It is certainly not a revelation to anyone following Mr Zardari’s politics of expediency. Even if the timing of mentioning the amendment at a press conference last Sunday (Dec, 16) might seem opportunistic, its essence is not. Back in June 16, 2015, Mr Zardari had dropped a similar bombshell, as he did last Sunday, by specifically targeting the army chiefs. He had proclaimed that ‘army chiefs come and go every three years but the political leadership was here to stay’. Yet once again left us in lurch whether it is the chiefs or their institution that call the shots? Since the beginning, the 18th Constitutional Amendment was a bitter pill for the security establishment and only the political circumstances forced it to swallow it for the time being. The amendment was never accepted as it struck the nerve centre of the security establishment’s centralist doctrine to command and control the polity. When the security establishment failed to scuttle through immense pressure the political consensus and parliamentary process of passing the amendment by the parliament, it came up with a gradual strategy. The first phase was going to render it ineffective by creating numerous hurdles in its implementation. The second phase would lead to its partial, if not total, reversal in an opportune political situation. The real elephant in the room was the provincial political and financial autonomy that omitted the concurrent legislative list and increased the financial shares of the provinces in the federal divisible pool. Initially, the smokescreen created by the so called War on Terror, the PTI’s 126 days long sit in in Islamabad and the ultra-politically active higher judiciary dampened the political resolve. The authority of provinces was hamstrung by the creation of Apex Committees and extracting police powers for the paramilitary forces. Facilitated by judicial activism through suomotu actions and entertaining political cases disrupted the political system. The looming faceless and much anticipated coup did not occur with an element of surprise. Even, the entire federal parliamentary system was threaten to be replaced by the presidential system. However, despite several weaknesses of the previous two parliaments, they could not implement it in its letter and spirit but did resist undoing or truncating the amendment. To the dismay of the invisible political engineers, notwithstanding using every available spurious and black tools, the July 25 general elections did not give ideal results. A thin majority was crafted for PTI by cobbling together a shaky alliance of strange bedfellows in the parliament which was unable to muster support even for ordinary legislation let alone a constitutional amendment which required two-thirds majority. Thus, some necks needed to be throttled. But the question is, why Zaradri’s neck? Was it concluded on the basis of some recent deliveries affected through mild jerks? Mr Zardari remained silent when the coalition government in Balochistan was toppled at the beginning of this year. He also facilitated denying the PML-N its Senate seat in the province and propelled Sanjrani into the Senate as Chairman. Did the perpetrators calculate that since he was isolated from the joint opposition he could be easily managed this time too? Mr Zardari stymied Mualana Fazalul Rehman’s effort to boycott the parliament to combine the opposition for agitation against engineered elections. He also facilitated the rupture in the opposition by denying to vote for Shehbaz Sharif in the election for the leader of the house as well as to field joint candidate for the presidential election. Were Mr Zardari’s actions guided by personal vendetta against Mr Nawaz Sharif or was the PPP co-chairperson expecting reasonable returns? The PTM shattered many political myths and established new traditions of peacefully challenging the brute unaccountable power through its sheer commitment to the cause of common people and articulating their issues. This can set a precedent on the national level too One does not know whether Zardari received the expected favour in return for his previous good behaviour or if he wanted to teach a lesson to the Sharifs when they left him high and dry after his June 2015 speech. Should it be assumed that reversing the amendment is too serious a political matter for him? But the question is whether this time the explosive will explode or become a damp squib like the previous one or not. What would be the Sharifs and PML-N response this time? Another important question, are the politicos at last ready to learn a lesson or two from the chequered political history? Will they continue to fall prey to be part of petty political treacheries and safe houses’ intrigues for the sake of short term power gains which later prove as a bait attached with a sharp hook and long string? Our chequered political history has witnessed that gaining power through an easy way or becoming part of an intrigue without a fight to win always proved suicidal for politicians at the end. And making compromises makes the tunnel longer and darker without an end. So far no politician has been saved by compromises. In fact it has led to the erosion of the politicians’ support base and discredited them. If the target is the entire body, a limb cannot satisfy the predator to exonerate the prey. From ZA Bhutto to Benazir, Nawaz Sharif to Zardari, no one was rescued by compromises. Entering into power in the hope of creating space later proved to be a trap. By now the politicos must learn that so far they were playing on the turf which they did not own or control. Instead of fighting while in the government with tied hands and paying the price later by falling into the trap or playing on uneven field, they need to conquer the field by ousting the third invisible force from the arena which to a great extent stands exposed now. Nawaz Sharif could not save his skin by leaving Zardari in the lurch but only weakened the political consensus forged during the orchestrated dharna which was considered a selfish move by the Sharifs. The level of political and economic oppression and the ensuing unrest among the people is unprecedented and in such circumstances time create its own leadership. The PTM is one of the manifestations of this reality where traditional leadership failed to highlight the suffering and miseries of the people which resulted in alternate voices in the form of the movement emerged from the gross roots. The PTM shattered many political myths and established new traditions of peacefully challenging the brute unaccountable power through its sheer commitment to the cause of common people and articulating their issues. This can set a precedent on the national level too. Therefore, the traditional political leadership should also keep in mind that time will not wait. They should provide true leadership san consideration for their petty vested interests to emancipate politics or time will render them redundant. The writer is a freelance journalist Published in Daily Times, December 20th2018.