logo
Can enlightenment forge peace?

Can enlightenment forge peace?

Express Tribune30-03-2025

Offering a provocative thesis that demonstrates Islamabad's inability to address conflict and foster peace, Professor Moonis Ahmar's latest book The Challenge of Enlightenment, Conflict Transformation and Peace in Pakistan critically explores the intersections of enlightenment, conflict management and governance in Pakistan. According to the author, the failure to embrace the fundamental principles of enlightenment such as rationality, scientific inquiry, intellectual freedom, and secularism has suppressed the country's ability to resolve conflicts.
Dr Ahmar constructs an argument that is drawn from philosophy, history and contemporary socio-political realities that deliberates enlightenment as a necessary precursor to conflict transformation and peace. Outlining the historical trajectories of enlightenment in diverse civilisations juxtaposing the intellectual revolution in Europe with post-colonial struggles of Pakistan, he asserts that without an intellectual revolution and cultural transformation, Pakistan will remain entangled in phases of sectarianism, ideological rigidity, and state centric conflict management.
The book begins with a historical examination of the enlightenment as an intellectual movement that has transformed European societies. Prussian Philosopher Immanuel Kant defines enlightenment as 'emergence of a man from his self-imposed immaturity,' and Ahmar emphasises how empiricism, rationality and secular form of governance drove Europe's progress.
He contrasts this with the socio-political realities of Pakistan, asserting that colonial legacies, governance structure and religious orthodoxy have suppressed intellectual progress. Ahmar analyses Pakistan's socio-political stagnation within a civilisational framework and challenges the dominant discourse that credits Pakistan's catastrophes exclusively to external geopolitical factors. He accentuates endogenous failures such as religious fundamentalism, educational decay and the containment of intellectual dissent as key obstacles to enlightenment.
Ahmar's work demonstrates the clarity with which it formulates and answers its core research questions. The book systematically addresses how cultural enlightenment may mitigate conflicts. He explores challenges such as intolerance, extremism, terrorism, and radicalisation in Pakistan. It also investigates the obstacles that suppress enlightenment and conflict transformation in the state and our society.
As he highlights the conservative and religious extremist organisations as prime barriers in resisting modernisation, Ahmar also examines why cultural enlightenment is taken up as a threat by the reactionary forces and how the moderate version of Islam may serve as a counter force to the militant ideologies. These interrogations construct the practical and theoretical rhetoric of the book. The questions posed by the author demonstrate that the book is comprehensive in its approach and is relevant to the contemporary policy debates.
The second chapter of the book 'Cultural Enlightenment' is framed around some of the significant critical questions that distinguish between culture, enlightenment traditions and cultural enlightenment. This part also illustrates the significance of cultural enlightenment in conflict transformation and peace building. As he examines how tolerance, intellectual reasoning, and critical inquiry play a pivotal role for humanism and moderation, he also portrays cultural enlightenment as a counter measure to radicalisation and social stagnation. He also investigates the emancipation of the marginalised communities to foster intellectual and cultural transformation, while recognizing the structural barriers like suppressive societal norms, orthodoxy and ignorance that thwart the progress. Ahmar believes that cultural enlightenment is required to promote open-mindedness and neutralising radical ideologies.
In addition to this, he posits that enlightenment is not exclusively associated with Westernisation rather it is a universal process that promotes social progress. He criticizes Pakistan's resistance to the enlightenment norms and values and further highlights that the emergence of colonial policies that strengthened authoritarianism and post-independence governance structures that prioritized ideological conformity over the intellectual liberty. Stressing the significance of education in fostering enlightenment, he emphasises that the curricula of Pakistan's education system is designed to preserve a state sanctioned worldview rather than encourage and endorse critical thinking.
The third chapter that examines the intricate relationship between conflict transformation and enlightenment in the context of Pakistan. The author raises fundamental questions regarding the significance of positive and negative transformation of human mind in shaping enlightenment and investigates the core barriers to promote societal progress and intellectual openness. The chapter accentuates that societal, political, religious and cultural transformation can act as a catalyst in demolishing parochial worldviews and therefore, strengthens a more enlightened society. The key premise here is that cultural transformation is essential in confronting feudal and tribal structures that inhibit intellectual progress via early social learning and quality education. A significant decline has been observed in the levels of tolerance and moderation since 1980s which may be attributed primarily to the Afghan Jihad and the rise of sectarianism and extremism. This chapter highlights that the conflict transformation must be comprehended not only as the absence of violence but as a recurring process that fosters reasoning, critical thinking, and humanistic values to neutralise radicalisation and ignorance.
Dr Ahmar builds on John Paul Lederach's conflict transformation model that suggests that conflict should be regarded as an opportunity for structural and cultural change rather than a problem to be resolved. Criticising Pakistan's militarised approach to conflict transformation, he argues that force alone cannot dismantle the structural and ideological roots of extremism and sectarian violence. Rather, the author advocates for intellectual engagement, dialogue and democratic institution building as durable resolve.
The fourth chapter discusses why enlightenment is required in Pakistan and secondly, it explores various ways through which enlightenment may be cultivated. According to Ahmar, enlightenment is pivotal for sustainable peace, conflict management and subsequent national progress. This assertion is built on the historical antecedents that our cultural and intellectual traditions have been surpassed by regressive ideological positions thereby, limiting the expansion of scientific inquiry, rational thought and tolerance in Pakistan. Ahmar illustrates that enlightenment is required for overcoming these impediments and it is not an imposition of exogenous values rather than an organic process that can be fostered through quality education, critical thinking and governance.
