I get what this Foreign Policy article is trying to say, despite some legitimate concerns about Malala's father. But really, couldn't have they researched this just a little better?
Yes, the idea of US intelligence recruiting a child agent is utterly ridiculous:
He was 8 at the time.
Like I said, I get what FP are geting at. But maybe the reason conspiracy theories are so prevalent in that part of the world is that they are often the target of conspiracies. Instead of infantalizing foreigners and treating them as simpletons who cannot appreciate sophisticated western political discourse, maybe we could try and see things from their point of view for once? Crazy talk, I know.
QuoteThe simple statement, "Malala Yousafzai, an innocent schoolgirl," has become increasingly contested through a counter-narrative that labels her a "CIA agent." What use the CIA would have had for a 14 year-old girl in Swat is of course a complete mystery.
Yes, the idea of US intelligence recruiting a child agent is utterly ridiculous:
QuoteAt the time of the meeting, the boy didn't know that the United States had decided to kill a man named Adnan al-Qadhi, and had turned to its allies in Yemen for assistance. Now the Yemeni government needed the child's help. The Republican Guard officers told him what they wanted him to do: plant tiny electronic chips on the man he had come to think of as a surrogate father. The boy knew and trusted the officers; they were his biological father's friends. He told them he would try. He would be their spy.
He was 8 at the time.
Like I said, I get what FP are geting at. But maybe the reason conspiracy theories are so prevalent in that part of the world is that they are often the target of conspiracies. Instead of infantalizing foreigners and treating them as simpletons who cannot appreciate sophisticated western political discourse, maybe we could try and see things from their point of view for once? Crazy talk, I know.