Op-ed

Nations win without fighting

Shakeel ahmad

From the bygone times, fights have been a hallmark of human history. These fights and conflicts are not just limited to humans but are also seen in the animal kingdom existing on this planet earth. In some, the lust for dominance over the weaker has been the sole cause. In others, the reasons rest with the mere survival that has been a natural instinct of all the biological beings. The former ones have not always made themselves stand on the pedestal of everlasting glory in most of the cases. As in wake of their nefarious designs, they often resort to those acts that make the suppressed classes to stand against them. Consequently, the power hungry and domination desiring nations have to meet with their eventual downfall. The latter ones by avoiding all possible shenanigans and believing in the fight free world have been observed to win their national goals. However, in wake of their survival oriented policy, they arduously stand against all those internal as well as external threats that might stand as an impediment in their national triumph.

The world today is facing conflicting environs all around that are one of a kind. Cold wars, guerrilla wars, media war are the terms of this very century. Perhaps, the contemporary man has forgotten those extreme mishaps encrypted in the history which the people saw during the world wars and one and only example of using uncontrolled nuclear fission chain reaction; the atomic bomb explosion in Japan. Adolf Hitler of Germany believed that only fight would bring his nation the first victory stand. But, what the world saw was nothing else but the decline of German nation. As soon as the Russian nation opt the fighting strategy to get utmost domination, it resulted in alteration in the world map after Russian’s defeat in Afghanistan. What the nations are doing today? One must assert that following the similar confrontation policies of the unfortunate past nations would indubitably instigate similar repercussions and ramifications. That by no means would earn them their nation’s victory whatever the ill perceived reasons for the fight may be.

Religion has been the most debated institution of society of being inciting more fights or of being the source of peace and tranquility. Every religion in its true sense abhors baseless and useless fighting. These are its adherents who use the misinterpretations of the religion to sanction their wrongly done acts. On the other side, the motives other than religion do stand on a non-negligible standpoint. Economic and political domination is a strong base behind these conflicts. Equipping with the weapons of mass destruction with the aid of modern warfare technology to ensure a nation’s sovereignty, integrity and in turn its hegemony over the world nations has been found to be an epicenter of fights and conflicts especially in the recent decade. The aftermath of 9-11 is quite evident to prove the veracity of this statement.

The nation that is entitled to be the world’s super power is currently facing a decline in its economy with increasing unemployment and crimes rate. The conquest of Afghanistan has seemed to prove a liability for USA that has allowed it to think seriously about the withdrawal of its forces from the Afghan region. The ‘confrontation for domination’ policy is not seemingly leading to fruition of American national goals. It is obvious that soon after the decline of USSR; the American nation upheld itself by fighting, not merely by guns and bullets at International environs as it is doing now, but by fighting against its internal threats and odd circumstances that are stumbling block in the progress of any nation. USA now is deliberating about the options of negotiating with the militant factions to extract a peaceful solution. As more than a decade’s fight and confrontation has brought more harm than good to its national interests.

In south Asian region, the two prominent nations had a boom in their progress rate as soon as they understood the fact that the new world domination order is not of merely fighting against other nations but is of fighting against the internal threats. The time when China and India started fighting for improvement of their economic growth, increase in per capita income, better life standards of their citizens, elevated literacy rates; the results were quite supportive in their broad national interests. Another nuclear power of this region, Pakistan, laid its basis on the footings of ‘confrontation with none and peace with all’ at the time of its inception. Father of Pakistani nation, Muhammad Ali Jinnah was a staunch believer of setting such a foreign policy that would prove fruitful in the long run. This could be materialized if Pakistani nation opt the policy of negotiations and reconciliation in the matters of disagreements and avoiding fights unless imposed.

Islamic Republic of Pakistan has been fighting at various fronts in one way or the other since the very first day of its independence. Some of them are externally imposed while others are due to lack of strenuous policy infrastructure to counter the offshoots of unending fights like the war against terror. Delicate problems like sectarian violence, terrorism and extremism are some serious question marks in the course of achieving nation’s progressive goals that must be dealt with the corresponding delicacy. In this regard, the fight should be the least possible option as it would further deteriorate the circumstances.

In the nutshell, it would not be justified to proclaim that the nations can win their national goals by investing their true potentials in strengthening the constructive forces rather than destructive ones. Those who believe to get victory with fighting and thereby damaging other nations cannot sustain their long lasting dominance. Even if they get it, the life time of such a glory won’t last long. Contrarily, the nations who fight for their survival and for their prosperity supportive elements after alleviating all the possible menaces become triumphant. In fact, these are not the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) but the weapons of mass construction (WMC) that are inevitable for any nation to win

About the author

Mian Bilal

Add Comment

Click here to post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *