October 03, 2007	Wednesday	Ramazan 20, 1428

ISLAMABAD, Oct 2: Scholars discussing whether non-violence was possible in today’s violent world here on Tuesday suggested that pluralistic democracy and respect for diversity can win the day by creating trust and understanding among the people.

“We are suddenly up against diversity,” said Dr Khalid Masud, chairman, Council of Islamic Ideology (CII), at a seminar jointly organised by the Sustainable Development Policy Institute, Action Aid Pakistan, the Sungi Development Foundation and the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan to explain the present day worldwide violence.

Different dogmas could coexist in the past when the regional culture used to be dominant. But with globalisation cultures were coming into conflict. “We are not yet ready to understand the modern world,” he said.

That was why violence was being practised, although no religion approves of it. “We justify violence rationally and emotionally,” he observed.

“Once we learn to give due space to people subscribing to other dogmas, the problem would be surmounted and mutual understanding established,” he said.

Part of the problem was that people classify everything into good and bad. “That is not appropriate as our religion does not preach rigidity which breeds racial and cultural conflicts and leads to violence”.

Two scholars, one from India and the other from Peshawar, who followed him, presented the view that the non-violence preached by Mahatma Gandhi and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan could build tolerance for contrasting views about truth.

Prof Mushirul Hassan, Vice-Chancellor, Jamia Mili University, New Delhi, talked about the post-colonial situation of India and highlighted certain aspects of Mahatma Ghandi’s Ahinsa (non-violence) Movement which promoted the culture of debate, compromise, reconciliation and removal of Hindu-Muslim conflict to help prevail non-violence amid contrasting views of truth.

He also highlighted some of the key features and approaches of nation building project of Jawahar Lal Nehru that helped India to address the question of violence and reconciliation in the post-partition situation.

He lamented that there was no handy roadmap in the world today for reconciliation for healing the wounds of societies in the aftermath of sustained violence, underlining the need for understanding and upholding the values of Gandhi’s concept of non-violence, secular parliamentary democracy and promotion of indigenous cultures.

Stressing the need for mutual understanding and brotherhood Prof Hassan said, “we should have valued and loved fellow being beyond any limit or boundary”.

Dr Syed Waqar Ali Shah, Chairman, History Department, Quaid-i-Azam University and Dr Fazal Rahim Marwat, Director, Bacha Khan Research Centre, Peshawar talked about the successful non-violence movement initiated by Bacha Khan before and after the partition of the sub-continent urging Pakhtuns to leave the gun culture.

Giving an overview of systematic violence meted out against Baacha Khan and his followers in 1930s and 1940s, Dr Waqar Ali Shah said that the non-violent philosophy of Baacha Khan prevented violence and blood feuds in NWFP.

Fazal Rahim regretted that despite the fact that Khudai Khidmatgar Tehreek of Baacha Khan was a non-violent, secular and pluralistic movement, Pakistani ruling elite and the establishment portrayed it as Soviet expansion and conspiracy to reach warm waters.

He lamented the increasing violence in society, especially in tribal areas and held the rulers responsible for it.

He blamed the media as well as the official textbooks taught in schools for portraying Pakhtuns and Balochs as “violent and hostile”. Citing an example he said in the textbook of Pakistan Studies for class three the Pakhtun and Baloch children are shown holding guns in their hands.

“Pakistan is both the victim and perpetuator of violence”, Mr Rahim said linking the genesis of violence to the two-nation theory and successive governments’ failure to evolve a federal structure, communalisation of state, lack of respect for diversity in society, defence-oriented policy and eventually contours of Jihad mania.

He criticised both the military dictators and democratic leaders for not being sincere to the country and creating chaos resulting in mistrust and increasing sectarian and regional violence.

He also criticised the ‘jahadi text’ taught to Afghan refuge children to keep them away from the normal life.

Mr Rahim further said “civil society has become a sandwich between Mullah and military today” and stressed the need for promotion of democracy, secularism, tolerance and harmony in society.