Support Us

Write For Us!

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

Writers Pool
About Us

A Global Digital Think-Tank on Policy Discourse.

Home Blog

Pakistan Must Reconcile with Bangladesh’s 1971 Painful Legacy

By
Saleem Samad
-
0
Bangladesh and Pakistan

It seems Bangladesh and Pakistan after decades of hiatus have made a major step forward treading into a new era of regional cooperation in South Asia, riddled with suspicion, distrust, disrespect, and lack of neighborliness among the eight countries.

When Nobel laureate Dr Muhammad Yunus, Chief Advisor of the Interim Government of Bangladesh embraced Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif with grins on their faces decided to put the bilateral relations at a new height.

The reactivation of SAARC is a top priority for fostering regional cooperation and rebuilding trust among South Asian nations.

Shehbaz Sharif called for a strategic relationship between Dhaka and Islamabad and said “We are really looking forward to strengthening our relationship with our brother-in-country Bangladesh.”

Dr Yunus expressed his keenness to reactivate the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) as “a top priority.” The moribund eight-nation SAARC (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka) was largely stalled due to arguments between Islamabad and New Delhi, French news agency AFP quoted Yunus as telling Shehbaz.

“I am a big fan of the idea of SAARC. I keep harping on the issue. I want a summit of SAARC leaders even if it is only for a photo session because that will carry a strong message,” he said.

The two leaders of Bangladesh and Pakistan are two wings of India and are not physically connected by land, rivers, and blue mountains. Yunus and Sharif met on the sidelines at the D-8 Summit held by developing nations in Cairo, the capital of Egypt.

The two leaders expressed the desire to resolve outstanding grievances from the brutal birth of Bangladesh in 1971. The month of December is an emotional month for Bangladesh. The marauding Pakistan military surrendered jointly to Bangladesh Mukti Bahini guerillas and Eastern Command of the Indian Army on 16 December.

The day is observed with due solemnity to respect the millions of martyrs at the gigantic National Martyrs Memorial on the outskirts of the capital Dhaka. All organizations, professional bodies, and political parties pay homage at the site, except for the Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami, who were alleged henchmen and armed militias groups, which rampaged and pillaged thousands of villages during the nine months of liberation war.

Pakistan’s 1974 Tripartite Agreement acknowledged war crimes, yet justice for victims of the 1971 war remains elusive.

On a historic day, Lieutenant General Amir Abdullah Khan Niazi, Commander of Eastern Command, Pakistan Army and Indian Lieutenant General Jagjit Singh Aurora of the Eastern Command, Indian Army flanked by a dozen Mukti Bahini commanders signed a historic ‘instrument of surrender’ in accordance to Geneva Convention, and led to the surrender of 93,000 Pakistani soldiers, auxiliary forces, civil officers and their families.

It was the world’s largest surrender in terms of number of personnel since World War II. The prisoners of war (POWs) were repatriated under the Tripartite Agreement signed in April 1974 by Foreign Ministers of Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India in New Delhi. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) held in Lahore, Pakistan in February 1974 helped resolve the issue of Bangladesh’s recognition intervened by Egypt and Algeria.

An estimated 93,000 members of Pakistan’s armed forces, other auxiliary forces, civil officers, and their families surrendered on 16 December after a humiliating defeat, which created an independent Bangladesh. The eastern province plunged into a bloody civil war after the military junta refused to accept the election results of the first-ever general elections in 1970.

The martial law government launched a crackdown ‘Operation Searchlight’ in March 1971 in denying hand over political power to the elected representatives. Awami League led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was detained.

When Mujib was picked up by the military in Dhaka, nearly 1,500 political and student leaders, intellectuals, acclaimed poets, senior lawyers, journalists and others were arrested from all over Pakistan. Yunus told AFP “The issues (of 1971) have kept coming again and again. Let’s settle those issues for us to move forward.”

Dr. Muhammad Yunus and PM Shehbaz Sharif call for resolving historical grievances to focus on future generations.

Relations between the two countries experienced hiccups during the last five decades. The three military dictators General Ziaur Rahman, General H.M. Ershad and General Moeen U Ahmed went ahead to thaw the bilateral relations with their counterpart military junta in Pakistan, which were never sustainable in the see-saw diplomatic maneuver by the autocratic regimes in both countries.

During the democratic era, the two Begums failed to build up the relationship between Bangladesh and Pakistan. The prestigious Pakistan newspaper The Dawn writes: In the years since the split (independence), Dhaka’s leaders — especially the recently ousted regime of Sheikh Hasina — stayed firmly in the Indian camp, preferring to maintain close ties with New Delhi and keeping Islamabad at arm’s length.

However, ever since a popular uprising that saw Hasina’s government toppled in August, there has been a thaw in ties between the two capitals, with trade and bilateral relations seeing a marked improvement, wrote the newspaper.

They also agreed to expand and deepen bilateral cooperation in all areas of mutual interest and emphasized the need to align efforts to achieve mutually beneficial development objectives.

The two leaders acknowledged the importance of people-to-people contacts and cultural exchanges including enhanced exchange of artists, sportspersons, academics, students, etc. Political historian Mohiuddin Ahmad said he does not see how the relationship would defrost the relationship which has deepened scars of the brutal independence war.

It is no denying that in the Tripartite Agreement, Clause 13, Pakistan agreed to put 195 senior military officers on trial for war crimes, crimes against humanity and rape as a weapon of war. Unfortunately, lack of a guarantee clause in the agreement, military dictator and President General Ziaul Huq instead pardoned the accused, which was a breach of the Delhi agreement, said the Mukti Bahini veteran Mohiuddin Ahmad.

An unconditional apology for 1971 crimes could serve as a foundation for deeper reconciliation and cooperation.

Sharif said the 1974 Tripartite Agreement involving Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India settled things, “but if there are other outstanding issues,” he would be happy to look into it. Yunus said it would indeed be nice to resolve things “once and for all for the future generations.”

He doubts settling the 1971 issue, retired Ambassador Humayun Kabir, who is also a liberation war veteran said it would be not easy for the people of the millions of people who joined the guerillas, became war refugees, genocide survivors and rape victims would be able to bury the nightmare and pardon the perpetrators, who were not punished from their crimes in 1971.

When military usurper General Pervez Musharraf’s visit to Bangladesh in July 2002 was greeted by a general strike and Dhaka University students fought a pitch battle with riot police in the capital.

He regretted the excesses committed during Bangladesh’s 1971 war of independence but called for burying the past in the spirit of friendship. Well, his statement was short of apology for the crimes committed during the war and said “Your brothers and sisters in Pakistan share the pains of the events of 1971.” Perhaps an unconditional apology for crimes committed by the Pakistan military during 1971 would melt the ice once and for all, remarks Ambassador Kabir.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.

