article on climate change and national threat to pakistan
As part of efforts to increase awareness and address the problem of climate change, Pakistan held World Environment Day last year in collaboration with the United Nations Environment Program. Last year’s topic was ecosystem restoration, which coincided with the launch of the United Nations Decade of Restoration. On the occasion, Pakistan asked wealthy countries to support the world’s poorest countries by establishing a Green Fund. Through increased collaboration, the international community has reached an agreement to take concentrated steps at the domestic, regional, and international levels to avoid additional climate instability and address the numerous harmful impacts of global warming. Climate change poses severe challenges to Pakistan’s national security because of an amalgamation of geophysical and topographical factors that expose the state to recurring severe weather events that are likely to increase due to climate change. Moreover, the crucial reliance of Pakistan’s economy on significant natural resources exposed to the adverse effects of climate change is a matter of serious concern. Apart from participating in international and national discussions, Pakistan has adopted a variety of measures to mitigate the detrimental effects of climate change on its economic sectors. However, as a global issue, climate change necessitates concerted actions by world leaders.
The fact that more than 70 percent of Pakistan’s surface water flows, supplied by the Indus Basin, originate beyond its boundaries emphasizes the importance of climate change implications in the context of Pakistan’s security policy. The Indus River, together with its major tributaries, rises on the Tibetan plateau and flows through Indian-controlled Jammu and Kashmir. Another significant source of the Indus, the Kabul River, reaches Pakistan from Afghanistan and meets the Indus, providing about a third of its water. Reduced river flows on the western side of the border due to climate change are a possible cause of strain in India-Pakistan relations. Moreover, climate change has resulted in a decrease in the flow of the Kabul River, which creates a security threat.
Likewise, sluggish economic growth, exacerbated by severe energy shortages caused by electricity theft, non-recovery of dues, mismanagement; bribery; and losses incurred by large public sector companies led by ineffective people, have a negative impact on Pakistan’s ability to maintain adequate military preparedness. Natural catastrophes caused by climate change, as well as domestic law and order disturbances, unavoidably entail the deployment of military forces for relief operations and peacekeeping at the expense of military contingencies. Natural catastrophes, particularly floods, storms, and hurricanes, as well as rising sea levels, wreak havoc on military assets as well as vital energy and transportation infrastructure, posing severe national security risks.
Climate change may also exacerbate conflict over limited resources, posing a challenge to Pakistan’s national security. Tensions between provinces over resource distribution, disparities between ethnic groups, population relocation, uneven and disordered urbanization, food insecurity, and poverty may all contribute to a conflict-prone environment that threatens to reverse Pakistan’s accomplishments in defeating terrorism. Food, for example, is one of the scarcest resources, and climate change poses a danger to food security. Despite the fact that Pakistan’s agriculture is very sensitive to climate change, it employs over 40 percent of the workforce and contributes 19 percent of the Gross Domestic Product of Pakistan’s economy. The country’s most prevalent agricultural practices are old, inefficient, and waste a large portion of the country’s freshwater resources. They are also overburdened owing to poor priorities in terms of crop kinds farmed.
Lt. Gen. Tariq Waseem Ghazi, a member of the Global Military Advisory Council on Climate Change, argued that the topic of climate change cannot be debated without discussing the issues of the military. Climate change is posing an increasing risk to world security and prosperity, especially in Pakistan. Pakistan was ranked 10th in the 2014 Climate Risk Index of Vulnerable States list but is now ranked 7th. Climate change is now a national security concern for more than 68 percent of the governments in the world, together with Pakistan, according to Ghazi. Climate change and global warming are major challenges that need to be tackled in a careful manner that takes security disruptions into account.
Climate Change: Existential Threat to Pakistan
Pakistan, under Prime Minister Imran Khan’s leadership, has made climate change a policy priority to mitigate and overcome the crippling effects of climate change. The government’s policies and efforts reflect its motive to make Pakistan clean and green. The various programs undertaken, including the world’s first Ten Billion Tree Tsunami, have received widespread praise, particularly from the World Economic Forum.
However, Pakistan’s recently announced National Security Policy fails to recognize the impact of climate change and Islamabad’s ability to deal with non-traditional security challenges, despite its mission. The NSP does not reflect the belief that it is vital to develop the country’s institutional capacity in order to address the complex and diverse threats and challenges posed by climate change. Although the NSP recognizes Pakistan’s significant susceptibility to the negative consequences of climate change, including extreme weather events that have multiplied and endangered our water supplies as a result of the rapid melting of Himalayan glaciers and climate-sensitive monsoon winds, it fails to address it. Unfortunately, the NSP ignores the landmark Climate Change Act of 2017, which established an elaborate institutional structure for climate action, including a National Climate Change Council for policymaking, a Climate Change Authority for project development and implementation, and a Climate Change Fund to mobilize and expend funds for climate initiatives. The National Water Policy, which was adopted in April 2018 with the consent of all provinces, was also ignored by the NSP.
Pakistan is experiencing environmental threats to its national security; yet, Pakistan is doing its best to adapt. It has successfully launched the Ten Billion Trees Tsunami Program, which is aimed at reviving the country’s forests. However, Pakistan’s efforts will be in vain since climate change is not a national or regional issue; instead, it is an international concern that needs an immediate global response to mitigate the effects of climate change.
The world is once again on the verge of another war in the 21st century on European soil due to the ongoing military confrontation between Russia and Ukraine. A great scholar referring to the First World War said, “This is a war to end all wars.” No wonder human history is tainted by wars and conflicts, precisely because war is considered inevitable. Indeed, we have seen two great world wars.
The current conflict between Russia and Ukraine started on February 24 when Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered his troops to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Soon after, Russian forces unleashed missile attacks on Ukraine’s major cities, including the capital city, Kyiv, and Kharkiv.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine occurred along the Russian borders with Belarus, Crimea, and the Black Sea. Around 200,000 Russian troops have laid siege near the border of Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has called the invasion of Ukraine, a “special military operation”.
Although tensions between the two countries have a long history, the current development came on the heels of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s explicit overtures to US President Joe Biden in January to join the western military bloc of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Predictably, this did not go down well with Russia, leading the Russian President to order the deployment of troops near the Ukraine border.
It is worth noting that prior to the invasion, the presidents of Russia and the US held meetings to reach an agreement on the issue, but it failed to avert the crisis. Germany and France also tried their best to resolve the crisis through diplomacy, but their efforts bore no fruit.
Historical Background
Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union before its disintegration in 1991. At the time, Ukraine was the third largest state in terms of its atomic arsenal in the world.
With the global drive to limit the proliferation of nuclear weapons coupled with US and Russian security assurances, Ukraine gave up hundreds of its nuclear warheads and returned them to Russia. In terms of geography, Ukraine is one of the largest countries by size in Europe.
After independence, Ukraine was not as strong politically and economically. In 2008, at the Bucharest Summit, Ukraine was officially welcomed by NATO members to join NATO and the European Union. Since then, tensions have come to characterize relations between Russia and Ukraine.
After that, in 2013, an internal crisis started in Ukraine when Russian-backed Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych rejected a deal that led to protests against the President allegedly supported by the US and its European allies. Then, in February 2014, anti-government protests toppled a pro-Russian-backed government in Ukraine, and in the same year, Russia annexed Crimea.
Sanctions on Russia
Given its non-NATO member states, the US and its European allies could not provide military support to Ukraine against Russian aggression, but they are helping Ukraine by giving considerable support in terms of military equipment.
In addition, they have imposed economic sanctions on Russia in a bid to isolate it from the rest of the world. Despite the fact that most European countries rely on Russia for crude oil and gas, they did not hesitate to cut diplomatic ties and suspend trade with Russia following the Ukraine invasion.
The gas pipeline agreement between Russia and Germany was also called off. Furthermore, Canada, Austria, Japan, and other countries have imposed trade and other sanctions on Russia in an attempt to prevent Russian aggression against Ukraine, demanding that Russia immediately put an end to the invasion of Ukraine and resolve the crisis through diplomacy.
