Hard Choices

Amir Zia
The News
Monday, December 08, 2014

Pakistan’s political divide is no longer based on the PPP versus the rest, but Imran Khan versus the rest. The traditional political forces can ignore the power of a determined ‘one’ only at their own cost. However, one important link that seems to be missing in this divide or is at least not playing its cards openly is the establishment, which is allowing political players to slog it out among themselves. 

For the beleaguered PML-N government, the worst phase of Imran Khan’s challenge of sit-ins and protests is apparently over – at least for now. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif looks relaxed and so are his close aides. They have concrete reasons to claim that they managed to ride out the storm that seemed to threaten the government and the system in mid-August and all through the month of September and the early days of October.
Allama Tahirul Qadri and his PAT have packed up their Islamabad sit-ins and now wait for some signal to fight another day. The elusive umpire did not raise the finger, leaving these political adventurists high and dry. All the traditional political and religious parties joined hands to save the country’s wobbling and dysfunctional democratic order. They acted with maturity and none of them tried to exploit the PML-N government’s moment of vulnerability.
The PML-N’s relations with the military establishment also seem to have found some uneasy equilibrium on the key geo-strategic and security issues. Barring the thorny issue of the trial of former president Pervez Musharraf on treason charges for imposing the November 2007 emergency, the civilian government has managed to survive by conceding space and allowing the military establishment to call the shots – whether it is on the war against terrorism or relations with neighbours and foreign powers. On the Musharraf issue, however, Sharif and the hawks in his cabinet remain adamant that the show must go on.
Imran Khan – despite the enthusiastic and swelling crowds at his rallies – appears increasingly politically isolated. Notwithstanding the PTI chairman’s frequent verbal tirades against the government and his threats to bring the major cities and then the country to a standstill – on which he and his team are having second thoughts, and appear unclear as to what they really want to do – for all practical purposes, the PTI has scaled down its set of demands. Imran Khan has given up his demand of Sharif’s resignation and wants negotiations with the government to pave the way for a judicial commission to probe the allegations of rigging in the 2013 general elections.
All these are good tidings for the PML-N. It means that Sharif has managed to get hold of valuable time in which he can attempt to reach a settlement with the PTI, quicken the pace of reforms – especially electoral changes which are needed and have been demanded by all the major political stakeholders – improve governance and address those pressing socio-economic issues that are fanning public discontent and anger.
But will that really happen? Will Sharif avail this window to do what needs to be done, showing vision, flexibility, political acumen and sagacity? Ironically, the signals from the Sharif camp are not too encouraging.
Background interviews with some key cabinet members give the impression that the ruling party is in no hurry for a deal with the PTI and wants to carry out reforms at its own snail’s pace as has been done for the past 17 months. The general idea appears to be to let Imran Khan and his rallies lose steam in their due course rather than to concede to any of the PTI’s demands – reasonable or unreasonable – in a hurry. The perception of handing over even a whiff of victory to Imran Khan or a face-saving exit does not appear a prudent strategy to the PML-N hawks.
One of the key federal ministers in the Sharif cabinet told the scribe in a lighter tone that ‘dharnas’ (sit-ins) suit the government as they have sidetracked many of those pressing issues on which the major opposition parties, including the PPP, won’t like to spare the government. “Now every political and economic ill in the country can be attributed to Imran Khan and his sit-ins. It is a perfect excuse to distract the people from the real issues – from the lingering energy crisis to the economic challenges which of course will take time to get resolved.”
The argument may make sense in the near-term but in the longer-term it reflects poor political choices. The prolonged uncertainty, turmoil and tensions are a bad omen not just for the government – underlining its inability to resolve these contradictions – but also for the democratic order which has many detractors who want to overhaul and reset the system.
In a strange twist of events, Pakistan’s political divide is no longer based on the PPP versus the rest, but Imran Khan versus the rest. The traditional political forces can ignore the power of a determined ‘one’ only at their own cost. However, one important link that seems to be missing in this divide or is at least not playing its cards openly is the establishment, which is allowing political players to slog it out among themselves. 
As the matter stands now, there appear to be little chances of a negotiated-settlement between the PML-N and the PTI as each side thinks that it will lose more in the public eye in case of any give-and-take. Imran Khan, who wants to settle for nothing less than a fresh poll as a result of any judicial commission probe or his politics of sit-ins, rallies and protests, perhaps sees it as a make-or-break decision for his political career.
Imran Khan’s demand that the government accept his terms of reference for the judicial commission in which he wants ISI and MI officials to help complete the probe from four to six weeks is seen by many legal minds as impossible to accept. The reason: the Supreme Court cannot be dictated how to conduct an inquiry or whom to call for assistance. Even the four- to six-week timeframe proposed by Imran Khan for the completion of the inquiry is too short. According to legal experts, a massive exercise of this nature – to find out whether there was widespread rigging in the elections – needs a longer period.
Given these pitfalls, the question is whether the PML-N and PTI will hold talks sincerely or sit across the table only for public consumption. The indications are that like the past, any fresh round of talks will lack seriousness from both the sides. But for the PML-N, perhaps a bigger challenge compared to Imran Khan is managing its relations with the military establishment, which so far has been constant in its support for the democratic setup. However, a lack of trust on both sides haunts this relationship. If one scratches the surface a little and talks to politicians – be they from the PML-N or any other major parliamentary party – one finds them blaming the ‘hidden hands’ or at least a section of the military establishment for the current political mess. In doing this, they fail to critically evaluate their poor governance and ignore the concerns of major stakeholders on the need to take them on board on important policy decisions. In a nutshell, it is the ‘us versus they’ mentality which also remains the root cause of imaginary or real problems between these two major state institutions. 
The civilian leadership will serve the cause of democracy better if it concentrates on providing clean, transparent and efficient governance, taking democracy to the grassroots level by holding the local bodies elections and building national and institutional consensus on vital policy issues.
On these three fronts, the scorecard of the civilian leaders is dismal. They have to improve their game if they are serious about strengthening democracy, which goes beyond the mere exercise of holding elections. The people of Pakistan deserve the fruits of democracy rather than just its tag.
Will Prime Minister Sharif transform himself into the leader the country wants him to be or will he remain hostage to the fears and enmities of the past? This is a make or break decision for him. Sharif’s frame of mind will keep him afloat or force him to commit the same old mistakes - which he must avoid in his own enlightened self-interest.

