The battle on both sides has multidimensional objectives. The PTI in the short term wants Imran Khan released; the Government has very little control over it and even if it did agree to make a joint effort to first ease his incarceration and then earn him a reprieve, it shall have to be around a set of conditions including he will not upset the apple cart. From PTI’s perspective what is short-term and ‘here and now’ is strategic and at the most mid-term for the government incrementally leading to an arrangement but essentially expecting the PTI to fall in line with the status quo. If PTI can move from the short-to-medium-to-long term, the objectives can be jointly pursued, and perhaps attained.
The demand for Commissions to investigate the May 9 and Nov 26 excesses are impossible under the present circumstances and hence a long shot. These are better shelved for future reference when in another set of circumstances these may be resurrected. The political purpose – strategic enough for all to agree in gaining the primacy of civilian rule without an adjunct – can be pursued through a different strategy; something on the lines of the Charter of Democracy minus its self-serving elements. The 2006 Charter was more tactical seeking control of institutions to serve patent political interests. The 26th Amendment, though late in coming, is the case in point. It may seem to have served an immediate purpose but is a most opportune realisation of a long-held political ambition. Free judiciary is a sine qua non for democracy. Without it, it is just not democracy.
Can the PTI and its leader make this change in their strategic thought? It may currently be focused on short-term gains only but those are likely non-starters for the government which hopes to keep the current order. Can PTI make this bargain for its mid-to-long-term interests? It is unlikely that the current order will change the emplaced arrangement. If at all the PML-N becomes too adventurous driven by political altruism – always lurking below the surface – another in-house change in the leadership is not beyond probability. The April 2022 change of government exemplifies the possibility. Similarly, any likelihood that early elections may indeed be on the horizon or a via media as an agreement through talks is remote as long as the current power wielders are in place. Nor will the PML-N of its own accord make itself the sacrificial lamb for a cause which may be politically and democratically correct but unfavourable to its interests as a party.
Which brings us to the larger point embedded in this entire confrontation of style and content both in the philosophy of politics in play and the belief system which is currently the oxygen to this kind of agitation and conflict in society. Popular politics is the antithesis of conventional politics. In Hungary it is Victor Orban and his style; in Turkey it is the autocratic Tayyab Erdogan; in Russia it is Putin and none else in competition; in India it is state fascism around politico-religious combine that fuels the popularity of Narendra Modi and the derogation of the minorities especially Muslims; China is a uniquely party-controlled quite separate from how rest of the world is constituted; and, Trump in the US has again found favour around identity and lack of economic opportunity for those left behind in a prolonged phase of politics where progress missed significant segments of population.
It boils down to inequitable distribution of opportunity and chance in life to move ahead which creates an alienation giving rise to feelings of being marginalised and disfranchised. USA and a lot of Europe, which boasts of robust democratic mechanisms and processes, are equally impacted by this sentiment giving cause to numerous populist leaders finding eminence. Established economies and democracies like France and Germany are grappling with this neo-fundamentalism pushing societies further to the right towards exclusivism. Anyone appealing to such a sense of alienation and promising to disabuse the system from such neglect and inattention wins elections giving cause to populism.
In Pakistan’s imperfect governance system, barely a democracy, the feeling currently resides only around political alienation and injustice. The larger slogans around which the Imran Khan phenomenon took route may have been the alleged corruption and plundering of national resources by his opposing political competitors, but the bite of economic unfairness has not yet fully instituted among the people – most political leadership, including PTI’s, is alleged to be tainted. Once economic difficulty overwhelms political factors, it will open the gates to a more abiding and resilient populist sentiment. What is thus only a trend now will turn into a phenomenon.
If this be so, and it is so, it is prudent and favourable for the government and the system in place to continue the dialogue with PTI and its leadership even if the return to the PTI is incremental and calibrated. Keeping the PTI engaged on the table is imperative, and the aim to help politics realise common purpose will become the long-term gain. Meanwhile, in the process, the PTI and the rest can agree on some basic rules of the game and conduct which can turn politics harmonious and fair from divisive and polarised as it stands. Rules of business and interaction with and between the political parties, parliament, judiciary, military and importantly the Election Commission must be transparently spelled out for the comfort of all. Politics is as much about trust between the people and the political aspirants as it is how the state, its institutions and the resources placed at the hands of the elected leadership are fairly and evenly disposed.
It all begins with a common set of ground rules that all must strictly adhere to. That alone will create the predictability in the environment necessary for sustained growth and progress which can reach all without differentiation. Judiciary in the country has been comprehensively compromised. It was already a laggard but the latest changes to it have only sharpened the warts. It is time to put that right as a part of the package of agreement that should come out of this process of talks. Imran Khan has nothing to lose from the talks, he must stick to the process even if he plays around for maximum gains – any gain would be a gain from the position he is in. The government has a lot more at stake. From strategic to tactical the talks open the space to address any number of challenges that may come government’s way internally and from external players. Cumulatively, the stability and predictability that the talks can ensue in bringing all political forces on one page will augur well for both, economy and society.
