saiah Berlin (1909-1997) was a British philosopher and historian of ideas. His writings on political philosophy and the concept of liberty are significant for their profundity as well as for their clarity. In some ways, he is comparable to Bertrand Russell. Both were prolific, accessible and engaging and ardent believers in the liberal tradition based in the Enlightenment.

However, in his works dealing with Vico, Hamann and Herder, Berlin seems dismissive of Enlightenment. This is where he is markedly different from Russel who is steeped in the positivist tradition. According to Berlin, philosophy concerns itself with questions of a special, distinctive character.

No definite answers are known to such questions. Even the means by which one can arrive at the answers and the standards of judgment by which to evaluate a suggested answer are not ‘known’. Berlin’s work on liberal theory and value pluralism and his opposition to Marxism and communism have had a lasting influence.

While reading his works, I was impressed the primacy of the abstract notions like peace, prosperity, justice and freedom and their mutuality. In a sense, these form the constants in human history and constitute the ultimate ideals for humans to achieve. All else are merely means to making sense of these and executing these.

Prosperity requires peace which becomes possible through justice; justice leads to freedom. In today’s column, I have tried to theorise these notions and their inter-connection.

Peace is a state of security or order within a community provided for by law or custom. Without peace, it is not be possible to achieve the levels of trust, cooperation and inclusiveness needed for societies to be resilient to shocks, manage disputes and adapt to changes in their environments. This is because peace creates a stable environment wherein businesses can flourish and governments can function to ensure the rule of law.

Thus, peace is a key component of sustainable development. A healthy business environment is important for development. In conflict-ridden communities, business operations are disrupted due to unreliable social services and the prevalence of social problems like poverty, hunger and inequality.

A lot is being said and written these days about economic peace theory. Peace economics is a branch of conflict economics and focuses on the design of the socio-sphere’s political, economic and cultural institutions and their interacting policies and actions with the goal of preventing, mitigating or resolving violent conflict within and between societies.

Peace enriches our communities and individual lives. It directs us to embrace diversity and support one another. Through caring, generosity and fairness we provide a cornerstone for attaining sustainable, just, meaningful, vibrant and fulfilling personal and community lives.

Johan Galtung, in one of the most influential approaches in the discipline, has coined the term ‘positive peace’ as opposed to ‘negative peace’. Here one can detect the influence of Berlin who has talked about positive liberty and negative liberty which means exactly what Galtung ascribes to positive peace and negative peace. The latter term means only the lack of violence. Positive peace, however, exists when physical as well as structural violence is eliminated. Structural violence is characterised by a difference between the potential of human happiness and its actual realisation.

Justice is defined as a situation where actors obtain what they are entitled to. Obviously, once actors get what they are entitled to, a pivotal reason to use force falls by the wayside. It is, thus, evident that justice - once it exists and is perceived by all relevant actors – has a positive influence on peace (defined minimally as the absence of the use of violence for political purposes).

Nancy Fraser has asserted insightfully that justice concerns the distribution of three types of goods (good conceived in the broader sense). First, material goods, which humans need for survival, welfare and well-being. Security may fall under this heading. Security relates to a profound individual and collective human need for an environment constituted both materially and ideationally.

Second, the distribution of the fundamental value of recognition. In the context of justice, persons and collectives long for recognition as potential or actual bearers of entitlements. To be recognised as a person, as a legitimate party in a conflict, as representing a politically meaningful minority, or as a legitimate state is constitutive for becoming an actor in the respective settings and a bearer of rights and entitlements. The recognition of sovereignty is one of the most important entitlements that collectives demand for themselves.

Third, justice relates to the opportunity for political representation and participation in the making of decisions the consequences of which relate to the actors enjoying or seeking such representation and participation. Aristotle said, “At best man is noblest of all animals, separate from law and justice he is the worst.”

We, Pakistanis, are among the people who need to remember this the most. Justice not only ensures peace but also helps create an environment where freedom is fostered. The relationship between justice and freedom is two-way. Freedom enables justice to transpire and vice versa.

It is particularly worrisome with respect to Pakistan that ignorance and power have frequently formed a formidable alliance. This reminds me of James Baldwin who once warned those wanting justice to prevail, “it is certain in any case, that ignorance allied with power, is the most ferocious enemy justice can have.”

More importantly, the situation prevailing in Pakistan reminds me of John Locke who once stated, “Where there is no law, there is no freedom”. Many laws enacted in this country have legitimised corruption so that the remit of the state institutions has been circumscribed.

This is a record we can obviously not be proud of. People at the helm have yet to realise the vital connection between the law, its proper enforcement and freedom that leads to the truth. Pakistan’s literati should engage with such notions and make the debate a part of our public sphere.

That is how the educated and the enlightened can assert themselves. Running the state is far too serious a business to be left to a small group that makes all the decisions on our behalf.

The writer is Professor in the faculty of Liberal Arts at the Beaconhouse National University, Lahore.  He can be reached at  tahir.kamran@bnu.edu.pk