the late Nelson Mandela spoke of “twin obligations”: everybody has both an obligation to the family and to their community. In “Letter from Birmingham Jail” Martin Luther King Jr. discusses his moral obligation to fight against systemic racism in his country, on behalf of his community. In Kamila Shamsie’s Home Fire Aneeka Pasha’s obligation lies deeply within her family, more specifically, her brother Parvaiz, who died in Istanbul after trying to abandon his Jihadi past and return to the United Kingdom. The refusal of Kamarat Lone to allow Parvaiz’s body back into Britain for a proper burial highlights the unequal treatment of the Muslim community in modern Western society. Aneeka’s fight for her brother’s repatriation into Britain is emblematic of a pursuit of justice and equal treatment of the larger Muslim community. Aneeka, like King, faces a moral dilemma. While King’s moral dilemma was clear, the system of segregation and the overall oppressive policies of the United States government, Aneeka’s is not. While King has a large support system, consisting of the majority of his African American community, his religious community, and several white members, Aneeka has none. Throughout most of the novel, Aneeka is alone in the pursuit of her brother’s repatriation as justice. Although it can be argued that Aneeka’s pursuit for justice is unconventional and perhaps manipulative, the obstacles she has to go through as a Muslim woman are difficult, and in the face of adversity she stayed true to herself fighting for a just cause. For this reason, I find my sympathies lying with Aneeka.
Aneeka Pasha’s struggle for justice is catalyzed by Britain’s refusal to allow her brother to come back and sustained by the necessity for change in the treatment of the Muslim community by society at-large. The discrimination against the Pasha family does not start when their brother is exposed as a jihadi terrorist. For them, and many Muslim families in similar situations, everyday life is filled with instances of xenophobia and scrutiny. Xenophobia at the hands of the state are present at the beginning of the novel when Isma was detained, her belongings were confiscated, and was subject to hours of interrogation. Despite being British born, the officer asks if she “considers [herself] British” (Shamsie 5). This question of nationality and citizenship is one of central concern in the novel. When it is known that Parvaiz went to join the IS, his British citizenship was revoked, rendering him stateless. It can be argued that, if Parvaiz was not of Muslim descent, his citizenship would have never been taken away. Isma expresses similar sentiments: “the terrorists were never described by the media as ‘British terrorists.’ Even when the world ‘British’ was used, it was always ‘British of Pakistani descent’ or ‘British Muslim’” (Shamsie 40). As Isma explains, it's as if there is an interposition between being British and being Muslim, a mutual exclusivity.
This idea of never being fully British if you are of Muslim descent is best exemplified by Kamarat Lone. Despite his wealth, education, and his powerful position as home secretary of the UK, Lone continues to face scrutiny because of the color of his skin. Lone is conscious of his tenuous position and the fact that he faces opposition from both sides of the aisle, which earns him the name “Lone Wolf.” Insecure about the way that his religion and ethnicity set him apart, he makes it his mission to take on the “backwardness of British Muslims” (Shamsie 35). The cost of Lone’s success has been assimilation–having to forgo his religion, family, and culture “as though Muslim-ness was something he had boldly stridden away from” (Shamsie 35). The instability of Kamarat Lone's place in society compels him to decide to revoke Parvaiz’s citizenship, ignoring that decision’s effect on his own family, notably Eamonn.
While Kamarat’s decisions are made in fear of the fragility of his position in society as a Muslim, Aneeka willfully ignores the fragility of her place in society, which allows her to stand up to him and the unjust law. Although Isma paints Aneeka’s naivety in a negative light, this very naivety is what allows her to take on Kamarat Lone’s decision despite her status as a Muslim woman in a political climate that is unfavorable to people in her position. Like Aneeka, King defies and protests against the state law of segregation which he feels is immoral. King’s letter is composed in his period of incarceration for fighting against bigotry, racism, and unequal treatment of African Americans at the hands of the state. King faces criticism from clergymen who believe that this push for equality is “unwise and untimely.” Similarly, Aneeka is frequently told by the people from her own community to back down against her push for justice, “[go] back to uni, study the law. Accept the law even when it's unjust” (Shamsie 203). According to King, however, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws asserting that “any law that degrades human personality is unjust” (King 3).
King responds to criticism by pointing out that “the time is always ripe to do right” (King 5) and that there is a call to action which must be responded to urgently. Through nonviolent direct action, King created a tension that caused a community to negotiate with him about an issue they would have preferred to neglect (King 2). According to King, a “dramatiz[ation]” of the issue is necessary so that “it can no longer be ignored”. As a way to bring awareness to her situation, Aneeka also dramatizes an event by flying to Karachi to take her brother’s body. Staging a protest against Lone’s orders at the British consulate in Pakistan, where she sat with her brother’s corpse “ until the world changed, or crumbled into the soil around them” (Shamsie 200).
Ultimately, both King and Aneeka sense the “urgency of the moment” and “the powerful need for action to combat injustice” (King 6). While Aneeka’s manipulation of Eamonn can be a cause for criticism, her ability to do whatever it takes to fight for justice for her brother is honorable. In the end, Eamonn reconciles with Aneeka and recognizes the urgency of the situation, the need to fight for justice for Parvaiz and to advance the cause for equal treatment of Muslims in society, In some way, both King and Aneeka can be seen as extremists. For King, however, extremism is not an issue, the importance lies in what kind of extremist one chose to be. He writes: “Will we be extremists for hate or love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or the extension of justice?” (King 6). Aneeka’s ability to stand up amongst opposition from the state, her community, and even her sister shows true character and devotion in fighting against immoral and unjust laws.