Nuclear Energy: A Path to Energy Security and Climate Resilience

By
Sher Ali Kakar
-
0
Nuclear energy

The rapidly growing energy demands, whilst reducing harmful emissions of greenhouse gases have become a key component of energy policies of many countries. Nuclear power is gaining widespread recognition as a clean reliable and economical source to combat pollution, climate change, and environmental risks.

Many countries including Pakistan aim to expand their nuclear power capacity in the coming decades and reduce their dependence on fossil fuels. Pakistan, facing the deepest energy and economic crisis in the country`s history, needs to revive its energy policies and prioritize nuclear energy to achieve twin targets—the growing energy needs and address climate change challenges.

Pakistan’s energy sector relies heavily on fossil fuels, contributing to 76.1% of the country’s CO2 emissions.

Pakistan is grappling with a serious energy shortage issue that contributes to the country`s economic crisis. Due to the inefficiency of Pakistan`s power sector, electricity costs have significantly risen well beyond what many citizens can afford. Energy shortages have greatly affected commercial activities in many ways, such as production, profitability and productivity, investment, and business suspension while increasing the cost of living for consumers and householders.

Currently, Pakistan is largely dependent on fossil fuel imports for its energy needs which is a major burden on the country`s economy as it puts significant pressure on foreign exchange reserves. In 2023, the contribution of fossil fuels was 59% of the country`s electricity generation mix. In the first quarter of FY25, the oil import bill surged by 15.74% indicating that the consumption of petroleum goods is rising.

This has worsened energy insecurity and made the country vulnerable to fluctuations in the prices of oil coal and gas in the international markets.  Also, due to its heavy dependence on fossil fuel energy for economic growth, 76.1% of overall CO2 emissions are from the energy sector.

Pakistan suffers severely from Climate change. The Global Climate Risk Index 2024 ranked Pakistan as the 5th most vulnerable country to climate change. In 2022, the climate-change-induced flooding caused mass displacement of people and economic damage of $40 billion.

Climate change has deeply affected the productivity of Pakistan’s agriculture sector which is considered the foundation of the country`s economy. The rise in temperatures, the alterations in precipitation, changes in the incidences of extreme weather events, and a decrease in water availability are negatively affecting the production of the agriculture sector.

Nuclear energy offers high efficiency with low greenhouse gas emissions, achieving a capacity factor exceeding 90%.

Nuclear energy is widely recognized as a reliable source, offering a stable baseload and often achieving one of the highest capacity factors among all energy sources, frequently exceeding 90%. This means that nuclear power plants operate at nearly full capacity almost continuously, in contrast to renewable sources like solar (15–30%) and wind (30–40%). Though wind and solar energy are considered economically competitive with fossil fuels in many countries, their capacity to generate electricity depends on the weather conditions and time of day.

Nuclear energy is known for low greenhouse gas emissions and offers high energy density, allowing a small amount of fuel to generate substantial electricity. It provides a reliable, cost-effective and stable energy supply, reducing dependence on fossil fuels and diversifying energy sources. Modern reactors feature advanced safety technologies, while long-term fuel availability ensures sustainability.

Many countries across the globe, including Pakistan, aim to increase the capacity of nuclear energy. For instance, the United States intends to triple its nuclear power output by 2050, increasing from its current capacity of 96,952 MW. China increased the capacity of its nuclear energy by more than 400% between 2010 and 2020.

Additionally, EU ministers recently voiced the approval of nuclear energy for the first time in their mandate of the bloc for the UN climate summit, marking the increasing use of atomic power as an energy source. The call for endorsement of nuclear energy represents a gradual change in the standpoint towards nuclear energy in Europe, which took a negative stance after Japan’s Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011.

Pakistan is currently operating six Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) with a total installed capacity of 3,545 MW which contributed about 18.2% of the total electricity generation in the national grid during July-March FY-2024. Pakistan aims to increase its nuclear power generation capacity to 40,000 MW by 2050 as part of its Nuclear Energy Vision 2050 reflecting the country’s commitment to expanding its energy mix and enhancing energy security through sustainable and clean energy solutions.

Pakistan aims to expand nuclear power capacity to 40,000 MW by 2050 under its Nuclear Energy Vision.

Nuclear energy enables Pakistan to meet its energy needs while tackling climate change challenges promoting a climate change resilient environment for the country`s agriculture sector. Thus, nuclear energy offers a sustainable solution for the country’s future.

Facing the dual challenge of climate change and rising energy demands, Pakistan needs to incorporate nuclear power into its energy plan to achieve both sustainability and energy security. Also, the peaceful application of nuclear power is incredibly useful in promoting a climate-resilient environment, pest management, and sustainable agricultural practices.

But, increasing nuclear power in Pakistan is not without significant challenges. Pakistan is excluded from trade in nuclear plants or materials which hinders the development of its civil nuclear energy program. The US-India nuclear deal and the NSG waiver which has provided India with the opportunity for nuclear trade despite being an outlaw to the NPT is an evident example of the discriminatory behavior of the international community.

Climate-change-induced challenges threaten Pakistan’s agriculture sector, exacerbating economic vulnerabilities.

Finally, through international cooperation and promoting public awareness about peaceful uses of nuclear technology, Pakistan can improve its energy security economic growth and address environmental challenges.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.

The Myth of ‘Peace’ in China’s Peaceful Rise

By
Ali Ayub
-
0
China

Global power distribution is dynamic and oscillates among different great powers. In the contemporary era, scholars debate the rise of China and its potential implications for the existing power distribution. The rise of China can be better understood in economic terms as it sustained incredible [average] GDP growth of 9.71% from 1989 to 2017. According to the World Bank, this is the highest-ever GDP growth sustained by a state.

The high GDP growth makes China the second-largest economy in the world in terms of GDP and the largest economy in terms of PPP. Scholars, particularly Western scholars, assume China will alter the dynamics of global structure. Nonetheless, China has always pledged that its rise will remain peaceful. Officially, China first marked its economic growth as “Peaceful Rise” and later replaced it with “Peaceful Development.”

China’s rise challenges the established global order, with scholars debating whether it will remain peaceful amidst increasing assertiveness.

So far, China has grown peacefully. However, China’s rise’s future trajectory might differ from its past developments. In line with Mearsheimer’s argument, this article assumes that China’s rise in the future cannot be peaceful. Many reasons can be accounted for this claim, among which this article subscribes to the following: the historical pattern of other powers’ rise – Germany, Japan, and USSR, the new global developments/dynamics, and China’s domestic changes.

Historically, the rise of a new great power (with a different ideology from the existing powers) is always coupled with abrupt changes in international structure. For instance, the rise of Germany after its unification in 1871 and its subsequent quest for a share in global power eventually led to World War I. Likewise, the rise of imperial Japan in the post-World War I era became one of the leading causes of World War II and the inter-war crisis period. Further, the rise of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in WWII remains a backbone of great power contention throughout the Cold War era.

