Girl who defied Pakistani Taliban shot for ‘promoting Western culture'

Malala Yousafzai told Pakistani media in 2009, 'I don’t mind if I have to sit on the floor at school. All I want is education.'

A 14-year-old girl who became a national heroine when she protested the Pakistani Taliban’s ban on education for girls in her home district was in critical condition Tuesday after she was shot in the head as she waited for a ride home from her beloved school, according to officials and witnesses

Malala Yousafzai, who was only 11 when she stood up to the Taliban over their ban, was sitting in a school van in Swat with other students on Monday, waiting to go home, when an assailant approached, asked which student was Malala, then opened fire. She was airlifted to a hospital in the provincial capital, where she was reported in critical condition. Fortunately, doctors said, the bullet did not enter her brain.

Claiming responsibility, Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan, the main faction of Pakistan’s home-grown Taliban, warned that if she survived, it would return to attack her again. Earlier this year the TTP had stated that she was on their hit list for her “secular” views.

“She was young but she was promoting Western culture,” TTP spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan told local news media, adding that it was a warning to other youngsters.

The Pakistan military supposedly cleared Swat, a district in northern Pakistan, of Taliban in 2009, but the area still has a heavy military presence.

Two girls who were in the van and injured when the gunman opened fire described the attack to local reporters from their hospital beds.

Malala came to the world’s attention when her diary, written under a pseudonym, was the basis for a report by the local Urdu language service of the BBC. In it she described what was happening in Swat, which was then under Taliban control. Then, with the Taliban menace still present, in early 2009 Malala spoke out on television, always sticking carefully to her demand only for schooling.

In a Pakistani television appearance in Swat in early 2009, with Taliban sympathizers in the audience, the then preteen Malala had said, “I don’t mind if I have to sit on the floor at school. All I want is education. And I am afraid of no one.”

Malala said then that her ambition was to become a politician. “This country is in crisis and our governments are lazy,” she said.

The shooting of the girl more than three years later immediately renewed debate over what to do about the Pakistani Taliban. Despite their relentless violence since 2007, some Pakistanis see the extremist group as nothing more than a reaction to the central government’s support for the American presence in Afghanistan and US drone missile strikes in the country’s tribal area, the Taliban’s traditional area of operation.

Over the weekend, Imran Khan, the former cricket star turned populist politician, led a march to the edge of the tribal area, demanding that peace talks be opened with the Pakistani Taliban and that the drone strikes end.

Media figures and other politicians and media figures, shocked by the attack on Malala, quickly denounced the Taliban on Tuesday.

Hamid Mir, Pakistan’s most popular talk show host, began his program last night with the words: “I can see the whole nation’s head bowed in shame today.”

“I want to ask those who shot a girl who only wanted to go to school: Do you think you are Muslims?”

Speaking in Parliament, Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf said: “Malala is my daughter, too. She is Pakistan’s daughter. If this [extremist] mindset persists, which girl in Pakistan will be safe?”

Swat, a mountainous area that was known as a holiday resort and does not border Afghanistan, started to come under the creeping control of the Pakistani Taliban over several years, from at least 2005. The extremists’ domination was complete by 2007, seemingly accepted by Pakistan’s central government, which in February 2009 signed a treaty with the Taliban that effectively handed them Swat. It was only after US pressure, and the Taliban’s decision to stage a takeover of the neighboring district of Buner, that the Pakistani military launched an operation to dislodge them in May 2009.

Shah is a McClatchy special correspondent.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.