The deceptive performance of politicians on the current democratic stage has proved more than ever to be a recital of a lesson we refuse to learn: there are no loyal friends or permanent enemies in politics, only ‘permanent interests’. In the recent Pakistani political script this means: I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine. We tame the itch, and both of us stop ?dgeting. Nawaz Sharif and Asif Ali Zardari have brought an unsettling quality to the portrayal of a deceptive rivalry; we must applaud their e?orts, regardless of their subjective motivations. Politics has been a dangerous and dirty game since times immemorial; a modern approach may be less gruesome but no di?erent. Someone may threaten to hang another person upside down, or drag someone through the streets of the country, but when need be a hand for friendship is extended. This type of ‘friendship’ does not have any standards, previous verbal onslaughts are wiped clean from memory, and egos are sterilised as long as both individuals stand to gain from each other. A specimen of ‘permanent self-interests’. The pursuit of peaceful administration isn’t easy, the constant e?ort to strike deals that reap mutual bene?ts is exhaustive, and sometimes, even treacherous towards companions. The Sharif-Nisar situation is re?ective of this observation. Chaudhry Nisar has been the political comrade of the prime minister for many years; he is known for re?ned and qualitative civic deliverance. Nawaz Sharif returned to politics with a big bang. The 2013 elections are a testament to his popularity where he was able to generate enough votes to become prime minister for the third time, rekindling his romance with power. A love a?air that had been rudely interrupted by those who envied the intimacy, Sharif’s possessiveness and paranoia, therefore, are justi?ed; however, his protective methods may not be. The fear of history repeating itself in one way or another has compelled Sharif to do whatever he deems necessary for protecting his one true love. Sharif’s indi?erence towards Nisar is not surprising. Prime minister’s executive decisions to shift power from Nisar to the security advisor for the National Action Plan tasks connote the withdrawal of Nisar from the programme. It strongly suggests that a conscious e?ort is being made to distance the PML-N ideology with that of the interior minister to pamper the opposition. There is no doubt that the Panama leaks have become a nuisance for the leadership, and desperate times call for desperate measures. Not only are Nisar’s brazen press conferences compromising Sharif’s e?orts of scoring a ‘deal’ with the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), but there is also his nonchalance towards extending extra help to Khawaja of Sialkot on the report submitted by NADRA to Supreme Court on NA 110. Nisar’s inaction could potentially add to the series of setbacks concerning the infamous four constituencies, thus putting the future of the PML-N in jeopardy. Such ‘non-discipline’ and dismissal of the executive wishes forced Sharif to disassociate himself from the interior minister. And that is clearly indicative of a permanent rift within the PML-N; if Nisar continues to be on a di?erent page with the government, he will have to bear the brunt of humiliation caused by curtailment of ministerial power limiting his options to either play by the rules or not play at all. Nisar has been rendered almost irrelevant; he has been isolated by other party workers, and excused from sensitive deliberations, which primarily fall within the domain of his ministry. The Ayyan Ali case was propagated to bring shame to the man whose political career depends on the Bhutto slogan attributed to his martyred wife. Although Nisar succeeded in damaging Zardari’s reputation, he was unsuccessful in achieving the desired political results. The prime minister is assumed to have instructed an intervention, and rumour has it that Ishaq Dar and Khursheed Shah covertly operated in unison concerning the Ayyan and Dr Asim cases, in reiteration of the tradition of o?ering a favour in return for a favour. The post-meeting silence of the PPP can imply that they are in a comfort zone. Zardari instigates the opposition’s behaviour in parliament; he is commonly known as the king of political reconciliation, a talent used sparingly during his presidential tenure, albeit at the cost of the public exchequer. Zardari no longer calls the shots from the president’s o?ce, but his ability to control the climate of Pakistani politics has not diminished since he vicariously acts through the leader of the opposition, Khursheed Shah. When Zardari feels ignored, unimportant or irrelevant, he instructs Atizaz Ahsan and Latif Khosa to accelerate the pace of the anti-corruption campaign against the leadership. This tactic instantaneously arrests the attention of the prime minister and, invariably, the government yields to the demands of the opposition, resulting in the activation of cruise control on a fast anti-government movement. It is amusing to witness the unwillingness of the civic elite to think about anything larger than the self — be it the provincial political future of one’s party or the beginning of an o?spring’s political career. The promise of seeing another Bhutto rise to the standards of his family is lost. Wise commentators did not question PPP’s next move, they only reinforced the apparent irony: people living in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones on others. Political suicide certainly wouldn’t be on Zardari’s agenda, and therefore, it would be naïve to expect to see PPP on the streets of Pakistan in an anti-corruption movement. Detractors have already begun misleading the public with their jargon; the decline in Imran Khan’s popularity is overly discussed rather than the core issue of the increased rate of corruption. Moreover, there is constant scrutiny over Khan’s ability to mobilise an impressive crowd, while no importance is given to the reason for mobilisation. Although Khan is vigorously ticking all the boxes to ensure a positive outcome — public protest, pressurising the Election Commission of Pakistan, submitting references in National Assembly — he is embarking on an incredibly taxing journey where prospects of success are very slim. It wouldn’t be wrong to suggest that we are on a ghost-hunt. The urge to hold people accountable may never be ful?lled in a country where institutions like the Federal Board of Revenue, Federal Investigation Agency and National Accountability Bureau act as silent spectators. The efficacy of systems has been stripped down by the status quo, and there is a complete eradication of democratic essentiality through duress and favour. It seems that the Apex Court has also decided to exercise restraint, and a revolutionary outcome in near future is unlikely. Meanwhile, legal minds are working together, strategies are being considered, contingency plans are being made, and media giants are being contacted with attractive campaign budgets to counter anti-government sentiments. Having said that who knows about tomorrow in this political world of permanent interests. Only time will tell whose time is up and whose has only begun. The writer is a media professional, and can be reached at ybmirza@gmail.com