Friday, July 30, 2010 - 10:18 AM

Yesterday, the Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project, which conducts public opinion surveys around the world, released a new poll on Pakistani perceptions based on face-to-face interviews conducted from April 13 to April 28, 2010. However, the sample size is relatively small -- 2,000 Pakistani adults out of a population of 180 million -- and admittedly "disproportionately urban." Moreover, while Pew polled people in Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan, and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (formerly NWFP), portions of Balochistan and K-P were not included because of instability. Pakistan's tribal areas (FATA), Gilgit-Baltistan, and Azad Jammu and Kashmir were also not included in the survey, leading me to question how reflective Pew's poll results are of Pakistan's entire population.
The results were, for the most part, unsurprising, and paint a grim picture of Pakistani attitudes in the wake of militancy, military operations, a worsening economy, and political instability. For example, an overwhelming number of Pakistanis polled continue to have a negative view of the United States (68 percent), and a majority of Pakistanis (53 percent) see India as the greatest threat to the country, over the Taliban (23 percent) and al-Qaeda (3 percent). Much like last year's Pew survey, the majority of Pakistanis polled say they are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the country, citing terrorism, crime, and a lack of jobs as very big issues.
Some of the most interesting results relate to attitudes toward religion, law, and society. According to the findings, "Pakistani Muslims overwhelmingly welcome Islamic influence over their country's politics. Nearly nine-in-ten (88 percent) of those who see Islam playing a large role say that is a good thing." Moreover, many Muslims in Pakistan say there is a struggle between groups that want to modernize their country and Islamic fundamentalists (44 percent), and of those who see a struggle, most identify with the modernizers (61 percent). At the same time though, a solid majority of Pakistanis polled said they would favor making gender segregation in the workplace a law in the country (85 percent), as well as punishments like whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery (82 percent), and stoning people who commit adultery (82 percent).
So what explains this obvious paradox between people who side with modernization but simultaneously support punishments like stoning and flogging? According to Peter Mandaville, professor of Government and Islamic Studies at George Mason University and author of Global Political Islam, this reflects "a mistaken tendency to conflate modernization with the adoption of liberal social and religious values. When many Pakistanis think of "modernizing" their country, they think primarily in terms of economic development and technology -- both of which can comfortably coexist alongside conservative religious attitudes."
Although Pakistan has drifted right of center over the last three decades, the aforementioned findings seem to be contradicted by the reality on the ground. Cyril Almeida, an assistant editor and columnist at Dawn, noted that though Pakistani Muslims overwhelmingly welcome an Islamic influence over the country's politics, citizens continue to "consistently reject religious parties at the polls." The alliance of Islamist parties in Pakistan, the MMA, was trounced at the 2008 polls, managing to win only a miserable 2.2 percent of the vote. Moreover, a rise in public opinion against militancy in 2008 was in part due to a video showing the Taliban flogging a girl in Swat Valley, images that generated outrage in Pakistan. Almeida emphasized, "Pakistanis have certain fairly rigid conceptions of what is religiously permissible and what isn't. This isn't to say they will always do what they believe is required of them -- but when a survey puts certain questions, they're more likely to respond to what ought to be than what they do."
The framing of survey questions can help explain contradictory quantitative data. In the case of the results generated in Pew's Religion, Law, and Society section of the survey, respondents were asked black-and-white questions, like, "Do you favor or oppose making stoning people who commit adultery the law in Pakistan?" According to Moeed Yusuf, a South Asia Advisor at the U.S. Institute of Peace, much of the so-called "Muslim World" find it difficult to go against anything seen as ordained by Islam. He added, "At an abstract level, Islam remains important to even the most secular of Muslims -- remember Islam is very candid about state and religion being an integrated whole (at least in the classic narrative) and so such questions would elicit such responses."
When faced with a choice between what they are supposed to say and what they actually practice, respondents tend to match abstract questions with equally abstract answers. However, Yusuf noted, "Do they want to be flogged or stoned for the same sin? No way. What about their own family members? Most probably not."
But issues related to such punishments continue unabated in Pakistan (Just last week, media outlets reported that a couple was sentenced to stoning to death for alleged adultery in a tribal court in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa). This suggests that quantitative data cannot capture the nuances and complexities of identity and society. In the case of the Pew opinion survey, the data provides an important snapshot of some Pakistani attitudes, but it is by no means the whole picture.
Kalsoom Lakhani is director of Social Vision, the strategic philanthropy arm of ML Resources in Washington, D.C. She is from Islamabad, Pakistan, and blogs at CHUP, or Changing Up Pakistan.
Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images
EXPLORE:AFPAK, AFPAK CHANNEL, AL QAEDA, CULTURE, FOREIGN AID, MILITARY, PAKISTAN, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
Majority of Pakistanis are Islamic fundamentalist
When one looks at Pakistani history, it is hard to believe Kalsoom Lakhani’s hypothesis that actual Pakistani people are more ’moderate’ than poll results paint them to be.