So far, plenty of sanctions have been imposed on Russia by the U.S. and its key allies. The Russian Central Bank and its largest financial institutions have been targeted.
Biden said, “We will limit Russia’s ability to do business in dollars, euros, pounds, and yen to be part of the global economy; we’re going to stop the ability to finance and grow the Russian military.” We’re going to impair their ability to compete in a high-tech 21st-century economy.
Impact of war on Europe and Russia
We know that in war, there is only loss and never profit. Thus, in a war, neither side gains anything except loss on both sides. So if we look at history, we know that whenever there is war, there are losses.
Europe, which has always been the epicenter of bloody battles, fought in the name of religion, for economic and political causes, in the event of a major catastrophe. In addition, two of the greatest wars in the world took place in Europe, which led to a great catastrophe.
Once again, Europe is on the brink of war because of the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine. There are significant losses, and the consequences of this current war will not only be limited to Europe but will be felt all over the world.
And secondly, the current Russia-Ukraine tensions are taking place in the European region, and the most dangerous consequences will be for the European countries, and those countries will have to bear the brunt because some European countries depend on Russian gas and crude oil.
European financial conditions may worsen in the coming days due to the European financial crisis. In addition, millions of people are taking refuge in Ukraine from other countries due to the war in Ukraine, which can lead to many new problems in the future because nobody knows for sure when the war will end.
Indeed, Russia will also suffer the consequences because its economy is dependent on oil and gas. One can only hope that sanity prevails and the ongoing conflicts around the globe are addressed through dialogue and negotiations rather than war and military might.
Gender Equality and Climate Change : There is a deep nexus between climate change and gender inequality. Women are increasingly being recognized as the primary victims of climate change due to their relatively disadvantaged and lower socioeconomic status in society.
There is no denying the fact that the effects of climate change are disproportionate and significantly vary across nations and socio-economic groups. It exacerbates the pre-existing gender equality gap throughout the world.
Being in a disadvantaged position, women are more vulnerable compared to men when it comes to coping with the detrimental effects of climate change.
For instance, if a household faces economic hardships due to climate-induced natural disasters, leading to food insecurities, then women and girls would be the first to bear the brunt, potentially facing early and forced marriages, dropping out of schools, prostitution, and becoming the victims of domestic abuse.
In addition, climate change also leads to the economic recession by reducing crop yields and food production throughout the world. This recession weighs heavily on women’s shoulders because they are the primary caregivers and are expected to provide for the family in terms of emotional and psychological support.
Understandably Gender Equality And Climate Change create an extra workload and burden for them to handle when it comes to accessing basic resources like food, water, and firewood typically considered the responsibility of rural women.
Thus, women in rural areas are highly vulnerable as they depend on natural resources for livelihood. Due to the unequal distribution of resources, limited mobility of women, and lack of inclusiveness in decision-making forums women face the aforementioned gendered specific issues.
In order to improve the situation for women and especially for rural women, it is important to adopt gender-sensitive strategies that also aim at mitigating the humanitarian and environmental crises caused by climate change.
The extreme and unusual weather patterns cause food insecurity due to adverse effects on crop productivity, thus creating a vicious cycle of malnourishment and poverty. In order to overcome all these challenges and issues, it is vital that women are given an equal say in the decision-making bodies.
Because owing to their pivotal role in food production, food distribution, and food utilization, women are better positioned to come up with innovative and efficient ideas to address the issue.
Increasing control of women over landownership could increase the productivity of land and thus improve food security at the community, national and international levels. But unfortunately, women are not given equal access to land ownership compared to men.
According to a report by the UNDP, “If women farmers were given the same access to resources (such as finance) as men, their agricultural yields could increase by 20 percent to 30 percent; national agricultural production could rise by 2.5 percent to 4 percent, and the number of malnourished people could be reduced by 12 to 17 percent.”
Therefore, it is inevitable that the role of women in ensuring food security and combating the adverse effects of climate change be recognized at the societal and state levels.
Furthermore, due to the increasing pernicious impacts of global warming, the influx of climate refugees is escalating day by day. Research shows that women, girls, and children are unequally affected by climate migration due to socio-cultural norms and limited livelihood options.
Climate migration is one of the burning issues in the world, but it disproportionately affects third-world countries like Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Pakistan. Despite being the lowest contributors to global warming, people, especially women, in these countries face the deleterious effects of climate-induced migration on a daily basis.
Comparatively, women in low-income countries contribute to the economy on a very large scale. They work for daily wages to fulfill their family’s needs. But unfortunately, climate-induced displacement makes their lives even more difficult. According to a report, the vast majority of the internally displaced climate refugees are women and girls, they are not only vulnerable to displacement but they are also vulnerable to displacement.
Research shows that displacement increases women’s vulnerability to harassment, gender-based violence, trauma, and domestic violence. Thus, climate-induced displacement aggravates the existing gender inequalities, sexual exploitation, and human trafficking.
In a nutshell, to mitigate the challenges and adverse consequences of climate change, we need to include women in policy-making forums. The inclusive policy will consider the needs and requirements of women, therefore protecting women and girls from any kind of discrimination and gender-based violence and will enhance economic empowerment.
The state of Pakistan and the incumbent government are taking cognizance of the multiple traditional and non-traditional security threat to Pakistan.
From the traditional focus on military or state security, the concept of nationalsecurity has changed and expanded over time to encompass both human and state security.
Indeed, the newly adopted and first-ever National Security Policy of Pakistan to reflects this expanded conceptualization of national security and a greater appreciation on the part of concerned state institutions about the need to take timely action to avert the adverse consequences of global warming and climate change and threat to Pakistan.
This is least surprising given that some scholars have gone so far as to claim that it’s neither India nor the threat from religious extremism or terrorism but climate change that poses an existential threat to the country.
Needless to say, the Pakistani civil-military leadership cannot dismiss such alarm bells and suggestions by scholars as part of anti-Pakistan campaigns without jeopardizing Pakistan’s human and economic security.
Indeed, the fact that Pakistan is ranked the fifth most vulnerable country to climate change provides no reason for complacency.
The sudden heat wave that has come to engulf the country even before it has witnessed the spring season bodes ill for the country and can cause havoc in terms of water scarcity, and the underutilization of cultivatable land, thus causing acute food insecurity.
This, in turn, will exacerbate existing vulnerabilities and inequalities in Pakistan, leading to societal fragmentation. Therefore, as a responsible state aspiring to play a leading role in climate diplomacy and a global drive for a clean and green environment, Pakistan needs to invest more in mitigation and adaptation strategies.
This involves addressing the social and political repercussions of rapid, large-scale ecological change and their interplay with drivers of insecurity including demographic dynamics, and tools for managing system risk.
It is reassuring that climate change is being increasingly treated as a human rights issue in more civilized and democratic contexts.
Yet the unprecedented primacy accorded to climate change in state policies and academic debates needs to be translated into tangible and concrete steps in terms of augmenting the reforestation drive, imposition of carbon taxes, incentivizing eco-friendly business ventures, etc.
This will go a long way in establishing a partnership based on shared trust and understanding between the state and citizenry thus providing the necessary wherewithal to combat the consequences of climate change efficiently.
On the other hand, a myopic understanding of the issue and lack of state capacity explains the general indifference in countries where human security is not generally a cardinal feature of state narrative.
Therefore, it becomes indispensable that concerted and sustainable efforts are made to sensitize the public and policy institutions if we are to achieve the objectives of national development and SDGs.
To this end, it is imperative that we develop and implement mitigation and adaptation strategies, especially in the ecologically vulnerable and politically disputed contexts like the Gilgit Baltistan region in Pakistan.
Cognizant of this growing threat, the government is taking measures at policy, management, and operational levels. But more needs to be done to honor our international commitments and national obligations in letter and spirit.
