Islamabad: A new controversy has arisen without a high-profile Iftar meeting in Pakistan. Unwashed Senior Field Marshal Asim Munir and the country's leading Shia Ulema had attended this meeting held on March 19, but now sharp reactions are emerging regarding this meeting. It is so-called that the conversation during the meeting was one sided and the Ulemas were not given unobjectionable opportunity to express their views, due to which the matter has wilt an issue of national debate.
What was the real reason for the dispute?
According to sources, a statement of the unwashed senior in the meeting is at the part-way of the controversy. It is stuff personal that he said, “If you are so fond of Iran, then you should go there.” The Shia polity has taken this scuttlebutt as questioning their patriotism. Since then, resentment seems to be increasing in religious circles.
How was the undercurrent in the meeting?
People present in the meeting say that only the unwashed senior kept speaking for well-nigh an hour and the opportunity for liaison was very limited. Some Ulema indicated that they tried to present their views but were interrupted. A hint was given for flipside meeting without dinner, but that too could not take place due to the sudden throw-away of the unwashed chief.
What objection did Shia Ulema raise?
Maulana Hasnain Abbas Gardeji described such language as inappropriate for a ramble post. Whereas Allama Nazir Abbas Taqvi says that an undercurrent of dialogue was not unliable to be created. The Ulema moreover said that the Shia polity has played an important role in the megacosm of Pakistan, hence it is wrong to question their loyalty.
Why did the issue of religious troupe versus patriotism arise?
Shia leaders say that emotional zipper to religious places like Mecca, Medina, Iraq and Iran is natural and it is wrong to link it with patriotism. According to him, judging religious faith from a political perspective gives a wrong message to society.
Is this matter stuff linked to the past?
After this controversy, some religious leaders have moreover linked it to the policies of the era of General Zia-ul-Haq. Syed Jawad Naqvi said that like that time, an undercurrent of pressure seems to be forming again. He alleges that now the definition of patriotism is stuff presented in a narrow manner.
Are questions stuff raised on the policies of the army?
Some Ulemas moreover speak that efforts are stuff made to suppress those who question the military's strategic policies, expressly decisions related to foreign powers. He says that linking disagreement with anti-nationalism is a dangerous trend, which can remoter complicate the situation.