The discussion highlights that the country's educational system is fragmented and divided into public, private and religious seminaries, where each system reinforces peculiar worldviews. Ahmar suggests that an education system that incorporates ethics, comparative religion and philosophy would be instrumental in strengthening an enlightened mindset, pointing out that Pakistan remains entangled in a system where political elites manipulate religious sentiments to acquire power, therefore inhibiting progressive thought and likewise reformist initiatives. The author also calls for rational discourse that may promote historical accuracy and social tolerance. The author highlights the pursuit of enlightenment as a desirable goal and an existential imperative for Pakistan's future.
In the fifth chapter, the author demonstrates that ethnic, societal, sectarian, societal and resource-based conflicts may not be transformed positively without the transformation of mindset. Transformation of mindset from parochial, retrogressive, ultra-conservative and negative to positive and enlightened would require a knowledge Conflict transformation through cultural enlightenment cordial society. Similarly, the pragmatism of the justice system, order and rule of law may address conflicts that may either destabilise the society by initiating violent conflicts. According to the author, the law made and enforced must be just and accessible. Moreover, justice should be delivered through capable, ethical, neutral independent and within the reach of common masses.
The chapter 'Lessons to be learned from Europe' critically investigates the European Enlightenment and its relevance to the socio-political transformation of Pakistan by emphasising on six themes. Chronologically listing scholarly work on enlightenment, Ahmar highlights Europe's transition from medieval stagnation to a knowledge-based system through Renaissance, and Treaty of Westphalia which emphasized for governance reforms and intellectual freedom. He asserts that despite the rich historical and cultural legacy, Islamabad has failed to endorse same philosophical and educational transformations due to embedded religious conservatism and a lack of critical thinking.
The transformation of Europe from religious orthodox to secular form of governance established an environment conducive to enlightenment. The Thirty Years War (1618-1648) and subsequent treaty of Westphalia created a precedent for separating religion from politics, thereby fostering rational and law-based governance system to emerge. In Pakistan, the absence of a tolerant and inclusive national identity is attributed to religious extremism and sectarianism. The chapter elaborates the 1980's Islamisation policies fostered ultra-religious forces and sectarian divisions. In contrast, comprehending from Europe's experience of restricting religious dogmatism, Pakistan has let the theology led factions to influence state policies restricting intellectual discourse.
The author framed the lesson acquired from European enlightenment in three categories, freedom from fear, dogmatism and exploitation. Ahmar stresses that the society of Pakistan has to liberate itself from fear-based governance system where opposition is suppressed, and critical thinking is discouraged. He believes the erosion of dogmatism is fundamental as seminaries continue to employ disproportionate power in policy making that badly effect education sector and causes ideological rigidity. Persistent religious exploitation for political gains strengthens sectarian divisions. He accentuates that the misuse of religion in the political developments, blasphemy laws and sectarian based violence are regarded as major obstructions in the pathway of enlightenment in Pakistan.
The last chapter of this book delivers a critical analysis of the significance of enlightenment in conflict transformation and peace building. The research elaborates that Europe had overcome feudalism, religious orthodoxy and intellectual repression with the Enlightenment and the separation of Church and the State. However, Pakistan remained entangled in feudal, tribal, and religious conservatism. The country is unable to achieve sustainable development and peace because of the lack of knowledge friendly culture that causes perpetual social backwardness, intolerance and extremism.
Dr Moonis asserts that enlightenment provides a corridor for conflict management by emphasizing on tolerance, scientific advancement, and critical thinking. The youth of Pakistan offer an opportunity to foster intellectual awakening, however the failure of the state to invest in research and education has left many youngsters vulnerable to radicalisation.
This book suggests five essential areas for reform that could initiate Pakistan's process of enlightenment. First, the religious institutions must be a centre of tolerance and knowledge rather than a hub of sectarianism and radicalisation. Religious scholars may play a crucial role in countering extremism. Second, Pakistan must work to bridge the rural urban divide by focusing on education and developing modern infrastructure in the rural areas. Third, the educational system must promote critical thinking, reasoning and scientific research. Fourth, individualism and intellectual autonomy must be fostered as modernisation is not Westernisation rather innovation with discipline. Lastly, the state's commitment to eradicate extremism and intolerance is imperative. In a nutshell, the conclusion of the book highlights that the process of Pakistan's enlightenment will not be smooth because of the existing resistance from entrenched power structures that remain strong.
Prof Moonis Ahmar's has authored a thought-provoking book with several strengths that are outstanding for the readers. An innovative perspective that links cultural enlightenment with conflict transformation. The book's interdisciplinary approach is pivotal as it bridges philosophy, political science, history, and religious studies to present a comprehensive analysis that is relevant with the contemporary and pressing challenges of Pakistan like extremism and intolerance among others. It offers pragmatic recommendations for advancing critical thinking and rational discourse in Pakistan.
Maheen Farhat Raza is a lecturer at Department of International Relations, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad
All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the writer

