Media Coverage of Bacha Khan University Attack
Bacha Khan University of Charssada is attacked by terrorist, this
is not the first time that any educational institute is being attacked by
terrorist which causalities, we have recent history of attacks, which is
discussed in the chapter in detail.
Media in its mashroom growth is highliting such issues with keen
interest and that is helping masses to be up to date, even media pressure is
helping authorities to take some serious action against terrorist wich are part
of policy of the nation.
Media not only showing the facts that are reported but at the same
time giving courage to the masses, recently a song mujhe dushman ke bachon ko
parhana he, popular on electronic media is positive sign for decreasing
aggressive behavior of the masses, specially whos children died while such
attacks.
Terror attacks to education institutes in Pakistan are being
reported frequently after 2000, attack in Sawat schools mainly and after that
when heavy operation against terrorist in sawat such attacks are seems to be
revealed in paksitan, Attack in Public school last year and now attack on Bacha
Khan university are historically big terror attacks in all over the world.
After such attacks Pakistan educational institutes are critically
warned to make safe measurements against terror possibilities.
Recently Sindh 3 big universities located at District Jamshoro
including University of Sindh, Mehran University and Lumhs university are
suggested to take strong measures for security concerns, which is reported in
newspapers, Lumhs is strongly suggested to limit their open activities.
Media in this regard is playing its role to not only sharing the
information with the masses that what has happened and what measurements needs
to be taken, though it is some how critical to inform the parents against any
possible attack information which makes parents a little sad while leaving
their children for respective universities because of terror rumors
surrounding.
Attack Background
On 20 January 2016, several gunmen opened fire at Bacha Khan University, Charsadda,
Pakistan. Said University is located in the Charsadda District of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. At least 22 people were
killed and over 20 others were wounded in the mentioned attack. Over 200
students were rescued from the premises, while four gunmen were killed by arm
forces of pakistan. The Tariq Geedar Afridi faction of theTehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan claimed
responsibility for the attack, although the main spokesman for Tehrik-i-Taliban
Pakistan later denied and condemned the assault.
At 9:30 am, four men entered classrooms and accommodation
blocks, opening fire on teachers and students; they were also armed with
suicide vests. The attack happened as the students and faculty members gathered
at the school for a poetry recital to commemorate the death anniversary of Gandhian Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan. The university was reportedly
not adequately secured, especially at the backside of the building, which had
low boundary walls. Witnesses reported that an assistant professor, armed with
a pistol, fired at the assailants.
According to provincial Health Minister Shaukat Ali Yousafzai, more than 30 people have been
killed and over 60 wounded, including students and an assistant professor. More
than 60 students were rescued from the premises. According to an army
spokesperson, four gunmen have been killed. Provincial
Public Health Engineering Minister Shah
Farman said:
"54 security guards were stationed at the university. Around 200 people
were present in the examination hall, all of whom were rescued, and timely
action by police and army has prevented large scale damage".The Education
Department in Charsadda has announced the closure of all schools for 10 days.
Adnan Khan, a canteen owner in the university saw gunmen entering
the university and instructed students to remain silent and turn off their
mobile phones thus as a result saved many lives.
Victims included 17 students, two gardeners, a caretaker and a
professor. A later investigation revealed 21 people had been killed, mostly
students at an all-male hostel. A security official said the death toll could
rise to as high as 40 as army commandos cleared out student hostels and
classrooms. According to reports from eyewitness students, 27 years old
university lecturer Syed Hamid Hussain fought
the attackers and saved the lives of many of his students. He is regarded as a
hero of this attack.
The Dara Adma Khel branch of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan claimed
responsibility. The attack was believed to have been planned by Khalifa Omar
Mansoor of Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan's Tariq Geedar Afridi faction, after he
claimed the attack through a post on his Facebook page, adding
that four attackers were sent to the university. Mansoor is also the alleged
mastermind of the 2014 Peshawar school massacre.
Mansoor told the media that the attack was in response to a military offensive
against militant strongholds. However, the group's main spokesman, Mohammad
Khurasani, later said the Pakistani Taliban had not been involved.