Like any other nation-state, Pakistan envisions national security as the ultimate goal of its foreign policy. All concerned state institutions provide their input in the formulation of the national security policy. The foreign office, intelligence agencies, civil-military bureaucracy, and academia have a significant influence over the policymaking process. They offer strategic review of threats and challenges confronting Pakistan and provide support in achieving national security and foreign policy goals by employing and deploying their unique institutional expertise and resources.
However, this is more so in theory than in practice, for the national security Policy of Pakistan as of any other western or democratic state like the US is primarily shaped and driven by its strategic community in light of its strategic culture. For sure, public aspirations and perceptions may inevitably find some expression and consideration in the making of national security policy yet it is predominantly conceptualized and determined by a narrow strategic community of the country, popularly referred to as the deep state or the establishment. Hence it can safely be stated that the national security policy of Pakistan does not necessarily stem from the general masses but a manifestation of the careful strategic calculations of the strategic community which reserves the ultimate prerogative, capability, and legitimacy in determining the parameters, thresholds, and objectives of foreign and national security policy of the state.
This inference leads us to an important question as to what is considered the national security of Pakistan ? What is considered as a grave national security threat and challenge, and last but not least what is considered as an acceptable and satisfactory condition of security by the country’s strategic community and security decision-making apparatus?
The answer to these questions may be found through an examination of the linkage between a plethora of endogenous and exogenous factors that shape the broader security threat landscape and resultant national security policy, planning, strategy, and operational tactics of Pakistan. The exercise of national security policy and decision-making process does not occur in a vacuum rather there is a historical context to it. In this regard, the historical legacy of the post-partition-oriented dynamics of Pakistan has had a decisive role in shaping Pakistan’s strategic culture. This strategic culture has long shaped the national security threat perception of the strategic community and security establishment of Pakistan.
On a critical note, it can be said that the strategic culture of Pakistan, albeit, providing a valuable analytic lens to better understand, predict, and counter the motives and actions of other states in an anarchic and hostile international political system is not without drawbacks. Strategic culture is like a double-edged sword. While it may be helpful in so far as it provides a context in which to develop a sense of self and others, but it can prove perilous to the extent that it causes ‘bounded rationality, leading to misinterpretation of situations and actions of other states based on past conditioning in a chaotic and uncertain world of immeasurable possibilities and ambiguities. States may incur unintended consequences and costs due to the phenomena of ‘bounded rationality which is an unavoidable pitfall inherent in the strategic culture.
Against this backdrop, the strategic community of Pakistan perceives and frames India as the only real threat to the integrity of Pakistan. It appears to be a strong conviction that India has never accepted the ‘reality of Pakistan’ and is very unlikely to do so. This explains Pakistan’s predominantly Indo-centric defense and military strategy. It goes without saying that, the Indo-centric military security and defense policy of Pakistan can be criticized as too narrow and myopic that it compromises on other and arguably more important aspects of national security challenges. Yet there is plausible justification for it. For one thing, after partition, the political leadership of India always suspected the newly established state of Pakistan’s ability to survive as an independent country but their hopes that Pakistan would be compelled to rejoin Indian Union were dashed. India’s role in midwifing the birth of Bangladesh in 1971 in violation of Pakistan’s national integrity, sovereignty, and international law further reinforced the Indo-centric military security policy of Pakistan. The quest for survival culminated in the logical conclusion once Pakistan acquired nuclear power and offset the conventional and nuclear military threat from India.
Understanding the changing nature of warfare, India along with its regional and extra-regional allies resorts to hybrid warfare, and embroils Pakistan in unending conflicts, and preferably arm-race to render it socially fragmented, politically unstable, polarized, and economically bankrupt. Indeed, India’s perennial quest to undo Pakistan has left an indelible imprint on the collective national psyche of Pakistan and predictably its strategic community finds no sufficient reasons to shrug off the bitter memories of the past or turn a blind eye in the face of relentless Indian machinations against Pakistan. Yet it has never been oblivion to the great toll of Indian hostility and wants amicable relations by resolving all bilateral and regional issues, traditional and non-traditional security issues.
For better or for worse, national security is a dynamic phenomenon and encompasses state as well as human security. Unfortunately, for seven decades after its inception, the concerns of state security overshadowed human security in Pakistan. Thus, cognizant of the changing security dynamics and foreign policy objectives, Pakistan is now in a position to maintain a balance between the traditional military security, especially against India, and prioritizing the long-overdue human security and economic security reflected in the newly adopted National Security Policy of Pakistan.
This encouraging development will augur well for the state and human security of Pakistan given that the two dimensions of security are inextricably interlinked. The first-ever integrated national security policy of Pakistan addresses the gap between human security and state security.
However, the daunting challenge is to develop a national consensus on a strategy to implement the policy. It’s not only just enough to get it approved by parliament but to also encourage a public debate on the policy. It should not be seen as a policy of a particular government but of the state for the policy to be successful in achieving the objectives.
As for the answer to the questions posed above, Pakistan may be said to have achieved an optimum level of national security when it would have succeeded in securing strategic parity with India. Put another way, national security is not fully achieved unless India is wooed, cajoled, compelled, and coerced to relinquish its hegemonic designs and respects Pakistan’s national sovereignty (fundamental principle of modern nation-state system) as an equal sovereign power. The strategic community of Pakistan does not believe this to be the case given Indian unabated highhandedness. As a result, Pakistan emerges as a revisionist state and is more likely to continue with its revisionist foreign and security policy seeking and advocating for a just solution to all the unresolved political issues including the long-standing Kashmir dispute in line with the relevant UN resolutions and international law. Thus, the national security strategy of Pakistan, understandably to the chagrin of India, entails invoking international legal and humanitarian rights to highlight Indian excesses, challenging the existing regional political order and status quo on Kashmir which is characterized by Indian hegemony and domination. Pakistan is perceived to be antithetical to the very DNA of India by the Indian security establishment thus emerges from the phenomena of the security dilemma between the two South Asian nuclear rivals.
In the prevailing situation where the prospects of rapprochement with India are meager at best, what would provide Pakistan with a sense of victory vis-à-vis India on Kashmir? The answer is simple when India cedes its illegitimate occupation and control of the Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir in face of unwavering indigenous freedom struggle, mounting insurgency, international pressure, and Pakistan’s unflinching moral, political, and diplomatic support to this cause. This is the cardinal feature of Pakistan’s military and security policy towards India. Indeed, from the perspective of the security establishment and the deep state, Kashmir provides the only chance at vengeance and settling score with India for the dismemberment of East Pakistan, now Bangladesh.
There is a consensus within the strategic community that the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Pakistan helped achieve strategic/ deterrence stability and semblance of national security thus rendering India unable to deliver a strategic and geopolitical shock to Pakistan. Nonetheless, Pakistan remains deeply wary and suspicious of India given that it continues to pursue anti-Pakistan machinations and hegemonic designs. This has reinforced the perception of India being Pakistan’s arch-rival, always on the lookout to undermine the national security and integrity of Pakistan. Unsurprisingly, the security and strategic community are of the view that India seeks to harm Pakistan’s ‘strategic trinity’ comprising the people, the government, and the armed forces. The architects of Pakistan’s national security policy have no qualms that India wants to dismember Pakistan from within by driving a wedge between the ‘strategic trinity’ through sowing seeds of distrust, propaganda, and information warfare. India’s overt and covert support to anarchists, insurgents, or disgruntled groups and miscreants, especially in the marginalized, volatile, and impoverished contexts like Balochistan, Gilgit-Baltistan and FATA explains Pakistan’s historical Indo-centric national security policy.
In the final analysis, having offset the military threat from India to a great extent by achieving sufficient conventional and nuclear capability, Pakistan is now shifting from military security and geopolitics to human security and geo-economics. To this end, it needs to master the art of soft power strategy to improve its global image, address the multitude of human security issues, fulfill the requirements of modernity, and civilization.
