The use of force and violence is increasingly becoming a defining feature of our national and social life. Why this phenomenon has taken such deep roots is not an easy question to answer. One important aspect of violence and conflict in Pakistani society is that the basic structure of society remains authoritarian, patriarchal and tribal in nature. In such a social order, violence and conflict emerge as almost natural outcomes of everyday social interactions and relationships.
In a society where values are largely non-democratic, peace cannot realistically be pursued as a cherished value or collective goal. Instead, all those tools, mechanisms and institutions that can be used to coerce opponents into submission or force them to concede to one’s demands are often valued and celebrated.
In those areas where peace in Pakistani society has prevailed, it has largely been a form of ‘negative’ peace, meaning merely the cessation or absence of open hostilities. Such peace has mostly been the result of a fragile ‘balance of terror’ among individuals, groups and communities. People have refrained from using violence against one another primarily out of fear that they would be met with equally violent retaliation by their rivals. However, peace that is achieved through a balance of terror is inherently unstable and unsustainable, particularly within a complex societal context. While in the arena of international politics the balance of terror—created through the development of nuclear weapons by rival superpowers such as the United States and the former USSR, as well as regional rivals like Pakistan and India—has proven relatively sustainable, its application within society yields very different results. In Pakistan, where the social structure is authoritarian and chronically conflict-prone, the balance of terror only produces an uneasy, brittle and fragile peace.
On the other hand, ‘positive’ peace—defined as the creation of social, political and economic conditions that eliminate the root causes of violence—has not been a defining feature of peace in Pakistani society. Only a conscious, democratic, politically engaged, educated and aware society can reasonably be expected to sustain positive peace. Unfortunately, these essential conditions do not currently exist within society and must therefore be consciously created from without. Since transforming society and its people into conscious, democratic, political and educated actors is a gradual and long-term process, the attainment of positive peace inevitably requires considerable time and sustained effort. Nonetheless, it largely depends on the state and societal leadership how effectively they go about creating the necessary conditions for positive peace. If the vision is clear and policy priorities are correctly aligned rather than misplaced, achieving positive peace across society and the country is not an insurmountable task. In fact, the process can be significantly accelerated through clarity of vision and coherent policies. However, for such a vision and policies to exist, there is an acute need for genuine and capable leadership.
True leadership is that which possesses the necessary qualifications, abilities and skills to understand the dynamics and nature of violence and conflict, comprehend the magnitude and consequences of violence, and demonstrate the courage and conviction required to address the sources and driving forces of conflict. Such leadership generally emerges through two principal pathways.
The first pathway involves an objective and subjective realization within society and among its members that the prevailing situation has become intolerable and that the existing leadership lacks the capacity to respond effectively. This realization triggers a process within society to identify and seek alternative leadership, whether in the form of individuals or organized groups. At this stage, potential and conscientious leaders also step forward into the public sphere, and society gradually accepts them as credible agents of change and, in some cases, as its saviours.
The second pathway through which true leadership emerges is when circumstances themselves give birth to such leadership. In this scenario, there is little or no objective and subjective realization within society that the appalling situation is the result of a leadership vacuum. Consequently, there is minimal effort by society to search for alternative leadership. However, perceptive and responsible potential leaders, recognizing the gravity of the situation and the urgent need for direction, choose to step forward without waiting for public cues or invitations. They assume leadership proactively and attempt to guide society out of crisis.
Insofar as Pakistan is concerned, society and its members have been extensively and profoundly affected by violence at multiple levels. There exists a subjective realization regarding the leadership vacuum and the need for new leadership. However, there is a glaring absence of objective or collective realization at the societal level. As a result, there is little organized or collective response aimed at ending violence. Although certain potential leaders have emerged, they have so far been unable to organize themselves effectively or mobilize society to respond meaningfully to the deteriorating situation. Consequently, violence has continued to spiral, proliferate and permeate every level of social interaction—whether domestic, communal or national.
True modern leadership in Pakistan—leadership that is fully aware of contemporary societal issues and understands viable and sustainable solutions—has failed to emerge due to a host of structural and historical factors. Foremost among these is the ultraconservative nature of society, where traditional figures of authority such as nawabs, khans, chaudhris and waderas have historically dominated leadership roles. Such figures are rarely democratic in outlook and do not attain authority through institutionalized or merit-based processes. As a result, their perspectives have often been narrow and short-sighted. Consequently, they have been unable to effectively address conflict and violence within their respective spheres of influence. While they may have managed conflicts through various tactics and manoeuvres, they have failed to prevent large-scale violence or address the structural causes underpinning it. As a result, conflicts have persisted, multiplied and intensified, producing ever-increasing levels of violence.
As Pakistani society has grown more complex due to rapid population growth, rising levels of education and the widespread availability of mass communication—particularly social media—traditional leaders and authority figures increasingly find themselves ill-equipped to address the multitude of emerging issues. The escalating violence within society, in particular, is a challenge that traditional leadership, with its outdated and repetitive approaches, is incapable of resolving. What Pakistan urgently requires is a new breed of leaders—truly educated individuals with strong academic and research backgrounds, extensive exposure to diverse cultures, and a deep understanding of the historical and social context of violence in Pakistan, along with the competence to devise and implement viable solutions.