There are writers arguing that this is not a victory for the Taliban. I understand where they are coming from, but disagree on a fundamental level. A return to Sharia law, especially when you have arch-conservative Taliban elements in your ranks, can never be a proper choice for fair and just government. Every time a community or state institutes a theocratic government most social freedoms go right out the window, and that is exactly the sort of narrow-mindedness organizations like the Taliban thrive on.
I think that, when polling the will of the people (as Chief Minister Hoti says he’s done) they failed to ask anyone aside from married Pashtun Sunni Muslim men. I’d be willing to bet that the women in the region, some of whom must know firsthand the terrible horrors that accompany Deobandi style Sharia law, would reject this move. Even if the British-based law of Pakistan is corrupt and complicated, I would imagine it gives women more freedom.
Reformation of corrupt secular law is a far better path than embracing reactionary theocratic principals. I’m not interested in getting into a deep debate about the state of Sharia law in the world, but there is no argument that I’m aware of that shows Sharia law does a better job expressing and protecting the fundamental human rights of women than secular law. Misogynistic secular law can be altered; Sharia law shows no such flexibility.
This move is a massive step backwards for the people of Pakistan, especially in the Malakland province. While Swat’s brand of Sharia might not be as conservative as the Taliban’s (yet), the lack of social freedom inherent in the application of Sharia law is a terrible offense to free-thinking and progressive minds the world over.
And if you don’t think so, then try going to Swat and posting this piece on the wall of a madrassa. Cross my name off the top and sign this article as your own (don’t worry: I’ll wave the copyright). You will find out quickly what sort of justice Sharia law proscribes for speaking one’s mind.