Do the women in their homes, in the cities, in the rural areas, in the backward areas; in Pakistan, suffering domestic abuse have any clue about the women day on 8th march? Do they really know what Aurat march is or there is something actually called Aurat march for the rights of women. Do the people who come out on the roads represent these women; deprived of their rights, victims of sick mentality of men, victim of domestic abuse? Do the futile slogans ‘ mera jism meri marzi’ help these women raise voice for themselves at least in their homes or demand their rights or get rid of the suffering or protect themselves from being beaten or come out of their homes knowing they are safe. Does Aurat march protected or saved girls and women from being raped, harassed and abused? Does Aurat march played any role in ensuring the safety of women? Is Aurat March helping? Will Aurat March help?
On 8th of March, people come out on the roads in the cities like Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore, and some others holding placards’ and raise their voice for the rights of women I believe, some people give speeches representing the women of Pakistan I believe, media coverage, and then go home. Whole day was about women, dedicated to women; Women day. Next day, on March 9, back to routine life; normal day. People who came out on the roads for Aurat March representing women they forgot about the rights of women the rest of the whole year and next year again on 8th of march they will raise voice for women. What about the rest of year, what good is the one day for women. What about the women who are being domestically abused by their husbands even on 8th of march and the rest of year and is unable to do anything about it because she has no support, she has no idea how to survive this suffering, she has no idea what her right is under the constitution of Pakistan because there is no such bill for women so they can protect themselves from the sick mentality of their husbands or even there is a bill she is unaware or even if she is aware she knows that it lacks practical implementation and yet she knows that at the end she will be the one suffering.
If there would be some bill, if she knows that she has some legal rights, if she knows that she can held her husband accountable for this crime, if she knows that this is called domestic abuse which is a crime, if she knows that she can report domestic crime, if she knows that her voice will actually be heard, she would not have this much bruises on her body, she would not be in pain, she would have protected herself. But unfortunately she can’t do anything because she is unaware, because people don’t come out in their streets for them, because there is no such system, because there is no practical implementation of the law and the existing bills. She only knows that she is a woman living in Pakistan. And we don’t raise voice for these women on Aurat march, and if we do, we forget about them the rest of year, why are we not demanding from the government to pass the bill for the protection of women in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Why are we not continuing our march until and unless we ensure that the bill is being practically implemented and these thousands of women who are victims, their voice will be heard, they will not continue suffering, they will be saved? These women are present in almost every family, in every street of every city and villages and this Aurat march is not helping them, these slogans and placards are not helping. I myself can’t help the woman I am seeing the victim of domestic abuse despite Aurat march every year how am I supposed to help her by coming out on the road and back home at the end of the day without any change. Women need revolution not march.
One Aurat march every year will not bring any change. Noor Mukhadam is one case in front of us, an example which has given women of Pakistan a hope. This was a change; this was a hope that after this, women will come stronger. If every year, we observe more of these women who are victims getting justice, we will see the numbers declining from thousands to hundreds and one day we might achieve victory; Victory of Women. But again Women need revolution not march. Revolution will bring change, Aurat march will only help those people who can get media coverage, help this elite faction achieve their purpose. They have changed the meaning of Aurat March which was supposed to be for women, demanding the rights of women, which needs to be highlighted first.
Fall of East Pakistan : Can We Learn From History? Mustansar Siam sat down with Dr. Ilhan Niaz, Chairperson, Department of History, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, and author of four books, including The Culture of Power and Governance in Pakistan and The State during the British Raj: Imperial governance in South Asia 1700 to 1947, to discuss the separation of East Pakistan. What had been some proximate reasons behind the fall of East Pakistan: Can We Learn From History?? And, has the 18th amendment proven successful in diminishing the reservations of those who were feeling alienated?
Mustansar Siam (MS): What actually happened on the eve of 16th December 1971? What remained some proximate factors that ultimately led to the separation of East Pakistan?
Dr. Ilhan Niaz (IN): Well, I mean as I have mentioned when you contacted me that I am not an expert on this particular issue, there are plenty of people better qualified than me to comment on that particular crisis and its outcomes. I am also not a military historian. So, I only know what happened on December 16, based upon memoirs and other things that have been made public about that period of time. So, what I gather is that what happened was that the Indians were successful in reaching the outskirts of the capital of East Pakistan and that the will of the Pakistani military commander in East Pakistan to continue offering resistance collapsed that led to the surrender of military and civil personnel representing the central government in East Pakistan to the Indians. Of course, technically speaking, if you see the famous Dawn headline next day: it says in effect that the war is going to continue. But, for all practical purposes, that meant that the war on the Eastern front was over. As far as the causes are concerned, I mean there are so many that we can get into, there are so many that we can discuss. I think at one level you can say that Pakistan’s military and political decision making during the crisis itself was extremely faulty. There was a failure to anticipate likely Indian actions. There was also a failure to prepare for a serious military strategy to defend East Pakistan in the event of an Indian attack. This failure partly had its roots in the traditional security doctrine that prevailed at the time about how the defense of the Eastern wing of the country lay in the Western wing of the country, which justified the concentration of military assets in the Western theater. But, as we all know from the 1965 war, those assets concentrated in the Western theater were barely enough to stop an Indian attack across the international border. They were obviously not sufficiently strong to actually create enough of a counter offensive that it would deter the Indians from taking on East Pakistan if they felt that an opportunity had arisen.
MS: After the Separation of East Pakistan, there had been criticism of the Two Nation Theory. Indira Gandhi famously noted that she had drowned the Two-Nation Theory in the Bay of Bengal. Do you think that the separation of East Pakistan was the negation of the very idea of the Two-Nation Theory?
IN: If we go back to the fall of Dhaka taken by Curzon at that time when East Bengal was separated from West Bengal and created as a Muslim majority province, the Hindus of West Bengal were extremely upset by that, and that led to a very serious agitation, and ultimately it led to an undoing of that partition. But then what we see is that in the 1940s, as you have, the rise of Muslim nationalism, when the time came to actually go for independence and the fall of Dhaka, the Hindus of West Bengal were not willing to live in a United Bengal state where the majority of the population would happen to be Muslim. So in a way, that episode itself basically demonstrates that the bond between the Hindu Bengalis and the Muslim Bengalis, even though they shared so much else in common in terms of culture, language and other things, was somehow trumped by the fact that the Hindu Bengalis were not willing to live in a state where the majority would be held by Muslim Bengalis. Now, regarding the overall structure of Pakistan, in terms of how it comes into existence in 47 over there, there is little doubt that when you compare East Pakistan or East Bengal, as it was then called, to the territories that were to become the Western wing of the country, there really wasn’t much other than religious commonality that gave the state of Pakistan a sense of national togetherness or national identification. So in that sense, what we can also say is that between 1947 and 1971, the leaders of Pakistan, which were predominantly, of course, from the Western wing of the country, were unable to actually provide the kind of content, the kind of political programs, the kind of social uplift that would have convinced the people of East Pakistan that they were better off remaining part of a United Muslim state. So I think that when it comes to nationalism or when it comes to any form of ideology, these debates are always highly subjective. In a sense that the same people who were very keen on Pakistan in 1947, if you look at the Muslim League in Bengal, it was in many ways a better developed political party in East Bengal than it was in the Western parts of what would become Pakistan. But after independence, the East Bengalis seemed to have lost the confidence that they would have a fair chance of participating in the politics and in the decision-making of a United Pakistan. But of course, from Indira Gandhi’s perspective, certainly I think that she would have felt validated in the sense of having drowned the Two Nation Theory, as she put it. But on the other hand, if the Two Nation Theory was really incorrect, then certainly Hindu Bengalis may have preferred to have had a United Bengali state rather than separating and being a part of India. So, you can make an argument either way.
MS: There is another predominant and robust argument about the Fall of Dhaka that Pakistan was born with a geographical defect. The distance between East and West Pakistan was 1600KM, and this political edifice eventually would have to be separated. How would you place this argument among several others?
