Daily Times

The forces of the status quo have historically dominated the mainstream political scene of Pakistan. The only exception was Bhutto’s regime when efforts were made to change the status quo. However, indecisiveness and the constant vacillation of the Bhutto government between the pro- and anti-status quo forces resulted not only in the failure to bring revolutionary changes in the country but also in his tragic judicial murder.
With this, the power sharing formula to govern the country was clearly defined. The centrality of the military establishment to control state power and the role of mainstream political parties as the ‘B team’ of the armed forces is by now accepted across the political spectrum of the mainstream. The rules of the game are set. Politicians are given turns to govern but not allowed to destabilise the hierarchal relationship between the civil and military forces. Within this larger power context, political parties participate in electoral processes and compete for their own share of state power.
Therefore, the political landscape of the country is dominated by the pro-status quo pro-establishment political elite belonging to the landed aristocracy, tribal fiefdoms, business community and the corporate sector. However, all of them play in the arena of politics according to the set rules. The simple minded Imran Khan, known for his political immaturity, naivety and arrogance, joined the club of this political elite and has started to play foul. His impatience to wait for his turn threatens the elite consensus. His maximalist position of demanding the resignation of the prime minister has created a serious challenge and a deadlock for the government and the establishment.
The roots of the inqilab (revolution) and azaadi (freedom) marches actually lie in a civil-military tussle. The Nawaz government has excluded the military establishment on several issues of national importance. It prematurely asserted its political power through (a) the refusal to give a safe passage to ex-army chief Musharraf, (b) the establishment of close friendly relations with India and (c) dilly dallying on a military operation in North Waziristan. This greatly annoyed the military as these acts were seen to be a violation of the rules of the game. In order to realign the civil-military power balance and to send a clear reminder to the PML-N that real power lies within military quarters rather than political, Qadri and Imran are being used to play the role on behalf of the establishment.
The current political conundrum has several lessons for players in politics. Firstly, the elected government must learn lesson of the falling away of public support because of not putting the people first. Economic policies that may improve macro-economic indicators but fail to bring immediate relief in poor people’s lives in terms of reduction in poverty, unemployment, inflation, security threats, etc, will alienate and disillusion the voters. With this fast eroding popular base, the government’s attempt to realign the balance of power in favour of the civilian government is no less than political suicide. Had the PML-N performed well on the account of the people’s favour, it would not have been so easy for the establishment to destabilise their government like it is today.
The establishment must learn that proxies cannot always remained confined within the prescribed limits. They often develop their own aspirations for power and start acting independently (the Taliban and jihadis are a case in point). The maximalist stance of the PTI and PAT is a lesson for the establishment. Their proxies have taken them towards a blind alley with no way out and no point of return. The lesson for political parties is that if they will betray their own vote bank and play into the hands of the establishment, they can be ditched any time by the establishment, depending on the latter’s own vested interests.
Finally, a lesson for the people of Pakistan is that chasing the hollow slogans of tabdili (change) and inqilab without asking real questions will not bring any change in their lives. First of all, the poor, marginalised millions should pay more attention to not what is being said but who is saying it. Politicians with no personal integrity often use and abuse pro-people ideologies to attract the people. However, once they achieve their agenda, they abandon these ideologies without any shame.
Secondly, people should be asking the leadership of the PTI and PAT some substantive questions. How do they plan to bring this inqilab and azaadi? Are they going to replace the market economy with a planned economy? Are they going to abandon neo-liberal economic policies? Will they introduce land reforms and distribute land amongst landless peasants? Are they going to give big industries into the control of workers? How will the state increase its resource base to deliver on the basic fundamental rights of free education, health and employment for millions of deprived citizens?
The silence on this crucial issue is a clear indication that political parties are using revolutionary conditions in society to gain partisan political power. The sacrifices of the thousands of poor people who have marched thousands of miles to gather in Islamabad in the hope of some betterment will go in vain as always. The misguided crowd in Islamabad may be able to force a change at the top level but this will not bring any change in the people’s lives.
The only pathway for real change in the lives of the majority of the people is the establishment of a political party of the oppressed classes under the leadership of peasants and workers. Without taking control of the state and national resources by the working classes, social justice will remain illusionary and elusive.

The writer is a human rights activist and university professor