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Before 18 is not a crime, after 18 is not a cure: rethinking
Before 18 is not a crime, after 18 is not a cure: rethinking

Express Tribune

time11 hours ago

  • Express Tribune

Before 18 is not a crime, after 18 is not a cure: rethinking

Listen to article Amidst the fête of a so-called HerStoric moment not only by Pakistani feminists but anyone with simple common sense, I am once again mentioning the unpopular questions I have been asking since 2003, long before this issue of legal age of marriage aligned with donor-driven priorities or became fashionable in policy circles. In chorus, a relapsing outbreak of moral panic is being orchestrated by self-appointed sentries of Islam and selectively spread "ethics" that almost always concern themselves with the conduct, corpora and choices of women and girls. The decree raises the legal age of marriage to 18 for both boys and girls in the ICT and mandates strict punishment most notably for the nikkah-khawan who solemnises such unions. This may provide symbolic relief to rights-based stakeholders. What remains concealed is the country's continued inability to address the issue of adolescent sexuality, social vulnerability and child protection with depth and context. A daring detailed reevaluation reveals that Pakistan is celebrating a partial fix for a deeply complex problem. As of now, only two regions, Sindh and Islamabad, have enacted laws clearly setting the minimum marriage age at 18. Sindh led the way in 2014 with the Sindh Child Marriage Restraint Act. In contrast, other four regions maintain to manage under the colonial-era Child Marriage Restraint Act of 1929. Punjab could only amend the original 1929 Act in 2015, maintaining a minimum marriage age of 16 for girls. Meanwhile, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan and Gilgit-Baltistan continue to operate under the outdated 1929 Act, with no substantial amendments to address child marriage. In December 2015, a bill tabled by the Parliamentary Secretary for Law, calling for making marriages under the age of 18 illegal in Gilgit-Baltistan, was blocked by legislators who called it "un-Islamic", and "against divine law". After the strong opposition, the bill was referred to a select committee for review where it remains buried. Even today, nearly all provinces lack a determined drive toward legal and social protection of millions of children and adolescents. Not all early marriages are child marriages. But what we are witnessing in many cases is not marriage at all; it is institutionalised child sexual abuse and a legitimised harmful ritual. When such unions are later nullified, these victims are shoved to carry the stigma of being divorced. Can our system handle that reality? Do we have support mechanisms in place? The answer is no. The state institutions are not available to fathom the compounding trauma and there is no accountability on inaction. Entitling an underage and uninformed arrangement a "marriage" should itself be a cognisable crime. Rethinking without donor-supported projects is among many other tabooed territories and forbidden fruits in Pakistan. No wonder people like myself never got powerful allies who could dare Rethinking the "Child" in Child Marriage. The term "child" itself needs exploration. Legally, children are under 18. But functionally, our own laws allow for layered maturity: one can get a learner's driving licence at 16, work part-time in informal sectors even earlier, and face adult-style accountability in many contexts before turning 18. From a public health lens, the 10-19 age bracket covers early and late adolescence, a group often left in a policy vacuum. They are not children, and not fully empowered youth either. Adolescents have distinct sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) needs, which neither laws nor public discourse are willing to acknowledge. This discarding stems from a toxic concoction of cultural abjuration, lack of sex education and fear of addressing "morality". As per the WHO, pregnancy during adolescence can be associated with increased risks of preeclampsia, premature birth and other health complications. The real risk is pregnancy. Early marriage (post-18), if informed and consensual, is safer than delaying marriage while denying sexuality and reproductive rights. The social cost of delayed marriage in a selectively traditional society is high, particularly when there are no alternatives for safe relationships. The call to action must extend beyond a single piece of legislation, because one law is neither a reform nor a revolution. If we correctly care about our children including adolescents, we must confront the root causes of child marriage and exploitation with a comprehensive, multi-layered approach. This includes introducing community-based, age-appropriate SRHR education; raising awareness about the safe age for pregnancy with a focus on reducing health risks; and guaranteeing compulsory education for all children for at least 14 years. The burden should not fall on poor nikah-khawans alone, as scapegoating them ignores the systemic failure to prevent violence and protect children. We must promote responsible parenting, strengthen family and community-based support networks and provide helplines and counseling services for adolescents in distress. Pakistan must develop and implement a strong