The government directed by Asif Ali Zardari and formally headed by Prime Minister Gilani is said to be both corrupt and incompetent. It lost majority support in the National Assembly in recent weeks. The JUI-F withdrew its seven members from the government side and placed them on the opposition benches, apparently because the prime minister had sacked a minister who was one of its more important members. A few days later the MQM members in the Assembly joined the JUI-F on the opposition benches because a PPP minister in the government of Sindh had implied that the MQM had been a party that considered physical violence as a legitimate means of waging politics. Recently, Mr Gilani was able to placate the MQM with the assurance that its demands will be met and its grievances removed. The party then returned to the government benches but we cannot be sure if it will not change its mind again. There were indications that some other groups of legislators might also move to the opposition. The government is clearly unstable, and the possibility remains that it may be ousted either by a no-confidence vote or some other procedure. On January 3, Prime Minister Gilani went into hectic meetings with leaders of various political parties to keep them away from the opposition. Normally when one party in negotiations seeks the other’s support, the latter wants to know what it will get in return. Politicians who have been approached may want jobs for their associates. But they will not want to advertise this fact. They will probably present their version of the public interest and call upon the government to implement it. Mr Nawaz Sharif has recently (January 4) confessed to facing a dilemma. The present government, he says, is intolerably bad. But he is not anxious to move for its dismissal. He has announced a 10-point agenda of steps to be taken for eradicating corruption, enforcing a merit system, and solving the other problems facing the country. He gave the prime minister three days in which to say whether he agreed to this agenda. If he accepted it, he must implement it by February 20, 2011. I anticipate that Mr Gilani will endorse this agenda unhesitatingly as if it were his own. But in his actual practice he will set it aside as he does most of the other programmes that he has promised the nation to undertake. February 20 will come and pass without positive action on Mr Sharif’s agenda. What will Mr Sharif do then? He says in that event the PPP ministers in the Punjab government will be sent away. That in my view is not a compelling enough reason for Mr Gilani to oblige Mr Sharif. Mr Sharif’s experience with the Zardari-Gilani dispensation should have taught him that that it cannot be relied upon to fulfil its promises. Why did he then address his agenda to the prime minister? Two reasons come to mind. He has said many times that he does not want to destabilise or overthrow the present government because it might invite the anti-democratic forces (meaning the military establishment and the intelligence agencies) in the country to intervene and take charge. This is not a real danger. The military has ruled this country several times and in that role it has not done well. It is held in high esteem as a fighting force but it is not well regarded as a ruler. The emoluments, privileges and perquisites that the officers have at present are very considerable and they are not likely to add much to them by replacing a civilian regime. Mr Sharif has given Mr Gilani 45 days to mend his ways, not because he believes that the prime minister will improve his performance. He has done so because he wants to appear as patient and deliberate, not as hasty or impetuous. It is possible also that he thinks this is a bad time for him to head a government. If he were in power, he would not be able to eliminate the acute problems facing the nation. That is true, but only partly. The intensity of these problems can surely be mitigated if the requisite moves are made. In taking the position that it is expedient to let Mr Gilani’s government remain in office for another two years or so, he implies that corruption and incompetence are acceptable for the same duration. This is a strange and entirely an untenable position for him to take. An additional word about political stability and its negation may be in order. If he understands the dynamics of democracy, which one hopes he does, Mr Sharif should know that the comings and goings of parliaments and prime ministers is a part of its process. If a government falls because it has lost majority support in the assembly, an alternative government is formed, and if that cannot be done, new elections are held. None of this hurts democracy in any way. In fact, it advances democratic institutions and tradition towards maturity. It has been suggested that the PPP should come up with a more capable person to replace Mr Gilani to act as prime minister. He is generally regarded as a nice guy. He may or may not personally be misappropriating public resources, but it is a well known fact that he does not object to corruption on the part of his associates and subordinates in government. He may even have gone out of his way to protect them. His departure may then work for the good of the order. But that is made problematic because he does what he does upon the bidding of Mr Zardari. The president has recently voiced complete confidence in his prime minister and declared that all conspiracies to oust the government will be defeated. In this connection it should be kept in mind that as head of the PPP, Mr Zardari exercises despotic rule over his party’s members in parliament. As president he can dissolve the National Assembly upon the prime minister’s advice and call for new elections. That is a prospect that most politicians would not welcome. Mr Nawaz Sharif’s implicit position that the present corrupt and incompetent government will have to be tolerated for another two years is thus sustained. The writer, professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, is a visiting professor at the Lahore School of Economics