Imran's Second Innings

By Amir Zia
The News
November 17, 2014

Imran Khan’s political isolation, his unfulfilled expectations from the shadowy umpire and his party’s organisational weakness do not mean that the tough days for the Sharif government are over. In any political tussle, conflict and war a lot depends on the tenaciousness of the key protagonists.
 
More than three months after the launch of his campaign to oust Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif from power on August 14, Imran Khan now apparently seems to have landed himself into a blind alley. All the odds appear to be stacked against him.
His Islamabad sit-in has fizzled out. The massive crowds which Imran Khan hoped and promised to bring to Islamabad at the start of his ‘Freedom March’ never materialised. His main ally Allama Tahirul Qadri has taken a ‘short break’ from his ‘revolutionary’ struggle, casting a serious blow to the ‘Go Nawaz Go’ campaign. The series of public rallies the PTI has been holding in various cities – though huge and emotionally charged – are doing little to intensify pressure on the Sharif government. And the elusive umpire is now no longer even part of the mainstream political discourse.
The Sharif government after showing obvious signs of nervousness during the initial weeks of the ‘revolutionary and freedom’ marches and sit-ins by the PTI and the PAT appears to be breathing easy and hoping that in the long run it will be able to wear out its political opponents. And it has reasons to believe this.
Firstly, Imran Khan is a solo flyer. Barring a working alliance with the PAT and support by Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed’s small Awami Muslim League, he has failed to form a broad-based anti-Sharif alliance – a prerequisite in South Asian politics if any opposition is serious about challenging a well-entrenched government.
The parliamentary opposition, comprising the PPP and most of the traditional religious, nationalists, ethnic and political forces has put all its weight behind Sharif – or what they call saving democracy. The PTI has even been unable to take the Jamaat-e-Islami, its ally in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provincial assembly, on board its venture to dislodge the Sharif government.
In fact, the PTI is being targeted and attacked by most opposition parties – from the PPP to the ANP and JUI-F to Baloch and Pakhtun nationalists – as much as it remains under fire by the ruling party. The friction between the PTI and the rest of the opposition is understandable given Imran Khan’s attempt to create political space for his party by eroding the vote bank of these traditional forces. On the one hand, he is trying to woo the right-wing vote bank by his strong anti-US rhetoric and sympathetic stance towards the local Taliban militants, while on the other he is attracting the liberal as well as onetime apolitical element which is fed up with the old guards due to their alleged corruption, misrule and bad governance.
But despite his popularity among many Pakistanis, Imran Khan stands politically isolated. Will he be able to broaden his anti-government campaign in the days to come by bringing other disgruntled political forces such as the MQM into its fold? The bigger question perhaps is: does he even intend to take this course?
Secondly, Imran Khan’s hopes that he will be able to cash in on Sharif’s estranged ties with the mighty military establishment also did not happen. His campaign only helped expose Sharif’s vulnerability and forced him to backtrack on key security and foreign affairs matters, but shrinking of this space for the civilian government went more in the favour of the military establishment than benefiting the PTI. 
With these two odds firmly against him, realistically speaking Imran Khan holds little chances to take his anti-government movement to the next level – at least for now. He needs a new element to bolster his flagging drive, which appears nowhere in sight.
Yet, call it Imran Khan’s determination or rigidity, his unyielding optimism or grand disillusion, that he is tenaciously trying to bowl hard and fast on a political pitch, which after showing some promise and unpredictably in the initial overs has apparently become dead and slow. The coveted wicket of Nawaz Sharif stays intact despite the initial ferocious spell by the PTI chairman. It appears that the World Cup winning captain has to settle for a long haul without any guarantees that at the end of it all he will be able to lift the dream cup of his political career.
In a way, at the Nov 9 rally in Rahim Yar Khan, Imran Khan climbed down a notch or two from his initial demand of Sharif’s resignation when he asked the government to form a judicial commission by November 30 to investigate the alleged rigging charges in the last elections. Imran Khan wants the commission to also comprise ISI and Military Intelligence officials and furnish its report within four to six weeks of its formation. Until then, according to Imran Khan, Sharif can stay in the office but should resign if the charges of electoral rigging prove correct. 
Imran Khan has vowed to not let the government function after Nov 30 if it fails to meet his latest demand, but the idea of including military personnel in the commission has already been shot down by Sharif’s team.
This means that Imran Khan will try to fulfil his promise of disrupting government functioning through protests, but does his PTI have the organisational capacity and ability that was possessed by the Jamaat-e-Islami, the MQM and the PPP of the olden days to launch street agitations and strikes as advocated by Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed. The PTI cadre has yet to prove its mettle in this regard.
However, Imran Khan’s political isolation, his unfulfilled expectations from the shadowy umpire and his party’s organisational weakness do not mean that the tough days for the Sharif government are over.
In any political tussle, conflict and war a lot depends on the tenaciousness of the key protagonists. In his play, Saint Joan, George Bernard Shaw summed it up so well in these words; “You should always attack; and if you only hold on long enough the enemy will stop first....”
Okay, the imagery of Joan of Arc does not gel with Imran Khan – the poor girl was burned on the stake for her conviction and simplicity. But calculated aggression and tenaciousness sometimes do work.
The political alignments can change anytime, the opponent can commit blunders (Sharif and his team have a great inherent capacity to open unnecessary fronts and take on useless fights) and help sometimes can come from the unknown quarters. Imran Khan seems to have the political stamina for a protracted fight, which is likely to keep the government on tenterhooks.
A prolonged tussle is ominous for the country and its economic and political fallout will hurt the government more than the opposition. While Imran Khan can afford to keep the pot on the boil, the government must show urgency to resolve the crisis in its own enlightened self interest. So far the government appears to be in no mood to avail the opportunity, which the backing of parliamentary parties has provided to it, and move quickly for a political settlement. 
The government can take the initiative by requesting at least for the formation of a judicial commission to probe the alleged charges of rigging in the 2013 elections, and acting swiftly for electoral reforms along with reopening of talks with the PTI and PAT. Unfortunately, it has been dragging its feet even on these issues.
As a result, the impasse is intensifying the country’s political instability and adding to the prevailing sense of uncertainty. The brewing crisis has all the potential to spin out of control if it is not managed now – before the start of the next round.
Imran Khan may look less threatening today than he was on August 14. Many of his demands may appear flawed or even unprincipled, but he has the hunger to make his mark and disrupt the apple cart. Sharif can afford to disregard him at his own peril.
For in practical politics, nothing succeeds like success. There is nothing moral or immoral – it is an amoral game. The ultimate goal justifies the means. Who should know this better than Nawaz Sharif, our most experienced third-time elected prime minister?