All these powers were unsatisfied with their place in the global structure and challenged the status quo. These powers first enhance their military power and then flex their muscles globally. China’s rise is slightly different from the pattern of the above-mentioned powers as it primarily focuses on its economic development. However, with the economic development, China is heavily investing in its military.

Military expenditure of China has grown exponentially since the outset of China’s economic growth, and China’s military budget increased from US $27.86 billion in 1996 to US $224 billion in 2023 (1.55 trillion Yuan). Moreover, with the coming of Xi Jinping, China is eagerly acquiring new military technologies and displaying more assertive behavior in security matters.

Historically, no emerging power with a different ideology has risen peacefully, raising concerns about China’s trajectory.

Since the dawn of the 21st century, several significant changes have occurred in international society. The foremost among them is the rise of China itself. A few decades ago, when China began crawling on the development path, China was weak and unstable. Now, the dynamics are different. Further, the Asian Financial Crisis (1997), the 9/11 incident (2001), America’s unilateral invasion of Iraq (2003), the American Financial Crisis (2008), the European debt Crisis (2012-15), the growing environmental catastrophe, the outbreak of Covid’19, and other events/challenges, severely weakened US legitimacy as a hegemon.

The declining US legitimacy creates a leadership space. The available space will certainly motivate China to play its role. Another dynamic is the rise of Xi Jinping to the highest power cadre in China. Xi is an ambitious person with global aims. Xi’s actions are more assertive than his predecessors as he believes it is the right time to extend China’s power beyond its horizons. The aforementioned global and national dynamics have been missing in China in the past decades.

China never acknowledges wanting to alter the existing structure; instead, it repeatedly pledged its support for the current global structure. However, they always maintained that the existing structure should be reformed for a more equitable and fair power distribution. Before Xi’s era, China was gently asking for reforms. After Xi assumed power, China became more assertive in its claims. On one hand, China is now vehemently pushing for reforms in the system. On the other hand, China is actively engaged in forming new institutions and taking new initiatives.

Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is the most significant example, which engages more than 100 countries through different projects. Likewise, China joined hands with other developing states and formed BRICS. China’s active advocacy of expansion finally led to the inclusion of six new members into the group. From the BRICS platform, China and other members launched the New Development Bank (NDB) and Contingent Reserve Assets (CRA). These developments aim to rescue member states during crises and decrease their dependency on international institutions.

Moreover, China also laid the foundation of the Asian Infrastructural Investment Bank (AIIB), which gives loans to states for developmental projects. Finally, China initiated projects like Asia for Asians and Community with Shared Future. Ostensibly, all these projects support underdeveloped and developing states in their development endeavors. However, scholars are alarmed that these institutions will be utilized for reducing states’ reliance on international liberal institutions vis-à-vis growing China’s role in global power dynamics.

US efforts to decouple from China through alliances and trade wars risk global economic instability.

China is rising and making its mark all across the globe. However, few scholars doubt China’s rise. Still, many scholars assume that China is rising. Few scholars believe that China’s rise will be peaceful. They based their claim on China’s rise in the past few decades, which is smooth and peaceful. Nevertheless, this might not be the case in the future. Historically, no state with different ideologies from established great power(s) ever rose peacefully. China’s behavior differs slightly from the past emerging great powers but somehow aligns with the historical pattern.

Additionally, space has been created to shape China’s behavior in the global dynamics, where many factors challenge US legitimacy and hegemony. Finally, the rise of assertive leaders like Xi Jinping to a central powerful position in China will also impact China’s foreign policy. In Xi’s era, China’s policy structure, where the economy was dictating politics – Deng reforms, was reversed; now, politics is again dictating the economy like in the Mao era. Therefore, it can be assumed that China’s future development trajectory will take a new and more aggressive path.

The aggression, or even changing the course of foreign policy/relations, might aggravate established power, the US, which can trigger conflict. Nonetheless, the conflict nature will be different from past conflicts. Currently, the US and the West are looking for shortcuts like the formation of QUAD and I2U2 alliances, and imposing a trade war on China. Pragmatically, current policies are intended to decouple from China. Though, rhetorically US top leadership always maintains that they are not intended to achieve decoupling. These policies can never be viable.

Integration into the existing global system and acknowledging China’s role are essential to maintaining peace in the evolving power dynamics.

Decoupling from China will be disastrous for the whole world, particularly the US and the West. The only way to avoid the conflict will be through the complete integration of China into the existing system and shaping China’s belief in the system in ideational terms, not instrumental ones. Moreover, another way of preventing conflict escalation will be the US acknowledgment of China as a great power and acceptance of its role in power dynamics. Without both elements, the “Peace” in China’s peaceful rise will remain missing.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.

US Biased Sanctions Against Pakistan

By
Ali Abbas
-
0
Sanctions

The United States has sanctioned the National Development Complex (NDC), which is responsible for Pakistan’s long-range missile program. Along with the NDC, three other firms have also been sanctioned for assisting Pakistan’s ballistic missile development. Earlier this year, the US also sanctioned three Chinese firms for similar reasons which can be termed as silly excuses, at best.

The fact that US sanctions are biased and lack uniformity requires no explanation. It is amply clear that sanctions are not applied to enforce international norms such as non-proliferation, rather they are used against states that do not toe the American line. Pakistan has no missile that reaches the US mainland. Rather, it is India’s (the US’ geostrategic favorite for containing China), whose accelerating missile capability not only reaches the US homeland but also the entire Europe.

The US sanctions on Pakistan’s missile program highlight bias and geostrategic favoritism toward India, undermining regional stability.

This is a longstanding strategic issue being ignored by the world community. The US must have a balancing strategy in South Asia. Favoring one against the other has never been a viable strategy. Pakistan can never be ignored and undermined. If the modest balance is not kept, it will have repercussions on the South Asian strategic stability.

The Americans have always perceived Pakistan as a threat and have never welcomed its strategic missiles or nuclear programs. That Pakistan managed to become a nuclear power, notwithstanding its indigenous commitment and the leaderships’ vision, would not have been possible if Pakistan had not leveraged its indispensable position in the Cold War and the Afghan Jihad against communism.

The growing number of sanctions on Pakistan’s strategic programs are not just morally outrageous but also signal, albeit subtly, towards a risky future. The Stuxnet virus which infected the Iranian centrifuges in Natanz back in 2010, severely hampered Iran’s progress on its peaceful nuclear program. Common amongst the suspicions was the assumption that the virus had entered the centrifuges through a USB stick but given the tight security in and around such facilities, this idea seems far-fetched.

Another more probable theory suggests that American and Israeli intelligence infiltrated Iranian supply chains related to its nuclear program. The US and Israel succeeded in infiltrating and managed to compromise Siemens equipment, notably the Step7 software intended to be used in Iranian nuclear reactors.

