Political power struggles often drive protests in Pakistan, where leaders may exploit public discontent to undermine rivals or distract from their own failures. For example, protests initially focused on issues like inflation or governance can quickly become platforms for political rivalry. This manipulation tends to shift the narrative, diverting attention from genuine grievances to political manoeuvring.
In the lead-up to elections, protests may be strategically organized or supported by political parties to rally support. Politicians might exploit social issues to mobilize specific voter bases, framing protests as efforts to champion the rights of marginalized groups. However, once the electoral goal is achieved, their commitment to these issues may diminish, leading to disillusionment among the constituents who initially rallied for change.
More recently, the violent protests and repeated calls for demonstrations by the Awami Action Committee in AJK also appear aimed at fostering negativity and hate. The Awami Action Committee has transformed into a pressure group focused more on political interests than on representing public concerns. Its agenda appears self-centred, emphasizing personal gain and self-promotion. Reports indicate that one leader of the Awami Action Committee, arrested on charges of robbery, was attempted to be forcibly released by its leadership without going through the proper legal channels.
This incident illustrates how the Awami Action Committee seems intent on masking its misdeeds behind a facade of activism. Similarly, the leadership of PTI in Pakistan also seems disconnected from the country’s real issues and the needs of its citizens. They are desperate to gain power by any means, showing little concern for the harm they may cause to the country in pursuit of their selfish goals.
The PTI’s first sit-in in 2014 aimed to disrupt the visit of the Chinese president to Pakistan, while more recently, it planned to attack Islamabad during the SCO Summit, diverting attention from the significance of this event for Pakistan. The SCO is a crucial forum for international cooperation and a platform to raise awareness about the Kashmir issue globally. By choosing to protest during such an important time, the PTI appeared to align themselves with the agendas of those opposed to Pakistan, potentially undermining the Kashmir liberation movement.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), established in 2001, focuses on political, economic, and security cooperation in the Eurasian region. Pakistan became a full member in 2017, making the SCO a vital platform for Islamabad, offering numerous opportunities. Membership strengthens Pakistan’s ties with key regional players like China, Russia, and Central Asian nations, which is crucial for countering Western influence.
By engaging with the SCO, Pakistan can align more closely with countries that share its strategic interests, enhancing its diplomatic leverage. The SCO promotes regional connectivity through initiatives like the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and the broader Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which improve infrastructure and trade routes, facilitating economic integration and establishing Pakistan as a regional hub for trade and investment.
Engagement with the SCO allows Pakistan to balance its relationships with major powers like China and Russia while maintaining strategic autonomy. This multilateral approach can help Islamabad navigate complex geopolitical challenges. The SCO’s emphasis on economic cooperation can enhance trade relations among member states, providing Pakistan with access to new markets and investment opportunities, especially in agriculture, energy, and technology. By fostering economic ties within the SCO framework, Pakistan can diversify its trade partnerships and reduce reliance on traditional markets, engaging in initiatives that promote collaboration across various sectors. Increased cooperation in areas like energy resources, transportation, and infrastructure development can foster greater economic stability and growth for Pakistan and its neighbouring countries. The SCO can act as a platform for Pakistan to engage in development projects with other member states. Collaborative initiatives in fields such as water management, agriculture, and technology transfer can bolster Pakistan’s capacity for sustainable development and enhance the living standards of its citizens.
A key objective of the SCO is to promote regional security and combat terrorism. For Pakistan, which has faced significant challenges related to extremism and terrorism, participation in the SCO offers an opportunity to collaborate with member states on intelligence sharing, counter-terrorism operations, and the adoption of best practices in security governance. The SCO has shown a strong interest in the situation in Afghanistan, especially following the Taliban’s return to power.
Pakistan’s participation in the SCO can enhance its role as a mediator in Afghan affairs, promoting stability in the region. A stable Afghanistan is crucial for Pakistan’s own security and economic interests, making SCO membership particularly significant. The SCO focuses on cooperative security mechanisms and peacekeeping initiatives, allowing Pakistan to contribute to and benefit from collective efforts to maintain regional peace and stability while addressing shared threats.
Politicians who evade accountability can undermine democratic processes. They may dismiss criticism, disengage from constituents, and neglect pressing issues. This lack of accountability can lead to systemic problems, including corruption and ineffective governance. Many unscrupulous politicians employ populist rhetoric, making grand promises without concrete plans to deliver on them. While these promises may resonate with voters initially, they often result in disappointment and unmet expectations.
