Futile politics all over

The high sounding statements in support of democracy do not sustain democracy. What matters the most is the disposition and conduct of political parties and leaders and how they relate themselves with one another. How far do the principles and spirit of democracy reflect in their actual conduct?

The political class in Pakistan is at war with itself. Most political parties and leaders spend their energies in accusing the political adversaries and trading charges and counter charges. Every party describes its main adversary as evil and projects itself as the sole guardian of the national interest and welfare of the people. This makes politics too noisy, acrimonious and harmful to socio-economic development.

The success of democracy to a great extent depends on the efforts of the key political players to create a shared space of political action. Despite differences, the political leaders evolve a working understanding and harmony on how to pursue democratic goals and socio-economic development. This understanding ensures that certain policy areas and objectives are not made controversial in day-to-day politics.

There is no use in making everything contentious just because something has been suggested by the rival party. Democratic politics does not warrant viewing political issues as a life or death question. Democracy can be made secure by political approach that emphasizes ‘playing together’ rather than ‘playing to the exclusion of others.’

The political developments in Pakistan over the last couple of months have increased pessimism about the future of democracy. The major political parties are engaged in futile confrontation and their idiom and discourse is a negation of the principles and spirit of democracy. The top leaders of the PML(N) and the PPP have employed extremely rude idiom against each other. When leaders engage in war of words, the party activists operate like the drum-beaters, echoing what the leaders have said and, invariably, raising the tempo of confrontation and resorting to violence.

All opposition parties are engaged in criticising and condemning the PPP federal government. It is interesting to note that the PML(N) is ruling the province of Punjab but it holds the PPP responsible for the failures in the policy areas that are the exclusive domain of the province. The idiom of politics is non-democratic and the emphasis is on the failings of the federal government.

Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaf and the Jamaat-i-Islami separately project themselves as the alternative to the PPP and the PML(N). Therefore, they hold the PPP and the PML(N) responsible for all ills in Pakistan. They are dismissive of other political parties. Imran Khan is convinced that his party would knock out the two major parties in the next general elections and the Jamaat is no less optimistic about its electoral triumph. Their perspectives are hardly shared by serious political observers.

There is no doubt that the performance of the federal government is poor and it does not engender confidence that it will resolve some of the major problems of the people. However, the same can be said about governance issues in Punjab and other provinces. Therefore, the major opposition parties need to think beyond making hard hitting statements. They should put forward alternative plans of action where they think the PPP has failed. They should offer a workable formula to overcome power and gas shortages. This also requires a definite plan for resource mobilisation. It is easy to say that new dams should be built. How do you address political dimensions of building new dams and how would you raise funds for new power and gas projects, especially when the PML(N) and other opposition parties have adopted anti-American and anti-West posture?

Now, the MQM has decided once again to quit government and it has also declared a war of words against the PPP. As the MQM and the PML(N) are not in a position to mount a vote-of-no-confidence against the federal government in the National Assembly, their leadership is separately exploring the option of creating an opposition alliance to launch street agitation to pull down the federal government. They will have to make a lot of effort to bring the diversified opposition on to one political wave-length. The strategy of street agitation reflects negatively on the opposition’s commitment to the parliament. If they cannot achieve their political agenda through the parliament, they do not mind bypassing it.

The experience of the Azad Kashmir elections suggests that the major political parties are determined to produce the result of their choice from the ballot box. The situation was most unfortunate in Punjab where parliamentarians and activists of the ruling PML(N) engaged in running battles with the PPP activists. Though the local police and administration was under the control of provincial PML(N) government, its activists blamed the PPP for disrupting the elections in Lahore.

There was violence in Kashmir on the polling day. Two days later, the PML(N) activists attacked the rival party offices in Kashmir. The PML(N) and the MQM have gone to the courts for declaring the Kashmir elections as invalid. If that is how the political parties are going to behave when general elections are held in Pakistan, this will amount to a “suicide attack” on democracy by political parties, endangering democracy and their own future.

The opposition political parties, especially the PML(N), are also targeting the military and ISI for sharp and persistent criticism. They cannot tame military by adopting the approach they pursue towards their political adversaries, i.e., public denunciation. They need to do some sober thinking for asserting civilian primacy.

An independent judiciary is a pre-requisite for democracy. However, this is not the only condition for promotion of democracy. All institutions of the state have to function within the constitutional framework; not trying to overwhelm other state institutions, especially the elected institutions. No single institution can take upon itself the role of rectifying all ills of state system and society. The military attempted this in the past and failed.

Pakistan does not have the option of another collapse of democracy. The political parties and the state institutions have to develop a long term perspective on sustaining and broadening democracy. This requires a joint and shared approach rather than the political parties declaring war against one another and state institutions developing the saviour complex.

The writer is an independent political and defence analyst.