The Hezbollah pager explosions in September 2024 also directed attention toward Israeli infiltration of Hezbollah’s supply chain, as the late head of the group Hassan Nasrallah advised its members to stop using smartphones to avoid being hacked or traced by Israeli intelligence. However, according to experts, Israel managed to plant explosives inside the pagers before they were delivered to Hezbollah in Lebanon. This shows how acts of sabotage can seriously hamper the safety and security of both personnel and critical infrastructure.

Reliance on black markets due to sanctions creates vulnerabilities to sabotage, compromising national security and strategic integrity.

C-I-A, confidentiality, integrity, and availability is a famous triad used in sensitive matters to gauge the level of security of a project. Acts of sabotage aim to compromise at least one of these elements.

What made the acts of sabotage possible in the two cases mentioned heretofore? The answer, to an extent, lies in sanctions and the resultant shift to black markets for procurement. Iran has been sanctioned by the US for decades making it impossible for it to trade industrial components using normal banking channels. In addition, the unwillingness of providers to engage with sanctioned entities creates scarcity which may hinder the development of a certain sector.

It is the norm for sanctioned entities, therefore, to shift to black markets which have no oversight and no mechanisms to ensure safe transactions. This undoubtedly allows sanctioned entities to continue procurement of equipment but the lack of institutional checks and balances in the black market also enables clandestine sabotage operations by the adversary. Much like how Western intelligence sabotaged Iran’s nuclear program through Stuxnet, and the compromising of Hezbollah-owned pagers by Mossad operatives – both of which are serious security breaches.

These concerns fit into the current discourse on Pakistan’s strategic and nuclear programs as well. As entities, both state and non-state, gradually come under the US sanctions umbrella, more and more of these entities will be forced to redirect their procurement operations through the black market. If such may be the case, Pakistan’s missile program may become susceptible to the risk of sabotage.

Historical sabotage examples like Stuxnet and Hezbollah pagers underline the risks of black-market reliance for sanctioned entities.

An entirely new domain of concern will open as a result, and the already surmounting challenges to the country’s strategic capabilities will pile up. No adversary has been able to stall Pakistan’s nuclear and strategic weapons’ programs but if one believes they will not attempt to limit our capabilities through sabotage is naïve optimism.

The custodians of our strategic weapons program might already know the challenges highlighted here. What remains to be done are proactive measures to stay safe and secure from acts of foreign subversion lest our strategic programs suffer a similar fate as that of Iran.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.

Reappointment of Ambassador Sadiq Khan -A Game Changer?

By
Mozammil Shinwari
-
0
Ambassador Sadiq Khan

The reappointment of Ambassador Muhammad Sadiq Khan as Pakistan’s Special Envoy for Afghanistan has sparked considerable interest both domestically and internationally. A seasoned diplomat with extensive experience in Afghan affairs, his return to this pivotal role signals Islamabad’s intent to reinvigorate its approach to navigating the multifaceted relationship with its Western neighbor. At a time when regional stability is critical, Ambassador Sadiq’s reappointment could mark a turning point for Afghanistan-Pakistan relations.

Ambassador Sadiq Khan’s return reflects Pakistan’s commitment to stabilizing its complex relationship with Afghanistan during a time of regional turbulence.

Ambassador Sadiq brings decades of experience in diplomacy and a nuanced understanding of Afghanistan’s complex political and social dynamics. Having previously served as Pakistan’s envoy to Kabul and as Special Envoy for Afghanistan, he has built a reputation as a pragmatic diplomat with a solutions-oriented approach. His proven ability to engage with diverse stakeholders—including the Afghan Taliban, regional actors, and the international community—positions him uniquely to address the challenges facing both nations.

This reappointment comes amid significant turbulence in Afghanistan. The Taliban government continues to grapple with international isolation, a collapsing economy, and internal resistance, while Pakistan faces border tensions, cross-border militancy, and the escalating threat of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). These intertwined challenges demand nuanced and focused diplomacy, which Ambassador Sadiq is well-equipped to provide.

Rebuilding Trust

One of the most pressing issues between Pakistan and Afghanistan is the persistent mistrust and miscommunication that have historically plagued their relationship. Accusations of harboring militants and supporting destabilizing activities have created a cycle of blame that hinders constructive engagement. Ambassador Sadiq’s expertise in track-two diplomacy and his rapport with Afghan leaders offer an opportunity to rebuild trust and foster meaningful dialogue between the two nations.

His reappointment also reflects Islamabad’s resolve to address regional security concerns more proactively. Sadiq could play a vital role in mitigating cross-border terrorism, managing security along the Durand Line, and ensuring that Afghan soil is not used for activities detrimental to Pakistan’s national security.

Bridging the Gap

Another critical aspect of Ambassador Sadiq’s role will be to mediate between Afghanistan and the international community. Afghanistan remains diplomatically isolated, with most nations hesitant to formally recognize the Taliban regime. By leveraging his experience, Sadiq can encourage dialogue between Kabul and global stakeholders, promoting humanitarian assistance and economic cooperation while pressing for reforms in governance and human rights.

Challenges Ahead

Despite his credentials, Ambassador Sadiq faces formidable challenges. The Taliban’s unwillingness to compromise on critical issues, such as women’s rights and inclusive governance, complicates efforts to engage the international community. Rising anti-Pakistan sentiment within Afghanistan, fueled by nationalist rhetoric, further hinders bilateral cooperation. Additionally, Pakistan’s internal political and economic instability could limit the government’s ability to fully support his initiatives.

A Potential Game-Changer

Ambassador Sadiq Khan’s reappointment is a strategic move that highlights Pakistan’s recognition of the urgent need for stability in Afghanistan. His deep understanding of the region’s socio-political landscape, combined with his diplomatic acumen, makes him a vital player in addressing the intertwined challenges facing both nations.

Sadiq’s role as a mediator between Kabul and global stakeholders is critical to promoting humanitarian aid and pressing for governance reforms.

However, the ultimate success of this reappointment will depend on Ambassador Sadiq’s ability to deliver tangible results in an environment fraught with volatility and unpredictability. His efforts could reshape regional dynamics, promote stability, and pave the way for a more cooperative future between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Whether this move will prove to be a game-changer remains to be seen, but it is undoubtedly a step in the right direction.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.

UN Report: Rising Violence and Gender Persecution in Taliban’s Afghanistan

By
Arshad Mehmood
-
0
Afghanistan

UN Report Highlights Escalating Violence, Humanitarian Crisis, and Gender Persecution in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres has submitted his quarterly report on Afghanistan to the UN Security Council, revealing a troubling escalation in security incidents in 2024.

The latest report reveals a sharp 39% rise in security incidents in Afghanistan compared to the same period in 2023. During this timeframe, anti-Taliban armed groups launched 81 attacks against the Taliban, while the Islamic State–Khorasan Province (ISKP) executed six assaults targeting both Taliban forces and civilians.

UN reports a 39% increase in security incidents in Afghanistan, with ISKP targeting civilians and Taliban forces.