national adolescent policy that addresses physical health, mental well-being, SRHR, education and livelihoods. And above all, the state must ban forced marriages at any age, because consent is not a comfort, it is a non-negotiable human right. While fully regarding the hardwork of our legislators, especially the women lawmakers, it remains a fact that our legislators, largely from affluent backgrounds, have borrowed vision and continue to draft bills that reflect donor glossaries rather than ground realities. We must contextualise these issues within our own religious and socio-economic frameworks. Islam does not oppose the safeguarding of public health through SRHR education and protection. These aspects deserve greater media attention, and the existing law should be expanded accordingly. Do not call abuse "marriage". If Pakistan is to protect its young people not just from "child marriage" but from the embedded exploitation then we must build a society where sexuality is comprehended, not dreaded, and where rights are respected, not refuted. A law in Islamabad is a (delayed) start. But justice for adolescents demands much more.

Traffic fines
Traffic fines

Business Recorder

timea day ago

  • Business Recorder

Traffic fines

The Sindh government recently announced that it is amending the motor vehicle law which will increase the fines imposed for traffic violations and also ban four-seater rickshaws. While the banning of four-seater rickshaws will not only cause hardships to people from lower income groups but also deprive a source of income to the lower middle class owners and drivers of rickshaws the increased fines for traffic violations seem rather unreal and questions the seriousness of this decision. I say this because the new fines seem preposterous to say the least. Hold your breath while I tell you what the new fines are going to be starting immediately. You will not believe it but the traffic fine for driving wrong way has been increased to a hundred thousand for private cars and two hundred thousand for government vehicles. For motorcyclists this fine has been increased to Rs 25,000. For those driving without a valid license it will attract a fine of Rs 50,000 for four-wheelers and 25,000 for motorcyclists. The one fine that raises many questions is the hefty fine on government vehicles. Obviously, the department concerned will pay the fine and it will not come out of the pocket of any individual so in a roundabout manner it will be us the taxpayers who will be penalized. The logic of this fine is really hard to understand. Fines are imposed to discourage violations of law, but in this case as it will not affect the pocketbook of any individual and only involve some paper work it will not penalize any one nor reform anyone's driving habit. It will be a waste of government resources starting from the police officer who will issue the challan to the scores of government employees who will be involved in clearing the red tape to pay the fine from government coffers. As far as the fine of a hundred thousand on four-wheel drivers is concerned we have seen other attempts by our worthy traffic police to control traffic but not with any success. If you remember at one time with great fanfare exclusive lanes for motorcyclists were painted on Shahrae Faisal and announcements made that there will be strict enforcement of rules and no motorcyclists will be allowed to wander into other lanes where only four wheelers will be allowed. This did not last long and mixed vehicular traffic is still running on this important road leading to Karachi's international airport. The recent amendment in our traffic rules might not work but it has placed Karachi top of the list as far as traffic fines are concerned. We have even left behind European countries in this area. In Europe, Denmark leads in such fines but even they do not come close to our recently announced fines. Here fines for speeding are Euro 135 and Euro 670.27 for drunk driving. In Norway, the highest fine is for using your mobile phone while driving and you are slapped with a Euro 867 fine. In Spain, there is a Euro 200 fine for both speeding and mobile phone use while driving. France imposes some of the highest traffic fines and has no tolerance for drunk driving imposing a fine of Euro 4500. Pakistan can learn a lot from Canada where traffic fines are imposed seriously but they are meant to reform the drivers not just to punish them. The concerned department keeps an eye on individual driver's record. The driving licence when you receive it the first time comes with 15 points. Every time you breach the law whether it is drinking and driving or over speeding or any other traffic violation points are deducted. When your 15 points are reduced to 7 or thereabouts you get a call to visit the ministry for an interview. Here an officer discusses your driving history and warns you that you are about to lose your licence. If you heed the warning and avoid future violations your points come back after a while, otherwise your license is cancelled. In the end it all boils down to the intention of the amendments made. The present amendments will only work if there is not only good intentions but dedicated people to implement with sincerity and unity of purpose. Do we have what it takes to make our city safe and organized? Only time will tell. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025