Ruling The Airwaves

By Amir Zia
September 29, 2014
The News

The power and reach of the media has transformed many paper tigers and political lightweights into screen giants who manage to set the narrative. What is important becomes unimportant while the unimportant assumes importance
 
A few days ago, the BBC Urdu website carried an interesting news report that gave details of the number of exclusive interviews of various front-line politicians carried by Pakistan’s 24/7 private news channels over nearly a 10-month period – prior to the August 14 ‘revolutionary’ and ‘freedom’ marches and sit-ins by PTI and the PAT supporters.
According to the report, the PTI’s Imran Khan, the PAT’s Allama Tahirul Qadri and their ally, Sheikh Rashid Ahmed – who heads his own small Awami Muslim League – dominated the airwaves in hundreds of special interviews telecast by various news channels.
The entire focus of the cameras remained glued on these leaders once they formally launched their anti-government campaigns on August 14 as they addressed their supporters several times everyday – getting unprecedented live coverage.
The statistics about the pre-marches and pre-sit-ins coverage offer an interesting read, which has already been discussed in some detail by the section of the local media. For instance, Sheikh Rashid Ahmed appeared on exclusive talk-shows and interviews 170 times between November 1, 2013-August 12, 2014. Imran Khan stood second with 75 interviews and Qadri third with 60 interviews. In a nutshell, these three leaders gave more than 300 interviews in the build-up to their marches and sit-ins.
In comparison, leaders belonging to the ruling PML-N, including Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Chief Minister Punjab Shahbaz Sharif, share between them around 100 such interviews. The rest of the political parties including leaders and representatives belonging to the PPP, the MQM, the Jamaat-e-Islami and the ANP also appeared in around 100 such exclusive interviews.
This means that the PTI, the PAT and the AML of Sheikh Rashid managed to get more television appearances compared to the combined total of the government and rest of the opposition parties.
Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, who has just one seat of his own in the National Assembly, undoubtedly appeared as the darling of the electronic media as he alone got 170 exclusive appearances during the 10-month period – before the hurly-burly of marches and sit-in started in the country.
In comments Sheikh Rashid Ahmed made recently when he appeared in a talk-show on Geo Tez, he admitted that after Almighty Allah, it is the media that has kept him alive on Pakistan’s political scene. And this statement rings true for many other politicians as well.
Sheikh Rashid’s popularity on television shows perhaps stems from the fact that he gives entertaining one-liners, sharp and scathingly candid statements against rivals and makes doomsday predictions and prophecies about the system and the government. Ironically, all this makes ‘good TV’ at least when it comes to catching eyeballs and fabulous ratings in an over-politicised and deeply polarised society.
The BBC news report indeed offers a fascinating glimpse into the kind of journalism prevalent in the Pakistani media – which continues to remain overwhelmingly statement rather than issue-oriented. By and large, our electronic media has followed the trend set by our newspapers – especially the Urdu-language ones, which proudly carry statements of politicians from all hues on their main pages, including the front page.
These statements or ‘exclusive’ interviews, unlike the ones in the international media, may not necessarily fall into the category of ‘news-makers’, which focus on some key development, revelation or exposure, but in most cases on mere often reiterated points of view, unsubstantiated claims and allegations. Many of these ‘sensational’ statements would fall straight into the category of libel, defamation and slander in any other civilised country where freedom of speech and free media come along with responsibility. But this is not so in Pakistan.