It was reported that the attackers gave stiff resistance to state
security forces as they engaged in an operation to clear the university over
several hours. Unnamed intelligence sources said eight to 10 attackers were
inside the school and that they were between 18 and 25 years old wearing
civilian clothes with their faces covered.
Prime Minister Nawaz
Sharif, who was in Zurich to attend the World Economic Forum, said: "I'm deeply grieved
over the attack, and we are determined and resolved in our commitment to wipe
out the menace of terrorism from our homeland. Chief of Army Staff General Raheel
Sharif reached
Charsadda to boost the morale of the security personnel and took part in the
operation. Speaking from the university, former health minister Shaukat Ali Yousafzai said:
"This is a frontline province. We are fighting Pakistan's war in this
province... The backs of terrorists have been broken and they are breathing
their last. This stunt is an attempt to breathe life into their cause three-day
mourning has been announced in the province by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
government due to the attack. Pakistan observed National day of mourning and vigil on
following Thursday.
Chief Minister of KPK Pervez
Khattak
urged the federal government to take up the matter of terrorism with Afghan
government and also send the Afghan refugees back to their country to improve
law and order whom
Pakistan have been hosting since 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf chairman Imran
Khan Strongly
condemn cowardly terrorist attack on Bacha Khan Uni Charsadda today. The nation
stands united & resolute against terrorism in his tweet. He also pay
tritube to victims of attack saying "The whole nation salutes our hero Prof Hamid Hussain who
was martyred, pistol in hand, defending the students at Bacha Khan
University".
Historical
Background
Pakistan has been affected by years of militant violence, which
has seen hundreds of suspected militants killed and arrested under a crackdown
launched.
Education and educational institutions have been frequently under
attack since Taliban took hold of valleys of Swat in early
2000s. They frequently attacked and burned schools in Swat valley during their
years of hold. A young schoolgirl Malala
Yousafzai strongly
opposed the Taliban in her blogs. She was also attacked and seriously injured. Pakistan
Army launched
an operation in the valley during the time when Awami National Party (ANP)
was in power in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The Taliban was effectively
driven out of the valley in later years. Over the years, the Taliban have
launched reprisal attacks on ANP leadership including Asfandyar Wali Khan, grandson of Bacha Khan. One of
those attacks killed a government minister, Bashir Ahmed Bilour and
only son of Mian Iftikhar Hussain, another minister. Awami National
Party is considered an ideological legacy of Bacha Khan.
Terrorism in pakistan
Since Pakistan is fighting against terrorism with the name as war
on terrorism, Pakistan is badly suffering from such events. Forign involvement
is some how base on attacks recently faced by Pakistan, like After the attacks
of September 11, the United States lifts some sanctions placed on Pakistan
after the 1998 nuclear tests and the 1999 military coup.
On account of the September 2001 attacks on US, President George W. Bush
encouraged Pakistan to become their ally in the war against terrorism.
Initially Pakistan tried to strike a negotiation deal with Taliban and al Qaeda
members to handover Osama bin Laden to American authorities. However, when
negotiations failed, Pakistan allowed American army to use its military bases
for launching attacks on Afghan soil. President Pervez Musharraf confessed that
the country had no option but to support United States as it had threatened
Pakistan of “bombing it into stone age” if it did not join the fight
against al Qaeda. Simultaneously in 2001, US officials introduced a bill to
lift all the sanctions, previously imposed on Pakistan under Pressler and Glenn
amendments. President Musharraf, under strong US diplomatic pressure offered
President Bush agreed upon Pakistan’s “unstinted cooperation in the fight
against terrorism.” In the US led anti-terrorism coalition Pakistan became a
vital ally. In October 2001, large amounts of U.S. aid began flowing into
Pakistan. United State in 2003 officially forgave $1 billion worth of loan it
had granted to Pakistan in a goodwill gesture and appreciation for Pakistan’s
cooperation.
President Bush designated In June 2004,
Pakistan as a major non-NATO ally of the United States under the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961. Pakistan has been a source of nuclear proliferation to
North Korea, Iran, and Libya may complicate future Pakistan-US relations.
