Theological reasons aside, the whole economic activity of Eid primarily revolves around the poor and working class. The wealth filters down directly to daily wagers, small traders and most importantly, rural households, unlike the usual concentration in corporations.
From a stock farmer to a transporter, to animal feed, to butchers, even till the last point of meat distribution. Even the smallest of things, such as rope, bring food to the hundreds of houses.
Every layer of this cycle creates livelihood opportunities for hundreds of thousands of ordinary people. An entire chain of labour is connected to it: truck drivers, loaders, market workers, tent installers, water suppliers, fodder vendors, and street hawkers all earn.
A farmer from a remote village spends an entire year raising livestock, depending on Eid sales as his main source of income. For many families, these few days determine their survival for the next few months, from household expenses, debt repayments, and even school fees. Livestock and crops serve as the backbone of the rural economy.
But some pseudo-intellectuals, while living in gated communities, eating KFC in AC rooms, having zero understanding of the fundamentals of the economy and geographic typologies, would be giving expert opinions on how a single meal doesn't help anyone.
Maybe one shouldn't be insensitive to the hardships of farmers and to the world that exists outside the Pseudo activism of gated communities.
The US president, who recognised occupied Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and stood alongside Netanyahu in the destruction of Gaza, is once again pressuring Muslim countries to sign the Abraham Accords. In reality, this agreement is nothing but a document of surrender.
The people of Pakistan will never accept any coercive attempt to legitimise and legalise Israel’s occupation of Jerusalem. Palestine belongs entirely to the Palestinians, and Jerusalem is its capital. Israel is an illegitimate state. This was the firm position of the founder of Pakistan, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, and it is, and will remain, the position of every Pakistani.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif should clearly announce the rejection of Trump’s illegitimate demand.
When viewed through a theological and strategic lens, despite the regional diplomatic efforts and positive signalling from both sides, the possibility of resumption of war during the Hajj/Eid period cannot be dismissed.
This would carry significant socio-religious and geopolitical implications, amplifying both the symbolic weight and political messaging of any military escalation.
It would influence the religious and regional narratives, disturb the sectarian dynamics, and political legitimacy across the muslim world. If regional instability and chaos are the intended endgame. This timeline perfectly fits the script.
جن حضرات و خ��اتین کو ڈاکٹر انعم فاطمہ کی دیانت، قابلیت، شفاف تقرری اور تمغے کی اہلیت کا غم کھائے جا رہا ہے، ان ریاستی ٹرولز سے گزارش ہے کہ اپنے قابلِ فخر ماڈل کو ذرا آگے بڑھائیں۔ کسی میجر کو 111 بریگیڈ کا کمانڈر لگانے کی سوشل میڈیا مہم ��لا کر دیکھیں، پھر دیکھیں کہ کیا ہوتا ہے۔۔۔
ہم نوجوانوں کو یہی سمجھاتے رہے کہ بھائی “یہ” والے بھی “انکے” ہیں اور “وہ” والے بھی “انکے” ہیں!