Our vibrant electronic media, which has explored many new grounds and highlighted issues and subjects that were once taboo in mainstream discourse, has unfortunately failed to break away from the trend of statement-oriented journalism – for better or for worse. In fact, 24/7 live coverage has intensified the impact of this statement-oriented journalism as, unlike in print, in electronic media all that is said goes unfiltered and unedited to the viewer.
A newspaper may usually give a single, a double or a triple column news report out of most press conferences, interviews or speeches, but the same would get over-played during live coverage on TV. Such is the nature of the beast called 24/7 television in Pakistan. As a result politicians manage to disseminate their message effortlessly and free of cost. Both politicians and the media tend to feed each other – one getting free publicity, the other content, no matter whether it is newsworthy and of journalistic standards or not. 
The question of why these three politicians – Qadri, Imran and Sheikh Rashid – managed to so-effectively dominate the airwaves, however, is a pertinent one. Some media analysts and political rivals see an organised anti-government conspiracy, which allowed these politicians to set the narrative – in league with some media houses.
This may or may not be the case and falls into the realm of speculation, though a couple of media houses went all the way to champion the cause of the PAT, the PTI and their allies, who want to bring down Prime Minister Sharif just as a couple of others supported the government and the continuation of the existing ‘democratic order.’ This division among the media houses also reflects the deep chasms in our politics in which no issue seems to be settled yet and remains open for intense debate and a possible change. 
But it is a fact that the opposition is always a star for the media compared to the government. Therefore, when politicians are in opposition they have usually better ties with journalists rather than when in government. The opposition is always available to highlight issues, and go on the front-foot to expose the real, imaginary or perceived wrongdoings and policy flaws of the rulers. Government stalwarts in many cases try to evade tough questions about their decisions, policies and things done or not done. 
Had it been any other politicians attacking the government as is being done by Qadri, Imran and Rashid, they would have probably got the same amount of coverage, given the fact that the government and its supporters started reacting slowly to this challenge.
But that does not sweep away the fact that the lopsided coverage of the leaders of the revolutionary and freedom marches exposed the gullibility of the media which remains in love with the proverbial ‘bad news’ and tend to lean more on sensational journalism. 
In their own way, all channels imitate their competition or react to their coverage. As a result, every screen appears to follow the same pattern, highlighting the same leader, his opinion and his statements. And in doing this it often compromises the core values of this profession which calls for fairness, objectivity, balance and sticking to facts. 
Since private TV channels exploded on the scene in 2002, we have seen this kind of sensational and opinionated journalism a number of times – be it on issues as grave as covering terrorism and extremism to political crises of which we have no dearth in this Islamic Republic. 
We have seen the distinction between news and opinion getting more and more blurred over the past decade or so in Pakistani journalism. Objective and independent analysis has been surely taken over by subjectivity in which many media persons unashamedly paddle this or that point of view. Professional journalists have to either fall in line with the dictates of policies of media houses or be ready to be sidelined.
The power and reach of the media has transformed many paper tigers and political lightweights into screen giants who manage to set the narrative. What is important becomes unimportant while the unimportant assumes importance.
This calls for a close self-scrutiny by the media itself about its role and journalistic practices. The answer to this problem is both simple and complex. Simple if we stick to the core values of journalism and complex given the current state of political polarisation, financial stakes, weak regulatory framework and absence of an agreed code of ethics.

