On September 12, 2023, a group of Global Studies students took a short trip to the CT Public Broadcasting Building for an evening discussion with the Ambassador of Pakistan. Here, we listened to discussions about economics, travel, human rights issues, and government hypocrisy. The event was a one-of-a-kind experience that I will never forget!
Event Reflection
On September 12, as we entered the public broadcasting building after our short commute in the van, I thought the night would be uneventful. The ambassador spent the majority of his time discussing investment, economic relations, and the state of affairs between Pakistan and the United States, however, once the Q&A with the audience began, things got very interesting. The first question fired at the ambassador came from a woman who initially refused to share her identity due to her fears that she would be in danger. She immediately addressed the ambassador's hypocrisy and the lack of protection for the press and journalists in Pakistan along with the protection and rights of regular citizens. The rest of the audience followed her lead, addressing a corrupt democracy, human rights violations, military corruption, and more. Despite these valid questions and concerns, the Ambassador showed only anger and frustration and no understanding. Throughout the event and in the days after it, a question arose in my mind.
Does acknowledgment hold any power without justice?
Again and again, the Ambassador, whose job is to uplift Pakistan, dismissed remarks and questions that doubted the actuality of his claims that Pakistan is a country where human rights and democratic processes hold high value. He answered with hostility and contradiction, angry anytime the audience doubted him or the “Motherland”. However, what would happen if he had acknowledged these issues and acknowledged that Pakistan is a country that is not loyal to human rights and making sure their citizens feel safe and protected? He would most likely be ousted by his government, potentially prosecuted, and he would be doing the exact opposite of what an ambassador is supposed to do! Additionally, his acknowledgment would only temporarily make those in the audience feel validated but their anger would rise up again with the realization that nothing will be done to change these issues or give the people of Pakistan the justice they deserve. Despite these realities, would his acknowledgment truly mean anything?