قصہ گو کردار بنا
مجھ کو پُراَسرار بنا
خود آگاہی نعمت ہے
اس کو مت آزار بنا
بولنے والی آنکھوں کو
دل میں رکھ دلدار بنا
حسن و عشق سے آگے بھی
دنیا ہے، معیار بنا
شعر میں اس کا قصہ چھیڑ
شعر فضاؔ شہکار بنا
Definition of justice and its scope is something about what legal and political philosophers could never reach a unified position throughout a history. In these days, many in the West are trying to present Islam and its law and justice as something utterly uncivilized, unjust, cruel, and outdated and of no use in modern world. Positivist's concept of justice that prevails in the world today, mostly based on temporary secular-materialistic values, is in most of the cases opposed to the eternal principles and rules laid down by God Almighty. Justice according to the early proponents of Natural law, if not based on the universal values in itself is not justice, and as such is doomed to failure. Today we are witnessing the kind of global justice that threatens even to destroy humanity. The present article is an effort to find out the most suitable definition of justice according to the Islamic law, and present the concept of universality and scope of justice in Islam in a way to show the absolute God's principles and values are unchangeable and everlasting, and only rightful solution to be followed today.
This dissertation has addressed a central question of what were the foreign policy doctrines of Bush and Obama and how did they manage to implement their foreign policy objectives in Afghanistan in the post 9/11 era. This all was intended to explore the patterns of continuity or change in the policies of Bush and Obama in Afghanistan. Both the administrations applied their own means and interests to attain its objectives somehow or the other. However, the neglect of Afghanistan and inconsistent and faulty policies had been the basic reasons that the U.S. could not achieve its objectives or to make an outright victory and the war still continued and is not yet completely lost. This dissertation also spelled out the other systemic and domestic factors due to which Afghanistan could not get the concerted attention, resources and unified policy actions. The closer analysis of the U.S. policy and Afghanistan’s situation revealed that despite differences in rhetoric and somewhat in actions the main U.S. approach towards Afghanistan had remained more or less the same and suffered from inconsistency and neglect regardless of the leader. Many observers characterized the U.S. attempts to control terrorism had rather worked to breed more terrorism in Afghanistan. Afghanistan had become the center stage of international politics where indigenous people did not have the power while the outsiders enjoyed the power to play politics over this geo-politically important state. Underlying assumptions of neoclassical realism (NCR), and Foreign Policy Decision-Making (FPDM) formed the basis of this study. Based on the findings of this dissertation and foregoing analysis it has been concluded that despite different rhetoric and talking a lot of change, the Obama administration had continued the Bush approaches at his policy level and his grand strategy had shown a great degree of continuity in case of Afghanistan.A great body of literature had proved this continuity particularly in his counterterrorism and national security policy. Though he introduced significant changes in his overall approach by using different means but those were meant to attain similar ends. Obama wanted to end the war but his generals did not let him do so. So, the continuity has proven to be more striking and rewarding than the changes he had proposed.