And the future hangs somewhere between hope and despair
“Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status-quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward.”
Apple, Inc.
The bonhomie witnessed across acrimonious divides during the three-week parliament session was principally reflective of the mortal fear that parties representing the status-quo are gripped with at the hands of those who are talking of a change in the country. A small sample of it was witnessed during the by-election in Multan that resulted in the political annihilation of one of the leading advocates of the decrepit system who was supported by the party of the Sharifs while his adversary, the ultimate winner, had the backing of the PTI. Is this setback a mere bubble that may burst at the first serious hurdle it encounters, or is this reflective a more substantial and sustainable change that is likely to reshape the political narrative in the future?
It may be too early to make a definitive projection of this nature, but one can say with relative certainty that the days of the old system are well nigh over. Imran Khan may not have been able to secure the resignation of the prime minister as yet for which he had set out more than two months ago, but that may already have become irrelevant. In the process, he has injected key new ingredients into the arena that are likely to impact all future political activity in the country, most important being the factors of public awareness and mobilisation. In addition to the sit-ins, this is also owed to the cyclonic and massive public gatherings that he has addressed in quick succession over vast swathes of the country. His undeclared partner-in-arms Dr. Tahirul Qadri has also taken to the road and is following suit in charging up the crowds promising change.
Pakistan has been rendered effectively dysfunctional as a consequence of the persistent agitation together with a plethora of serious crises pertaining to the prospect of survival of a bulk of the people. Delivery at the grassroots level has never been a priority of any government that has ruled the country, be it democratic or despotic. The priority has always been to further fatten the coffers of those who already have more than they can manage. Those who literally survive below the poverty line are treated disdainfully as nothing more than serfs to continue dancing to the whims and fancies of the corrupt elite. Consequently, the ugly gulf separating the haves from the have-nots has been increasing rapidly. While a miniscule minority belongs to the former classification, a vast bulk of the people fit into the latter category that is persistently struggling to ensure its survival on the fringes.
Pakistan has been rendered effectively dysfunctional as a consequence of the persistent agitation together with a plethora of serious crises pertaining to the prospect of survival of a bulk of the people. Delivery at the grassroots level has never been a priority of any government that has ruled the country, be it democratic or despotic. The priority has always been to further fatten the coffers of those who already have more than they can manage. Those who literally survive below the poverty line are treated disdainfully as nothing more than serfs to continue dancing to the whims and fancies of the corrupt elite. Consequently, the ugly gulf separating the haves from the have-nots has been increasing rapidly. While a miniscule minority belongs to the former classification, a vast bulk of the people fit into the latter category that is persistently struggling to ensure its survival on the fringes
Worse still, people were not even conscious of what was their inalienable right, but they did not have. They were not conscious that they deserved to live better, but could not because the rulers had apportioned unto themselves all the bounties of the state. They were not conscious of their rights under the constitution and that fighting for the same was also within their legitimate domain. It is only now, and as a consequence of the persistent agitation, that they have a measure of their strength. It is only now that they have been mobilised into a formidable force to fight and get what has not been given to them as a matter of right.
This is what the usurpers, garbed as political leaders, are scared of. By keeping bulk of the population in dark, they may have prospered in terms of multiplying their illicit gains, but have simultaneously degenerated beyond redemption. The predominant question before any future dispensation would pertain to devising effective ways and mechanisms to deal with these corrupt political mafias who have indulged in indescribable plunder. They must be held accountable for their loot.
It is in this context that the result of the Multan election assumes greater importance. Some may say Javed Hashmi suffered for the cause of democracy and ever endured prolonged incarceration at the hands of a dictator. That may well be, but then, it is the same Javed Hashmi who was part of a dictator’s cabinet and who benefitted immensely by being in the profession of politics. He is also guilty of changing his loyalties often seeking greater recognition, even profit. In the last instance, he quit because he claimed that the protesting party was out to derail democracy and acting on the behest of unknown forces, but others contend that he wanted to go back to the womb that had nurtured his corrupt dispensation all along. The fact that he has been voted out may reflect two things: he has been rejected on the basis of his tainted credentials, or that the party that he had deserted looking for greener pastures, and that was leading the charge against him, has a greater acceptance value with the voters.
