Everybody I have talked to about the political intention, verbosity and action of contemporary political parties and actors in Pakistan seemed to have been boggled on account of the ambiguous, confusing and apparently irrational (dis)course of political activism by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) and Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT). This confusion is rightly so since such political actors started playing with one rhetorical statement in the morning and another at night. In other words, initially they marched from Lahore to Islamabad to protest against the alleged rigging in the May 2013 general elections. Having made it to the front of parliament, the spectrum of demands expanded from objective and independent investigation in four (and more) constituencies to attacking the very foundation of parliamentary democracy to “go Nawaz go”. Not only this, the mode and method of activism was transformed from essentiality democratic to authoritarian, and gradually, to supra parliamentary and extra-constitutional. Such quick, rhetorical change of mind and text has further compounded the difficulty of a common observer of political and social events occurring in this country with a long history of political confusion and instability.
In view of the foregoing, how can one understand and explain the politics of contemporary political parties that have openly challenged and confronted the norms of liberal democracy and constitutionalism? How can one explain the transformative nature and character of the PTI and PAT’s spectrum of demands and strategies adopted? Moreover, is it possible to measure the social and political impact of protest politics led by these political and religio-social forces? In other words, can one figure out rationality (cost-benefit analysis) in the political motives and moves of such actors?
To begin with, the marchers, when they set off from Lahore, stood on firm political and moral ground, namely, the questioning and criticism of the unwillingness and inability of the (federal and Punjab) government to provide ‘justice’ as regards the victims of the Model Town tragedy and the political victims of alleged rigging. Almost every politically sound person was subjectively concerned to know the government’s response and strategy on such important matters. The latter, unfortunately, handled it quite immaturely and irresponsibly under the framework of containment, and that too with containers! This became a cause of concern for the upper judiciary along with concerned citizens, especially in Islamabad. Little wonder then, when Dr Qadri and Imran Khan raised these issues from their respective containers, the locals of Rawalpindi and Islamabad, among others, rushed to D-square to register their protest. Even those who remained fixed to their television screens sympathised with them. Nevertheless, it is the job of the political parties to be a bridge between society and the state in terms of aggregation, articulation and channelisation of social and political voices. It is on this front the PTI and PAT have shown political and strategic immaturity by repeatedly over-emphasising subjective concerns, i.e. ouster of the prime minister by any means.
Moreover, repeated reference to the ‘third umpire’ further exposed the choice(s) these actors might have made. Ironically, this sort of reasoning in the process of communication constrained the mobilisational level of the ‘third umpire’. More importantly, the army acted as arbiter among the government and its rivals, taking political space away from both the PTI and PAT. Till this point, the demand of forcefully ejecting the prime minister and teaching a lesson to, in particular, the police (civil bureaucracy), seemed irrational, involving more political and financial cost. However, beneath this apparent irrationality was, in my view, a rational idea of massively projecting the parties nationally and internationally.
Hence, Imran Khan’s statements referring to the US and British authorities should not baffle us. Comparatively, the PPP had great gatherings under the charismatic and commanding leadership of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in the 1970s. However, the way the PTI and PAT have attracted local, national and foreign (print and electronic) media is beyond the imagination of a Bhutto fan, who had limited flow of information back then. Nevertheless, both the PTI and PAT had to pay the price of relatively losing prestige in intellectually and politically sound circles for not being able to get rid of the prime minister and his political dispensation. Instead, the Sharifs, having learned from the 1999 episode, seemed to have bent before the powerful military.
In order to recover from the shock of political non-performance, the marchers thought it rational to begin where they initially started. Hence, the PTI and PAT’s rallies and addresses in Lahore and elsewhere should not surprise us. Now, apparently, such a political move on the part of Dr Qadri and Imran Khan gives the impression of a well thought out strategy to earn an honourable exit from the federal capital but their re-entrance in the provincial capitals should be a cause of concern for both the PPP and PML-N, if not ANP and JUI. There is no doubt as to the rhetoric in the public speeches of these leaders but, in reality, in the absence of any foreseeable political change at the top, they are acting rationally to prepare for the local bodies elections since the upper judiciary seems to be serious about it. Indubitably, the excessive media coverage will further enhance the political and electoral cause of the PTI and PAT.
In this context of political activism, constantly covered by the corporate media, the formalisation of the role of Bilawal Bhutto Zardari as the future voice and leader of the PPP is a welcome sign for more than one reason. It will politically and morally boost the ideological followers of this party. Secondly, the PPP can rejuvenate itself from the ruins of defeat at the national level by reorganising its cadre locally and provincially. Here, along with its subjective focus on Bhuttosim, the party needs to flow with, and not against, the water. To politically stand as a force to be reckoned with, the PPP has to devise a policy to recruit young minds in its policy and operational mechanism. This may help it compete with the PTI, PAT and other contenders for political power who are mainly relying on the youth.
Last but not least, we, as the voting population of Pakistan, should not forget the fact that politics is about power (maximisation) that helps resource (re)distribution. All political parties are equal in this respect. A party’s leader may apparently aim at multiple goals in one breath; their attainability is tested by context, other players’ choices and resourcefulness of society, economy and the state. The latter variables, in turn, highlight the rationality of irrationality that normally stays hidden in the rhetoric, emotionally charged speeches and public sloganeering, if not music, of such political actors.
The writer is a DAAD fellow. He is the author of Military Agency, Politics and the State in Pakistan (2013). He works as assistant professor at Iqra University, Islamabad and tweets @ ejazbhatty