IN: I would basically say that in today’s world, when you have modern means of communication, formal geographical distance is not by itself an indicator that a territory or a group of territories cannot work together as part of a united government. So, for example, if you look at the American Federation, Alaska and Hawaii are located very far from the continental United States, and you could make an argument that that distance means that they should not be a part of the United States. In a similar manner, there are other States, like, let’s say, Indonesia that have a large amount of islands that are separated from each other, where internal communications are in the traditional sense, quite challenging, but they have been able to maintain their coherence as nation states or states post 1945. So I think that certainly geographic distance can pose challenges but geographical distance in itself does not seem to be the determining factor in whether a state or federation can work together for a long period of time.
MS: What lessons can we learn from this unfortunate incident? Because there are still reservations among different factions coming from South Punjab and Baluchistan particularly?
IN: I actually am of the view that Pakistan, that is to say, the Western part of Pakistan; if you think of pre-71, and obviously, then all of Pakistan after 1971 actually has a fair bit going for it in terms of national integration and in terms of the ability, if we want to, to make a case that these territories have enough of a commonality by way of geography, by way of a shared river system, a shared pattern of agricultural economy, by virtue of the fact that there has been a tremendous amount of internal migration over the last 50, 60 years, that has led to a situation where many different communities are now living alongside each other in our major cities, whatever their origins might be. I think that we can actually make a pretty good case that Pakistan is in the process of acquiring the characteristics of a national state. But what I find more interesting is that our elites, they continue to beat the drum of religion as the primary instrument of identifying Pakistanis as a nation. Now, before 1971 that made sense because as I mentioned a bit earlier, there really wasn’t much else other than religion that bound East Pakistan and West Pakistan together. But after 1971, there [are] actually a great deal of other things that bind the people of Pakistan together. And instead of actually trying to cultivate a sense of national identity, rooted in the shared historical experience of the Indus region, rooted in the tremendous amount of demographic change and interaction that has taken place over the last several generations, we still seem to be sort of imagining that it is the year 1946, and we want to bring all of the Muslims together on essentially a communal or a religious platform. So in a way, I fear that Pakistan has sort of become trapped by the original programming of the Pakistan movement [and] that we have not been able to grow beyond our original programming. And notwithstanding the fact that the objective situation now would actually allow for a more balanced or more historical, more geographical sense of Pakistani nationalism to be promoted, we are still stuck in the whole Islam is in danger, and you’re a Muslim first, and it is because you are a Muslim that you are a Pakistani. So there appears to be a disconnect in that our leaders and our elites and our cultural propagandists for the state, they seem to be existing in this sort of a time where we are still under British rule, and we’re we have to bring all the Muslims together, and Islam is the force that can provide that asbiyah (Group feeling).
MS: Has Pakistan learned the lesson from the fall of Dhaka, particularly when there is greater demand by the state to reverse the 18th amendment?
IN: Well, it depends upon what lessons we are talking about. So, for example so one big lesson that Pakistan learned from the secession of East Pakistan is that all this rhetoric about there being a rules-based international order, all this rhetoric about there being an architecture of alliances that will protect smaller states against stronger states, that all of that was, in fact, complete nonsense, that essentially if you are a second tier power operating in the world and you want to retain a certain amount of autonomy in your decision making, then the only way you can do that is by relying upon your own defensive capabilities. So in that context, I think that Pakistani elites did draw a very powerful lesson from the secession of East Pakistan, and they decided to embark upon a very ambitious, for that time, project of making Pakistan a nuclear weapons state. So that is one lesson that they definitely did learn. And, if anyone has been watching what is happening to the Ukraine, I mean, Pakistanis can certainly sympathize with what the Ukrainians are experiencing. It is because we experienced something very similar in that a more powerful neighbor, essentially tried to, and succeeded, in that case, in bringing about a change to UN recognized boundaries through the use of military force. But Pakistanis also fully understand, as the Ukrainian President is now realizing that you’re essentially on your own, no one’s going to come to help you. And I think that realization and the fact that Pakistan is a nuclear power has a lot to do with the secession of East Pakistan. Of course, there are other lessons as well that we should have learned from that. So one lesson, for example, that we should have learned from the crisis in East Pakistan, and what happened during it is that our governments need to treat our people a lot better than they actually do. That if you disrespect people, if you humiliate people, if you cause unnecessary harm to people and those people think that you are doing those things to them because they happen to belong to underprivileged or marginalized communities, then obviously that will breed alienation, it will breed discontent, it will create continuous problems for you in the peripheries. It will also be damaging for your international reputation. So unfortunately, post-1971 Pakistan seems to have become a more communally oriented state. So the kind of oppression that Pakistan visits on religious minorities that’s there for all to see the way in which the Pakistani government treats dissidents. I mean, these days there is a whole thing going on about the whole PECA amendment Act. Of course, PECA was originally passed by the PMLN government and that under the current government, they’re trying to make it even more draconian in order to go after anybody who might disagree or might dissent from the policies or the personalities of the government. So I am again afraid that that lesson we seem to have not learnt from the East Pakistan crisis.
MS: My last question is not directly linked with our debate. It is about your recently published book The State during the British Raj: Imperial Governance in South Asia 1700-1947. You have argued that the Pakistani and Indian elite remained unsuccessful in modernizing institutional frameworks. Can you please explain how and in what ways the failure of the institutional framework resulted in the crisis of governance in South Asia?
IN: All right. I think if, let’s say look at just Pakistan, our own experience, the British Indian civil service structure, just to take one example, was not organized, nor was it intended to bring about rapid economic development or industrialization or any of the things that the government of Pakistan wanted to bring about after 1947. What happens in Pakistan is that rather than reforming our civil service structure in order to keep those aspects of the imperial legacy that are useful, i.e., having a merit based service and modifying those things that are not useful or that are harmful, such as the over emphasis on having generalists (non specialists) in all key decision making positions. What we do is that we blindly adhere to the myth of the general administrator as the proper person to be heading highly specialized departments. Now in 1959, Ayub Khan created the Pay and Services Commission. It was chaired by Justice Cornelius. Cornelius himself, of course, was a former ICS officer, and he then went into the judiciary and he’s, of course, very famous as a judge because of his refusal to agree with the doctrine of necessity. But in his capacity as the chairman of the Pay and Services Commission, he essentially made the case that if Pakistan would like to modernize, it needs a civil service structure that is knowledge based, subject based, and highly specialized. So what he proposed was that every subject, every government Department should essentially operate in a self-contained hierarchy with integration between its Secretariat and its field posts. What he was arguing for was that what we should do is that if you want to, let’s say, have health or you want to have education or you want to build infrastructure, you essentially need specialized services for these things. And in those specialized services, you need to recruit people with specialized knowledge and then promote them and train them accordingly. Now, what this would mean is in practice that let’s say the health Secretary would be essentially a medical doctor with advanced degrees in medical management. The education Secretary would be an educationist with relevant qualifications and experience in managing education. The people in charge of your various infrastructure development organizations would then be engineers that had management training and experience and so on and so forth. Now this effectively cuts at the heart of the monopoly or the near monopoly, the civil service of Pakistan, now known as the Pakistan Administrative Service enjoys. So when Cornelius was making these recommendations, 90% of Ayub Khan’s federal secretaries were [ex-ICS/CSPs], and they, of course, ganged up on this proposal and they convinced Ayub not to implement it. Then, when Bhutto comes to power and there is another wave of civil service reforms, again, nobody paid any attention to what Justice Cornelius had said. Instead, what Bhutto wants is to have a civil service structure that does not have any statutory safeguards. That is essentially a prime ministerial civil service that answers directly to the top boss and where people can be promoted and even recruited – reference the lateral entry scheme – on the basis of political loyalty. So he wants a politically committed civil service structure and that of course means that the professionalism of people and their security from political interference, all of that is not necessary. So what we effectively do is that first under Ayub Khan we miss a huge opportunity for setting our bureaucratic institutions on the path of becoming modern bureaucratic institutions based upon specialized knowledge and then, under Bhutto, what we do is that rather than trying to improve things the government of the day consciously breaks the back of the civil service structure in order to render it the instrument in the hands of whoever happens to be politically powerful at any given point in time. So rather than moving forward, we first fail to move forward and then we essentially convert our bureaucracy into a kind of neo-medieval bureaucracy where personal loyalty and sort of arbitrary internal management prevail. So we end up with, in a way, the worst possible bureaucratic structure any state that would want to modernize can end up with. You have a bureaucratic structure where not only are people not posted or transferred on the basis of merit, they are not recruited on the basis of their specialized knowledge. It is essentially an accident of the examination result that lands you in one service or the other and there is no attempt to actually manage these services in a professional or a sound manner. So, you don’t even acquire the skills you need as you progress in the service even if the initial recruitment is not necessarily based on subject knowledge. So that is what we end up with now. This kind of state machinery obviously cannot develop the country. It can’t even develop itself. So how is it going to develop the rest of the country?