From August 1 to October 31, 2024, 2,510 security incidents were documented across Afghanistan. The report highlights ongoing atrocities by the Taliban, including the killing, arrest, and mistreatment of former officials and military personnel.

It also paints a grim picture of the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, where approximately 23.7 million people face severe challenges such as food insecurity, malnutrition, and displacement.

Guterres noted that as of November 11, 2024, the Afghanistan Humanitarian Needs and Response Plan had received only 37.5% of its $3.06 billion funding request, marking a significant decline in international financial support.

Guterres further emphasized that Taliban-imposed restrictions and interference are hampering humanitarian operations, urging the group to end its obstruction of critical aid efforts.

The United Nations report underscores the worsening insecurity faced by the Afghan people in the aftermath of the US withdrawal, highlighting a sharp rise in violence and instability.

Afghanistan faces a severe humanitarian crisis, with 23.7 million people experiencing food insecurity and malnutrition.

This report also highlights ongoing abuses by the Taliban, including killings, arrests, and mistreatment of former government officials and military personnel. Additionally, it underscores growing international condemnation of the Taliban’s systematic gender discrimination, escalating gender-based violence, and widespread human rights violations.

Fourteen nations, including several Security Council members, have warned that these actions may constitute gender-based persecution under international law.

During this period, anti-Taliban forces launched 81 attacks, though they failed to challenge the Taliban’s territorial control significantly. The National Resistance Front of Afghanistan (NRF) was responsible for 56 of these attacks, while the Afghanistan Freedom Front (AFF) conducted 18.

Additionally, the People’s Sovereignty Front and the Afghanistan Liberation Movement (ALM) each carried out one attack.

Despite the Taliban’s claim of consolidating control, anti-Taliban resistance groups, such as the National Resistance Front and the Afghanistan Freedom Front, persist in their operations, further destabilizing the security landscape.

Meanwhile, the resurgence of terrorist groups like the Islamic State – Khorasan Province (ISKP) exacerbates fears of escalating violence, particularly as ISK-P targets both Taliban forces and civilians.

Compounded by systemic human rights abuses, economic hardship, and gender-based persecution under the Taliban regime, the Afghan people remain trapped in a dire and deteriorating security environment.

Taliban-imposed restrictions hinder aid operations, contributing to a significant decline in international financial support for Afghanistan.

Since the withdrawal of US-led forces from Afghanistan in August 2021, the Afghan people have been put through severe torture at the hands of the Taliban regime. The regaining of power by the Taliban has rolled many steps backward, particularly for the women and the minority community.

Women have been strictly prohibited and restricted in their rights within the Taliban’s strict Sharia law. For more than three years, girls have not attended secondary schools, and women have been barred from being admitted to university; consequently, they have never pursued higher learning and therefore no professional career path. And more than that, women have been disenfranchised from any activity in public life, including working in NGOs and, more importantly, in government.

Human rights abuses have increased, with arbitrary detentions, torture, and executions targeting those linked to the former government or perceived as opponents of the Taliban regime.

Freedom of expression has all but vanished, with journalists and activists suffering severe reprisals for dissent. Many media outlets have been forced to close down, and numerous journalists have fled the country fearing for their lives.

Afghanistan’s economy has plunged into crisis, marked by widespread poverty and acute malnutrition. The lack of international recognition for the Taliban government, combined with sanctions, has crippled the economy, resulting in mass unemployment and the suspension of foreign aid that once sustained vital health and education services.

The health sector is on its knees due to extreme shortages of supplies and manpower. The lack of female service providers has been an added plight, worsening access for women, children, and families, who have relied on female doctors and nurses simply because of cultural requirements.

Gender-based persecution under the Taliban sparks global condemnation, with 14 nations warning it may constitute violations of international law.

Persecution of ethnic minorities has been intensified, mainly through forced evictions targeted violence against the Hazara people, and systematic marginalization of various communities. Such policies have created an explosion in internal displacement and migration, as many move out for safety or better living conditions.

Active conflicts have ceased elsewhere in the region, yet relatively peaceful conditions persist; threats against their people remain precarious. These threats do not make lives for ordinary Afghans more secure because insurgencies like ISKP continually place the lives of other groups in severe danger.

The US forces’ withdrawal has placed Afghanistan under the Taliban regime, which has unwound two decades of gains, placing the nation deep in a humanitarian crisis with little hope of ever recovering.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.

Haqqani Murder: A Web of Accusations among ISKP, Pakistan, and Kandahari Taliban

By
Hassan Khan
-
0
Haqqani

Controversies shrouded the killing of Khalil ur Rehman Haqqani – the minister for Refugees and Repatriation in the Taliban Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and the second most important leader of the once dreaded Haqqani network.

Haqqani was killed at his highly secured office in the Darul Aman neighborhood of Kabul by a suicide bomber masquerading as a needy destitute person with a bandaged hand wherein he was hiding the explosive materials.

The Islamic State of Khurasan Province (ISKP) – Afghanistan chapter of ISIS – has accepted the responsibility of killing Khalil Haqqani, however, those who knew the senior Haqqani as an outspoken member of the IEA cabinet and important leader of the Haqqani Network close relations with TTP (Pakistan-specific terrorist outfit) have doubts over the ISKP claims.

Khalil Haqqani was killed in a suicide bombing disguised as a destitute visitor at his Kabul office.

The body of the slain Haqqani was not yet buried when the Islamic Emirate started pointing fingers at a neighboring state–   Pakistan – where, they believed the execution was planned. Speaking at the funeral ceremony, IAE interim Minister for Foreign Affairs Amir Khan Muttaqi without mincing words accused ‘neighboring countries’ of having hands in the murder.

In the last seven months, ISKP carried out seven terror attacks in Afghanistan and Muttaqi claims the Afghan intelligence has confirmed reports that six attacks were planned and designed outside Afghanistan. “We will investigate this attack (killing Haqqani) to ascertain where it was planned. And we urge these countries to stop giving safe havens and nurturing Daesh terrorists under your sleeves.”

Next was the spokesman for Kabul police and Ministry of Interior Khalid Zardran who posted on his X page saying, “ISIS operatives carried out 7 attacks in past seven months, 6 of which were planned and designed in a ‘foreign country’ based on accurate intelligence investigations.” A reference to Pakistan as the Afghan interim government has long long-standing position on ISIS operating from safe havens inside Pakistan.

Contrary to these wild claims and implicit accusations, the Afghan Taliban powerful faction – known as the Kandahari group – has also shared in the blame for Haqqani’s murder. Those who understand like the back of their hands the milieu of the meaningless decade-long internecine wars have plausible reasons to see the hands of the Kandahari faction of Taliban in the blood of Haqqani. The growing perceptions are that Haqqani might have become a victim of the Taliban’s internal factional power struggle.

The senior Taliban leaders including powerful religious personalities targeted by ISKP following the fall of Kabul were mostly those who were very critical of the Kandahari faction’s extremely conservative policies and interpretation of Islam and shari’ah.

