“Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc” in Pakistan

In Islamabad, a bomb exploded in Marriott hotel, and killed more than 50 people including the Czech Ambassador (as of 21 September).

Allegedly, religious extremists and terrorists nesting in Pakistan conducted the strike, according to government officials, scholars, and journalists. Regardless of Pakistani position of the so-called “war on terrorism,” its unstable domestic security is enough to make the world horrified because of possible nuclear proliferation.

What I would like to call attention in THIS article is, however, neither on terrorist groups in Pakistan nor nuclear proliferation; it is on “post hoc ergo propter hoc (after that, therefore because of that).” This phrase is often referred by scholars in political
science and economics, and highlights the difference between correlation and causation. In order to give the readers some idea, I would like to bring an example from a TV drama “the West Wing,” a fictional story of the US administration.

At the premier of the second season, President Bartlet and his staff are shot, and National Security Advisor Dr. McNally recommends the soldier deployment into Kuwait and the Persian Gulf on the ground of possible involvement of Iraq in the attack. President did not take the recommendation. Later in the series, it is revealed that the attack was intended on President’s African-American Personal Aid conducted by a White supremacist group.

Of course, it is a fictional story, and hence, it cannot be compared with the real life situation. Yet, the message “correlation does not mean causation” still holds water. A happens after B does not mean A causes B. Likewise, doing C to stop A does not necessarily stop B. In the story above, Dr. McNally’s recommendation regarding Iraq is ineffective towards the White supremacists, as the gun shot was not fired by anti-American terrorists.

In the next few weeks, Pakistani government led by new leadership is most likely to tighten the security and may arrest several anti-Western activists in Pakistan. However, if (I emphasize this “if”) the bombing was conducted by political opponents in Pakistan who are not satisfied by the new leadership, such arrest mentioned above is off-focus.

In conclusion, tighten the security in order to prevent a further bomb attack is undoubtedly necessary. Yet, the Pakistani authority must be careful to speculate motives of the attack and pre-emptively arrest the possible suspects. If the arrest was mistake, it encourages the further hostility and thus the second strike.

Tags: Articles, Columns, Pakistan, Politics

Category: Columns, Long Castling