In 2016, Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman announced Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia Vision 2030. Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia Vision 2030 plan is to reform the Saudi economy and society. In 2014 when global oil prices collapsed and country faced economic challenges so, King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud and his son Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud (now the crown prince) responded and developed economic and social reform plan, Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia Vision . After 2014 oil price collapse, Saudi Arabia now faces another economic crisis. It may feel there is need to reevaluate some of its vision 2030 programs.
The first objective of vision 2030 is about better quality of life, promoting Saudi Arabia’s cultural heritage, urbanism, entertainment, sports, increasing the number of Umrah visitors from 8 million to 30 million annually, UNESCO, beautiful environment and religious history and promoting cultural and entertainment opportunities. If Saudi Arabia achieve a vibrant society, so Saudi Arabia will focus on its people and the Islamic world. Saudi Arabia 2030 vision means to enhance social development in order to build a strong and productive society and provide education that builds children’s character, and establish empowering health and social care systems.
The 2030 plan outlines the following goals to attain a vibrant society.
To increase household spending on cultural and entertainment activities.
To increase women’s participation in the workforce to 30% from 22%
To reduce the rate of unemployment to 7% from 11.6%
A thriving economy:-
The second aim is to achieve a thriving economy. Such as employment, women in the workforce, Public Investment Fund, foreign direct investment, entrepreneurship and innovation, non-oil exports, establishing a sovereign wealth fund that will be financed through the partial IPO of Saudi Aramco; and build a comprehensive education system to enhance non-energy economic sectors. Saudi Arabia will have five universities by 2030.
The 2030 plan outlines the following goals to attain a thriving economy.
To increase the private sector’s contribution to 65% of GDP from 40%
To increase non-oil government revenue to SAR1tn from SAR163bn.
To increase foreign direct investment to the global level of 5.7% of GDP from 3.8%
To increase the non-profit sector’s contribution to the GDP to 5% from less than 1%
An ambitious nation:-
The third goal is to focus on the progressiveness of Saudi’s government by increasing the portion of non-oil revenues and improving overall government effectiveness, household savings and income, non-profits and volunteering.
The 2030 vision outlines the following goals to attain an ambitious nation:-
To rank 20th on the government effectiveness index from 80th
To improve the efficiency of various government departments and establish committees to review them.
To reduce bureaucracy and improve transparency in government programs.
What does 2030 vision mean
Saudi’s vision 2030 is about national sociopolitical and economic reform to reduce its dependence on crude oil through economic diversification and a series of public services’ development such as health, education and infrastructure because the government still 75% dependent on oil. The main objective of 2030 vision is to increase the portion of non-oil business sectors, such as tourism, banking, reductions in subsidies and the IT sector and show secular national image on the global stage. Another objective is to increase government spending on the military, as well as manufacturing equipment and ammunition. This plan is based on the three pillars: The first one is the status of the country in the world. The second pillar is about the determination that the country has to become a global investment powerhouse. The third pillar is the strategic location of the country on the map.
Societal Improvement and Unity:-
The main objective of Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia Vision 2030 is to protect the culture and traditions of the society. It is important to country that it pays more attention to strengthen its hold on culture and maintain an environment where people feel secure.
Building Infrastructure and sustainability:-
To make friendly environment because it improves its image in the international market.
Better Economy:-
The country aims to provide equal opportunities to people.
Implementing Transparency:-
The main aim of this 2030 vision is to ensure that in the next 15 years we will implement a system that is more transparent and clear.
Leveraging its Unique position:-
Saudi Arabia is located in important international trade routes between three continents: Asia, Europe and Africa. So the aim of Saudi Arabia is to get benefits from this strategic geographic position, through new strategic partnerships to grow the economy and help Saudi companies to increase exports.
Israel Vision and Jews in Saudi Arabia:-
Saudi Arabia and Israel have committed to rational and balanced foreign policies over the past 70 years. Hundreds of Jews are working in Saudi Arabia, jews in Saudi Arabia contributing to its financial, infrastructure, and energy projects. To illustrate this, Arabs and Jews were the strongest partners in trade, culture and mutual security, jews are living in Saudi Arabia in relatively peaceful coexistence for centuries. Israel contributing in Saudi Arabia’s biggest economic transition. It is a great opportunity for Israel to take part in the Saudi economy and it is also a Israel vision, After all, Israel is technologically advanced country in the field of mining, with a robust, globally recognized diamond industry. Saudi Arabia is the largest country in the world without any source of flowing water, Israel is also a world leader in the water engineering industry that’s why Israel vision is contributing in Saudi’s vision 2030.
Saudi Arabia’s Development Strategic Plans:-
Since the five-year plans starts, Saudi Arabia has adopted a comprehensive planning approach. This development plan maintains a balance between the economic growth and the maintenance of great values and legacies.
Saudi Arabia’s Quest for Power:-
Saudi Arabia has regarded itself as the natural leader of the Islamic world. Saudi Arabia’s quest for power is about to maintain its dominance over the Muslim world. Saudi Arabia aims to maintain hegemony in Egypt. When protests started in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia immediately sent its military support to this country. After overthrow of Mubarak, Saudi Arabia provided major financial support for Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s coup. Furthermore, Saudi Arabia launched military operations in Yemen because Saudi wanted to maintain its control on Yemen. Saudi Arabia considers the Houthis as Iranian substitutes.
The government has set goals but also announce a detailed plan to achieve these goals.
Privatization / Divestment:-
Saudi plans to value state oil company Saudi Aramco at more than USD2tn. It will increase the efficiency of the fund’s management and diversifying government resources and the economy. Prince Mohammad bin Salman plans to transform Aramco from an oil producing company into a global industrial conglomerate.
Public Investment Fund (PIF):-
Saudi Arabia would raise the fund’s capital to SAR7tn (USD2tn) from SAR600bn (USD 160bn).
Tourism:-
Government improving the quality of the services offered to Umrah visitors. Another plan is to build an Islamic museum in accordance with global standards. Further, the government plans to double the number of Saudi heritage sites by 2030.
Education:-
The government plans to have at least five Saudi Universities by 2030. The government plans to create suitable job opportunities for citizens.
Expatriates:-
The government plans to improve living and working conditions for non-Saudis and adopting an effective and simple system for issuing visas and residence permits.
Social:-
The government aims to achieve the following objectives by 2030.
To reduce the rate of unemployment from 11.6% to 7% and increase women’s participation in the workforce from 22% to 30%.
The government plans to promoting private medical insurance to improve access to medical services.
Saudi’s Vision 2030 Progress:-
This plan move the country away from its reliance on oil exports and fossil fuel extraction. After announcement of 2030 plan, Saudi Arabia expanding its environment projects, including encouraging the use of a circular economy. And expanding the proportion of solar and hydrogen projects. The main objective of Saudi Arabia’s plan 2030 is to generate 50% of its energy from renewable sources by 2030. The impact of fluctuating and unstable oil prices, Saudi Arabia has taken these steps to diversify its economy and reduce its dependence on oil. Saudi Arabia aims to boost its financial industry to reduce its reliance on the oil industry. Another major objective of Saudi Arabia is to develop its renewable energy sector. Saudi Arabia has been operating the 300MW Sakak plant.
