 |
 |
HBO: What did you discover about Daniel Pearl and
Ohmar Sheik as you began work on the film?
Ramesh Sharma: Well, from the perspective of Danny Pearl, I
came to know him because we have lots of
common friends. At that time, he was with
the Wall Street Journal in Bombay. He was
the kind of a person who you met and there
was a kind of connection immediately because
as a cliché goes, he was a good human being.
And it radiated. And that's what everybody
remembers about him. Whether it was music
people or the journalists he met, they were all
taken, bowled over by his charm and by his
goodness.
And when we were researching, I think that's
what comes out is the humanism. He was an
incredible journalist. When you read his
writings you realize the kind of work he did.
It wasn't the superficial work of a foreigner
who comes to a distant land and writes from
the top. He got into the grass roots. He
searched for stories. He researched. He tried
to be a bridge between civilizations. And that
was the compelling factor about Danny Pearl.
What was amazing about Omar Sheikh was
the fact that he wasn't the stereotypical jihadi.
You know he wasn't from a poor family, he
was an educated man; he started in the
London School of Economics. And yet he goes
on to become an extremist. That itself was a
compelling story. And what I found very
exciting about the two was this huge contrast
between a humanist, and somebody who also
wanted to change the world but on his terms
with violence.
HBO: Give us a little background on how did Ohmar
Sheik lure Daniel Pearl into his trap.
Ahmed Jamal: Ohmar Sheik believed in this notion that you
can make a difference by kidnapping someone
and using them for ransom. And with the new
technology of the Internet, Danny fell into his
orbit. And when he did, Ohmar Sheik was
very clever in disarming Danny through
personal emails. He gave information of a
personal nature, asking about Danny's
pregnant wife. And he was disarmed by that.
HBO: What was it like being an American journalist
at that time in that place?
Ramesh Sharma: This was just after 9/11. So there was a
simmering anger. I mean this was a time
where within Pakistan there was a divided,
sort of a country because there were those
who weren't happy that President Musharraf
was now towing the U.S. line. So the
atmosphere was super-charged. Working for
the Wall Street Journal, Danny Pearl
represented in many ways the same thing that
the Twin Towers represented; the symbol of
financial might of the United States.
And for somebody like Omar Sheikh, there
were many other journalists that were there
who were also looking for stories. Why is it
that they chose Danny Pearl? One reason of
course was that they had access to him. The
fact still remains that the atmosphere had an
impact on the events that happened, and they
wanted to teach America a lesson. And what
better way of getting publicity than
kidnapping or holding for ransom a journalist
from a very powerful media institution.
And of course what happened subsequently
was a great tragedy. But the truth is that
Omar Sheikh was a very intelligent man. He
really believed in the power of his mind. He
was a chess player. He was a man who
believed that he could play with the mind of
others.
Ahmed Jamal: And Daniel Pearl was a man who I think was
in many ways disarmed also because he spent
so much time reporting from Islamic
countries. He felt he was a friend of Islam.
That he didn't feel threatened.
Ramesh Sharma: I think the rules of the game have changed. And they've changed especially in places
where the fight that you're seeing is from
extremism and terrorism. Maybe if there's a
civil war somewhere or some kind of internal
trouble, journalists would still be respected.
But in places where there is this great fight
with fundamentalists who have absolutely no
respect for human life, I think journalists
become very easy targets.
HBO: What is Daniel Pearl's legacy?
Ramesh Sharma: I think his greatest legacy would be his
humanism. Ultimately, that is the most
redemptive feature of civilization. I mean the
world is a barbaric place. And the moment
you've lost humanism you actually are lost.
And what was great about Daniel Pearl also
was dialogue. He believed that you could
have different civilizations and different
viewpoints, and that it was only through
dialogue you could resolve it. And that's what
he was trying to do with his writing: to make
the West understand that Islam is a
civilization that has to be respected. It has
many, many important facets to it; you cannot
stereotype it.
I think in many ways Daniel Pearl was a
secular person who believed in inclusiveness.
I think the answer to a lot of things that are
happening in the world today is this element
of inclusiveness. That unless you bring in
this inclusiveness, unless you try to
understand somebody else's viewpoint, you
are going to create problems. And the more
you stereotype and demonize your opponent
and tar them with the same brush, the more
you're going to alienate the moderates. The
more militancy you're going to get.
And I think somewhere in Daniel Pearl, he got
it; this was a solution that he intuitively found
which is why he went to various places and
wrote about the culture. He was writing for
the Wall Street Journal but he was writing
about carpets in Iran. He was writing about
food. He was writing about the common
people. He was trying to make this dialogue
between two societies and hoping that by
understanding each other you could resolve
many of the differences that we're creating
violence and war. I think that is his lasting
legacy.
And as a journalist, his greatest legacy
perhaps is the fact that he fought for truth,
even when the truth was sometimes
uncomfortable and unpalatable to the
government in America. He didn't care. He
wanted to report the truth. And I think
Daniel Pearl's writings and his position on
what journalism should be-- there's a great
lesson for all of us there. And that to me is
what the entire story of Daniel Pearl brings
out.
And I think what's happened subsequently
with the Daniel Pearl Foundation, and
interfaith dialogue that's going on is a
remarkable thing for Pearl's parents. No
parent can go through that and really survive
fully. And they've come through it with this
incredibly noble gesture of trying to
perpetuate his memory through an interfaith
dialogue, and that itself is a redeeming part of
the whole tragedy.
|
|
|
|
|