The succession of drone attacks in Pakistan began since 2004 by the United
States government on Pakistan, controlled by the Central Intelligence Agency.
These attacks are primarily part of war on terrorism, initiated by US, to
defeat Al-Qaeda and Taliban militants in Pakistan however, they have killed
more civilians than terrorists. Since 2004, US army has launched a variety of
drone strikes on the north-western side of the country. The drone strikes plan
to target Pakistani Taliban and supporters of al Qaeda, however, the strikes
have also resulted in latge civilian deaths and caused much opposition from
Pakistanis. A report was issued in 2007 in which Pakistan was accused of using
aid money provided by US to Pakistan for its cooperation on war on terror,
for strengthening its defence against India.
Osama Bin Laden Operation 2011 (by Aleena Naghman):
May of 2011, Al-Qaeda’s leader
Osama bin Laden was killed in an operation conducted by US Navy Seals in Abbott
bad, Pakistan. Claimed by President Barrack Obama, the information pertaining
to the action conducted in Abbott bad was not shared with Pakistan Army.
However, the claimed of ISI that the operation was conducted jointly, a
claim which was blatantly denied by President Asif Ali Zardari. Since 2001, the
war on terror started, Pakistan has received an estimated amount of $20 billion
from United States; however, in the wake of OBL’s raid US withheld $800
million of aid to Pakistan. There is growing concern about U.S. drone
attacks directed at Taliban and al-Qaeda elements inside Pakistan that also
caused significant collateral damage. The
role of American military contractors and the unilateral U.S. raid on Osama bin
Laden’s multipart inside Pakistan are especially contentious.
The U.S. is vexed by Pakistan’s ties to the
Taliban, whether Osama bin Laden was harbored by elements in the Pakistani
government and/or security service, charges of endemic corruption in the
government, and difficulties coordinating U.S. military policies with
Pakistan’s army. To be successful, U.S.
strategy must be settled on understanding Pakistan’s objectives as well as
those of the United States. Arriving at
a complementary strategy requires identifying zones of agreement and pursuing
objectives with negotiations sensitive to the most intense preferences of both
parties. This is not to suggest that
Pakistan be supposed to accommodated at the expense of U.S. interests, but U.S.
policy will be extra effective if it is based on an understanding of Pakistani
interests. US interests in Pakistan expand well beyond the immediate war in
Afghanistan or the fight against al-Qaeda. Left unchecked, Pakistanis
demographic realities and fast-growing nuclear program will almost certainly
make it an even more unmanageable challenge in decades to come. Now is the time
for swift and decisive U.S. action.
Shakil Afridi Case:
The doctor went to Abbottabad in March, saying
he had procured funds to give free vaccinations for hepatitis B. Bypassing the
management of the Abbottabad health services; he paid generous sums to
low-ranking local government health workers, who took part in the operation
without knowing about the connection to Bin Laden. Health visitors in the area
were among the few people who had gained access to the Bin Laden compound in
the past, administering polio drops to some of the children. Afridi had
posters for the vaccination programme put up around Abbottabad, featuring a
vaccine made by Amson, a medicine manufacturer based on the outskirts of
Islamabad. In March health workers administered the vaccine in a poor
neighbourhood on the edge of Abbottabad called Nawa Sher. The hepatitis B
vaccine is usually given in three doses, the second a month after the first.
But in April, instead of administering the second dose in Nawa Sher, the doctor
returned to Abbottabad and moved the nurses on to Bilal Town, the suburb where
Bin Laden lived."
Pathankot
terror attack relation with Charsada Attack
After Pathankot
terror attack in india, Indian government stakeholders shared few hard words
belaming Pakistan for pathankot attack and words where shared to do the same in
Pakistan, which relates charsada attack in Pathankot, who knows who were the
terrorist in both attacks, but one attack feels to be reaction which is
reported in media
As security forces continue
the sanitisation operations inside the Pathankot air base, the big question is
should India continue with peace process with Pakistan? Islamabad's role in
Pathankot terror strike has been laid bare. India has handed over ample
evidence to the Nawaz Sharif government regarding his country's involvement in
the brazen terror attack.
