Asif Zardari’s latest outburst against Nawaz Sharif and the PML-N government threatens to be the harbinger of a regrettable relapse of Pakistan’s burgeoning democratic political system into the depths of uncertainty once again. Zardari’s fear of a return to the politics of the 1990s, when opposition parties conspired to get rid of the sitting government by utilising any means available, may prove prescient, albeit not in the way he is stating. The continuing saga of the Rangers and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) carrying out their supposed anti-corruption and anti-terrorist operation in Sindh has unearthed a can of ominous worms. There is no argument with the fact that both corruption and patronage of terrorism are deep rooted political ills plaguing the country, and in principle the efforts of the concerned bodies to eliminate them should be welcomed. But it is becoming clear by the day that the way in which the present anti-corruption drive is being carried out is highly partisan in nature and hence cannot be viewed as being politically neutral or indeed as a sign of better things to come. It smells no different from the various anti-corruption drives carried out by regimes in the past that were unmistakably sham and politically motivated. The fact that a federal body, the FIA in this case, is carrying out an operation which has the members of the ruling provincial party in its crosshairs, and is doing so without taking the sitting chief minister into confidence in a flagrant violation of provincial autonomy, which is a key feature of the new democratic overhaul of the Pakistani political system under the 18th amendment, means that the response of the Pakistan People’s Party’s (PPP’s) leadership has legitimate grounds. The pattern of the anti-corruption drive is becoming clear, as two major opposition parties have become targets in quick succession, with PPP’s grievances being preceded by those of the Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM). The current drive therefore is doing little to expose corruption to its very core. Instead it is only muddying the waters further and encouraging the divisive politics of victimisation. It is a strange and anomalous situation indeed as targeting of rival parties using the might of federal resources is hardly politically savvy in the post-Charter of Democracy (CoD) Pakistan. The CoD agreed by Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif in 2006 was an important agreement precisely because it showed that the two rival leaders, after years of being played against each other and eventually ending up in exile, had wised up to maintaining the importance of the democratic structure of Pakistan and to protect the basic system against the machinations of any “third party”. The PML-N government is reminded by the PPP leaders repeatedly of the fact that in the spirit of the CoD, they stood by the ruling party since August 2014 when it came under sustained attack by the protest movement of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) despite their own reservations about the credibility of the elections that the latter was disputing. The PML-N for its part maintains that it still respects the Charter and denies that the Rangers’ and FIA’s operation is being directed by it. Instead, much like Qaim Ali Shah in Sindh, Nawaz Sharif pleads ignorance and claims that he is trying to stop the relevant agencies from going after the PPP. Two crucial readings can be made of this confounding stance by the PML-N. If, in Shakespeare’s words, they doth protest too much, and are in fact behind this drive, then this is a disingenuous regime sowing the seeds of its own destruction by encouraging an opposition revolt. However, if they are being honest, admitting their lack of control over their own agencies so openly, it is a testament to their powerlessness while in the seat of power. This could end up shredding their credibility and expose them as a party merely content with being in office while not being fully in charge. In either case, the whole saga reveals that the brief candle of democracy lit by the CoD is now flickering in the wind. If the current drive is indeed a concerted attack on the political class by self-directed federal bodies, one has to wonder who is next. The question of the authorship of this drive is therefore fraught, but clearly only the undemocratic forces in the country will benefit from a house divided. *