Challenged by the hectic political activities of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) and eroding popularity, the 47-year-old Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) has woken up from its slumber. Though the PPP has regularly been holding the anniversary of the October 18, 2007 attack in which it lost 150 workers in two bomb attacks on Benazir Bhutto’s homecoming rally, this year it displayed a bigger show to launch its 26-year-old chairman and to breathe new life into the listless party.
Compared to the charged rallies of the PTI, the PPP meeting’s participants’ traditional jiyala fervour was missing and was noticed even by the party’s supporters. In spite of all the efforts by the PPP, the number of participants was not very impressive. Instead of self-praising, the leadership should do some soul searching to analyse what are the causes behind the fact that from being the largest party in the country its base is constantly eroding and has made it drop to third position. It would be a pity if the country’s largest left of centre party continues to lose the support of the masses. The responsibility for this erosion is on the leadership.
But the most asked question last Saturday eve was: can all of Zardari’s horses and all of Bilawal’s men put the 47-year-old PPP together again? It is still an open question unlike the nursery rhyme’s sad ending. Die-hard PPP leaders are optimistic, notwithstanding the great fall in the 2013 elections. But much of this hope is pinned on young and inexperienced Bilawal and the dead Bhuttos’ borrowed charisma.
Let us analyse Bilawal’s 90-minute speech. First, the positive points. Though the speech was unnecessarily long, it was well delivered by Bilawal compared to recent speeches in which he merely read his notes. This time it sounded rehearsed. Like his mother, he was brave enough to speak out against the terrorists and flag the danger to the country from organisations that are declaring allegiance to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). He had the courage to speak out against Aasia Bibi’s death sentence in a cooked up blasphemy case and condemn Salmaan Taseer’s assassination by a bigot. He rightly pointed out that all those who have migrated to Karachi are Sindhis, no matter which language they speak, implying that the Urdu-speaking community is accepted by his party. He hinted at reorganising the party after getting workers’ feedback in the planned November 30 meeting in Lahore and he aptly criticised the puppets and puppeteers for weakening the democratic institutions and taming the lion of Lahore — Nawaz Sharif — into become an ineffective prime minister.
Now the negative points of the speech outlining the PPP’s policy for reclaiming its lost space. While Asif Zardari’s short speech proclaimed that the PPP would continue its policy of reconciliation with Altaf Husain in Karachi and with Nawaz on saving the democratic institutions, the son’s rhetoric was pointlessly hostile. Bilawal did not give any programme for reviving the party and improving its tarnished image because of bad governance and corruption. He did not respond to the wise advice by Aitzaz Ahsan and Yousaf Raza Gilani that a new, young and dynamic leadership should be brought forward with seniors taking a back seat as advisors. But will the father, whose long shadow lurks beside Bilawal, take the back seat along with his sister? Most probably they would not.
Another negative stance taken by Bilawal of late, which deserves to be mentioned separately, is that on Kashmir. He has repeatedly said, “We will take every inch of Kashmir.” Is this to win the support of the same establishment that he labelled “puppeteers” and the power that neutralised the prime minister? Or is it bad advice that is responsible for him raising the Kashmir issue vehemently so as to win back Punjab? On both counts it is a mistake and does not help the Kashmiris of India. Their demand for the right of self-determination could have gotten them more international support if it had not been made a territorial dispute between the two countries and given a religious colour, the worst being if Pakistan had not lent support to Islamic terrorist groups to pollute the Kashmiris’ struggle for self-determination.
No democratic person can deny the right to secession to any nationality. Bilawal should read the Simla Agreement and the behind-the-curtain understanding his grandfather had with Indra Gandhi that was actually in support of maintaining the status quo, i.e. keep the Kashmir each side had. Musharraf moved on this to make the Line of Control (LOC) soft, allowing Kashmiris to meet and trade freely.
Today’s Punjab is not the 1960s Punjab where Zulfikar Ali Bhutto could whip up nationalist anti-India feelings to win the elections. He also changed this policy after Pakistan’s defeat in 1971. Today’s Punjab is for peace with India, keeping Kashmir on the back burner. Nawaz Sharif raised the peace slogan and won the elections. Bilawal’s mother also followed the policy of moral support to the Kashmiris and did not make tall revanchist claims.
Coming back to the PPP’s resurrection, this will only be possible if the party can prove itself in Sindh by improving governance and curbing corruption by bringing in a young and dynamic leadership. If Bilawal can open all the ghost schools in Sindh, bring all the truant teachers and doctors to work, improve cleanliness and infrastructure in major cities, he can prove himself as a worthy adversary against the two-pronged challenge from the PML-N and PTI. Let it be less talk and more deeds.
The writer is the author of What’s Wrong with Pakistan? He can be reached at [email protected]