The current structural pandemonium in Pakistan, undoubtedly, is a result of the protest by a well –known movement, the Tehreek Labaik Pakistan which aims to establish Islamic Sharia laws in the state, and does not tolerate a single word against the dignity of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). So much so, talking about the structural pandemonium, it is somehow difficult to decide the right and wrong between the TLP and the government.
If someone sees the government and establishment’s view regarding this fanatic movement he at once thinks that the government or the head of the state is on the right track in not considering the voice of this group, as it is busy with other serious issues of state. But the issue is as grave as anything can take the state towards anarchy and chaos. It is the need of the hour to listen to the demands of another new extremist group. The head of government and the establishment have to make a perfect platform to handle such conundrums. However the discussion has been seen at various levels on this issue, and the international media gave multiple dimensions regarding the spread of extremism in Pakistan, and condemning the extremis group, they criticized the government’s policies too.
The negotiations between the TLP and the PM were being held after dealing with huge disorder and confusion which was not acknowledged by the world’s analysts. Therefore, both the TLP and the government’s officials are accountable for this turmoil and lawlessness as one cannot denounce only one side of the two. The reason is that this fundamental group may prove a potential threat to the security of the state; hence, to meet all these challenges, the government and establishment must eliminate their mutual distances and take such issues ven-handedly– similarly giving respect to all these fundamentalists in the state so as to create a peaceful atmosphere which will be favourable to determine the internal variances and the strategic relations with other regional and international countries.
As for the recent social, political impasse which generated confusion between the government and the TLP about deciding to negotiate earlier, it has led the state towards pandemonium in its structure. The confusion about deciding in time is often what leads the states to the pandemonium where driving forces are usually observed bemused. The suggestion is obvious: to save the country from these affairs that the decision makers, civil and military bureaucracy, all the establishment, should handle such issues initially, not allow these groups to erupt to a large extent.
Discussing the TLP’s protest, everyone has discussed the government’s attitude too. A state like Pakistan is undoubtedly a developing state which needs a conducive environment to flourish the economy. It is a fact in international relations that when a country faces domestic anarchy and riots, rival states take maximum advantage of this situation. India, the first neighboring state, adds fuel to the fire on the erupting-situation by invoking the hidden intelligences. Therefore, to handle these challenges a peaceful environment is a prerequisite which may strengthen the foreign policy of the state.
Foreign policy is the main component to run the state on a systematic ground. A strategic decision has been made, to build relations with other countries, reduces the trade deficit and augments the Foreign Direct Investment opportunities within the state. Nevertheless, this is all only possible if a state is passing through favourable circumstances, as internal security challenges generally create hurdles in the progress and prosperity of the state. Moreover, it is the best way to raise democracy in the country –because democracy includes the respect and dignity of the human rights voices and demands. Saad Rizvi’s bail has been a controversial issue recently.
Denouncing the one side is not an intellectual way of defense; the TLP’s primary demand remained the bail of their leader Saad Rizvi which was neglected by the government officials and establishment. Later on, they required a peaceful settlement through dialogues or negotiations but it was also delayed by the head of the state; however, the protest was stopped by putting large containers in their way which further caused the killing of many policemen, barrier to
run the transport, digging roads etc. A natural phenomenon is that everyone becomes violent when his voice is not considered whenever he puts foward his demands for rights.
In a democratic state, human rights activism is seen as the hallmark of a country’s welfare and opulence. People require their accomplished needs at their home but when they are not listened to even on the roads, they definitely will create lawlessness and disorder: thus in this case of the TLP the element of negligence by the government is seen to some extent.
It is known that they were pledging just for the negotiations with the government to put the main issues; and the major issue was the bail of their leader Saad Rizvi. Before the issue of Saad Rizvi’s bail, initially, they were demanding to cut diplomatic relations with France.
As for the recent social, political impasse which generated confusion between the government and the TLP about deciding to negotiate earlier, it has led the state towards pandemonium in its structure. The confusion about deciding in time is often what leads the states to the pandemonium where driving forces are usually observed bemused. The suggestion
is obvious: to save the country from these affairs that the decision makers, civil and military bureaucracy, all the establishment, should handle such issues initially, not allow these groups to erupt to a large extent.