مگر جوان آدمی کو سمجھانا بھینس کے آگے بین بجانا ہے۔
مفتی صاحب تمام شہادتوں اور فتنے کے دوران خاموش رہے، اب بول اُٹھے ہیں۔ ریاست تب غامدی صاحب کو بیانیہ بنانے کے لیے استعمال کرتی تھی۔ 🤦🏻♂️😭🤣
ریاست اور ریاستی اداروں کو ان چیزوں کو بالکل سرے سے کوئی سمجھ ہوتی بھی نہیں۔ ان لوگوں کی کُل عقل اتنی ہی ہوتی ہے۔
ان فتنوں کے خلاف کسی نے اصل بند باندھا بھی تو وہی زیرِ عتاب آئے۔
پاکستان اور اسکے نظریے کی محبت بڑی عجیب شے ہے۔ جدید دنیا میں اس جیسا دوسرا کچھ نہیں۔ ہر سطح اور قماش کا عالم اور بندہ اسکا اسیر ملے گا۔
ہم نے تو خیر بنگال سے بلوچستان یہ رسم محبت ادا ہوتے دیکھی۔ اپنی نسلوں کو بھی یہی سکھا کر جائیں گے۔ اب تو بس:
هر گاه که چشم من و عرفی به هم افتاد
در هم نگرستیم و گرستیم و گذشتیم
عُرفی شِیرازی
جب کبھی میری نگاہیں عرفی کی نظروں سے ملیں
تو
ہم نے ایک دوسرے کی آنکھوں میں دیکھا ۔۔دونوں روئے۔۔اور ادھر اُدھر ہو گئے۔
مٹی کی محبت میں ۔۔۔ اس شعر کی پامالی بھی خود یہاں کے حالات کا استعارہ ہے۔
گلستاں کو لہو کی ضرورت پڑی سب سے پہلے ہی گردن ہماری کٹی
پھر بھی کہتے ہیں مجھ سے یہ اہلِ چمن، یہ چمن ہے ہمارا تمہارا نہی
TTA is Terrorist
TTP is Terrorist
Al Qaida is Terrorist
ISIS is Terrorist
BLA is Terrorist
BLA is Terrorist
Al Zainabiyoun is Terrorist
Liwa Fatemiyoun is Terrorist
Abduction of Saad Riaz on ridiculous grounds has badly shaken the reinstated confidence in state institutions.
State narrative imposition and then abrupt deviation is mindlessly arbitrary but it is imposed as criminal law. The dominant mindset uses this mechanism to make their rejected interpretations appear as "crime," with retrospective effect, while citizens are still bound to inertia.
The whole process, repeated again and again, at least for almost three decades has caused breakage upon breakage. For how long will this continue? It’s depressing.
If an individual like @hafizsaadriaz, who as a researcher has been carefully moderate, balanced and wholly academic regarding his views and criticisms of the state and its policies can abducted through farfetched and baseless war on terror like accusations, there's not much room left at all here for any serious dialogue.
You argue against the state narrative, you're down, you argue for the state narrative, you're downing is just delayed till the next regime revamps the state ideology and targets the sympathisers of the previous narrative, almost as if apolitical-ness is the only sane & pragmatic position being curated for the researchers, academics and journalists of the political.
Playing the game as an observer or a participant is just agreeing to being a criminal, either today, or later, unless you're spineless.
To civil society, journalists, and state officials:
I am writing as a grieving wife, seeking the immediate and lawful release of my husband, Muhammad Saad.
At approximately 3:30 AM this Monday, 12–13 masked men with guns forcibly entered our home and took him away without presenting any warrant or lawful authority. This was an unlawful deprivation of liberty and a direct violation of due process.
Only after legal pressure did personnel within CTD register an FIR on laughable grounds. This post facto action raises serious concerns of mala fide intent and abuse of process, where the law is invoked after the fact to justify an illegal act.
Saad is a journalist, researcher, and Political Science scholar. His work engages with complex subjects, including Balochistan, Kashmir, and international affairs. He has interviewed recognised public figures such as Former Prime Minister Anwar ul Haq Kakar, as well as senior journalists Sohail Warraich and Hamid Mir, and has introduced major international voices to Pakistan’s media space.
More importantly, Saad has worked with state institutions when called upon, contributing to areas aligned with the national interest. He was vetted, cleared, and entrusted by the State. Today, that same individual is being subjected to coercive action by its functionaries.
This contradiction is not incidental but structural.
If individuals who have been vetted and trusted by the state can be subjected to arbitrary detention and retrospective criminalisation, then the question is unavoidable: on what basis does the state expect trust from its citizens?
The actions of certain personnel within CTD constitute a clear overreach of authority. Powers granted for public safety cannot be exercised in violation of constitutional safeguards, including the inviolability of the home and the right to due process. The law does not permit enforced taking into custody followed by procedural reconstruction.
Saad has never engaged with any proscribed material nor been involved in any unlawful activity. His life and work have remained within the bounds of law and intellectual inquiry.
I call upon civil society, the media, and responsible state authorities to take immediate cognisance of this case. Ensure due process. Examine the legality of the initial detention. Hold those responsible accountable. And ensure his safe and immediate release.
