The Jamiat-e-Ulema-i-Islam-Fazal (JUI-F) is on the horns of a dilemma these days. It craves to emerge as a legitimate entity and settle itself in the new political alignment of Pakistan. For this purpose, its iconic leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman seems to be striving to transform it from a radical and reactionary jihadist party to a tolerant, moderate and accommodative party on the model of the AKP, the ruling party of Turkey. But transformation has costs. Not the least that landed it in the opposite camp of the establishment, where it does not feel comfortable and now contemplates means to cope with the situation. The urge for transformation is warranted by the new dynamics of Pakistani politics triggered by the 10-year-long war on terror and the globalisation of information. The volcano of Islamism that had been brewing in the hearts and minds of the average Pakistani since the collapse of the USSR in 1991 erupted with the US attack on Afghanistan in 2001. This eruption landed MMA, the alliance of politico-religious parties led by the JUI-F, in the power corridors. Then the average voter was so intoxicated by the whipped up spirit of jihad that he/she voted for those who begged for votes in the name of the Kitab (book, allusion to the Quran), Sharia system, destruction of the US and the rise of the Ummah, etc, instead of health, education, employment or other basic amenities of life. Almost 12 years later, that volcano having cooled down has become almost impossible to be re-brewed for a re-explosion. As informed by some independent media people, we came to know that their slogans were hollow and their explanation of internal problems and worldview is factually at fault. Due to the harsh nature of the Islamist parties, they are considered retrogressive and a token of thoughtless agitation. One can safely say that instead of following them, people exploit them for venting their anger against blasphemers because they join their protests but do not vote for them. The fact that their reactionary approach to politics is risking them their vote bank has built pressure on the leaders of these parties. Maulana Rehman is feeling the pressure the most. Other leaders are more concerned with the social pressure than the vote bank, which shows their fascist tendencies. Maulana Rehman is comparatively flexible, tolerant and over-concerned with his vote bank. He has a natural tendency to respond to that and has taken politically expedient decisions rather than stick to a rigid ideology. He also seems fearful of the wrath of the international community, especially the US, which scorns even his half-hearted flirting with the leaders of quasi-militant organisations. His momentary detentions and interrogation at US airports on several occasions is meant to give him a ‘correct your course’ signal. But any transformation carries costs. Steps to this end expose his vote bank to the onslaughts of quasi-militant groups and factions of the like of Difa-e-Pakistan Council (DPC). The JUI -F’s voter is amenable to the emotional and sentimental sloganeering of these groups. Therefore, he is cautious. On the controversial issues between the west and Islam/the Ummah, he and his party leader keep their profile low. Maulana Sherani who is deemed a think tank of the JUI-F said in a recent event organised by PIPS that “it is crucial for Muslims to stop finding faults in others for their failures and start focusing on their inner selves. [We] need to highlight the commonalities among humans instead of focusing on differences and conflicts.” He also urged the UN to ensure religious freedom for the followers of every religion. Maulana Rehman wants to avoid attracting the opprobrium of the radicals and concurrently impress upon Islamists voters that they (the radicals) are wrong and irrational. Against the challenge of the radicals, Maulana Rehman has to get the support of the progressive and pluralist academia on his side by doing away with the manifest contradictions in his discernible scheme. In his speech at a rally in Karachi, where he made reference to the Turkish model, he also bashed the secular forces. It is a contradiction. The Turkish ruling party, the AKP, has an observable respect for diversity, as it has been tolerating the secular forces. Maulana Rehman has to pledge to respect ‘pluralism’ and ‘co-existence’ if he has to get the support of the intelligentsia. In other words, he has to let live not only the Islamists but secular forces too. The urge for transformation landed JUI-F in the opposite camp of the establishment. In that camp, the JUI-F is like a fish out of water. It is now getting an answer to the question what it means to be anti-establishment, and contemplating means to cope with the situation. In a knee-jerk response, Maulana Rehman resorted to severe criticism of the establishment which, as yet, should only be taken as an attempt on his part to make himself relevant rather than to strike a balance in civil-military relations in Pakistan. If Maulana Rehman really wants to bring change in Pakistan, he should end pandering to and courting radical Islamists like the Jamaat-e-Islami for the rebirth of the MMA and join hands with the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) for the creation of a group of independent rightists and conservatives. It will not only help in providing easily differentiable groups — rightists led by the PML-N and leftists led by the Pakistan People’s Party — with a wide line of difference between their ideologies to an average voter but also to bracket radical groups with militants. (On the other hand, the PMAP led by Mahmood Khan Achakzai will really be a stranger in this group.) Other small groups will be obscured and pushed to the fringe. It will greatly facilitate positive, mature and laissez faire politics in Pakistan. Pluralist writers and commentators can prove of great help to Maulana Rehman to overshadow the radicals and rid us of the warmongers and naysayers, thereby helping him transform his party. The writer is a freelance columnist. He can be reached at khetranazk@gmail.com