Islamic and Christian leaders ambivalent over peace talks between the government and the Taliban
Islamabad (AsiaNews) - The government's attempt to broker ceasefire talks with Taliban groups in order to reach lasting peace in the country continues to fuel controversy and disputes in civil society and among religious leaders of every denomination.
Many are in favour of the policy and are pressing for an agreement that would stop fighting, attacks and bloodshed, which have caused hundreds of dead and injured in 24 incidents of Islamist violence since the start of the year. Many others are however in favour of military action, slamming the legal system and the courts for not punishing those responsible for the violence.
On the first day of bilateral talks, nothing happened as the meeting in Islamabad broke up in confusion.
Government officials did not show because of doubts over the "representativeness" of the Taliban counterpart, composed only of three of the five delegates originally expected.
Conversely, Islamists criticised the government for not being serious about talks, accusing them of bowing to pressure from Washington, which does not view them kindly.
Government sources announced more face-to-face talks for tomorrow, but no official confirmation has yet been made.
In order to strike a peace deal with Islamabad, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) leaders have put two conditions: the imposition of Sharia, or Islamic law, across the country, and, in radical step, the release of all jailed extremists and fighters, who are considered "terrorists" under Pakistani law.
The latter include Mumtaz Qadri, who murdered Punjab Governor Salman Taseerin January 2011 for his opposition to the country's blasphemy laws.
Speaking to AsiaNews, Pakistani political analyst and expert Mirza Ghulam Muhammad wonders whether talks with the Taliban is "the only way" to deal with people "who have killed innocent people and slaughtered soldiers."
Noting that the government "has spent a lot of money on prisons to ensure that these prisoners are not released," he slammed a weak judicial system that has not been able so far to "sentence to death one terrorist," whilst others prefer talks with people who "continue to kill innocent people."
Sharia expert Maulana Muhammad Hafiz is confident instead that talks would be the "best solution" to end the violence. Military intervention is likely to cause too much "collateral damage". In his view, "All the rational and reasonable terms can be discussed under Sharia and the Pakistani constitution."
Unfortunately, "No one is safe," said Fr Arshed John, a priest from the Archdiocese of Lahore. "Churches, mosques, schools, religious centres and markets are all potential targets of attacks".
Active in the area of social justice, the clergyman wants more "prayers for peace" in the region because "we've already seen too much bloodshed."
"Whatever decision the Government of Pakistan takes, we will support it," he explained. However, the pursuit of peace "should not be mistaken as a sign of weakness. Ours is one of the best armies in the world and we know how to defend ourselves against dangers."
For some time, ordinary Pakistanis have been calling for decisive action to bring peace and security in a country torn by religious violence and conflict.
In a march of "white flags" that took place recently in Faisalabad, hundreds of people expressed support for a "third way" that includes talks with militants but also a harsh crackdown against those who promote violence.
In late January, the Pakistani Catholic Church also promoted a day of prayer to remember all the victims of terrorism.
.png)