As security
forces continue the sanitisation operations inside the Pathankot air base, the
big question is should India continue with peace process with Pakistan?
Islamabad's role in Pathankot terror strike has been laid bare. India has
handed over ample evidence to the Nawaz Sharif government regarding his
country's involvement in the brazen terror attack.
But will PM
Sharif take any action on evidence provided by India? The combined inputs of
India's intelligence agencies suggest that the Pakistan army is not fully on
board with Nawaz Sharif's efforts to forge peace with India.
The Indian
political establishment has been informed at the highest levels that the
Pathankot attack has been carried out with the full knowledge of the Pakistan
army chief General Raheel Sharif.
Almost every
Pakistani news website has been carrying the news of Pathankot attack with some
of them questioning India's preparedness and its counter-terror abilities.
An article
titled - 'India scrambles to solve Pathankot riddle' - in Dawn noted that
"the government scrambled to answer uncomfortable questions about how it
all came this far."
"The
main questions being asked were what did the intelligence agencies know 24
hours before the attack; what did the government do with the specific inputs;
and if the intelligence agencies didn't get a firm grip on the facts, why
not?" the report further added.
A separate
article on Dawn's website said that the Pakistan "government is in touch
with the Indian government and is working on the leads provided by it."
"Cooperation
with India was in accordance with its commitment to effectively counter and
eradicate terrorism," it quoted a statement issued by the Pakistan Foreign
Office.
The article
noted that the attack in Pathankot and the one on Indian consulate in
Afghanistan may impact the upcoming Foreign Secretary-level talks between the
two neighbouring nations.
'India
airbase attack threatens Pakistan talks' - the lead story's headline on
Nation.com.pk read.
"The
Pakistan-India relationship is in a tailspin, what with Modi's landing in
Lahore and now the gun battle at Pathankot. The attack will cement the official
India position: that it will not talk about another issue until that of
terrorism is sorted- Pathankot is another case in point," an opinion piece
titled - Two Steps Back - on The Nation said.
"India
is mulling its options on whether to go ahead with foreign secretary-level
talks with Pakistan scheduled for later this month after militants attacked an
Indian Air Force (IAF) base over the weekend," said an article on Daily
Times.
Rustam Shah
Mohmand, who has served as Pakistan's Ambassador to Afghanistan, in his opinion
piece - Attack in Pathankot: Another derailment of relations? - in The Express
Tribune said," The long journey to peace and normalisation of relations
between India and Pakistan has been incredibly complex and painful.
"In
the aftermath of the attack, if Indian authorities come to the conclusion after
ascertaining facts that all or some its perpetrators had come from Pakistan or
that they had been trained in Pakistan, bilateral relations would receive an
irretrievable setback. Distrust would mount and suspicions would deepen,"
Mohmand highlighted
Attack on education
In the face of the latest in a series of attacks carried
out on our soil, there are certain truths that we need to take heed of. Through
careful introspection we must try to understand where we went wrong and what
the attack on Bacha Khan University reveals about Pakistan.
First, the attack proves that we have learnt nothing from
the past. If the TTP can carry out a very similar attack only 25 days after the
first anniversary of the APS horror, then we have failed every student who
dares attend a school, college or university in this nation. There is danger
that the much-coveted National Action Plan might end up in the same dusty
archives where impotent bills and committees established to tackle one problem
after another now reside. In any other country, the first call of action post a
tragedy of this nature would be to examine the methods employed to protect the
sovereignty of the nation, and to analyse and critique them where they have
failed us. A terror attack that leaves 21 dead is as big a failure as it gets.
Not surprisingly, the criticism of lapses of the security establishment is
missing. Will we ever demand an answer from those responsible for our
safekeeping?
