Daily Times

Why is compromise on major issues so hard for Imran Khan when no one doubts that it is necessary and that resistance to political compromise lies in the democratic process itself? I can understand that a permanent campaign encourages political attitudes but that also makes it more difficult to compromise. Political compromise is difficult for Imran Khan because it would appear to be a failure, deception and betrayal. It is also difficult for many reasons, including the decision by Dr Tahirul Qadri to call off his sit-ins, a decision that has been widely criticised. The resistance to compromise is a problem for Imran Khan because it stands in the way of change, which nearly everyone agrees is necessary, and thereby lays bias against the political process in favour of the status quo.
The psychology of politics shows the need to shift the balance in campaigning towards the compromising mindset and the promotion of political compromises it makes possible. However, Imran Khan’s defence of compromise is consistent with, and indeed requires, vigorous and contentious politics in which he can press strongly held principles and mobilise his support of bold causes. Social movements, protest struggles and electoral campaigns are the kinds of politics seen by the PTI; they may play important roles in democratic politics but all these activities are in vain if the democratic process does not produce the public good that people seek and protect the rights that they cherish. The success of the PTI’s politics ultimately depends on how Imran Khan deals with this mindset and also significantly on his attitude towards compromise.
It can be argued that resistance to compromise cannot be fully appreciated without understanding Imran Khan in the current political process itself. The incursion of campaigning against the present political system, the so-called ‘permanent campaign’, encourages Imran Khan’s political attitudes and arguments that make compromise more difficult. These constitute what I call the uncompromising mindset, characterised by Imran Khan standing on principle and mistrusting opponents. This mindset may be conducive to governing in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa but not to campaigning because it hinders the political process that may bring forward the change.
Standing on principle is of course sometimes an admirable stance to take in politics because compromises often require both sides to sacrifice some of their strongly-held principles to enter into the agreement. Why should PTI supporters be concerned? After all, some compromises are undesirable and politicians should sometimes stand resolutely on fundamental principles, opposing legislation that violates those principles. The chief reason for concern is to make Nawaz Sharif worry enough for a desirable compromise. Imran Khan has to understand better how the uncompromising and compromising mindsets function, specifically how the compromising mindset fits with campaigning and the uncompromising mindset with governing. The uncompromising mindset that characterises campaigning cannot and should not be eliminated from democratic politics but when it comes to dominate solutions, it obstructs the search for desirable compromises. It is like an invasive species that spreads beyond its natural habitat as it roams from the campaign to the minds of its supporters. Imran Khan has to consider that little change can happen in domestic politics without some compromise, and almost no major change can happen without major compromises. By making compromise more difficult, Imran Khan is self-obstructing the campaign and leading himself into a blind alley. The political process requires Imran Khan both to resist compromise and to embrace it.
If Imran Khan wants to get anything done he has to adopt a compromising mindset. Rather than standing tenaciously on principle, he has to make concessions. Rather than mistrusting and trying to defeat his opponents at every turn, he has to respect his opponents enough to collaborate on legislation. The problem for compromise is that the campaign ends the day Imran Khan decides to call off the sit-ins. This is one reason behind why so many critics are rightly sceptical of hearing “coming together” pronouncements from Imran Khan. The expectations raised by the present campaign continue to hang over the success seen in recent processions. Even when Imran Khan and his aides can recognise the desirability of compromise, their staunchest supporters still want to hold them to their campaign promises, believing that they will force Nawaz Sharif to resign and force mid-term elections. What Imran should believe is that at the same time one campaign ends, preparations for the next one begin.
To campaign successfully, Imran Khan must mobilise and inspire his supporters. He has to articulate a coherent vision distinct from that of his opponents, and present his opponents as adversaries to be mistrusted and ultimately defeated. But to proceed effectively, Imran Khan must find ways to reach agreements with opponents, including views of the ideologically diverse members of his own party. Unacceptable it may be but some compromises even the PTI’s own supporters may see as betrayals. This tension between what is required in politics to win power and what is required to exercise it is manifest in what is called uncompromising and compromising mindsets.
It would be a mistake to try to specify exactly when Imran Khan should adopt which mindset. That would be like the attempt to specify precise principles in advance for distinguishing between acceptable and unacceptable compromises, bound to be under-inclusive or over-inclusive, if not both. Nevertheless, it is clear enough that the democratic deck is not stacked against compromise in contemporary Pakistani politics. The uncompromising mindset has strayed well beyond its natural environment. To tame it, Imran Khan and his think tank need to better understand it and its compromising counterpart.
Understanding more clearly these different ways of framing disagreement can help Imran Khan overcome the obstacles to agreement and lead to more beneficial compromises. Political polarisation is of course also an obstacle but it is only part of the problem. Political moderates in the PTI with an uncompromising mindset are prone to block compromise, just as the PML-N and PPP with a compromising mindset can join together when necessary to support compromise, as Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari did in order to oust General Musharraf. Similarly, the MQM and ANP are not ideological moderates but they adopted the compromising mindset in order to craft important support for Nawaz Sharif when he needed it against the PTI.
The PTI and Imran Khan alike can benefit from seeing more clearly the strengths and weaknesses of compromising and uncompromising mindsets, and how they interact in the Pakistani political process. The ways that these mindsets frame disagreements are sometimes latent and often unrecognised. By more fully appreciating these very different mindsets required by campaigning and by governing, Imran Khan and his supporters are more likely to recognise opportunities to craft compromises that could make better laws for all.

The writer is a professor of Psychiatry and consultant Forensic Psychiatrist in the UK. He can be contacted at fawad_shifa@yahoo.com