All the parties across the board seem to be on one page on the issue whether they like each other or not, on issues like national security and how to tackle the rising trends of extremism after the new wave of terror in the country and recent activities of some outlawed groups.
The political parties and the establishment came on one page in 2014, after the December 16th massacre of schoolchildren of Army Public School, Peshawar, but political differences got sharpened and they blamed some powerful quarters for political interference. This polarization has further sharpened in the last two years. Things went from bad to worse when Pakistan was put on the grey list of FATF for terror financing. Pakistan has not been placed in the ‘black list’ but has also not been cleared from the grey list despite all its efforts and implemented most of the conditions.
It is a welcome sign as the government decided to address this issue and was able to form a high powerful commission as extremism is still far from over. Some extremist groups are often used even in political strategy, which is quite alarming. This we have also witnessed in the last elections. The recent statement of Interior Minister Brig (retd) Ejaz Shah against the Awami National Party drew criticism to an extent that the minister finally had to apologize to the ANP leadership.
But the new initiative could be the beginning of a ‘National Dialogue’ on the relationship of all the Four Pillars of the State and how the core issues are addressed by the State.
All the three mainstream political parties, the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, opposition Pakistan Muslim League and Pakistan People’s Party have their own respective ‘narratives’ when it comes to the role of powerful ‘establishment,’ which for decades has been criticized for interfering in political affairs and in running the governments. True or false, the country’s politics have revolved around it for years. For instance, in 2013, the-then opposition leader, Imran Khan had suspected it to being pro Nawaz; it’s the other way round in 2018, when the PML-N accused it for making the PTI government. The PPP leader and former President, Asif Ali Zardari, in 2013 believed it were the Returning Officers or RO’s elections. In 2018, his son and PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari termed Imran as ‘Selected.’
In the last two and a half years, the PTI government, perhaps, learning from the past experience of the two governments maintained a cordial relationship with the establishment but, it would be naïve to say that Imran was not a popular leader. However, despite all his efforts he could not break the popularity graph of PML-N, which even in 2018 emerged as the single largest party in the Punjab, the decisive province.
The role of the establishment seems to be the ‘key’ for any ‘National dialogue’ beside other important issues like good governance, economy, corruption and transparent process of accountability.
Within the two opposition parties, the strategy to address this core issue are different. The PML-N and its leader Nawaz Sharif have gone too far and named the army chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa and DG ISI Lt. General Faiz Hameed for alleged political interference. But the party found itself in a quite embarrassing position after the disclosure of two meetings of its leader and former Governor Muhammad Zubair with the army chief, including the one in the presence of ISI chief. The DG ISPR, Major General Babar Iftikhar, also confirmed the two meetings but did not say much on Sharif’s narrative except that the army’s rank and file are united from officers to Jawans.
The PPP, which had a vast experience of facing such situations and former president Asif Ali Zardari once had put himself in a difficult position in 2015, because of his controversial statement; he has clearly distanced himself from Nawaz’s narrative on the ground that the opposition may not be able to achieve the desired result if they open too many fronts, suggesting the Pakistan Democratic Party to target PM Imran and PTI instead of dropping names of army chief and ISI chief. Earlier, Bilawal Bhutto in an interview with BBC took a balanced view but said he was shocked to hear Sharif at Gujranwala. His interview and remarks generated a new controversy though the PML-N and PPP did not join the debate. The PDM has now formed a committee to formulate the new Charter of Democracy, and the parties would decide how to deal with the situation.
Without blaming each other, the opposition parties in their future public meetings may avoid naming individuals but will continue their criticism on the role of the establishment, something which may suit the PTI and PM Imran Khan, who has now become its key defender, saying the ‘corrupt leaders’ in order to hide their malpractices used the ‘establishment card.’
The PML-N leadership still seems to be behind Nawaz Sharif’s narrative and his daughter Maryam Nawaz, drawing huge crowds but the party’s real test would be after the party’s next public meeting in Peshawar, when the PDM will enter Punjab with two main meetings, one in Multan and the most decisive one in Lahore on December 13.
However, irrespective of how strong Nawaz’s narrative is and how popular PML-N still is in Punjab, the return of Nawaz in electoral politics is clearly linked with his legal battle, where he seems to be in a weaker position after being disqualified and convicted. To make his case weaker, his decision not to return led to the court ruling which declared him as an ‘absconder.’
The ‘Panama Leaks,’ is now history and though it is a fact that despite tall claims, only Nawaz’s case was picked out of hundreds of other Pakistanis. What happened to other cases still needs to be addressed.
In this battle for ‘narrative’, the polarization has sharpened in the last few years and some new terms have been introduced by all parties such as ‘umpire’ or umpire’s finger, selector and selected, those who matter, those who are firing the shot.
Historically, Prime Minister Imran Khan has a clear narrative and has never taken a ‘U-turn,’ when it came to attacking the PPP and PML-N top leadership since 1996. In a bid to get them out of the mainstream politics, he even went to support former President General (retd) Pervez Musharraf from 1999 to 2002. However, he compromised on strategy and even accepted their parties' turncoats and managed to form the government in 2018.
On the other hand, the PPP and PML-N, which in the past opposed each other and had a history of conspiring to oust their respective governments from 1988 to 1999, have now come close, the second time since 2006, when they signed the historic ‘Charter of Democracy.’ If nothing else, the COD led to a peaceful transfer of power and allowed governments to complete their tenure. Both did not implement the COD in letter and spirit. Can the new COD, which for the first time has expanded to other opposition parties, be able to bring the desired results? It all depends how the alliance draws its strategy and mechanism to ensure its enforcement.
The writer is a senior columnist and analyst of GEO, The News and Jang
Twitter:MazharAbbasGEO