Furthermore, the Saudi government announced USD$30billion in the renewable energy sector by 2025 to reduce domestic reliance on oil. If increasing Saudi Arabia’s renewable energy so it reduces domestic emissions. Saudi Arabia 2030 vision promotes sustainable business sectors to increase job opportunities for future younger generations. The major problems to implementing “vision 2030’ are, structural. The basic nature of the Saudi state is a federation of powerful tribes based on a bond between the Al-Saud royal family and the Wahhabi clerics, is hardly favorable to modernization efforts. The government has already started working to achieving its vision 2030 with numerous programs.
Human rights in China; The fight between Uyghur Muslims and Chinese Han is decades old but after 2009 its more highlighted China has become absolutely aggressive. China was raised as an economic power in the world with a complex political system or Confucius civilization challenging the world order system. And challenging the world’s largest powers tries the alike US in international politics. Chinese scholars claim the Chinese political system and adopted their system. After the Chinese communist party (CCP) come to power. It initiated certain rules and regulations on the minorities’ rights banded the religious activities or cultural practices. These rules and regulations are against the norm of world order value in the twenty-century violations of human rights, women rights, Media censorship of media and band the religious practice particularly on the Uyghur Muslims or including Kazakh ethnic. The Chinese government is considered a threat to national security. Due to this Chinese government struggle with extremism and want to increase the rise of Arabization in China. As a result of this Chinese government introduced the policy of the sensitization of Islam. Chinese residents will have been fellow the Chinese culture or law; the major point this that unfortunately, the Islamic countries stay silent. In further would like to explain the mean reason of this issue. Due to this, I resaid this question to find the main argument of Human Rights violations in China and specifically with Uyghur Muslims why happened and the Muslim World stay silent without any reactions related to this controversial situation of Human Rights violations.
Uyghur Muslims
Uyghurs Muslim are living in the Xinjiang province of China. They are stalled their centuries ago ethnically they are Turks. They have a unique culture on China. They are the Sunni Islam followers had linkage with Arab Worlds of Turkey but more influenced by Saudi Arabia following the Wahhabi school of thoughts. China authorities concern them as threat to the China national security or China global vision due to this Chinese communist party decided to transform them into mixture nation with Han ethnic. Although in the case of population Uyghur Muslim are the majority in the Xinjiang regions the total population is 24 million 45% percent of Xinjiang populations. And Han dynasty of population day by day increased to this region because economics beneficiaries and mixture policy of China. It is the biggest concern for the Uyghur’s Muslims. Although Communist party restricted social media and media because of their policy suppressive regimes and want to a dominant ethnic although multiple ethnics groups lives theirs. The fight between Uyghur Muslims and Chinese Han is decades old but after 2009 its more highlighted China has become absolutely aggressive towards the Uyghur Muslims population. Uyghur’s is an indigenous ethnic group of northwestern China and interior Asia, In Uyghur language is a part of Altaic languages groups such as Turkic, Mongolian, etc. Uyghur’s are also the oldest Turkic-speaking people in the region. They are mentioned in 3rd century C.E but their prominence was seen in 8th century C.E when they established their own kingdom near Orkhan River around 10th century C.E Uyghur’s accepted Islam as their religion and were as Muslims. Nearly 80% of Uyghur’s are, Sunni Muslims. After Chinese revolution in1912, the Xingiang province was captured by the commander later, in 1928, he was assassinated and after the victory of the Chinese communist party (CCP) in 1949, the control government implement liberal policies in the region and the Xinjiang region was declared autonomous under great leap forward policy in 1958, the entire population of china, including rural populations was to be organized. During 1966-76 Mao Zedong started Cultural Revolution in order to distinguish Chinese modes of revolution from the Soviets. After the Cultural Revolution many Han Chinese immigrated to the Xinjiang region causing a demographic change in the region. The population of Uyghur’s in Xinjiang region has reduced from 76% to 42% due to immigration of Han Chinese from the other parts of China. Due to the immigration of other ethnic to the Xinjiang it impacted on the Uyghur’s life the persecution of Uyghur Muslims, detention camps killings after 2009, the violent outbreaks between the Uyghur Muslims and Han Chinese have increased considerably. For the violence in Xinjiang province, China has been blaming East Turkestan Islamic Movement
(ETIM) which has also been designated by the US States Department as the most militant of the ethnic Uyghur separatist groups. Citing security reasons, China has increased surveillance and crackdown measures in the Xinjiang region. Though denied by China, the ground reports done by the media groups such as the Guardian, Washington post, BBC etc. confirm the existence of detention camps in the region.
Geo-politically this region is more significance to the Chinese government. It connected China with central Asian countries and south Asian countries. Because of that this region is too important to the China since the 1990s enforced the policy of Lormicla policy means bilingual education to the Uyghur’s Muslim to controlling the influence of the Arab World. And the other threat is to the China East Turkistan Islamic Movements (ETIM) it challenge the China national security. Because Wahhabi are to radicals they fight anti –Chinese government as result of these issues it put China in dilemma situations regarding this issues China narrated three items to World.
Terrorism
The history or idea of terrorism was highlighted after the 9/11 incident to the world. The great powers create the discourse of global war and terror in the world. The US was the pioneer of this discourse to come in Afghanistan and fought the Taliban government and Osama Bin laden. It transformed world politics into a proxy competition and Chaos arena; however, China also thrived to use this opportunity to lobby the UN Security Council to recognize the Uyghur’s Muslims as a terrorist group. But the P5 power did not accept the China proposal even same government showed their resistance regarding this issue. But for the Chinese government, they are a terrorist because they were involved in a certain incident like the 2011 bombast attack on the commercial markets. And also in a recent report, the crime increased as compeer to the previous years.
China wants to legitimize its claims on the ETIM and Uyghur’s Muslims due to this China supported it is a repressive regime.
Separatism
Separatism rise after the collapse Soviet Union in 1991 the freedom movement like East Turkistan Movement demanded freedom; urgently China government responded to them. Adopted the ban policy or sanctioned them to limit their activity in China. After the Afghanistan Jihad, all the radical fighters were inspired by them. They demanded a separate state themselves. There were two reasons for the separatism ideologies first after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 the central Asian countries; also demanded separate states to themselves. But in reality, they had a miscalculation to themselves; they directly undermined the China government sovereignty in the international farms. China adopted a repressive policy toward them to stop them and also balance the enemies of China in the regions. The policy of counterbalance was initiated by the legendary leader of China Mao it was followed by the inherent states of Mao in China. The second point of the separatism in China is the significance of the geopolitics of Xinjiang and the rich resources of mains to this region. Xinjiang has the fifth largest gas resource in China. However, it is a geopolitical crossroad to China connecting the two deferent regions. Xinjiang has a line of communication between China the neighboring states.
China considers Xinjiang as a political-strategic point to create communication with the world. It is due to the open-door policy China adopted toward the world. To achieve the political vision of China’s great power policy in the world. China’s government and policymakers are distinct that political propaganda against China; the involvement of vantage powers to this dilemma to create an internal issue to China could not rise in the region and the world.
It is interesting that at a time when exclusionism, supremacism, and hyper-nationalism tendencies are globally on the rise, China has decided to launch its version of harmonizing society, this thinking might appear to negate the global trends but in essence, its objectives are similar and it has little space for accepting diversity.
Religious
The tension between China and US was highlighted after the house of Uyghur’s representative. Due to bargaining between them China representative claims; the US wants to damage it is the international image, China mainstream policy want to change the live standards of other’s Chinese resident, and also Chinese definition of extremism is complicated as it hardly differentiates between religious, ethnic, linguistic, and cultural grievances. Nor does this definition describe separately extremism, of both violent and non-violent verity. The de-radicalization program is also a massive exercise in the social culture engineering of its minority communities.