Second, the aftermath of the attack reveals our inability
to admit our failures. It seems that it’s never our fault. The speed with which
we blamed external forces for the attack and thus freed ourselves of any
responsibility was astounding. Within a few hours of the attack, hashtags such
as #RawBehindCharsadda were trending on Twitter. All sensible dialogue is shot
down when even the educated class makes comments such as the one made by a
respected television anchor on Twitter: “Strategic Mastermind’s goal is to
continue definining Pakistan as ‘Epicentre of Terror’ to enforce global
isolation; now who wants that, guess?” Read: India, Jewish lobby, the US, and
so on. A flurry of politicians and influencers, not least former interior
minister Rehman Malik, raced to news channels to declare that India was to
blame. We’ve always been at loggerheads with India, and I don’t think anyone
doubts the existence of Indian proxies in Afghanistan. I also don’t doubt that
various outfits in the region, such as the TTP, Lashkar-e-Taiba,
Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, al Qaeda and even the Islamic State would be easy pickings
for any enemy of Pakistan. But for the sake of everything that we hold dear,
Pakistan must wake up and smell the coffee. Let’s start by taking a long hard
look at the banned organisations that, to this day, operate freely on our
streets, and ask ourselves: are these people our allies? Every nation has
enemies, and in this moment we need to focus on protecting ourselves instead of
playing mindless blame games. The bottom line is this: India isn’t responsible
for the safety of our people; we are.
Third, we see a tendency towards glorifying martyrdom.
This growing fixation seems to almost overshadow the stark finality of death. A
mother who loses her child to terror should never be described as ‘lucky’. It’s
all well and good to honour martyrs in their absence, but please let us not
forget harsh realities. I say this with the utmost respect and responsibility:
we need to stop this culture of glorifying death. It isn’t enough to pay
tribute to our martyrs. Feelings of grief, remorse and admiration must be
followed by those of fury and defiance, and most importantly, meaningful
action. To do otherwise is an insult to the memory of the very people we shed
tears for.
Lastly, this tragedy once again proves that we are braver,
stronger and more resilient than we realise. Every time a calamity occurs in
this part of the world, I am amazed by the resilience of the Pakistani people.
It would not be an exaggeration to say that Pakistan has never, in its young
history, breathed free. We have always been on the defence. The few periods of
respite in between appear to be nothing more than time allotted to prepare for
the next misfortune to befall us.
Yet mothers will nudge awake sleepy children tomorrow,
dress them, and send them off for another day of learning. Life goes on and we
persist, and in this lies our greatest victory.
What the Charsadda attack reveals about
For some time past, I have
been following a theme in my articles. A theme which I feel is not fully
understood. And the dastardly attack on a university in Charsadda only served to emphasise that fact
again. However successful anti-terrorist operations might be, however
well-planned our security measures might be, until they are eliminated from the
roots, terrorists will always be able to execute such attacks. With the attack
in Charsadda, once again people are saying that this is a failure of
intelligence and security forces. It isn’t. It is neither an intelligence
failure, nor a failure of the security forces. If we deploy every single
soldier of every single security establishment to defend every conceivable
target, there would still be targets that terrorists could attack successfully.
Let me go further, if the entire nation was armed and were to be deployed to
defend itself, we would still be vulnerable. An APS or Charsadda could still
occur at regular intervals. That ‘offence is the best method of defence’ is
drilled into every soldier’s mind throughout his career. Some theorists go so
far as to say that ‘offence is the only method of defence’, but that I disagree
with. In my view the sole, yes, the sole purpose of any defensive manoeuvre is
to create conditions for the offensive manoeuvre that must follow. And this truism is universally
applicable. The rationale is simple. No defensive manoeuvre ever won a war. It
can win battles; never the war. The reason is also simple. Defence, by
definition, is passive and reactive while offence is active. Consequently, all
initiative rests with the offender. All defending forces try to be active, and
that is the point: they try. That is why every defensive manoeuvre must be
conceived as a prelude to an offence. And let us be very clear; increased
security is a defensive measure. And terrorism is, by nature an
offensive mechanism. Even as we take all necessary measures, we can only defeat
terrorists by our offensive and, as long as the war is ongoing, we must be
prepared that, every once in a while, the terrorist will succeed. While every
single such attack can be dubbed an intelligence failure, it would be unfair to
do so. No intelligence agency, however well
organised, trained or equipped, can possibly have knowledge of everything that
terrorists are planning. The most well protected political leader is supposed
to be the president of the United States. And yet, how many have died in
office, as well as those being attacked and wounded? Furthermore, I have
explained at every opportunity that successes of intelligence organisations are
seldom known but failures are invariably public knowledge. This is precisely
why their limitations must be understood. Gaining intelligence of a
conventional enemy’s forces and dispositions is far easier than the uncovering
of plans of terrorists. Even the infiltration of enemy forces is easier. I
pointed out in earlier articles that infiltrating a terrorist organisation and
winning their trust would necessarily entail carrying out terrorist attacks
against our own citizens. Only then could the infiltrator win the trust of
terrorists. When British forces decided to infiltrate the IRA, it took them
almost five years. So, let’s go easy on the blame game and stop looking for
scapegoats.
