O |
n Thursday, Imran Khan pulled a plug on the month-long dialogue with the government that aimed at winning freedom for his party’s incarcerated activists and seeking the establishment of two separate commissions to investigate May 9 countrywide rioting and November 24 protest march in Islamabad. Imran and his party leaders wanted these actions taken through executive orders.
In December, representative teams of the government and the opposition had met in Islamabad, ostensibly to address the country’s ongoing political challenges. The government side was represented by the speaker of the National Assembly, Sardar Ayaz Sadiq, Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar, Prime Minister’s Advisor Rana Sanaullah, Senator Irfan Siddiqui, Pakistan Peoples Party leaders Raja Pervez Ashraf and Naveed Qamar, and Muttahida Qaumi Movement leader Farooq Sattar. The opposition team was led by Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf’s Asad Qaisar, Sunni Ittehad Council chairman Sahibzada Hamid Raza and Majlis Wahdat-i-Muslimeen leader Allama Nasir Abbas.
Since it is customary, the two sides also spoke to the media so that the “people of Pakistan are taken into confidence” on such an important process of national mollification. Expressing optimism, Irfan Siddiqui said: “We are participating with good intentions and a focus on Pakistan’s development and prosperity. Setting aside the past, we hope for positive outcomes from these talks.”
Attempting to sound statesman-like, Speaker Ayaz Sadiq reasoned: “I am grateful to all members for forming the committees. The presence of senior leaders underscores the importance of these discussions. I hope the dialogue will focus on Pakistan’s welfare. All issues are solved through negotiations.”
Opening for the opposition, former speaker Asad Qaisar described the discussion as “preliminary.” He said: “We have demanded the release of all prisoners, including Imran Khan, and called for the formation of a judicial commission. We will present a formal charter of demands on January 2.” SIC chairman Hamid Raza, chipped in, saying; “We want investigations into the events of May 9 and November 26. We are advocating for the release of political prisoners. The government has the power to meet our demands.”
For some time, it seemed that the government and the opposition were willing to bury the bad news on their watch: a battered economy, sloppy governance, messy law and order, drifting institutions, wanton poverty, communication curfew and social media blitz. But soon it became clear that they were not serious about the dialogue. The PTI was constantly shifting the goalposts; the government was dragging its feet, saying the negotiations could not take place with pre-conditions or under the shadow of a threat. The reinforced opposition squad – joined by Leader of the Opposition Omar Ayub Khan, PTI secretary general Salman Akram Raja and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur – was coming up with additional demands as talks progressed. The government was hedging its bets by announcing the formation of committees and sub-committees to study PTI demands before promising any substantial action.
Sitting fit or forlorn in Adiala, Imran Khan was either putting forward demands for release of under-trial political prisoners and judicial investigation into the May 9 and November 24-26 incidents, or threatening to launch a disobedience movement if his asks were not met. By the third week of January 2025, the government and the PTI were effectively in the third round of negotiations and the latter had presented its “charter of demands” in writing. Weeks of presumptive posturing had passed but neither parties had moved an inch towards resolving the core differences. What could be the reason behind this if not the fact that both these negotiating teams lacked the mandate to concede anything? Sir Charles James Lyall, the noted imperial civil servant in the British Raj during the 19th Century, once remarked that “there are four things that hold back human progress: ignorance, stupidity, committees and accountants.” At least a couple of those were involved here.
While the government kept pushing befuddling reasons for delivering nothing substantial, the PTI kept putting out bewildering demands coated in wasteful legal lexicon; the ignorant public cracked jokes on social media that both parties were scared to name the elephant in the room. The “reality” and “efficacy” of “dialogue” became crystal clear when it was announced that a PTI team had had a meeting with Gen Asim Munir to discuss the worsening law and order situation in the province. While the meeting underscored the inherent weakness of the coalition government at the Centre, it also exposed the PTI’s preference to deal directly with Rawalpindi rather than wasting time with Islamabad.
The January 14 meeting changed the very outlook of the ongoing political dialogue. Emboldened by the interaction, Chief Minister Gandapur told reporters, “There is no need for backdoor talks when everything is happening in the open.” The federal government had no direct comment but the spokesperson for its negotiation committee, Senator Irfan Siddiqui, clearly disapproved of the PTI meeting the general while a dialogue process was on. He said that negotiations could not be conducted simultaneously through multiple channels. “There is no point in peeking through small doors and windows now. If the door they had been striving to open for a year is now open, they should abandon other efforts.”
Posting on X, Senator Siddiqui claimed that he was aware of the details and conversations held during the meeting. Critics commented that Siddiqui was merely trying to hide the government’s embarrassment when he wrote: “Barrister Gohar reportedly stated that both backdoor and front-door processes for negotiations will continue. However, negotiations cannot be conducted simultaneously through multiple channels. The PTI should choose between ‘back door’ or ‘front door’ negotiations.”
To say that the dialogue was doomed to disappoint from the word go is no understatement. Despite weeks of parleys, both camps were fully aware of each other’s weakness. The government knows who put them in the driving seat after a poor electoral showing. The opposition, too, is aware of who could end their ordeal. That is why PTI leaders are putting forward “deadlines” now, warning the government that they will boycott any future meeting if their demands are not met. The government’s mindset is aptly expressed by one of its leading lights. Known for his incendiary remarks, Defence Minister Khawaja Asif wrapped it up for all and sundry when speaking to the media outside the parliament building earlier in the week, he announced that the purpose PTI was pursuing through the dialogue was to establish a contact with the establishment. “If that is the case, what is the need for holding talks with us.”
The month-long activity that consumed hundreds of broadcast hours and newspaper columns was described by a bitter Islamabad critic as the favourite pastime of politicians for “they can hardly do anything else.” What about the rest of the country and its people, I asked him. “Why would you bother about rest of the people when best of the people are happy?” His sarcasm reminded me of Karl Marx, who once famously said: “the oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.”
The writer is the resident editor of The News, Islamabad