A post-Altaf MQM?

It all started on August 22 with Bhai’s provocative and controversial speech. In a fit of rage, Bhai crossed all moral and legal boundaries by using foul language against the Pakistani state and inciting his supporters to violence, causing a nationwide pandemonium. The ensuing unrest in Karachi, which sent parts of the city into high alert, and the attack on a media house, caused further public outrage.

By throwing caution to the wind, Bhai pushed the MQM’s local leadership into a corner where it not only refused to defend him but also categorically distanced itself from the content of the speech vowing not to allow him the party platform for such speeches in the future. Later, in a press conference, the MQM leadership also announced it would run the party affairs from Karachi instead of London and take decisions independently.

This sudden development took place amid a critical social, political, and security transition that Karachi is going through. The city, which has reeled from multiple forms of ethno-political, criminal, and extremist violence for the last several years, is trying to get back on its feet amidst a reshaped environment and redefined rules of engagement.

Against this backdrop, it is essential to carefully monitor and handle the unfolding developments, which will have a major impact on Karachi’s political economy. What does this entail for Bhai and the MQM’s political future – as Pakistan’s fourth largest party with deep social roots in the educated middle class of urban Sindh? Will the MQM finally succeed in emerging out of Bhai’s shadow? More importantly, will the powers-that-be allow the critical political process to take its natural course without manipulation and intervention?

Arguably, Bhai’s rabble-rousing oratory has done more damage to the MQM than did the Rangers’ operation, the launch of the rival Pak Sarzameen Party, or the party’s ongoing media trials. Altaf’s speech indicates his weakening grip on the party affairs, his diminishing control over the city where his reign of terror was fabled and legendary. The bitter tone also exposed his helplessness in the face of declining revenues generated through money-extortion. Further, it indicates his desperation to hang on to Karachi’s power politics.

The speech triggered a new wave of resignations and defections from party leaders. So far, Asif Hasnain Malik, Amir Liaqut Hussain, and MPA Iram Azeem Farooqi have resigned from the party. Other leaders like Haider Abbasi Rizvi, Faisal Sabazwari, and Nasreen Jaleel have quietly left the country and side-lined themselves from party affairs.

Everything about Bhai’s speech was controversial: its content, timing, and the environment. It came at a time when India and Pakistan were engaged in a heated war of words over the Indian forces’ atrocities in Indian-held Kashmir. Pakistan’s criticism of India prompted the latter to launch the anti-Pakistan media campaign.

In this environment, the ‘anti-Pakistan’ content of Bhai’s speech touched some raw nerves of the Pakistani military establishment. The speech was seen less in the local context of Karachi’s politics and security and more as part of the India-Pakistan proxy war. Notwithstanding the genuine grievances and legitimate political concerns of Bhai, no sane person in a civilised society can condone the incendiary content that bordered on abuse and revolt.

In ‘Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny’, Amartya Sen notes that within the ethnocentric movements that are built around personality-cults, a genuine transformation comes from within not from without. If the MQM’s evolution as a political entity is carefully analysed, it has come a long way from fixation with slogans like ‘Hamein Manzil Nahin Rehnuma Chahye’ (we do not want destination but the leader) and ‘Jo Bhai Ka Ghadaar Hai Wuh Maut Ka Haqdar Hai’ (the traitors of Altaf Hussain deserve death), to categorically disassociating itself from Bhai’s controversial anti-state remarks.

There is a growing realisation within the party circles to shun violence and prepare for the post-Altaf transition in line with changing circumstances to survive at the national level as a forward-looking mainstream political party.

However, politics is a messy affair; it is slow, evolutionary, complicated, erratic, unpredictable, and inter-subjective. It is constructed around human desires, emotions, fears and expectations rather than rationality and objectivity. The Pakistani military establishment should realise this and provide more space to Karachi’s genuine political stakeholders instead of further squeezing the already shrunk political space or attempting quick-fixes through handpicked politicians.

Altaf Hussain is the MQM and the MQM is Altaf Hussain; nothing can change this but a genuine internal transformation in an evolutionary manner. This is why giving Farooq Sattar more space and showing patience is critically important now when a process of rethinking and reformulation is already underway within the MQM.

Regrettably, the heavy-handed manner in which the security establishment is dealing with the situation following the controversial speech is counter-productive. The removal of Bhai’s posters and demolition of MQM offices that dot Karachi and Hyderabad’s political landscapes will not erode his political following. On the contrary, it will further strengthen the narrative of victimhood, discrimination, and marginalisation resulting in vindication of his political position. Three years of the Rangers’ operation in Karachi has vividly established this: security cannot fix politics, the way politics cannot fix security.

A lasting solution to Karachi’s existing crisis can be found only in the political space, through negotiation and compromises. This is why the messy business of politics should be left to Karachi’s genuine political stakeholders. In the final analysis, looking at national political trends, seeking a change in the political culture of Karachi in isolation from rest of the country is wishful thinking.

The way Punjab votes for the Sharifs, interior Sindh votes for the Bhuttos, in the same manner, urban Sindh votes for the MQM. Political trends are defined along ethnic lines (voting patterns in KP and Balochistan are different). So, as long as the overall national political dynamics do not evolve a lasting change in Karachi’s political culture will remain elusive. This is why continuation and strengthening of the democratic process in Pakistan, despite all its flaws and gaps, is important.

The writer is an associate research fellow at the S Rajaratnam School of
International Studies, Singapore.

Email: isabasit@ntu.edu.sg