Many of us are familiar with Malala Yousufzai, and while she was once an inspiration to me, my perspective on her has recently shifted.
Among the three girls who were shot, Malala stood out as the sole individual airlifted on a private plane for advanced treatment in Birmingham. In contrast, Shazia Ramzan, shot twice in the arm, and Kainat Riaz, shot in the hand, persevered with their education at the same school without the opportunity for the high-level treatment Malala received.
Despite her advocacy for girls' education in Pakistan, questions arise about her commitment, considering she doesn't even reside in Pakistan anymore. If her fight is genuinely for the education rights of girls in Pakistan, why isn't she actively present in the country?
Another question that strikes is that with numerous women in Pakistan making substantial contributions and even sacrificing their lives for humanitarian causes, what sets Malala apart and leads to her receiving such recognition?
Particularly in the context of the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict, Malala's decision to maintain a neutral stance, despite being a Muslim and having firsthand experience in a war-like situation, reinforces the perception that she might be a puppet influenced by Western interests. Why hasn't she spoken out or provided support for the children affected by conflicts in Palestine, Iraq, and Syria, considering the significant loss of life in wars involving ISIS and Israel's actions in Gaza?
Lastly, when considering the thousands or even millions of children who have lost their lives in recent US-led conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, and Vietnam, should they not also be afforded the same level of recognition and prestige?
What do you guys think of this?