This SCO summit was especially important for Pakistan— not only because it was hosted by the country, but also due to the current challenges Pakistan faces. The financial crises and terrorism issues are critical concerns that require international cooperation. Those who impose restrictions on securing such international support for Pakistan cannot genuinely be considered its well-wishers.
A major problem in Pakistan is that some leaders exploit the populace as “human shields.” In the political arena, the ethical responsibilities of leaders are paramount. Unfortunately, some politicians resort to manipulative tactics, using their constituents as shields to deflect attention from their own wrongdoing. The term “human shield” traditionally refers to using civilians to protect military targets from attack. In a political context, it describes the tactic of placing vulnerable communities in precarious situations to deter criticism or scrutiny.
By leveraging these groups, politicians seek to insulate themselves from the repercussions of their actions, often in pursuit of power or personal gain. They exploit social issues— such as poverty, education, or healthcare— by presenting themselves as the sole protectors of these vulnerable populations. For instance, when faced with allegations of corruption or mismanagement, some politicians highlight their community engagement efforts, framing critics as adversaries of public welfare. This tactic effectively diverts attention from their misconduct.
Additionally, some politicians orchestrate protests or public demonstrations, portraying them as grassroots movements. This strategy distracts from their controversial policies or actions. When scrutinized, these leaders often claim that any criticism of their behaviour is an attack on the very people who support them, thus positioning themselves as morally superior.
In some instances, politicians prioritize the interests of specific groups— such as ethnic or religious minorities— while overlooking the needs of the broader society. This approach fosters a narrative that any criticism of their governance equates to undermining these communities. Such exploitation not only hinders accountability but also deepens societal divisions. When politicians use their constituents as shields, it breeds cynicism and disillusionment among the public. Citizens start to question the motives of their leaders, contributing to a wider erosion of trust in democratic institutions. This lack of trust can lead to disengagement among voters and reduced civic participation, ultimately weakening the foundations of democracy.
The tactic of using human shields can effectively suppress accountability. Politicians who manipulate public sentiment to shield themselves from criticism evade scrutiny for their actions, fostering a culture of impunity. This environment allows corruption and unethical behavior to flourish, undermining the principles of good governance. By exploiting vulnerable communities, politicians can deepen social divisions. Portraying dissenters as enemies of the people creates an “us versus them” mentality, further polarizing society. This division complicates dialogue and consensus-building, hindering progress on critical issues.
In any democracy, the relationship between politicians and the electorate is foundational. Citizens place their trust in elected officials to represent their interests, uphold the rule of law, and work toward the common good. However, the ability to distinguish between good and bad politicians is essential for a healthy democratic society. Good politicians are defined by their integrity and honesty. They prioritize transparency in their actions and decisions, keeping constituents informed about their intentions. These leaders take responsibility for their actions and readily admit mistakes. A hallmark of effective leadership is accountability; good politicians hold themselves answerable to their constituents and respond to public needs and concerns. They welcome scrutiny and engage in open dialogue, fostering trust and confidence in their leadership.
Good politicians possess a clear vision for the future and the competence to realize that vision. They understand the complexities of governance and are skilled at navigating challenges. Their policies are well-researched and aim to improve the quality of life for all citizens. Empathy is crucial for effective political leadership; these politicians actively listen to diverse perspectives and strive to represent the interests of marginalized and underrepresented communities. They promote inclusiveness and advocate for policies that benefit all segments of society.
In contrast, bad politicians often prioritize their own interests over the public good. They may engage in corrupt practices, using their positions for personal gain rather than serving their constituents. Such behaviour erodes trust in the political system and can lead to widespread disillusionment among voters. Bad politicians frequently resort to divisive tactics, exploiting societal tensions for their advantage. By polarizing the electorate and fostering animosity between groups, they undermine social cohesion and create an environment of fear and distrust.
Politicians who evade accountability can undermine democratic processes. They may dismiss criticism, disengage from constituents, and neglect pressing issues. This lack of accountability can lead to systemic problems, including corruption and ineffective governance. Many unscrupulous politicians employ populist rhetoric, making grand promises without concrete plans to deliver on them. While these promises may resonate with voters initially, they often result in disappointment and unmet expectations.
The people of Pakistan and AJK are increasingly discerning between good and bad leaders and are no longer easily deceived. There is a pressing need for strict action against those elements and groups that spread hate and chaos for their own interests and the agendas of our adversaries.
