war against the transgressors.

The numbers are equally unsettling. In 2009 alone, 3,021 people were killed through terrorism and the battles ensuing in Pakistan. This was 48 percent higher than in 2008. And it’s not just in the battlefield: Markets, town centers, even universities have become targets. I have never seen the country’s morale so low before. Cricket lifts us back up now and then, but for now, the country’s unity is in its sadness.

Contrary to popular belief, Pakistan is not a country made for or filled with fundamentalists. It is, at the moment, a country caught in a philosophical, ideological battle. Pakistanis are a warm, welcoming, hospitable, yet troubled people. Terrorist infrastructure, at times surprisingly developed, has shackled some of the core systems of the country, but a tolerant belief system remains. Fatima Bhutto, niece of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, has called the country a Sufi nation. Sufism is a tolerant, calm, peace-loving belief system, and the country draws on it today. But the solution to terrorism in this struggle remains elusive. We need ideas, a framework, some respect, some care and some talk.

And Pakistan is more than just a country threatened by terrorism. It has 180 million people who have actively fought to bring back an independent judiciary and who live in a rapidly changing economy, a thriving music scene and an amalgam of a huge number of cultural identities. Many remain unaware of these realities.

Dialogue and forthrightness, then, are essential for any nation fighting terrorism. But as the controversy surrounding the Bernstein Gallery exhibit shows, we lack a way to effectively talk about terrorism and other sensitive issues. Political correctness is aimed at respecting all cultures and opinions, but we need to ask ourselves if this is causing us to self-censor too much. While we must keep ourselves open to all ideas, we must not allow this openness to keep us from making strong, worthwhile and positive assertions.

We must not let our differences of opinion restrain us from talking about the threat that we face. The little awkward silence when the talk of terrorism comes up, the fear that one is being stereotyped, the feeling that we are being threatened must go. Terror is hardly anything to be comfortable with, but talking about a threat is as important as recognizing it. In the face of terrorism, we cannot fall prey to our inhibitions. If you think Pakistan’s numbness in the face of constant terror is disturbing, then surely our inclination to give the issue a cold shoulder is no better.

Zeerak Ahmed is a freshman from Lahore, Pakistan. He can be reached at zahmed@princeton.edu.