China political system
China’s political system is complex; it is not easy to explain China’s political system. Difference dynasties came and gone in Chinese history with various forms of cultural exceptionalism. Chinese political system is a little different than to other countries but China has its political system and is ruled with their Chinese value and norms. The China political system is close to the authoritarianism system of one-party rule in China; the Chinese communist party (CCP). CCP ruled in China for more than 63 years, this party came to power after the 1949 revolution by the legendry leader of China Mao Zedong. When he came to power introduced the communism system in China tell now. China also has the system of collective leadership system with seven top men in the party who will rule the whole of China. With this authoritarian system they limited the whole system only CCP can decide China’s future toward the world, fortunately, this system is successful in China and brought a massive change in China’s economy now China is the second-largest economy around the globe with a massive population. Chinese scholars call the 21st century is the Chinese century. China’s president in an annual speech on CCP told China model can be a better model for the world political system and we will not accept the western system means a Democracy system. This model is mixing authoritarian government with a clear system and market based on economy and a high level of technology. But china’s communism was different from USSR communism because China has the cultural exceptional Mao was Chinese he respected China exceptionality. These political systems were effective for China because China boosted fast in the world now china is one of the vantage power in the United Nation in the Security Council, China has the right of veto in the Security Council. For china, ideology is more important than the political system. As Chinese communist party claims that they will change the world. The system of collective leadership in china by seven men of the politburo standing committee and 25-member politburo the china highest decision making. When we look at the whole senior of china political system it is close to the aristocracy political system. Now china’s rise as an economy gauges power in the world with a clear policy by the name of peace and harmony policy toward the worldwide.
1: The Uighurs have twice declared an independent state of “East Turkestan” in the 1930s which was inspired by the Tibetan independence movement and many are now calling to break away from China. For China, Xingjian (home of Uighur Muslims) is too strategically important to allow an independence movement to get off the ground because it not only borders eight countries but also has oil and is home to China’s nuclear weapons testing sites.
2) Because of rising radical Islam in the world and it may have impacts on china as well?
According to different Human Rights groups the religious and other freedoms of Uyghur Muslims have been systematically abolished and they are now forced to live under a severely repressive system. The ruthless measures against Uyghur’s in the Xinjiang region is said to come directly from the Chinese President Xijinping absolutely no Mercy policy toward Uyghur’s minorities in 2018, the Human Rights panel of the UN had talked about possessing evidence of the presence of detention and genocide camps in the Xinjiang region. In 2020, the US has enacted Uyghur Human Rights policy act which mandates several US government bodies to report on the issues of human rights violations of Uyghur Muslims in Xinxiang.
There are three types of equality expressed by various political philosophers of their times.
Aristotle’s Concept of Equality
Firstly, Aristotle gave the concept of equal consideration of interests. It means that everyone should be given equal benefits or interests, then equality can only be better served.
This purpose can only be achieved through a monarchical system of government because to a monarch, everyone under his rule would be equal to other ruled ones, so he would protect their interests equally.
Thomas Jefferson’s Concept of Equality
Thomas Jefferson—one of the primary authors of the US Declaration of Independence—and Tecumseh conceptualize equality in terms of equality of naturalrights.
The Declaration’s political theory states that individuals are created naturally equal, so they possess natural rights; it is the duty of the government to protect these rights; if the government aggresses against these natural rights, then individuals may overturn such governments.
Chico Mendes’ Concept of Equality
Chico Mendes articulated the concept of equality of participation, which means that equality in the process of decision-making is the only way to ensure equality of results.
Equality in terms of Human Essences
Actually, the second and third concepts of equality are anti-Aristotelian concepts. Jefferson’s equality is the only equality discussed not in political terms but in terms of human essences.
It means that equality should not be viewed as an attribute of decisions but instead, be seen as an attribute of people. To him, rights are part of human nature itself. Insofar as each of us is equally human, none of us can possess it to a greater or lesser extent than others.
So, it proclaims the morality of revolution against a government that would deny the existence of these naturally existing rights. Similarly, Mendes’ concept of equality is also anti-Aristotelian.
To Mendes, if no one can understand the life of the rubber-tapper as well as the rubber-taper himself, then how can someone else, in Aristotelian fashion, determine, consider, and serve the interests of the rubber-tapper?
But to Aristotle, in equal participation, Mill’s ‘General Will’ will prevail, through which the minority will have to live at the mercy of the majority. This system will not serve the purpose.
In a democracy, the rule of equality in participation is adopted, which breeds inequality in society. It is an illusion of democracy that everyone sees himself as equal to other citizens, but the real interest of the majority is only served here. There is a need to develop a system based on the consideration of equal interests.
Morality:
Friedrich Nietzsche gave us the concept of two types of morality: slave morality and master morality.
Slave Morality and Master Morality
Slave morality is defined by him as a morality serving the interests of the weak, while master morality is the ethical code that serves the strong and praises attributes of strength, conquering, ruling, and dominating.
Slave moralities condemn as bad what is called good by master moralities, and master moralities condemn as bad what is termed as good by slave moralities. Both are self-serving in nature.
Neither morality nor its context provides the concept of good or bad that exists beyond. Democracy, from a Nietzschean perspective, is an example of slave morality if it preaches that none should be more privileged than others.
On the contrary, democracy is also acting as a tool of master’s morality because it serves the interests of rulers at the expense of ruled ones—the followers of slave morality, i.e., ruled ones.
So, it is the illusion of democracy that promotes morality for common purpose or benefit. Everyone thinks that he is getting the benefit, but it is actually the manipulation by the “masters” of their “slaves” and by the “slaves” of their “masters”.
Justice:
Plato thinks that if each person follows his or her nature, then he is acting justly, and when each person is acting justly, then the state itself would be just.
He states three types of attributes in humans, of which the dominating one defines the personality of the person. These are desire, courage, and reason, forming three classes, i.e., of workers, military leaders, and philosophers.
To him, philosophers can only be true kings to rule in the best interests of all. But democracy demands equality of participation, negating these very attributes of the human nature of the platonic world and putting the world under the illusion that they are living in a just system. Though a Platonian state is not achievable, we can try to form a just system in the best interest of all.
Power:
In a democratic state, power is usually placed in different hands to avoid manipulation, but this separation of power actually creates many pressure groups which prove hurdles in the way of the smooth functioning of government.
This illusion is taken as a necessary evil for the delivery of good service and formulation of the current welfare state, but unity of power is presented by many political philosophers, such as the Aristotelian monarch, Hobbesian Leviathan, and Machiavellian Prince. Power merged into one institute, body, or person can easily be applied in the best interest of all.
Liberalism:
The classical liberal philosopher, Locke, says that human nature is characterized by freedom, equality, and reason. So, he claims that in the state of nature, there are no rulers to whom we owe obedience.
Thus, to him, there should be a minimum involvement of the state in an individual’s life because man is rational and can decide for himself better. Then Adam Smith further elaborated on liberalism by giving it a capitalistic touch.
He said an individual is a rational being so he can pursue his interests. He views inequality in society as a sign of development. But it actually is the precursor of disappointment among people and defeats the purpose of the state. A balanced system is required in which states check the transactions and protect innocent people because not everyone is as rational as liberal democratic views.
These classical liberals were succeeded by modern liberals who believe in “expansive liberty” and are promoters of the government’s role in regulating economic and social interactions. Modern liberalists define freedom in broader, more expansive, and more inclusive terms. T.H. Green’s liberty is the freedom to expand the boundaries of human potential and to become a creative, contributing member of society.
So, modern liberals promote “positive liberty” and have called for the government to assist struggling ones while restricting those who deny others the fullest realization of human potential.
This shift towards modern liberalism is proving that state involvement in public life is necessary for the peaceful growth of a society. In the future, a time will come when states will again move back towards monarchies in order to get protection; when the state’s involvement in an individual’s life is at its climax.
So, democracy is not a suitable state system to be adopted for the progress of the state and the protection of all. The illusions propagated for the promotion of democracy are actually perceived by the world as a key to peace and development.
But it is the manipulation of all in the interest of some. It also applies to the world – a tool for the poor west to manipulate the rich and peaceful east. Because in the 1930s, the world’s richest person living in the east—Nizam of Hyderabad—and now has been looted by the west through this “fantasy”.