On this
occasion, I sensed a more defensive approach from the response of the
authorities. It is enough to inform the public that the attack was being
controlled from Afghanistan, and that we are not accusing the Afghanistan
government. There was no need to parade those captured before the media. However,
that is by no means intended to say that there is no room for improvement.
Foremost, the National Action Plan needs to be implemented in letter and
spirit. We need more vigilant and better trained security personnel,
individuals who are trained to look for the unusual and the suspicious, and to
act on it, without waiting for orders. We need small groups of Rapid Deployment
Forces, RDF, strategically located to react swiftly and surely. We need them to
be accessible on hotlines to members of the public. And we need a public
awareness programme in the media which makes the public aware and tells it what
concerned citizens can do and, more importantly, what they must not do. We need to
expand the role of the Citizens-Police Liaison Committees. But then, these
citizens must also be carefully selected and trained. If they consist of
alarmists, the RDF will be running in circles endlessly and will never be where
it should.
All sensible
citizens need to take the trouble to educate themselves and be on the lookout
for anything suspicious. If you spot something suspicious, don’t alert the
person whose actions alerted you by word, deed or reaction. Merely call the RDF
or alert-nominated personnel.
Most of all,
be more understanding of those deployed to provide security to us all. Not only
those manning checkposts who hold up traffic, and are frequently castigated by
commuters — sometimes under their breaths — but even the ordinary traffic
policeman who assists us past crossings and traffic jams.
LOCAL
CHANNELS
Over all programs
analysis
After the attack all Pakistani local
channels were busy in conducting programs on Bacha Khan University attack, who
were the terrorist, who has got the responsibility of the attack, why
educational institutes are under the attack, what are the root causes of the
attack, how to fight with terror, is Pakistan on right direction to fight
against teroor, is Pakistan used by other countries, Afganistan involvement in
the attack, Indian threats to Pakistan after attack at Pathankot air base to
india, these were the common questions in all kind of programs telecasted or
onaired by the television channels here in Pakistan, some anchors were using
hard language for the government for securing educational institutes, while
mostly in programs it was discussed that Pakistan should review their foreign
policy in this regard.
Conclusion
Media in its age of flow of information
sharing has done its best in informing masses about each and every update
regarding such attacks to pressurize the authorities to not only take action to
find out the root causes and to identify the persons who were involved in the
attack, though few persons are identified as involved in the attack. as each
and every attack is agreed by some groups who accepted the attack which media
not only shared with masses but such information helped security organizations
to coop with terror and root out the cause and reach to the culprits.
Media even is sharing the information to be
save and limit their exercises which is good for institutes specially, though
some information should be confidential for not showing openly in media.
The flow of information regarding event was prioritized by the
media organization for atealst a weak, all newspapers and tv channels were
reporting the event and after event news feeds.
The research shows Media coverage was full of information to
investigate the attack which is good sign, impact shows masses aggressiveness
after flow of information few culprits are captured, sharing manner is some
where out of ethics as abusive language was also used and giving too much time
to terror attack increased peoples aggression, so promoting aggressive behavior
is not ethically good manner.