ISKP claimed responsibility, but internal Taliban factional struggles are suspected in Haqqani’s assassination.

Sheikh Rahimullah Haqqani the senior Taliban leader believed to be an ideologue of the movement was targeted by ISKP in Kabul at his mosque. Mawlawi Mujeeb u Rehman Ansari was another influential voice criticizing the policies of Taliban reclusive leader – Mulla Hibatullah Akhund – particularly the ban on womens’ education and employment was targeted at his mosque in Herat.

Like Khalil Haqqani, both Shiekh Rahimullah Haqqani and Mujeeb Ansari were influential religious scholars with large following, very vocal and not shy of publically expressing their opinions standing out against those imposed by the regime.

Haqqani too was pleading moderation in policies with regard to womens’ education and dealing with the opponents. He was a strong advocate of getting recognition from the international community by responding to its concerns and sensitivities. He was believed to be one among very few within the government system capable of speaking his mind in the presence of Mulla Hibatullah Akhund.

The Taliban interim regime acting Prime Minister Mullah Abdul Kabir speaking to the funeral procession has said that in a recent meeting of the cabinet held in Kandahar, Khalil Haqqani spoke very boldly with a strong sense of honesty in the presence of the Taliban supreme leader Mulla Hibatullah Akhund asking for shunning extremist policies towards women and the opposition.

Undoubtedly, the Haqqani is the only group threatening the influence of the mighty Kandaharis’ Taliban and resort to the non-Kandahari Taliban.

Besides, their positions on women and recognition of the international community, another controversial demand of the Haqqanis was seeking revival of the Shura – in charge of appointing and selecting the amir (the supreme leader). The same shura was disbanded by Mulla Hibatullah Akhund immediately after his appointment as supreme leader of the Taliban.

The elderly Haqqani was the head of the Haqqani family – of whom he became the 52nd martyr. He was a rock behind his nephew Siraj u Din Haqqani – the current interior minister and head of the once dreaded Haqqani Network. His death will definitely have significant impacts on the camp of non-Kandahari Taliban and Haqqani network. He was a strong force on the back of his nephew – Sirajuddin Haqqani – a trusted adviser and supporter in the Taliban leadership structure.

Those close to Sirajuddin believe that as an elder of the Haqqani family and experienced jihadi commander, he was playing an intermediary role for Sirajuddin in the time of crisis. Siraj – as a shrewd politician – often used the services and position of his uncle to raise sensitive issues or forward proposals he could not bring up directly for discussions.

Khalil first came into the limelight when led the first batch of Taliban soldiers and entered Kabul with the collapse of Dr Ashraf Ghani’s government. As a veteran of Afghan jihad and tribal elder, he played a very crucial role in securing former jihadi commanders, political leaders, and members of the former democratic regime who did not escape with the fall of Kabul. Khalil Haqqani soon invited them to his office and given assurance of not to be harmed. Those including Hamid Karzai, Gulbadin Hikmatyar, and Dr Abdullah who did not come due to fear of prosecution, Haqqani personally visited their homes.

However, unaware of his fate the elderly Haqqani became the target of his weapon – the suicide bombing strategy pioneered by the Haqqanis in Afghan wars. The network was popular for launching the most dreaded attacks using a squad of suicide bombers euphemistically called Fidayeen in the two decades of struggle against US and ATO forces.

He was also accused of being instrumental in the killing of former Afghan President Ustad Burhan u Din Rabbani by fitting explosives materials in the turban of a visitor masquerading as a peace representative of the Taliban. Haqqani became the victim of the same strategy wherein the ISKP sent a suicide bomber – masquerading as a disabled destitute refugee – with explosives substances wrapped in the bandage of a seemingly fractured hand.

Haqqani’s close ties with TTP have led to Pakistan facing accusations over his death.

Pakistan is accused of having hands in Khalil Haqqani’s murder because of his close relations with Tehrik Taliban Pakistan – declared Khwarij by Pakistan. He had reasons for being grateful and indebted to TTP. In 2007, the elderly Haqqani was imprisoned in Pakistan. The TTP founding leader Baitullah Mehsud abducted around 230 Pakistani security persons one of the demands was the release of Khalil Haqqani in return.

In Afghanistan, the Haqqani network is known to be providing strong support to the TTP and is accused of using the terrorist outfit as a proxy against Pakistan. The Haqqanis are believed to be managing funds for the terrorist network, feeding and keeping their families, providing training facilities and even resolving its internal problems. In the recent past when TTP was suffering from internal differences with divisions in groups it was the Haqqani leaders who had made the patch-up and encouraged small groups both in Pakistan and Afghanistan to join the main TTP.

Due to the backing of Haqqais, the TTP members are enjoying free movement across Afghanistan however; its fighters are majorly concentrated in areas like Khost, Paktia, Paktika, and Ghazni – the strongholds of Haqqanis in Afghanistan.

The terror outfit is using these regions to enter Pakistan and launching attacks across the border in the southern districts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa particularly North and South Waziristan, Kurram, and Khyber Districts. His death will no doubt leave impacts on the movements of TTP in near future and will reduce their support base.

Haqqani’s death will impact Taliban dynamics, TTP movements, and Afghan security measures, increasing public hardships.

The Taliban interim administration might also resort to major administrative measures, particularly on the security front. The leaders of the puritanical militia will become more careful and security conscious and might adopt big restrictions and protocols while interacting with people or moving around in public. This will no doubt lead to compounding problems for ordinary Afghans who are already facing a multitude of problems.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.

Stronger When Together

By
Dr Bilal Ghazanfar
-
0
Indus Shield 2024

The Air exercises are conducted to forge the professional air forces to dominate their adversaries in air combat operations. Following the success of Indus Shield 2023, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) organized Indus Shield 2024 and Indus Shield-C (the bilateral module of Indus Shield 2024) between Pakistan and China, with the motto “Stronger When Together”.

Indus Shield 2024 focused on multi-domain operations, bringing together advanced platforms and high-tech equipment for modern air combat training.

These exercises were a step-up, aimed at gaining training experience with operational value in multi-domain operations (MDOs). Moreover,  with their multi-domain operational standards, both exercises pushed the participating forces to achieve the desired outcomes at the right time and place.

In the multilateral Indus Shield 2024, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, and 20 other nations participated in the exercise, each in various roles. Apart from combat platforms – J-10 Vigorous Dragons, F-16s, J-17 Thunders, and  Panavia Tornados – strategic airlift and aerial refueling aircraft, transport aircraft, electronic warfare aircraft, airborne early warning and control aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and helicopters were involved in the exercises.

In Indus Shield-C, combat platforms including J-16, J-10C, and JF-17 Block III, equipped with high-tech AESA radars, and simulating long-range beyond-visual-range missiles, the lethal HQ-22 surface-to-air missile system, the potent airborne electronic warfare YTG-9 platform, and the KJ-500 airborne early warning system, took part in the exercise.

