Power of Nonviolence

Power of Nonviolence

            In a world where terrorism has dominated the headlines, violence has become the norm of human life. The right response has been the debate in several countries. Many people believe that terrorism should be met with an equal measure of violence. Terrorism has been associated with extremism and massive disrespect to humanity. Most terrorists fight with the motivation that it is a religious obligation to fight for the cause that aims at establishing the dominance of a particular religion in a given region. Terrorists tend to defend their cause based on religious writings that are not interpreted well among the people. Agencies tasked with fighting extremism and terrorism, have had difficulties in choosing the right way to take. For example, several groups disagree on whether to use violence to destroy terrorist groups or to use diplomacy and peaceful negotiations to change the way of thinking of the different groups.  Yousufzai Malala has risen above the odds to prove that nonviolence is more powerful than violence and can be seen to challenge the course of terrorism.

Born in July 1997, Malala is a Pakistani national born at a time when terrorism was rampant especially in the Islamic states. Malala was born at the Swat valley were the famous terrorist group; the Taliban had established its terrorism ideologies. The main challenge that awaited Malala was the rule set by the Taliban group that, girls were not allowed to attend school. Education was only viewed as a right reserved for men, and that education was supposed to be given according to the ideologies set by the terrorist group. However, Malala chose to represent the voice of the Pakistani girls and thus defied the Taliban call. Malala advocated for education for the girl child and did not heed to any threats posed by the Taliban. In the year 2012, Malala was shot in the head by a suspected militant but survived the attack miraculously (Smith, 2017). The attack on Malala followed a series of death threats issued to Malala by the Taliban group and happened as Malala was returning home amid growing fears of attack by the group towards girls attending schools. After surviving the attack, Malala did not stop at anything from standing as an advocate for female education. The courage shown by Malala to continue with the advocacy for female education despite the assassination attempt led her into winning the Nobel Peace Prize in the year 2012.

The case of Malala is a real gesture of how nonviolence can be used as a strong weapon against violence. From experience, responding to violence with violence only leads to loss of lives and confusion. Responding to violence with violence is only proof that violence is acceptable in society. The government forces should take into consideration the factors that lead individuals into joining terrorist groups and seek diplomatic ways of helping out the individuals. The case of Malala shows how strong nonviolence can act to oppose the mistreatments posed by violent groups. Although Malala had the support of her father in the pursuit of education, she decided to talk on behalf of the girls who had to beat two obstacles to getting an education: parents who did not admit to the responsibility of providing education to the female children and the militants. Malala admits to using wisdom to challenge the militants who are always sent to kill her by narrating to them how the cause they were following was not sensible. In one of the interviews on live television, Malala admits that she does not shy from explaining the importance of education to the militants. After making the point understood by the militants, Malala would dare the militants to complete the assignment given to them. The events that Malala survived under the attack by the militants prove that the nonviolence was a strategy.

The use of nonviolence equips individuals with confidence. Malala seems confident in her quest of fighting for the rights of the female children. Malala has the guts to attend to interviews on national televisions and criticizes the ideologies of the Taliban group. The fact that the Taliban seem to draw back when dealing with Malala proves that nonviolence can dominate in the event of violence and can serve well to champion for the rights of people caught between violent crises. Malala is a unique character and stands to change the perception of Islam that has associated the religion with terrorism. A significant group of people does not accept the fact that terrorism is only an act of extremism from individuals who take religion to cover the evil behind terrorism. Being a Muslim, Malala decides to show that Islam was much better than people used to think. Many people had always been associating Islam with violence and with an aim to conquer the world. Malala is among the countless Muslims who have decided to stand for justice through nonviolent means (Schultz, 2017). However, Malala decides to do the fight for justice uniquely by standing in the way of danger to make her case heard by the right people. Malala takes her fight to the militants’ territories by making sure that the militants sent to assassinate her receive the information about the young girl’s fight before going on with their assignment.

The militants are unconfident in the bid to silence Malala and leave a doubt on the power of violence over nonviolence. The attempt to kill Malala in the bus in 2012 seemed to be conducted by unconfident individuals. The use of a masked man to assassinate a young innocent girl for standing for the rights of other girls can only be seen as an act of fear and a failed course. In yet another event, violence fails to prevail over nonviolence since Malala does not die and later recovers to continue with the fight for her course. Malala knew that the attempt by the Taliban to prevent girls from getting an education was only directed to the impoverished community since the rich were able to obtain education for their daughters from far off areas. The fact that Malala did not stop in the fight for justice and went further to establish girls’ schools showed how determined Malala was in the fight against terrorism and injustice towards feminism. Malala was a little girl who had no power backing to engage in violent resistance. The immediate response from the Taliban in case Malala had decided to use violence would probably be an armed response. The most likely power that Malala would have for such a course would be mobilizing other little girls to engage the militants, and that would only have led to killings by the militants and confusion in the society.

The use of nonviolent means to fight for justice is not costly. Malala did not need any special weapons to engage in the fight for education and challenging the militants. Malala only worked strategically to get her information to the militants, and that included using the chance when the militants attacked her to pass the information to the militants who would be sent to assassinate her. In one of the events, Malala raises a very sensitive topic that captured the attention of the militant when she mentioned of the desire to help other children that the militants were destroying the only future available for the children. Malala has grown to understand that the only reason the Taliban were against the education of children was that the militants were afraid of the outcomes of education. The feared outcome of education was the empowerment of the women that would lead to the end of the dominance of men over women. The fact that Malala has remained in the fight for justice for such a long time proves the argument that nonviolence has prevailed for a large part over violence and the militants do not have concrete reasons to engage Malala directly for her course. Also, the use of nonviolence has won positive attention from the international community.

In sum, Malala has used the power of nonviolence to stand out in a society faced by the threat of terrorism. Malala has faced many challenges in the fight against injustice and the act of denying the female children, their rights to education. However, Malala employs the only weapon available to her; courage and confidence motivated by nonviolence. The story of Malala is sufficient proof that nonviolence is more powerful than violence.

References

Smith, N. (2017). Faith and Awareness in Young Female Celebrity Life Writing: The Memoirs     of Lena Dunham, Malala Yousafzai, and Katie Davis.

Schultz, D. F. (2017). Precedents and Parallels: Raden Adjeng Kartini and Malala Yousafzai—    Two Case Studies of Transformational Leadership. Rethinking Leadership in Higher    Education—Vision, Models, Expansion, Inclusion, Development and Transformations,           34.