In the post-Cold War era, the disintegration of the Communist Bloc, followed by the resurgence of civil wars, ethnic conflict, and interstate clashes in Asia, Africa, and Eastern and Central Europe, has necessitated a prolonged and continuous search for conflict resolutions. Historically speaking, since all conflicts, either within a state or between states, are multi-causal, complex, and constituted by an interplay of behaviours and attitudes that can assume a reality of their own, they call for a multidisciplinary approach to understand their causes, consequences, and solutions.
The complexity of conflicts has triggered many interstate conflicts in the Global South generally, and particularly in the South Asian region in the present and recent past. These interstate conflicts have not only contributed to a general global decline in peacefulness but have also given rise to terrorism, religious extremism, internal unrest, and poverty within the warring states.
The 2025 Global Peace Index, released by the Institute for Economics and Peace, which assesses countries on factors like safety, security, and conflict, shows a general global decline in peacefulness, with South Asia being the second least peaceful region due to increased internal unrest and cross-border conflicts. Pakistan's rank fell from 140th in the 2024 index.
The decline is attributed to factors such as internal unrest and militant activity, including attacks by groups like the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan on civilians and security forces. Looking at it comparatively, neighbouring countries like Sri Lanka (97th), India (115th), and Bangladesh (123rd) have witnessed low rankings in peace but still rank higher than Pakistan. At the bottom, Russia ranks last at 163rd, with Ukraine, Sudan, and Afghanistan among the least peaceful countries. Israel, according to this index, is criticised for its actions in Gaza and ranks 155th.
Internal unrest in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India, along with recent cross-border skirmishes between Pakistan and India and between Pakistan and Afghanistan, have significantly contributed to this decline in the region. The index identifies Kashmir as a critical conflict hotspot, with high tensions between India and Pakistan. A recent Pahalgam attack brought South Asia’s two largest countries, India and Pakistan, which have a combined population of more than 1.6 billion people, about one-fifth of the world’s population, under the shadow of potential war.
A democratic institution such as the parliament is central to internal conflict management and to democratic peace beyond borders through parliamentary and public diplomacy
Similarly, fighting was triggered between Pakistan and Afghanistan after Islamabad claimed that Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, an umbrella organisation of several armed groups commonly known as the Pakistan Taliban, operates from havens in Afghanistan and demanded that Kabul control this cross-border support of armed groups. After heavy casualties during these deadly clashes on both sides, a fragile ceasefire between Afghanistan and Pakistan was established. The recent ceasefire hinges on Afghanistan curbing armed groups, as claimed by the Pakistani Defence Minister.
In the 2025 Global Terrorism Index, Pakistan was ranked second. This reflects a significant deterioration in its security situation, with the report noting a sharp increase in both the number of terrorist attacks and fatalities, a trend that has been rising for five consecutive years. Such an alarming rise in terrorism along the borders, combined with internal unrest such as political instability, the rise of religious extremism, political polarisation, economic dependence, and the rise in the poverty rate, has placed Pakistan in the bottom quartile for democratic performance and democratic governance.
Additionally, a low score on political rights and freedom of expression has resulted in the fragility of parliamentary democracy in Pakistan for two main reasons: first, because of the breakdown of civil mechanisms of dialogue, and second, because the incumbent regime seems unable to resolve political disputes among dissenting political forces politically, rather than through political violence, as well as its apparent inability to respond to citizens’ socio-economic grievances.
In democratic societies, all socio-political conflicts are regulated and managed peacefully by sparking positive social and economic reforms. A democratic institution such as the parliament is central to internal conflict management and to democratic peace beyond borders through parliamentary and public diplomacy, and through political dialogue within, for resolving internal political unrest and instability. The parliament, as a people’s representative and overseer of the executive’s policies, needs to subscribe to its institutional democratic ethos that can potentially enable it to manage conflictual situations within Pakistan and resolve interstate conflicts peacefully.
The Parliament of Pakistan can perhaps act as the best vehicle for establishing internal political stability in the country by promoting political dialogue
However, the fragility of the Pakistani parliament hinges on the broader institutional environment in which it operates, where the democratic ethos and institutional supremacy of the parliament are undermined by the executive, party heads, and party frontbenchers, combined with undemocratic forces outside that encroach on its very political legitimacy through repressive mechanisms that do not create the space for parliament to act as a central platform for negotiations and political dialogue.
Such a stifling situation has left people with grievances and with only one option: to start disengaging from the political process and losing political trust in parliament itself as their true representative institution. This deliberate and continuous institutional encroachment on the parliament by undemocratic forces within and beyond has contributed to the parliament’s inability to perform its institutional role in advancing democratic governance within the country and promoting democratic peace beyond the borders.
In countries that are experiencing a crisis of democracy, their parliaments are weak. This situation is exacerbated by one common trend: the dominance of the executive in the management of state affairs and its arbitrary culture of governance, which tends to take the country back to instability. Such dominance of the executive can be neutralised if the parliament is strong and effective, which is its institutional imperative.
The Parliament of Pakistan can perhaps act as the best vehicle for establishing internal political stability in the country by promoting political dialogue, and can promote regional and global peace by bringing the security sector under firm civilian control and promoting parliamentary diplomacy. It could, therefore, offer an avenue for healing and reconciliation when it is properly constituted and representative of the people, which would give it political legitimacy to advance democratic governance and ultimately help consolidate peace.
Political legitimacy in parliament can be achieved through periodic free and fair elections, the only key to reviving public trust in parliament and providing institutional strength to exercise its representative and oversight role effectively. But a more fundamental and enduring solution for securing these outcomes requires political will to bring political change, to tone down zealous politics, and to decrease the space for undemocratic forces, allowing aggrieved groups to pursue their socio-political interests through open, peaceful, and constitutional means. There is no better way for citizens to pursue their interests than through their representative institution, the parliament.
In our view, we continue to see an important causal link between the role of parliament and peacebuilding efforts that may serve as an avenue where groups that have been fighting each other in the past can now sit at the table and attempt to resolve their differences with words.
The parliament can substitute the resort to physical violence with dialogue, and the rule of force with the rule of law. Thus, in the nascent state of our society, which appears politically and economically fragile, the role of parliament in the national security dialogue and in consolidating democratic governance is crucial. It can foster dialogue between nations and, through domestic functions that promote stability, such as representing diverse groups, ensuring minority representation, and building public trust, prevent a return to violence. In the final analysis, by tackling issues like poverty and unequal resource distribution, our parliament can help mitigate the conditions that can lead to conflict.