Playing With Words

By Amir Zia
Monday, Sept 8, 2014
The News

Sharif’s recent outings at the National Assembly failed to boost the morale of his supporters. This task was done by the opposition lawmakers, who extended unconditional support to democracy

It seems that the much-trumpeted revolution of Allama Tahirul Qadri will have to wait for now and the freedom sought by Imran Khan will also have to remain on the hold because the ‘umpire’ ignored their initial bout of appeals. But let’s admit that this ‘odd couple’ succeeded in involving the nation in debate and discussion the likes of which has never been witnessed before – thanks to the 24/7 live television coverage and a vibrant social media.
Oratory – good as well as bad – is at the centre stage. Be it the speeches outside parliament or on the floor of the house, they are attracting listeners. While veteran parliamentarians such as Aitzaz Ahsan, Raza Rabbani, Shah Mehmood Qureshi and Mushahid Hussain Syed have yet again made their mark during the ongoing parliamentary debate, there are many who stand exposed because of the barrenness of their style, thought and content.
When it comes to the party chiefs, it is Qadri who steals the show. One may differ with his agenda and tactics, but let’s give him credit for keeping the PAT’s die-hard supporters as well as many ordinary Pakistanis spell-bound with his oratory. He has a vast treasure of words which he weaves and spins with grace and ease. He knows the intricacies of the art of public speaking – demonstrated through all the right pauses and well-timed stresses.
Hardly any of Pakistan’s top politicians today – from our grim-faced Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to the self-proclaimed premier-in-waiting Imran Khan to the wily and ever-beaming former president Asif Ali Zardari – can match Qadri when it comes to the effective use of words.
Oration – the heart and soul of politics – is indeed used by both heroes and villains of history to motivate and galvanise the people, to fight or commit injustices, stoke passions or frenzy and trigger just or unjust wars and revolutions. A well-knit tapestry of words makes people shed tears, get hope and confidence and leap into action. It is the magic of words that makes people feel patriotic, and sacrifice or take lives in the name of religion, ethnicity or nationalism.
Qadri is definitely not in the league of the mighty greats who changed the course of history. To his critics, he remains just another smooth-talking cleric, an alleged ‘confidence man’, holding his followers at his whim. But in our barren political landscape dotted mostly with mumbling politicians, Qadri is among the few best.
He is able to connect not just with religious-minded people, but also with many ‘not-so’ religious, ordinary Pakistanis. His passionate attacks on the extremist mindset and condemnation of religiously-motivated violence and terrorism are music to the ears of all those who stand against the misuse of the sacred name of Islam in politics or fanning sectarian and religious hatred. This is the kind of message one likes to hear from a cleric.
There are many other firebrand religious leaders who sway the hearts and minds of listeners, but their message is confined to the narrow set of their sectarian followers. Qadri seems to be trying to make a broader appeal and sell a dream which his critics find half-baked, impractical and a threat to the fragile democratic system.
If we believe Qadri’s critics, his ‘innocent followers’ are chasing a mirage. Yet, there is no denying the fact that his attacks on Pakistan’s dysfunctional democracy, rampant corruption, nepotism and the greed and indifference of our ruling elite towards the plight of the masses echo the sentiment of many Pakistanis. However, when he is seen with some of the very symbols of the political mafia he attacks one questions his choice and motives.
PTI chairman Imran Khan – also trying hard to stir the passions of his followers – is monotonous. The ‘entertainment value’ of his frequent addresses at the sit-in comes from the harsh language and below-the-belt remarks he makes against rivals, the media, judiciary and what not. It seems that the entire universe conspired to snatch the election victory from him.
