Uproar over a Cartoon?

"It’s idiotic and offensive". Angry Pakistani politicians of all cadres are demanding an apology from the newspaper which published the cartoon. The National Assembly of Pakistan strongly denounced the cartoon passing a unanimous resolution against it. The Pakistan Embassy in Washington soon followed suit and officially protested against a cartoon appearing in a section of the US press that ridicules the country’s role in the war on terror.

“We are disgusted with the insensitivity of the editors of the Washington Times. They have insulted the 150 million people of Pakistan,” says Mohammed Sadiq, Pakistan’s charge de affaires in Washington.

The cartoon was published by Washington Times and shows a US soldier patting a dog that holds Abu Faraj Al Libbi and saying, “Good boy … now let’s go find bin Laden.”

The critics are incensed. Considering it a malicious attempt by the US media to undermine Pakistan’s efforts in war on terror, they say that Washington Times is guilty of poor judgment.

Why so much uproar over an editorial cartoon? Why is it considered derogatory and why are the Pakistanis so offended?

Cultural differences are partly to blame. Pakistanis have distaste for dogs. Most shun them or stone them if they can. Patting them is out of the question if you are getting ready to say your prayers as they are considered “napaak” or sullied. Most, if not all, spend their entire life as un-named stray dogs on the streets. Skinny dogs with bodies covered with sores are a common sight in almost every major city.

Americans, on the other hand, consider dog a friendly, helpful and reliable family pet equally loved by kids and elders. Majority of them receive a puppy even as a Christmas present. Kissing them and even sharing a bed with them is not that uncommon. They wonder why Pakistanis are making such a big deal out of it.

Pakistanis have a low tolerance threshold for humor to begin with. Perhaps, continued oppression and in some cases outright censorship of Pakistani press has not allowed Pakistanis to develop a taste for such things. Even today, it would be impossible to show an army officer in uniform in a derogatory position. In contrast, western media and US media in general, have a higher threshold for such jabs and are riddled with editorial cartoons showing governments and politicians as animals or in subservient positions. That material could be highly inflammatory and everyone is potentially a target. Nobody is immune, from President to Pope.

The periodical Maxim in its February 2003 issue carried a humor piece on Gandhi. It showed a cartoon in which a man was shown beating Mahatma Gandhi.

A cartoon by Stephane Peray, a Bangkok based editorial cartoonist, that has been completely overlooked by the Pakistani politicians, is worth mentioning. It portrays Uncle Sam on a donkey’s back, dangling a carrot shaped like F-16, escorting the donkey towards a directional arrow, which says “War against terror”. The donkey is labeled as (you guessed it), “Pakistan”.

There is no selective treatment for Pakistan here as other countries are similarly attacked with the same vengeance. Portraying its lack of support for the Iraq war, France was once highlighted as a pet poodle urinating with its leg up on its master, Bush.

Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister was shown as a poodle on the White House lawn by pop star George Michael, in the cartoon video to his song “Shoot the Dog”. This reflected Mr. Blair’s established reputation among critics as Bush’s unquestioning poodle in world affairs. In another cartoon, he was again shown as a dog and was offered by Bush a new pair of boots to lick.

So why the fuss over a cartoon which shows Pakistan as a dog? At least Pakistan was shown as a “Top Dog”, not a flimsy poodle.

To be honest, the impact of this cartoon is virtually none on Pakistan and most likely, Pakistan was not even the intended target. In fact, the target audiences for this cartoon probably were the Americans. One can interpret this cartoon as strong anti-Bush. Bush has been blasted for years by the democrats and liberals alike, for shifting his focus from capturing Osama Bin Laden to Iraq shifting this enormously important responsibility on Pakistan to lead the war on terror.

The claim that Washington Times is the voice of America and its editorial content is reflective of US policies is equally preposterous. The newspaper has a small circulation relative to other media giants. It does not even make the list of top hundred newspapers of America. It carries a measly 113th ranking with a subscriber base of only 100,603. It certainly does not run its editorial content through White House before publishing it.

Still, most Pakistanis consider it a direct blow under the belt. Cultural differences are not enough to soothe their inflamed pride or to take the edge off that message that was bluntly conveyed to them via this cartoon. Opponents of Musharraf are having a ball over this with potentially negative consequences for the US in the long run.

Political opponents of Musharraf have been accusing him for quite some time that Pakistan has gone way out in order to please US. However, this may not be entirely true. Pakistan solidly supports US where the interest of Pakistan and US overlaps, i.e., capturing Osama and its cohorts, withdrawing its support for Taliban and stabilizing Afghanistan. At the same time, it held its ground on other significant issues. As a matter of fact, it did not send any troops to Iraq as part of the coalition forces and continue to refuse to participate in the ongoing security/stability operations in Iraq, even after repeated “requests” by US.

A strong negative reaction by the people to this cartoon does indicate a palpable underlying disquiet between the government and the Pakistani people. It highlights a legitimate concern for those who seek to define the extent of their role in terms of the war against terrorism and the degree of relationship they want to have with the only remaining Super power.

The US-Pakistani relationship is not scared of debate. It is an issue that is likely to be exploited to its fullest extent in the next coming elections by all religious parties who unanimously oppose the US hegemonous intentions within the region.

Pakistan needs to have a consensus as to how far the nation could go.
However, calling an editorial cartoon an attack on the integrity of Pakistan is pointless. It is an opinion with an extremely short half-life and it fills its spot in a paper for a day only.