That raises issues of a different nature: can the present momentum of protest be maintained for a good three-and-a-half years leading up to the elections in 2018, or will the burgeoning events precipitate the causes paving the way for earlier elections? Although Zardari stands behind the prime minister as he still has a few corruption cases pending in the NAB and the accountability courts, most of the PPP stalwarts, notably from the Punjab, have prophesied that 2015 will be the year of elections. This may be part of a two-pronged strategy of the party: on the one hand, to continue extending support to the incumbent government to save the illicit billions of its leader and, on the other hand, get itself into top gear for elections if circumstances necessitate that these be held earlier than 2018
The prevalent atmosphere is reminiscent more of an election that is in the offing rather than the one that was held less than a year-and-a-half ago and whose ‘claimed’ mandate extends to 2018. The dysfunctional state that is contributing to creating further schisms and divisions cannot be wished away. More likely, it is going to aggravate further with the passage of time as the sit-ins in the capital will linger and the public gatherings are also likely to pick up in frequency with the induction of more political players. The PPP has already joined in with its maiden show in Karachi and some other political outfits, fearing possible elimination, are also contemplating prospects for staying relevant in the fast-changing environment.
That raises issues of a different nature: can the present momentum of protest be maintained for a good three-and-a-half years leading up to the elections in 2018, or will the burgeoning events precipitate the causes paving the way for earlier elections? Although Zardari stands behind the prime minister as he still has a few corruption cases pending in the NAB and the accountability courts, most of the PPP stalwarts, notably from the Punjab, have prophesied that 2015 will be the year of elections. This may be part of a two-pronged strategy of the party: on the one hand, to continue extending support to the incumbent government to save the illicit billions of its leader and, on the other hand, get itself into top gear for elections if circumstances necessitate that these be held earlier than 2018.
Some others are complaining about the tone and tenor of the speeches at the sit-ins and the manner in which the so-called leaders of the country are being addressed with regard to exposing the loot that they have so gruesomely indulged in. The opinion is that it is undignified and should be avoided as, after all, they are all from the comity of politicians and should, therefore, show respect for each other. That may be one opinion. Among other reasons, I approve of the sit-ins for their boldness and the level of real-time awareness these have generated for the people to recognise their leaders as what they really are: a bunch of scum. They are not dignified and have never acted with dignity during their tenure in power. Consequently, they don’t deserve to be addressed in any manner other than what they have proven to be. So, let them be exposed. Of course, they would always have the right to prove the accusers wrong!
Inspired by the longevity of the sit-ins and the unprecedented participation of people at the political gatherings, there are some who are predicting change in quality and substance: that we are developing a better stock of people who could be elected to positions of power to make Pakistan a more enduring and sustainable preposition. But, there are others who remain smitten with nagging doubts and are not easily overwhelmed by the winds of change that are apparently blowing. They believe that, but for a very few who may be decidedly better-provisioned to lead Pakistan, bulk of the people who are part of the agitation hail from the same old, corrupt stock who, inherently, are nurtured in the juices of corruption and would operate by patronage in preference to institutionalising governance
Change is in the offing. What remains to be determined is of what kind? Will it be a change that would signify improvement over the wholesomely corrupt lot that has ruled Pakistan through all of the sixty-seven years since independence, or will it be another dose of the same old vampires wearing deceptive apparel? The truth hangs somewhere in the middle. Inspired by the longevity of the sit-ins and the unprecedented participation of people at the political gatherings, there are some who are predicting change in quality and substance: that we are developing a better stock of people who could be elected to positions of power to make Pakistan a more enduring and sustainable preposition. But, there are others who remain smitten with nagging doubts and are not easily overwhelmed by the winds of change that are apparently blowing. They believe that, but for a very few who may be decidedly better-provisioned to lead Pakistan, bulk of the people who are part of the agitation hail from the same old, corrupt stock who, inherently, are nurtured in the juices of corruption and would operate by patronage in preference to institutionalising governance. Such people are seen in abundance at the sit-ins who, by all indications, also have the leader’s ears.
But there is going to be one difference, nevertheless. At the end of the ongoing phase of agitation, Pakistan may be rendered totally ungovernable. Traditionally, there has been scant respect for the rule of law in the country that primarily emanates from the dictatorial predilection that the leaders have been wholesomely afflicted with. After this phase of agitation which, of course, would yield immense positives also, the governability factor would be the likelier victim. This would be further compounded by the increasing existential woes of the people who would be more inclined to snatching their share away rather than going by the legal path of securing it. The problems have multiplied and, with it, the expectations of the new band of leadership who would be returned to the assemblies if the elections were to be held anytime soon. While the traditional empires may be tottering, the new incumbents would be given little time to plan their strategy for providing relief to the people. And, worse still, they will practically find nothing in the state coffers to make use of for providing relief to the deserving who survive on the verge of extinction.