Pakistan among nuclear states spent $100bn on weapons in 2024: ICAN
Pakistan among nuclear states spent $100bn on weapons in 2024: ICAN

Business Recorder

timea day ago

  • Business Recorder

Pakistan among nuclear states spent $100bn on weapons in 2024: ICAN

Nuclear-armed states spent more than $100 billion on their atomic arsenals last year, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons said Friday, lamenting the lack of democratic oversight of such spending. ICAN said Britain, China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia and the United States together spent nearly $10 billion more than in 2023. The United States spent $56.8 billion in 2024, followed by China at $12.5 billion and Britain at $10.4 billion, ICAN said in its flagship annual report. Geneva-based ICAN won the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize for its key role in drafting the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which took effect in 2021. Some 69 countries have ratified it to date, four more have directly acceded to the treaty and another 25 have signed it, although none of the nuclear weapons states have come on board. This year's report looked at the costs incurred by the countries that host other states' nuclear weapons. It said such costs are largely unknown to citizens and legislators alike, thereby avoiding democratic scrutiny. Although not officially confirmed, the report said Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey were hosting US nuclear weapons, citing experts. Meanwhile Russia claims it has nuclear weapons stationed in Belarus, but some experts are unsure, it added. The report said there was 'little public information' about the costs associated with hosting US nuclear weapons in NATO European countries, citing the cost of facility security, nuclear-capable aircraft and preparation to use such weapons. 'Each NATO nuclear-sharing arrangement is governed by secret agreements,' the report said. 'It's an affront to democracy that citizens and lawmakers are not allowed to know that nuclear weapons from other countries are based on their soil or how much of their taxes is being spent on them,' said the report's co-author Alicia Sanders-Zakre. Eight countries openly possess nuclear weapons: the United States, Russia, Britain, France, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea. Israel is widely assumed to have nuclear weapons, although it has never officially acknowledged this. ICAN said the level of nuclear weapons spending in 2024 by these nine nations could have paid the UN budget almost 28 times over. 'The problem of nuclear weapons is one that can be solved, and doing so means understanding the vested interests fiercely defending the option for nine countries to indiscriminately murder civilians,' said ICAN's programme coordinator Susi Snyder. The private sector earned at least $42.5 billion from their nuclear weapons contracts in 2024 alone, the report said. There are at least $463 billion in ongoing nuclear weapons contracts, some of which do not expire for decades, and last year, at least $20 billion in new nuclear weapon contracts were awarded, it added. 'Many of the companies that benefited from this largesse invested heavily in lobbying governments, spending $128 million on those efforts in the United States and France, the two countries for which data is available,' ICAN said. Standard nuclear doctrine — developed during the Cold War between super powers the United States and the Soviet Union — is based on the assumption that such weapons will never have to be used because their impact is so devastating, and because nuclear retaliation would probably bring similar destruction on the original attacker.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store