Pakistanis aren’t the only ones threatened by Islamabad’s refusal to uphold religious liberties.
American policy in Central Asia is threatened by Pakistan’s slow surrender to extremism and violence. The growing mistreatment of religious minorities demonstrates that many of Pakistan’s problems are rooted in the spread of hateful and intolerant beliefs. The State Department should cite Pakistan as a “Country of Particular Concern” under the International Religious Freedom Act.
Islamabad is not the only U.S. ally that persecutes Christians, Jews, and other religious minorities. In fact, most Muslim states mix discrimination, repression, and persecution in varying degrees.
Saudi Arabia is essentially a totalitarian state when it comes to matters of faith. Much of the Christian community has been driven from the new Iraq, and Coptic Christians are coming under increasingly violent attack in Egypt. Among the worst persecutors is Iran, which has been actively brutalizing religious minorities.
But it is Pakistan, perhaps America’s most obvious “frenemy,” that best illustrates why religious persecution is a problem transcending national boundaries. Freedom of conscience, the essence of religious liberty, is a foundation for all other human rights.
A national community that refuses to even accept, let alone defend, those who believe differently is likely to become a source of intolerance, hatred, and violence — which may end up directed well beyond its own country’s boundaries. A government unwilling to protect individuals worshiping and serving their creator, both singly and collectively, is not likely to respect the life, dignity, and freedom of its citizens, and even less so people from other nations. Such a regime certainly will find itself ill-equipped to confront the very extremist forces it has previously, even if inadvertently, encouraged.
The ongoing disintegration of Pakistani society was dramatically illustrated by the assassinations of Punjab governor Salman Taseer in January and Religious Minorities minister Shahbaz Bhatti in March. Taseer was a Muslim who opposed the religious parties and denounced Pakistan’s blasphemy law. Bhatti, known internationally, also opposed the blasphemy laws and said he was “speaking for the oppressed, marginalized and persecuted Christians and other minorities.” Although a few brave Pakistanis embraced the two men in death, many more, including in Taseer’s own ruling Pakistan People’s Party, stayed silent while extremists praised the murderers.
In such an environment, it should surprise no one to find official support for al-Qaeda and other terrorists. While civilian members of the Pakistani government may have had no idea about Osama bin Laden’s presence on Pakistani soil, it beggars belief that members of the military and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency did not know, and did not aid him. A poll last year found that some 60 percent of Pakistanis viewed America as an enemy. Rank-and-file military attitudes seem little different.
Much of America’s unpopularity results from Washington’s policies. The war in Afghanistan and especially drone attacks in Pakistan have created growing popular hostility.
But the spread of Islamic extremism has created an environment in which violence naturally flourishes. Even if those willing to strike remain a minority, they increasingly receive warm support from religious and other leaders.
In Pakistan, the social environment is toxic. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom reported that “Pakistan continues to be responsible for systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of freedom of religion or belief.” The Commission pointed to the blasphemy laws which, along with “other religiously discriminatory legislation, such as the anti-Ahmadi laws, have created an atmosphere of violent extremism and vigilantism.”
The State Department’s assessment of religious liberty is equally blunt. Noted State: “Security forces and other government agencies did not adequately prevent or address societal abuse against minorities. Discriminatory legislation and the government’s failure or delay in addressing religious hostility by societal actors fostered religious intolerance, acts of violence, and intimidation against religious minorities.”
Both the Commission and State emphasize the blasphemy laws as a particular problem. Not uncommon around the world, the laws have become a particularly threatening tool of persecution against non-Muslims in Pakistan.
In a detailed study released last year, Freedom House concluded: “Although many other countries have laws against blasphemy, the situation in Pakistan is unique in its severity and its particular effects on religious minorities.” The extremist Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam party has even proposed banning the Bible as “blasphemous.”
The majority of those prosecuted for blasphemy are Muslim, but the law is disproportionately deployed against Christians, who also often find themselves targets of vigilante violence. At least 35 Christians charged with blasphemy have been murdered since 1986. “Many others have endured brutal rapes and beatings, while churches, homes and businesses have been ransacked, looted and burned,” added author Lela Gilbert.
Unfortunately, even before the Taseer and Bhatti murders, the situation in Pakistan was deteriorating. Last November the State Department declared: “the number and severity of reported high-profile cases against minorities increased” and “organized violence against minorities increased.”
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?