But Pakistan’s Premier stands compromised
After having tottered on the edge of displacement, it seems like the Government of Nawaz Sharif will live to fight another day. On Wednesday, nine out of the 10 political parties represented in Pakistan’s National Assembly voted in favour of a resolution that expressed their confidence in the incumbent regime. They also criticised opposition leaders Imran Khan and Tahir ul-Qadri for their disruptive anti-Government campaign. This was not just a vote that favoured Mr Sharif or his party but one that represented Pakistan's collective decision to remain on the democratic course. It is a heartening sign of that country finally maturing as a democracy. Merely the conduct of elections, even if free and fair, do not make for a democracy; the acceptance of the people's mandate by all parties, especially those that have been rejected by the electorate, the establishment of strong state institutions, and public scrutiny and accountability, are all critical elements. By alleging that the general election which brought Mr Sharif to power, that too a full year after he had taken office, was rigged, Messrs Khan and Qadri had begun walking down a dangerous path which could have led Pakistan back to military rule. In the process, there would have been irreparable damage to the fragile gains made in these past six years since the Pakistan People’s Party Government became the first civilian regime to complete a full five-year term and hand over power to another civilian administration. Moreover, had the two leaders managed to remove Mr Sharif, they would have brought back into circulation an old template of disruptive politics — wherein the Government is practically at the mercy of any opposition leader who can bring a few thousands on to the streets. This is also where the Army comes into play. As previous coup experiences show, toppling a Government, especially one that has an overwhelming mandate (like Mr Sharif enjoys), would not have been possible without military support.
The Army may have made clear that it will not stage a full-fledged coup against Mr Sharif, who has previously been toppled by the military. But it has demanded ‘greater space’ in governance. It's not clear what a power-sharing agreement, if one is put in place, will look like. But it is certain to erode Mr Sharif's position. Given that the military already has a priority position in the Pakistani establishment, and enjoys effective veto powers on defence and foreign policy matters, a formalised agreement will not make a huge difference — except for officially underlining what is already accepted as a matter of fact in Pakistan. More important, as the current crisis comes to a close, Prime Minister Sharif must examine his failings that contributed to the mess, such as his inability to deliver on reforms and his perception in the public as an absentee leader who runs Pakistan like a family fiefdom.