As PTI legislators go ahead with their decision to resign from the National Assembly, uncertainty deepens in Pakistan. Will the people of Pakistan back them or will it be a repeat of the experience of the Indian Aam Aadmi PartyIJ
looking at Pakistan today and its march through history, a Hobbesian misquote is apt here: Pakistan and political turmoil were born as twins. That it has tumbled on, despite its vivisection and through multiple coups, is quite amazing. Do Pakistanis deserve what they have todayIJ
Army as arbiter endorsed by the people
To some extent, the answer is yes. Over the years, they have endorsed trouble mongers to unseat elected government with the help of the powerful military. Political instability in Pakistan has often been injected by unseen forces unwilling to let the elected ones govern. Mavericks and rabble rousers come in handy for these forces to launch surprise attacks against the government and either weaken or dislodge them. Unfortunately, in the past, Opposition political forces have successfully mobilised popular protests and brazenly rallied around the Army to create a situation of anarchy where the Army would step in as an arbiter, or as a Pakistani observer would call it “gamekeeper”.
The net result has been the growth of an authoritarian culture, where there is no patience, let alone tolerance, with any dissenting perspective or point of view. There has been a clear unreadiness to accept defeat honourably and wait out the tenure of the elected government. The experience during the days the PPP-led coalition was in power was an exception, when the main Opposition party refused to play ball with the Army to bring down the government, but since the elections of May 2013, the old dynamics seem to have resurfaced.
Protest on flimsy pretext
A good 14 months after the elections, Imran Khan, the leader of the principal Opposition party Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), has taken to the streets alleging fraud in the last elections, and that too in mainly four electoral seats! Another fringe political group, Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) led by Tahirul Qadri too has led a parallel protest against the Sharif’s government. Taking a leaf out of Gandhi’s protests, Imran has called upon the people of Pakistan to stop paying tax and utility bills as a form of “civil disobedience”. The allegations of these two parties have not been too convincing to demand rolling back of the government.
Both these leaders had threatened the government with their claims of leading millions of protesters to Islamabad from lahore on the Independence Day of Pakistan. The show was a dampener for not many joined the march, and the coverage of the visual media showed that the crowd was rather in hundreds and few thousands than in millions. Not to be discouraged by the poor turnout, the two leaders have staged a sit-in for last seven days demanding the resignation of the Prime Minister.
The demands
The six main demands of Imran are: (i) resignation of the Prime Minister; (ii) electoral reforms (iii) re-election to follow reforms; (iv) establish a neutral caretaker government; (v) resignation of all the members of the Election Commission that managed the previous election; (vi) those responsible for election rigging, must be imprisoned and tried under Article 6 (which deals with “high treason”).
The ten-point demands of Tahirul Qadri are quite rhetorical which aims at establishing a democratic society which brings about rule of the people, alleviates poverty, caters to basic needs of the people, transforms society, eradicates terror, and protects the rights of minorities and women. However, Qadri has demanded dissolution of the assemblies and the government and establishment of a national government to realise his demands.
While demand for investigations into the allegations of electoral fraud is quite legitimate and similarly the issue of bringing out electoral reforms is also quite acceptable, the demands for removal of the Prime Minister and his government, dissolution of the national and provincial assemblies, and holding of re-elections are politically immature and smack of a larger conspiracy to push back the ongoing democratic experiment in the country since 2008.
Is there a conspiracyIJ
Many commentators in Pakistani media, especially the English-language ones, suspect that both Imran and Qadri have been unleashed by the Army or powerful sections within the Army to weaken the hold of Nawaz Sharif on power. There is a view that Nawaz’s policies towards India and Pakistan were not acceptable to the Army and through his actions — like allowing Afghan interlocutors access to Mullah Barader and coming to India to attend Modi’s swearing-in and not meeting Kashmiri separatists — he had annoyed the Army (especially the top leadership, including or excluding Gen Raheel Sharif, who was Nawaz’s pick and supposedly loyal to him).
Hence, it is believed, the Army quietly allowed Imran and Qadri to go ahead with their marches. They would argue that the march could have been called off had there been efforts by the Army to dissuade both these politicians in time.
Nawaz’s efforts to hand over the security of Islamabad to the Army has therefore not deterred the protesters from marching into Islamabad and later move into the Red Zone. Some of the analysts in Pakistan had thought that it was a master stroke for Nawaz to bring in the Army, when suspicion was rife that the march was vetted by the Army. However, it has not been able to either stop the march/protest or weaken and embarrass the Army.
Advantage Army
On the contrary, the army has seized the opportunity and felt terribly happy about being catapulted into the centre stage. Army chief General Raheel Sharif in his meeting with Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan and Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif asked the politicians to engage in a meaningful dialogue to diffuse the political turmoil on August 20. A day earlier, responding to Imran’s call for marching into the Prime Minister’s house, Army spokesperson Asim Bajwa used social media (Twitter) to respect the sanctity of the houses in the Red Zone which were “symbols of state”, and called upon all stakeholders to show “patience, wisdom and sagacity” and resolve the prevailing impasse “through meaningful dialogue in larger national and public interest”.
Reflecting on the tweet, the editorial of Dawn, one of the prominent dailies of Pakistan wrote: “Place …the statement in the proper historical context and it amounts to little more than big brother chiding the children of democracy to behave - or else. The ‘or else’ is always left unsaid, but the country hardly needs reminding about what it could be”.
Future portents
As things stand today, both Imran and Qadri have pulled out from the talks, and have stuck to their demands. According to media reports, following Army chief’s meeting with Nisar and Shahbaz, there has been a tacit understanding between the Nawaz government and the Army to concede the latter space in the decision making structure, especially in matters relating to defence and foreign policy.
Nawaz government’s decision to go ahead with talks with Kashmiri separatists, despite request from the Indian foreign office to the contrary, is being perceived as the first signs of Army’s inroads into Nawaz’s India policy. Nawaz’s ability to take talks with India forward will be much more limited than before.
As far as developments in Pakistan are concerned, a soft coup has already taken place and Nawaz has been forced to take the help of the Army to continue in power. However, imponderables remain. If we compare the present situation with the one encountered by Bhutto in 1977, there are some disturbing similarities and differences we must not lose sight of.
In 1977, when the allegation of rigging was brought in against Bhutto, most analysts agreed that despite it Bhutto would have won a comfortable majority. The Opposition, led primarily by the religious parties, kicked up a storm, making it easy for the Army to step in as a mediator. And at a moment when a deal between Bhutto and the Opposition looked possible, the Army intervened, toppled Bhutto, and later executed him for fear of his getting back to power and avenging the humiliations he suffered at the hands of the Army and the Opposition.
It remains to be seen what the Army will do in case Imran does not back out and prolongs his protest along with Qadri. Will Nawaz step down to satisfy the protestersIJ In case the ‘movement’ does not fizzle out and gathers fresh momentum, will the Army stay neutralIJ In case it does, will Nawaz be able to wrench himself out of the control of the ArmyIJ
It all depends on how the people of Pakistan will behave. So far, large majority of them have kept themselves out of the turmoil.
As PTI legislators go ahead with their decision to resign from the Aational Assembly, uncertainty deepens in Pakistan. Will the people of Pakistan back them or will it be a repeat of the experience of the Indian Aam Aadmi PartyIJ More the uncertainty, merrier the forces in the deep state of Pakistan.
(Dr Ashok Behuria is Coordinator of South Asia Centre and a Fellow at IDSA. The views expressed here are his own)