Malala Yousafzai is the “bravest girl in the world.” In early 2009, when Malala was only 11, she began writing a blog for the BBC about life under the Taliban. Last year, this sixteen year old Pakistani girl was shot in the head on a school bus by the Taliban for her public championing of girls’ education. Malala has since been exalted in Western media, conducting interviews with everyone from Christiane Amanpour to Diane Sawyer to John Stewart. In the past weeks, she spoke at the World Bank to recognize International Day of the Girl and was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Malala’s campaign for girls’ education is one of the most urgent and necessary of our times. Educating girls is the single most powerful tool for young women, the world’s most vulnerable demographic. Beyond the opportunities it provides for each young girl, education is the one consistent determinant of practically every positive development project, ranging from categories of women and familial health to broader social progress through poverty reduction and equitable growth.
Malala has repeatedly stated that her campaign for girls’ education is not just her story, but a story for all the young girls in Swat Valley, her hometown in Pakistan, and young girls across the world who have faced insurmountable obstacles to education. And while Malala’s message has stayed consistently on point, there has been speculation about her iconic status being misappropriated for Western political agendas.
Much of this resistance is coming from within Pakistan itself. The reaction of people in Pakistan “stems from sensitivity at Western hectoring, a confused narrative about the Taliban and a sense of resentment or downright jealousy.” There has been reference to Malala as that “BBC blogger,” which depicts her as something of a Western pawn, out of touch with her people’s interests and concerns. Some have gathered that her vocal resistance against the Taliban, who are of course enemies of the West, transitively suggest her siding with Western policy in the region. Afghan critics of Malala have suggested that this is but one instance in the Western imperialist project, which continues to use girls and women as pawns against the Islamic threat. And this suspicion is not unfounded; the CIA has a record of using various personnel, including civil society workers, as informants.
The website Storify collected Tweets discussing “Why Conspiracy Theories About Malala Go Viral,” which elucidates several angles from which observers are taking a critical lens to the rise of Malala, an icon for young girls and a symbol of the UN focus on education. One common frustration is the hypocrisy of a situation in which one brave girl is idealized while so many others in similar situations are ignored. Because Malala was given a mouthpiece in the Western media, she had a privileged position that allowed her to be rescued. Then there is the aspect of other innocents who are killed, both by the Taliban and by American forces, while one victim of the Taliban’s attacks has risen to international heroine status. In a nauseating battle of pawns, there are circulating images of little Afghan girls in wheelchairs, victims of US drones, and the radiant face of Malala Yousafzai.
It is not hard to imagine that Malala’s story about securing a global platform could serve to perpetuate Western sentiments about the Middle East, and furthermore, the validity and effectiveness of its military presence in the region. In heaping praise on Malala, Western audiences may turn a blind eye to their governments’ role in Pakistan’s struggle with the Taliban and promote a simplistic view of international conflicts.
Malala’s story could conceivably further reinforce the pro-war agenda regarding the northwest of Pakistan — an agenda Malala herself has stated she opposes. Those who call for drone attacks may read Malala’s predicament as a reassertion that this tactic of war is more effective and appropriate, and overlook all of its various ramifications. In fact, several reports have demonstrated that drone strikes have killed many civilians, and more broadly instilled a profound fear among the general population in Pakistan and elsewhere.
Americans must be conscientious of the fact that the threat of the Pakistani Taliban, who inflicted this terrible tragedy on Malala, has been exacerbated by the Western presence in the region. In fact, human rights groups and NGOs have consistently been highlighting that the plight of women is worse since the 2001 invasion, despite Western rhetoric and programs. The Taliban are motivated by forces deeper and more complex than hatred and misogyny; the ongoing Western occupation of Afghanistan has exacerbated animosity towards values and institutions associated with the West.
Last month, Barack Obama defended U.S. presence in the Middle East, calling the US “exceptional” on the world stage. So how is this grand vision of social responsibility to be reconciled with the sobering foresight of Edward Said, who writes in the preface to the 25th anniversary edition of his contentious yet canonical text, “Orientalism:”
“Every single empire in its official discourse has said that it is not like all the others, that its circumstances are special, that it has a mission to enlighten, civilize, bring order and democracy, and that it uses force as a last resort. And, sadder still, there always is a chorus of willing intellectuals to say calming words about benign or altruistic empires, as if one shouldn’t trust the evidence of one’s eyes watching the destruction and the misery and death brought by the latest mission civilisatrice.”
Time and again, American rhetoric and values are not translated in actual global impact. Malala, who champions young girls’ rights, could indirectly provide fodder for intrinsically contradictory political agendas. Though history may prove that the impact of Malala ultimately furthers American sense of exceptionalism, her message, pure and simple, is not political. Malala has handled the varied doubts and accusations with grace and a single-minded focus on her cause. She has clearly emphasized what is important: the 600 million-plus adolescent girls in the developing world who do not have access to education, thereby lacking the means through which to empower themselves and their communities. A global effort to improve girls’ access to education is not solely about overcoming the Taliban, but about surmounting the various social, economic, legal and political obstacles that have prevented millions of young girls from fulfilling their potential.