Pakistan’s government and an outlawed radical Islamist party reached an agreement to end a 10-day long, and at times deadly violent, rally calling for the closure of France’s embassy and the release of the party’s leader.

Neither foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi nor religious leader Mufti Muneebur Rehman, who took part in the talks, gave any details of the agreement at a news conference in the capital Islamabad.

Thousands of supporters of the outlawed Tehreek-e-Labiak Pakistan party marched from Lahore on October 22 toward the capital Islamabad.

They demanded the expulsion of France’s envoy to Pakistan over publication of caricatures of Islam’s Prophet Mohammed in France.

The protest march saw supporters clash with police at several points along the way.

At least seven police officers and four demonstrators were killed.

“Details and positive results of the agreement will come before the nation in a week or so,” said Mr Rehman, who said he had the endorsement of TLP party leader Saad Rizvi.

The violence erupted a day after the government of prime minister Imran Khan said it would not accept the Islamists’ demand to close the French Embassy and expel the French envoy.

It was not immediately clear on Sunday when the party would end its rally.

Thousands of supporters halted their march in Wazirabad, about 115 miles from the capital on Friday after roads and bridges ahead of them were blocked.

Paramilitary rangers were deployed to stop the protesters from continuing toward the capital.

Sajid Saifi, TLP spokesman, said supporters were ready to “pack up” but were awaiting instructions from the party’s leadership.

He said he hoped party leader Mr Rizvi and all the supporters arrested in recent days would be released soon.

Besides demanding expulsion of the French ambassador, the TLP was also pressing for the release of its leader, Mr Rizvi, who was arrested last year for inciting supporters to stage an anti-France protest.

Mr Rizvi’s party started demanding the expulsion of a French envoy in October 2020 after French President Emmanuel Macron tried to defend caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed as freedom of expression.

Mr Macron’s comments came after a young Muslim beheaded a French school teacher who had shown the caricatures in class.

The images were republished by the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo to mark the opening of the trial over the deadly 2015 attack against the publication for the original caricatures.

Mr Rizvi’s party gained prominence in Pakistan’s 2018 elections, campaigning on the single issue of defending the country’s blasphemy law, which calls for the death penalty for anyone who insults Islam.

The social fabrics of Britain is in a desperately fragile state. Assaults from extremists on many sides, covering all bases of bigotry, and poisoning our political discourse in the age of Brexit and terrorism has given a hue of grim bleakness to our way of life.

Language is a powerful weapon today in these discussions, often used to exaggerate or underplay something, depending on the topic and the narrative. Our biases instinctively inform how we approach topics. There is no consistency in ethical application, seen in how leftists vehemently shout down racism but then ignore anti-Semitism within their own ranks.

And sometimes, something bad is morphed into something it isn’t. This can be debilitating in its effect, to lend an air of inevitability to a situation that cannot be avoided whatever the political will in the world. If you believe that there is state oppression being perpetrated against British Muslims, and you look for examples in the Prevent strategy and hostile media environment, then no amount of evidence or action will change your mind or make you want to change it. Engaging with a system whose apparatuses you regard as levered against you becomes irrational, an act of naivety in participating with a set of political mechanisms in the hope of reforming it only to achieve nothing.

This is the narrative of a lot of Islamists. The West is against us. The West is our enemy. We are oppressed. There is a fundamental clash in values between the two, an argument echoed fervently by those on the far-right who regard membership to the west to be based on ethnic lines rather than a broad set of shared values and customs. The narrative further atomises communities into monocultural ones, segregated by a set of prejudices that aren’t dismantled because again, why engage with a society built upon racist structures?

There are multiple problems with this. Human beings are drawn to a sense of belonging and attachment to others, something we can share. Values of family, community, reciprocity and fairness are wired into our psyche. It goes against our human nature to isolate ourselves from other groups, especially when we share towns with them, or to think that Islamophobia is so bad that we can never come to see Britain truly as home. Our hearts and minds are elsewhere. This outlook fundamentally ignores the massive transformation in racial relations between different demographics. There was once upon a time when black Britons were actively discriminated on the streets and faced major obstacles institutionally. The latter certainly exists across many parts of life, but there is also a conscious effort by part revered national institutions to embrace tolerance and inclusivity and regard diversity as a morally good thing. Turning racism into a victimization process that we are trapped in doesn’t allow us to see the change that can come about, to see the social strides that are made. We disregard them, see them as impossible and so don’t seek to make them. Cultural isolation is detrimental to all, but primarily the racially disadvantaged group because the stereotypes become harder to obliterate. History shows us that in Britain, racism exists but is also combatted.

Narratives of state oppression become harder to justify when you look at Britain’s environment for Muslims and then compare it with other countries. Consider in Europe where the far-right have made huge surges into their respective political systems and what it means for Muslims there. Consider in America where a ban on Muslims caused outrage. And chillingly, in China where a million Muslims are persecuted in internment camps for their faith and are regarded as the dangerous fifth column. Are we really then calling the Prevent Strategy, a fishing net for the far-right as well as Islamists, a sign of state oppression?