The involvement of high-tech equipment indicates that Indus Shield is more than just a state-of-the-art air exercise; it is a futuristic one, centered on the integration of technology to enable a seamless transition into modern warfare concepts through an integrated training environment. Like all other air exercises, Indus Shield aspires to be a platform for participants, where they can share best practices, engage in joint training, and learn from one another—essential intangibles for fostering synergy during joint operations.

The exercise emphasized interoperability, fostering strategic partnerships among 25 nations, including Pakistan, China, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia.

However, a question arises: what differentiates Indus Shield from other air exercises in the region and beyond? Firstly, the rules governing this exercise were developed to provide experiences for air personnel in consonance with their future wartime roles. Secondly, Indus Shield focuses on multi-domain operations (MDOs) that address the predominant concerns of 21st-century warfighting dilemmas.

There are few countries focused on honing their abilities in multi-domain operations that are abreast with contemporary warfare parameters, aiming to develop seamless collaboration across all domains for the future battlespace.

Another question arises: how will the Indus Shield benefit the PAF? Firstly, Indus Shield will enable the PAF to transform a set of aspirations into enduring characteristics of its warfare capability through the operational integration of niche and emerging technologies related to the space and cyberspace domains.

Secondly, the exercise will enable the PAF to adapt to future warfare by integrating active and passive sensors, manned and unmanned assets, existing and future platforms, and an intelligence and operations network for collaborative combat under human control, which is highly complex.

PAF’s Cyber and Space Command and ACE training centre are pivotal in aligning operations with future warfare requirements.

The third question arises: what kind of facilities does the PAF have to complement the Indus Shield exercise, which is largely focused on modern air warfare concepts? In recent years, the PAF has prioritized aligning its modernization projects with multi-domain operations (MDOs) under the current Chief of Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Zaheer Ahmad Babar Sidhu, to achieve operational excellence.

This forward-thinking approach is evident in the establishment of a Cyber and Space Command—essential elements for MDOs. Furthermore, the PAF Airpower Centre of Excellence (ACE) is equipped with state-of-the-art facilities for training pertinent to future warfare. Major General Lancelot Mathebula of the South African Air Force (SAAF), during his participation in Indus Shield, remarked that the PAF ACE training center is “next level” and that it is every air force’s dream.

Indus Shield 2024 and Indus Shield-C were successful, as they enhanced military cooperation, strategic partnerships, and interoperability among the participating nations, as indicated by the remarks of personnel from participating forces.

Moreover, Indus Shield- C symbolizes the close nature of the relationship between PAF and the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF), who are continuing on the path of shared destiny.

Indus Shield-C symbolizes the close strategic partnership between Pakistan and China, showcasing advanced collaboration and shared destiny.

Shortly, it will become even more significant when Pakistan inducts the Shenyang J-31 Stealth Fighter into its fleet. These exercises highlight the PAF’s commitment to staying ahead of its adversaries in today’s fast-paced defense environment.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.

Letter of The Two Sorries-Wars of Words Between China And United States of America

By
Anees Muhammad Khan
-
0
China-US

Languages all over the world have the vastness of vocabularies whereby different words that generally convey the same meaning are used based on context according to the situation. The use of words depends upon the addressee’s age, relation, authority, and the emotions behind it. However, this linguistic nuance has very interestingly averted a very serious situation which otherwise could have led to more tensions and eventual war between United States and China.

Chinese, Arabic, English, German, Japanese, Urdu languages, etc all possess the same hallmarks of expressions, however, its practical testimony was very interestingly observed which otherwise would have been a very delicate issue between China and the USA. The tussle between big powers was averted by the use of the words ‘Sorry’ & ‘Very Sorry’.

The 2001 US-China air collision crisis was resolved by the careful crafting of the ‘Letter of Two Sorries.

The incident took place in April 2001 in the airspace above Chinese territory. It’s no secret that big powers prepare themselves for the strength of their adversary through intelligence gathering by all means at their disposal. In this regard, satellites, and surveillance planes are used with stealth characteristics. On 1 April 2001, one such US Aircraft, EP-3E which was on its routine mission in the South China Sea, as proclaimed by the USA, off the Coast of Hainan Island, China. This area is strategically very significant for China and is heavily patrolled.

Subsequently, the USA Surveillance plane was detected by the Chinese Radar. In retaliation, the Chinese scramble its fighter jet, Chengdu J 8 piloted by Lt. Cdr. Wang Wei which intercepted the EP-3E. During the interception, the fighter jet and the reconnaissance plane collided. The Chinese jet was severely damaged and crashed into the sea, killing Wang Wei. The U.S. plane sustained major damage, including to its propeller and nose cone.

The crew of 24 Americans made an emergency landing at Lingshui Airfield on Hainan Island without clearance from Chinese authorities. The plane along with its crew was detained by the Chinese Government. Thus, started a diplomatic row which took eleven long days to reach its culmination.

As anticipated, the Chinese demanded a full-fledged apology from the USA for the incident. However, that would have meant taking responsibility for flying over the Chinese territory in violation of international regulations and norms. China was, however, not willing, for anything sort of full apology.

This event rapidly escalated into a major diplomatic crisis as the U.S. government demanded the immediate release of the crew and the airplane. In turn, China sought an official apology for the incident and expressed its discontent regarding U.S. surveillance activities in the region. Both the U.S. and China released conflicting narratives about what transpired. The USA maintained that the EP-3 was operating in international airspace and called for the immediate release of the detained crew. On the other hand, China demanded an apology and expressed outrage over what it perceived as aggressive U.S. actions in its airspace.

Diplomacy often hinges not just on actions but on the nuanced use of language to convey intentions and avoid conflict.

Notwithstanding the US official stance, President George W. Bush was under tremendous pressure to secure the release of its crew and avoid escalating the situation. Its reputation was at stake inland and abroad. Military preparedness was heightened in both the states, just in case.

Presumably and probably where the military minds were found scratching their heads, linguistics were called in to draft an apology that shall not appear like an apology. Chinese were however not so naive and were fully prepared to stop nothing of a full-fledged apology. Words like Sorrow, Grieved, and Sorry were echoing in the corridors of the Pentagon and the State Department. Chinese were not amused by such words & USA did not want to sound weak. So a mere SORRY was out of the question for the USA.

However, an apology without the word ‘Sorry’ was unacceptable to the Chinese Government. Face-saving was evident for both the states to appear strong and diplomatically victorious in this situation. The world was carefully watching and reporting on the incident through print and electronic media. Every passing day was adding stress to the situation.  For a good eleven days, the two sides were locked in a diplomatic standoff.

Finally, the famous letter which is remembered today as ‘Letter of Two Sorries’ was drafted. The USA sent a carefully worded letter to China, in which the USA expressed being “VERY SORRY” for the death of Pilot Wang Wei & “SORRY” for the EP-3E landing on Chinese territory without permission. Both sides were happy and content with the outcome. China on its part believed that the USA apologized for both incidents equally, however, the USA was celebrating that it had shown remorse only for the death of the pilot and apologized only for the unlawful landing, which in her reckoning was understandable since the plane was damaged and it was unavoidable and was of lesser gravity amongst two.