This is not just about one individual. It is about law and dignity. It is about giving hope to others who have worked for the state and Pakistan whenever called upon, who have trusted the state against all odds. This youth must be protected and safeguarded within a shrinking demographic that believe in state and that is increasingly disillusioned and disenfranchised.
#ReleaseSaad #RuleofLaw
I have a conspiracy theory about why the world is going up in flames rn. Which you'all aren't ready for.
The world is churning up so many IR graduates that they have to create a secret society to keep things interesting in the world in order to keep them job openings coming.
Pakistan and Turkiye troops deployment in Gaza
There remains no official confirmation from Israel regarding reports of a possible Pakistani troop deployment in Gaza, and details about the mandate, objectives, or duration of such an arrangement are still unclear. However, what is confirmed is Israel’s explicit opposition to any form of Turkish military deployment in the territory.
This raises a critical question: why would Israel unofficially signal openness to Pakistani troops while opposing Turkish involvement?
In reality, Israel is unlikely to permit any foreign troops from any country, especially under a UN mandate, inside Gaza. However, its objection to Turkish participation offers insight into its threat perception and regional outlook.
Over the past decade, Türkiye has pursued an assertive foreign policy, expanding its military presence across the region. Israel now sees Türkiye as a potential regional rival, with both nations’ interests increasingly colliding, particularly in Syria and beyond.
Türkiye maintains direct diplomatic and political channels with Hamas, which would complicate any “post-war” arrangement. From Israel’s perspective, Turkish participation could allow Hamas to retain indirect influence even if limited or symbolic.
By contrast, Pakistan presents a different strategic calculus. The idea of Pakistani troops in Gaza cannot be understood in isolation; it must be situated within the broader matrix of Israel–Pakistan–U.S. relations.
In recent months, Israel has demonstrated a renewed interest in shaping Washington’s approach toward Islamabad, notably influencing the U.S. sanctions imposed on Pakistan’s National Development Complex (NDC), a key institution in Pakistan’s missile program. Unlike earlier sanctions targeting private entities, these were aimed directly at the state’s strategic-industrial base, particularly over the Shaheen series of ballistic missiles. These systems were primarily designed to deter India but also serve as a latent deterrent against Israel, given Tel Aviv’s increasing operational reach through CENTCOM. Apart from this influence, Israel finger fingerprints during the India-Pakistan standoff in May were quite visible.
Despite this adversarial history, Israel’s quiet openness to a limited Pakistani deployment appears to serve multiple strategic and psychological purposes rather than signalling a policy shift.
First, it allows Israel to undermine Pakistan’s soft power in the Muslim world by associating Islamabad with a controversial post-war arrangement that lacks popular support on the Arab street. Such ambiguity could create internal confusion within Pakistan between the rhetoric of solidarity with Palestine and the realities of any deployment under Western or Israeli-approved frameworks. Second, the move serves as a psychological signal of potential post-Gaza normalization, suggesting a softening of barriers without committing to formal diplomatic engagement.
From Israel’s standpoint, Pakistan represents a low-risk participant: it lacks Türkiye’s regional ambitions, Iran’s ideological posture, or the logistical infrastructure to sustain long-term deployments in the region. This makes Pakistan a less unsettling option for limited participation.
Should Israel, unexpectedly, approve a Pakistani presence, it would almost certainly come with strict conditions:
- The mission’s mandate would be peacekeeping, not peace enforcement.
- Pakistani units would be lightly armed, prohibited from deploying heavy weaponry or offensive assets.
Under these constraints, combined with Pakistan’s limited logistical depth and absence of regional military infrastructure, the deployment would serve Tel Aviv’s strategic interests more than Islamabad’s.
In the event of hostilities or Israeli violations (a recurring issue in past UN missions), Pakistan would lack the capacity to respond effectively, thereby exposing the limits of its strategic autonomy and eroding its deterrence credibility.
Any Pakistani military involvement in Gaza without Palestinian consent, a clearly defined mandate, and robust rules of engagement would constitute a serious strategic miscalculation. In the volatile and deeply contested war environment, such a move risks entangling Pakistan in regional rivalries while yielding little strategic benefit.