Anti-Muslim bigotry is growing at an unscaled rate and we should be wary of its nature. But there is little evidence to suggest that the politics of Tommy Robinson will pervade Westminster and lead to interment camps and repatriation of Muslims. Far-right bigots have increasing support but for most part remained marginalised. Moreover, using anti-Muslim bigotry as a tool for justifying social exclusion harms more than helps. And whilst a cultural retreat is understandable, no-one should be perpetuating the siege mentality with language that fundamentally pits us against the rest of British society and talks about us as oppressed victims unable to live life. Were this to be true, then the mayor of our capital city would not be a Muslim. We would not have Muslims in Parliament or in the media.

This is always the risk of language. Dismiss the inflammatory, melodramatic rhetoric and you can be seen as dismissing the real urgency of tackling racism. But language crystallises the solutions we have mapped out for us. If you believe Muslims are genuinely oppressed, then the steps for integration and creating communal cohesion become harder. It also becomes easier for terrorists to reach disillusioned youth. But if you believe racism is bad but there is potential to recalibrate British society into a more equal and tolerant one, and Muslims are a part of that story, you can tackle racism in an attempt to bring Muslims into the social fold. Language can determine our actions. It can shape what is possible and desirable and it’s crucial we are more careful with it.

– Written by Rabbil Sikdar

The Pakistani lawyer who helped a Christian woman overturn her death sentence for blasphemy said on Saturday he had left the country in fear of his life after her acquittal earlier this week sparked street protests by Islamists.

Leaders of the ultra-Islamist Tehreek-e-Labaik (TLP) group blocked main roads in Pakistan’s biggest cites for three days, calling for the murder of the Supreme Court judges who acquitted Asia Bibi on Wednesday — urging their cooks and servants to kill them.

Saiful Mulook had kept a low profile during the years he represented Bibi, a mother-of-five who has been on death row since 2010, due to the highly sensitive nature of the case. Two politicians who had tried to help her have been assassinated.

Mulook told Reuters in a WhatsApp message he had gone abroad “just to save (my) life from angry mob” and because of fears for the safety of his family.

“I consulted and everybody is of this opinion (that I should leave),” he said, adding that he would return to the country to continue his work on the case if he was given protection by security forces.

The TLP called off the protests late on Friday after striking a deal with the government that would see authorities seek to put Bibi on an ‘exit control list’ barring her from leaving the country.

Bibi’s whereabouts are unknown, but Islamists have warned the authorities against taking her out of the country.

“There will be a war if they send Asia out of country,” TLP leader Khadim Hussain Rizvi said after the deal was reached.

Earlier in the week one of Rizvi’s deputies called for Pakistan’s Chief Justice Saqib Nisar and two other judges who ruled in the case to be murdered.

“Whoever, who has got any access to them, kill them before the evening,” TLP co-founder Muhammad Afzal Qadri told supporters.

The TLP was founded out of a movement supporting a bodyguard who assassinated Punjab provincial governor Salman Taseer after he spoke in Bibi’s defence in 2011. Federal minister for minorities Shahbaz Bhatti was also killed after calling for her release.

Bibi was convicted of blasphemy in 2010 for allegedly making derogatory remarks about Islam after neighbours objected to her drinking water from their glass because she was not Muslim. She always denied having committed blasphemy.

The case has outraged Christians worldwide and been a source of division within Pakistan, where Islamist parties such as the TLP have framed Bibi’s release as Pakistan’s government caving into Western demands.

Bibi’s acquittal is being reviewed, though it is extremely rare for a review to overturn a Supreme Court ruling.

Swiss authorities were monitoring the social media activity of about 400 possible jihadists who might pose a security threat, the NDB federal intelligence service said on Monday.

Switzerland is not a primary target for Islamist attacks because it is not part of the military campaign against groups such as Islamic State, but the security threat level has been elevated nonetheless, the NDB’s annual report said.

The report showed a photo of a Swiss passport next to an explosive belt posted online by a suspected Swiss jihadist who had travelled to the Middle East, and an Islamic State video showing the Swiss flag among the 60 countries seen as targets.

“Attacks in Switzerland are more to be expected from lone wolves or small groups that would be conducted with simple means, little preparation and minimal logistical effort,” the report said.

Authorities have been closely tracking suspected jihadists who return to Switzerland from countries, Syria in particular, where they are believed to get training in carrying out attacks.

A Swiss court last month sentenced three Iraqis for terrorism offences, a verdict that the senior prosecutor said should send a message to jihadists not to see the country as an easy target.

The three main defendants, who had denied wrongdoing, were arrested in early 2014 on suspicion of planning terrorist attacks and helping Islamic State militants enter the country.

The Swiss attorney general’s office has more than 60 open cases linked to jihadist militancy, it said on Monday.