His political message is vague, convoluted and floats around narrow ideas. It begins and ends with allegations – mostly about election rigging – rather than vision. The challenge of extremism and terrorism is conveniently ignored in his sit-in speeches, which fail to support or oppose the ongoing military operation.
Attempts to make a ‘new Pakistan’ along with scions of the old ruling elite, a handful of pseudo-intellectuals, apolitical former corporate gurus, socialites and fan-club members appear difficult to digest. His repetitive megalomaniac assertions that he remains a gift of God for this wretched nation has began to appear comical.
Yes, we all know by heart now that the Great Khan does not need to be in politics. He has all the fame and fortune and can cool his heels for the rest of his life on the basis of his past feats. He is spending nights in the container and dirtying hands in politics for people like you and me. But isn’t it time for some new lines? Imran’s frequent use of cricket terms as a metaphor in politics has also been overdone. It underlines his lack of imagination and simplistic mindset. Politics is no game of cricket – 20/20, One-Day, or Test. It is a subtle art and requires more brain than brawn. Toe-crushing Yorkers and piercing bouncers can do the trick in cricket, but not in the game of chess called politics. Imran needs to grow up.
Prime Minister Sharif has always been seen as an uninspiring speaker. Experience and three decades of being in politics failed to sharpen his public speaking skills. At his best, he can sell tangibles like the yellow cab scheme, metro buses, motorways and trade etc. But expecting a businessman like him to paint a grand dream or sell an idea is perhaps asking for too much.
Sharif’s recent outings at the National Assembly failed to boost the morale of his supporters. This task was done by the opposition lawmakers, who extended unconditional support to democracy. Sharif’s initial remarks in parliament that the government did not ask the army chief to mediate in the crisis shows how carelessness with words backfires and create a controversy where there should be room for none. 
The snowball effect of Sharif’s statement led the military spokesman to tell the world that it was the government that had asked Army Chief Raheel Sharif to play a “facilitative role" to resolve the impasse. These contradictory statements led to some wild speculations, which the government later tried to gloss over saying that they meant more or less the same thing.
Some of our top politicians of yesteryears fared much better. How can one forget Benazir Bhutto’s last speech on the floor of parliament before she went into self-imposed exile in 1999? The house with Sharif’s two-third majority listened in pin-drop silence as she roared and thundered, shredding government policies into pieces. Yet, she was articulate, to-the-point and logical.
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s fiery speeches are a classic in Pakistan’s populist oratory. It was not just slogans of bread, clothing and shelter he could sell with ease to the downtrodden but also the finer points of foreign policy to win support for his seemingly unpopular decisions like Pakistan’s recognition of Bangladesh. He changed the political culture of Pakistan the way he connected with the people through the power of words.
Former military ruler Pervez Musharraf, too, had his high points. His presentation of Pakistan’s case on Kashmir during his meeting with Indian journalists during the 2001 Agra Summit is just one example of his golden moments. He spoke with conviction, candour and passion while fighting the Kashmir case. I can recall some of the grim and sour Indian faces in the lobby of an Agra hotel where we listened to this interaction. The Indians blame Musharraf’s bluntness for the failure of those talks, but he made us all proud that day.
Getting back to the present, Pakistan’s political stage has all the room for a leader who can again mesmerise us and make us dream big as a nation. Can the present lot of politicians improve their game? So far the tidings remain bleak.