Let us just look at say last 15 years or so.
Nobody forced it but Pakistan’s democratic government of Benazir Bhutto chose of its own free will, to facilitate relocation of Osama bin Laden from Sudan to Afghanistan in 1996.
Nobody forced it but Pakistani Army and ISI created what ex-CIA official Bruce Reidel called 'this jihadist Frankenstein monster' on their own with full financing provided by Pakistan’s democratic governments during 1990s.
Al Qaeda, Taliban, LeT, JeM, JuD, HuJi and countless other terror outfits have been spawned in Pakistan, the official ’terror center’ of the world as per CIA with the help, support and sanctuary provided by the Pakistani State that is owned by Pakistani Army that uses ’terrorism’ as an official tool of state policy to further its own objectives.
Osama bin Laden had publicly congratulated Pakistan in 1998 for exploding world’s first Islamic nuclear bomb.
Pakistani Army used to provide military protection to Osama bin Laden during his umpteen visits to Pakistan. Osama bin Laden has received many dialysis treatments at Pakistan’s military hospitals.
Osama bin Laden had made huge campaign contributions to Pakistani prime minister Nawaz Sharif’s election campaigns in 1990 and 1996. Let us NOT forget that Nawaz Sharif has personally met Osama bin Laden at least three times in Saudi Arabia at Nawaz Sharif’s own request. Nobody can call Nawaz Sharif’s PML(N) a fundamentalist Islamic religious party.
So most of the Pakistani society is Islamic fundamentalist for a long time, contrary to Kalsoom Lakhani’s postulation.
ARVAY, there are different shades of secular!!
I keep hearing that the Pakistani Populace is secular because they reject MMA. (Their Islamic parties) This is a flawed argument because "secularism" has many definitions and many shades.
Now, lets take the definition as we commonly understand in the West.
"Secularism means that the state is indifferent to any religion. It does not award preferential treatment to ANY religion. It holds the constitution as supreme not any religious text. It even asserts the right to be free from religious rule and teachings"
May I daresay that neither the government nor any political party in Pakistan is "secular" by this definition. The state routinely defines "who is Muslim (e.g. Ahmadis declared as non Muslim), has draconian laws against blasphemy and state officials routinely invoke religion. Religion is a litmus test for higher office ( non Muslim can not be a president or prime minister). Populace looks at everything with a strong Islamic prism. They accept the non Muslims but only in the Islamic context of "Dhimmis" with their rights and responsibilities to be apportioned by what "Islam" says about them.
Here is a quick read on Dhimmi.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi
For more unkind opinion, read stuff by Ayan Hisri ali!
The rejection of MMA only means they do not take it to ultra super extreme of religious rule. Every Pakistani party or government ( perhaps with the exception of the communists in the die hard marxist tradition, who are mostly atheists and a minuscule minority) is Islamic NOT SECULAR!
There is another definition of "Secularism". This is particularly popularized in Indian subcontinent, due mostly to Gandhi. It basically says that "The state shall hold all religions in equal esteem".
This means it is acceptable for a state to sponsor anything religious as long as they do it for ALL religions.
Indians, especially Hindus tend to practice this definition as it jives very well with their philosophy. ( Eko Sat, Vipra Bahuda vadanti: Truth is one; sages know it by many names. Ie: it is possible to have many religions to take you to the ultimate destiny)
The congress party in India and many of its offshoots tend to live by this.
As the Abrahamic religions tend to have an"exclusivity" about their religion ( "I am a Jealous God", in the Torah or "I am the way and the truth and the life" in the new testaments or "La Ilaha" in the Quran)
This definition works when the religious traditions amalgamate, like Sufism or Islam as practiced in small villages in India, especially in the South India or with an educated populace who tend to venture out in seeking spirituality and thus interpret their own traditions liberally.
Pakistan is homogeneous enough in its religious traditions that they can dial the amount of Islam as up or down as they want. But even at a very low setting it is plenty "Islamic' !
Ugg Boots Clearance more and more people are pay attentions to newest ugg boots,so where to buy Chocolate UGG Classic Tall Boots?Pink UGG Classic Tall Boots,Buy MBT Slippers ,Bailey Button Ugg,UGG Classic Mini,especially new ugg boots has become a topic.
Then let them have Sharia justice. If they want the state to enforce amputation as punishment, let them have it. Islam is a barbaric religion and it has consumed Pakistan. While I am a "devout" atheist, I am very happy India as a whole was not consumed by Islam. They can create hell on earth in Pakistan and leave India to thrive.
Then let Hindoo India have Hindtuva
Hindooism is a barbaric religion and it has consumed India. I am very happy India is being consumed by Hindooism. They can create hell on earth in India and leave Pakistan to thrive.
(5)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE