Editor in Chief: Moh. Reza Huwaida Saturday, October 20th, 2018

Civil Movement or Political Orientation?

Wednesday’s deadly attack, which killed more than 100 and around 600 people, sparked off a violent demonstration in Kabul. The attack triggered a strong sense of hatred in the social media as gory pictures of the scene were posted with harsh titles. Later, postcards were circulated entitled “Exhausted from Decease, towards Presidential Palace” urging the public to participate Friday’s demonstration. But the protest turned violent and the clash between police and demonstrators ensued death and injury.
The escalated insurgency and high civilian casualties have led to growing rift between state and nation. According to public belief, the state is constitutionally supposed to protect the rights and liberty of the citizens. The government has committed itself in the Constitution’s preamble to “establish an order based on the peoples’ will and democracy; form a civil society void of oppression, atrocity, discrimination as well as violence, based on rule of law, social justice, protecting integrity and human rights, and attaining peoples' freedoms and fundamental rights”, however, large number of civilians are killed in the spate of terrorist attacks and suicide bombings. Democracy and people’s rights are in moribund as a result of unmitigated militancy.
On the other hand, the true spirit of democracy is still in mystery for the public. It is self-explanatory that people have the right to launch a peaceful demonstration, which will be supported by the government, too. However, the public go beyond the red line of democracy under the same term. In other words, people tend to misconstrue democracy and resort to illegal actions. After all, a number of political opponents are likely to channel the public sensation against the government, based on their comments in social media.
It is believed that warring factions seek to widen the gap between state and nation through inflicting casualties upon the innocent civilians. If the nation launches a violent demonstration against the government, the militants will approach their objectives. It will be naïve of the public not to yell to their sensation in such a critical situation. Our soldiers, who are paying large sacrifices in combating terrorism, are our brothers and fight to protect our rights. Afghans must not turn a blind eye to soldiers’ casualties. In late April, about 300 hundred soldiers were killed and wounded in Mazar-e-Sharif by the Taliban fighters. Hence, clashing with our own police and launching a violent demonstration are supported neither by law nor by sound conscience.
Of course, political tension among the officials is a great challenge. That is to say, political tension within the government’s machinery has led to widespread mistrust and fragile security. For instance, critical posts and ministries are still being managed by acting heads, which is believed to be the result of political disagreement between the heads of the National Unity Government (NUG). In short, the states’ incompetence about protecting the citizens’ rights and liberty is an undeniable fact. The question is that can this issue justify citizens to break the law?
Socrates obeyed what he regarded as an unjust verdict. Crito offered him an easy escape but instead he went to his legally mandated death despite believing that the conviction and sentence were wrong. According to Socrates, citizens do not have the right to break the law under any circumstances. If the law is cruel, people are supposed to change the law through legal process. So, they are not allowed to violate the law or pave the ground for chaos and social disorder. Demanding rights under civil movement will not be opposed by the government.
It is strongly believed that a number of individuals will fish in the troubled waters. Painting demonstration with ethnic and factional brush will stoke tension and put its civility under question. After all, carrying arms and pelting stones to police bespeak of a violent demonstration. The genuine intention of some demonstrators who participated to raise their concerns against instability can not be denied. But the mysterious hand which caused violence blemished the demonstration.
Our nation must be cautious enough not to fall for the bogus claim of political opponents or succumb to their own emotions. It should be noted that besides rights, responsibility is the other side of the coin. When citizens claim their rights, they have to fulfill their responsibilities as well. Our responsibility is to boost the soldiers’ morale in combating terrorism. We have to spread hope and optimism in the air rather than exaggerating a disappointing issue. What the enemies want is to build a tall wall of mistrust between state and nation. Yelling to one’s emotion will smooth the way for enemies’ objectives. Moreover, political opponents must not fan the flame through making harsh rhetoric against the government. We are one nation and our unity is our only asset.