March Madness Grips Pakistan

The current phase of political frenzy in Pakistan goes beyond the usual uncertainties associated with the country. Pakistan has witnessed opposition to Army rule or military takeover of civilian regimes, but never a popular uprising against a popularly elected Government. Who are the key players in this political drama and what’s motivating them? 

The decision of the Pakistan Supreme Court to uphold the ban on Former P.M. Nawaz Sharif and Punjab C.M. Shahbaz Sharif has plunged Pakistan into a whirlwind of existential crises. Implications of the Court ruling are simple: the Sharif brothers and their party PML-N will not be able to effectively challenge President Zardari in future elections. Punjab, the support base of PML-N, has been placed under President Zardari’s control through the imposition of Governor’s rule in the province. Deprived of a politic-judicial redressal mechanism, the PML-N seeks to make a comeback by exploiting the anti-Zardari sentiment simmering across the country.  By aligning its political agenda with the popular demand of reinstating the judges, the PML-N has sought to confront President Zardari with formidable opposition.  The PML-N – Zardari confrontation has activated all stakeholders in the country eager to explore their political fortunes.  

For Nawaz Sharif the ensuing political crisis is an opportunity which he is sure to capitalize. The short lived PML-N and PPP coalition arrangement was a temporary time-buying tactic by Nawaz Sharif. Few had expected the coalition to survive beyond a couple of months. The JUI-F Chief Maulana Fazl-ur Rehman, who was mediating reconciliation between Sharif and Zardari, holds Nawaz Sharif responsible for the political deadlock. According to Fazl, President Zardari had agreed to accept the demands of the PML-N including a review of the disqualification of the Sharif brothers on the condition that the protest march is called off. Even though there was no certainty that President Zardari would honor his pledge, Nawaz Sharif’s confrontationist posture had been emboldened by the popular support he was receiving. By comparing President Zardari’s policies to that of former President Musharraf, Nawaz Sharif has deliberately enlarged the mandate of the lawyer’s protest march.

President Zardari is employing all possible tools for thwarting attempts to unseat him. He has instituted a host of legal measures including ban on protest gatherings and stationing of para-military troops to contain the popular uprising. President Zardari’s decision to attend the ECO summit in Tehran a day before the protest march is an attempt to convince the international community that he is capable of effectively playing multiple roles even when a domestic crisis is impending.  The significance of President Zardari’s decision can be ascertained from the fact that the physical absence of the leader has acted as a catalyst in Pakistan’s military’s coups. The most potent weapon in President Zardari’s arsenal is the 17^th Amendment; the amendment allows the President to dissolve provincial assemblies, remove the P.M. and even appoint a new Army Chief.  

Former President Pervez Musharraf considers conditions opportune to stage a comeback. In a recent interview he has expressed the possibility of reclaiming the President’s Chair; a ‘contributing President’ to be precise. Though the possibility of Musharraf re-emerging as a central political functionary in Pakistani politics is dim, his versatility with power politics can influence the course of the political events in Pakistan.  Imran Khan, leader of Tehreek-e-Insaf, has not only supported the PML-N in demanding the restoration of the Chief Justice Iftikar Choudhry, but has fanned the anti-Zardari fire by contrasting his policies to the sacred vision of Mohammed Ali Jinnah.  

The only political functionary in Pakistan capable of sailing through this political turmoil is Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani.  The P.M. has demonstrated political sagacity and maturity rarely evident among the Pakistani political elites. He has dared to differ with President Zardari on the latter’s decision to institute mobile courts in the country and has objected to the Supreme Court’s decision on the Sharif brothers as ‘weakening of democracy’. Even though he views the protest march by the lawyers as a democratic right, he has not sided with President Zardari’s opponents. P.M. Gilani’s attempt at reassuring every party in the conflict that democracy would be protected has placed him in a win-win situation. Moreover P.M. Gilani’s statements in the wake of the recent India-Pakistan tensions reflect his balanced demeanor; neither did he seek to create war hysteria nor did he antagonize the popular sentiment in Pakistan.   

Pakistan’s political chess board may appear challenging but is still a few moves away from check-mate. In a situation where General Kiyani is disinterested in claiming political power but concerned about the country’s political stability, the Gilani-Kiyani nexus could save Pakistan. The unpopularity of military rule and incapability of either Nawaz Sharif or Asif Ali Zardari to govern without political vendetta leaves P.M. Gilani and General Kiyani to work out a political arrangement. The military backed Caretaker Government in Bangladesh could serve as a credible model.