منهنجو سنڌ جي مختلف ضلعن ۾ وڃڻ ٿئي ٿو، جتي ان طبقي جي ٻارڙن کي اسڪول بجاءِ گهرن ۾ ڏسندو آهيان، يا ته راند روند، يا ماءُ پيءَ جي هنج جو حصو هوندا آهن، پوءِ مختلف سوال اٿندا آهن ته شايد والدين چاهين ٿا ته سندن ٻار به سندن ٻانهه ٻيلي ٿين پڙهندا ته وڏو پورهيو ڪرڻو پوندو، سندن فيسون، سفر، وڏي پيڙاهه ۾ وجهي ڇڏيندا، پر شايد صرف ائين ناهي، تازو ميرپورخاص ۾ ٻارڙن جي داخلا جي حوالي سان ڪم ڪندڙ تنظيم جي دوستن سان ڳالهه ٻولهه پئي ٿي ته آخر اهي ڪهڙا شاگرد آهن، جيڪي داخلا نٿا وٺن، اسڪول نٿا وڃن، يا سندن والدين کين اسڪول نٿا موڪلين، ته ذڪر آيو گهڻائي اهي ٻار آهن، جيڪي مزدور طبقي سان تعلق رکن ٿا، هارپو ڪن ٿا ۽ ڪنهن نه ڪنهن وڏيري جي زمين تي عارضي ويٺل آهن، ڀلي انهن کي ڇو ته ڳچ عرصو ڇو نه گذريو هجي، اهڙن شاگردن کي يا ته تر جا استاد داخلا ڏيڻ کان لنوائين ٿا ته هي هوءَ ئي هليا ويندا، يا ته سندن زمينن وٽ اسڪول ناهي، يا کين ڪوئي سمجهائڻ وارو ناهي ته ڀلي جيترو عرصو رهو، ٻارڙن کي اسڪول موڪليو.
ٿيڻ ته ائين گهرجي ته حڪومت کي اهڙن ٻارڙن جي پڙهائيءَ لاءِ قانون سازي ڪرڻ گهرجي، ڪو فارمولو آڻڻ گهرجي ته جيئن اهڙا ٻار پڙهي سگهن ۽ سنڌ جي تعليمي شرح 50 سيڪڙو کان مٿي به مٿي چڙهي سگهي، تعليمي وزير سيد سردار شاهه سان ماڻهن جو اختلاف به آهي، ته سندس سوچ سان اتفاق رکندڙ به موجود آهن، ڪي سندس واکاڻ ڪن ٿا ته ڪن کي سندن هر کنيل قدم اجايو ٿو لڳي ۽ هو تنقيد جا تير وڏي واڪي سوشل ميڊيا جو سهارو وٺي اڇلائيندا نظر اچن ٿا، پر اميد جو هجڻ اتساهيندڙ ڳالهه آهي سو اسان به ان اميد ته هي مسئلو سندس اکين آڏو ايندو ۽ ڪا پاليسي جڙي سگهندي، جيڪا اهڙن ٻارڙن جي لاءِ تعليمي سهولتون مهيا ڪرڻ لاءِ ڪا ڏيٺ ويٺ ڪندي، جنجو هڪ ٺڪاڻو نه آهي، يعني يا ته هو لاڏائو آهن، بک جي باهه وسائڻ لاءِ پنهنجي امڙ ۽ بابا سان سدائين سفر ۾ آهن.
هاڻي تازو تازو نائين، ڏهين، يارهين ۽ ٻارهين جا پرچا پورا ٿيا آهن، جنهن ۾ ڪاپي ڪلچر خلاف هڪ ڀرپور مهم هلي ۽ اهو بحث به هليو ته اوچتو رڳو امتحانن ۾ سختي ڪاپي ڪلچر جو خاتمو آڻيندي يا ان لاءِ تعليمي سرگرمين دوران ماحول کي بهتر ڪري پڙهائي کي مضبوط ڪجي ته جيئن ٻار ڪاپي ڪرڻ بجاءِ اسڪول ۾ ذهني طور باصلاحيت ٿئي ۽ کيس ان ڳالهه جي به سڌ هجي ته ڪاپي نه پر پنهنجي ذهانت سان امتحان ڏيڻو آهي.