The USA expressed ‘very sorry’ for the pilot’s death and ‘sorry’ for the emergency landing, satisfying both parties.

Seldom the selection of words avert wars and come to the rescue of men in uniform in contemporary history.  In essence, the art of diplomacy relies not only on the actions of nations but also on the language used to express intentions, emotions, and concessions. Carefully chosen words can create connections, while poor choice of words can result in misunderstandings that jeopardize peace. Therefore, few tools are more powerful than well-crafted dialogue in the realm of international relations, where the stakes can be extremely high.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.

Jinnah’s vision: Theocratic or Modern State

By
Uroosa Khan
-
0
Jinnah's vision

Pakistan was incepted in the political horizons of the Indian subcontinent due to the structural inequalities, systemic injustices, and the political domination, which Muslims faced during British rule, in a Hindu-dominated environment. The idea of a separate homeland was not sudden but a culmination of decades of struggle starting right from Sir Syed Ahmed Khan’s advocacy of Muslim education and identity to Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s leadership.

The various efforts and inputs together with the passion and efforts of perhaps millions stood between Pakistan and nationhood when finally the case of Mohammed Ali Jinnah won the state where Muslims would live freely and without discrimination and prosper.

Jinnah envisioned Pakistan as a modern state founded on Islamic principles of equality, justice, and tolerance.

Since the nation’s birth in 1947, there has never been an end to an unending argument over Jinnah’s vision for Pakistan: Was it to become a contemporary, democratic state with a secular ethos, or a theocratic Islamic state under the law of Sharia? The two lines of thinking thus arose, each with opposite interpretations of Jinnah’s speeches and actions. Liberals usually stress one side: Jinnah’s address to the Constituent Assembly on August 11, 1947, which stated: “You are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan.”. You may belong to any religion, caste, or creed—that has nothing to do with the business of the State.” Religious conservatives, however, dwell on Islamic principles and on the Two-Nation Theory to put forward proof of their demand for an Islamic state.

Jinnah’s vision was far richer and more complicated than either extreme can bear. He was also very pragmatic and unorthodox, seeking a happy harmony of modern systems of governance with Islamic principles. Considering minorities was always the subject of his political career: he participated often in performances and cultural ceremonies of the religious minorities as well. His declaring himself the “Protector-General” of Hindu minorities in Pakistan was enough to show his determination to make sure they stayed safe and sound in the new state.

At the same time, Jinnah can’t ignore his advocacy of Islamic values. Pakistan was founded on the Two-Nation Theory which has the premise that Muslims are separate and beyond a religion form a separate nation that deserves to have a different homeland where it can freely practice faith and customs.

In the speeches of Jinnah, Pakistan would be a torch bearer of Islamic values like justice, equality, and tolerance. At the suggestion of Lord Mountbatten to take Emperor Akbar as a role model for Pakistan, Jinnah immediately retorted that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was his ideal. A modern state according to him, Pakistan was to inherit the model of the State of Madinah where justice, welfare, and equality prevailed.

But though he was stressing Islamic principles, he was used to a very plain, open, explicit rejection of theocratic rule. In an interview with an American broadcaster, he declared, “I do not want a theocratic state to be ruled by mullahs. Pakistan will be a modern state founded on Islamic principles of equality, justice, and tolerance.” This declaration puts under the limelight the pragmatism Jinnah brought to the picture: he wanted a democratic Islamic. In it, the morality and ethics of Islam would have a place, but not based on any exclusivity or inequality for any citizen.

He appointed Jogendra Nath Mandal—a Hindu—as Pakistan’s first law minister, symbolizing progress towards minority representation.

Further actions of Jinnah as Pakistan’s leader proved that he was an inclusive visionary. He appointed Jogendra Nath Mandal Hindu as Pakistan’s first law minister, making it symbolic and practical progress towards minority representation within the state apparatus. When the violence of partition led to general suspicion and insecurity, Jinnah ventured day and night to ensure life and property security for all minorities. He even sent letters to British officers requiring them to join Pakistan’s administrative and military services to ensure professionalism and continuity in governance.

Jinnah also tried to create goodwill with India. After the partition, most leaders were having ill feelings. Unlike them, Jinnah did not give up his property in Bombay and expressed a desire to visit India in his last days as well.

During these initial days of the Cold War, an integrated South Asia made a defense pact with India to confront both regional and global issues-one among many-since it reflects the mindset that believes in diplomacy and pragmatism as the two most potent instruments for nation-building and peacemaking.

People say that Jinnah was inclined to a kind of secularism or Islamic conservatism, but the truth lies somewhere in between. In his reckoning, Islam was not simply a religion; it was a total way of life, entailing spiritual guidance along with a practical pattern of governance. He sought to create a state in which kindness, justice, and equality cloistered Islamic values would rule without impinging upon, or infringing the individual freedoms or rights of a minority; something between the hard secularism of Kemal Ataturk in the light of theocracy that might be envisaged by the most extreme elements in religion. It was an eclectic mix of the modern democratic ideal with the Islamic objective.

The legacy of Jinnah during the formative years of Pakistan stands as almost a perfect model of inclusion, pragmatism, and vision. He tried to forge an economic and political arrangement that would uplift all groups of society. Thus, the state would educate, provide health care, and administer justice to all without regard to religion, caste, or creed. He knew that the strength of Pakistan lay in the differences among the people and wanted to develop a nation where unity would prevail in diversity.

Jinnah’s legacy speaks for itself today for Pakistan. Today, the people of Pakistan fight major challenges, such as political instability, economic disparity, and social polarization. However, remembrance of the vision of Jinnah brings leeway toward progress, for it includes a vision for justice, equality, and inclusivity.

Jinnah rejected theocratic rule, declaring, ‘I do not want a theocratic state to be ruled by mullahs.

Essentially, Jinnah’s vision was a balanced and harmonious state, as well as within Islam. He envisioned the practice of modern democracy under angels of justice, compassion, and equality within an Islamic ideological framing. His legacy bids us to rise above minor interpretations and aim for effective realization toward a safe, secure, and healthy nation that would include all citizens. Indeed, a tribute to Jinnah would be the implementation in letter and spirit of what he envisaged for Pakistan. Unity, inclusiveness, and progress are the ingredients needed for Pakistan to realize its promise and move forward toward a better future.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.

123...146Page 1 of 146

Stratheia aims to be a global pioneer in the field of strategic intelligence. Our independent team of researchers cover topics ranging from the latest geopolitical events, to public policy, cyber security, and intelligence analytics.

Share with Us

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

Write for us
About Us
Writers Pool

© All Rights Reserved. Stratheia, 2024