Even if one considers that the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) has mastered the art of the unexpected under the leadership of Asif Ali Zardari, the events of recent days are confounding.

Until a few months ago, writing a letter to Swiss authorities to effectively reignite Pakistan’s interest in graft cases against President Zardari was a point of contention so great that a prime minister was sacrificed in the resistance effort.

In fact, another one of the king’s (former) men, former law minister Babar Awan, also fell as a result of this case, while PPP’s legal ace, Aitzaz Ahsan, was cut down to size after being made to defend a knowingly unwinnable and untenable stand, and given strict political parameters that often forced him to make absurd arguments and statements, both in court and outside. It must have been difficult for him. But what was it for? So that Naek could have taken the credit later?

Either due to circumstances, or his limited political standing, the man brought in as the new prime minister was almost universally accepted to be a temporary arrangement; another sacrifice.

The signs were aplenty. Even while the government consented to writing the letter late last month, under the fresh legal guidance of Farooq H Naek, friction was observed over the wording of the letter. Later, the government challenged the show-cause given to the Prime Minister Ashraf – giving rise to speculation that this was just another delay tactic by the government.

The court’s renewed belligerence, threatening to restart the contempt process against Premier Ashraf, only gave this more credence.

But that didn’t happen. Law Minister Naek’s draft letter was accepted on Wednesday.

What changed?

One theory has it that the Supreme Court was not very keen on knocking off another premier after showing Yousaf Raza Gilani the door. Having already made their point, the judiciary was willing to be softer in its stance. This school of thought pointed to Justice Asif Saeed Khosa’s statements during the hearings that the court was not keen on dismissing another premier, and that the bench was keen on resolving this issue.

This theory fails to answer why the government would not readily exploit the court’s hesitation. In fact, the draft letter, at least what has been shown publically, isn’t very, if at all, different from what the court wanted in the first place. It is hardly a reprieve – especially relative to what all was sacrificed. It mentions presidential immunity. That is all.

Aitzaz could have done this easily, and Gilani would have kept his job. In fact, a week before Gilani was disqualified, The Express Tribune ran a story on its front page stating that the letter would, in fact, be written in coming days. The story was from immaculate PPP sources.

But the letter never came. There was a sudden change of heart. Instead, Gilani was told that the line was that the letter, under no circumstances, would be written. There was no room for negotiation.

Gilani followed, and ultimately was booted from office and shunned from electoral politics for five years. The one thing that he took with him, political martyrdom, also stands diluted given that the PPP ultimately wrote a letter – without much fuss. Once in the forefront, even after his removal, Gilani has now floated into obscurity – angered statements against the courts appearing once in a while.

The euphoria of his great sacrifice has died down.

Why?

You see, there is a fundamental difference between Gilani and Ashraf: The man from Multan had a price on his head.

Remember his audacious and fiery outbursts against the army, against the army chief, against the judiciary and the chief justice? Outbursts that were not only limited to political gatherings and meetings, but made on the floor of the National Assembly, and carried as banner headlines in newspapers, and breaking news on television.

Remember that Gilani interview to a Chinese newsagency, which caused immense embarrassment to the army and ISI chiefs?  Right after his fiery outbursts, remember his unceremonious sacking of Defence Secretary Lt-Gen (retd) Naeem Khalid Lodhi – a man considered a close friend of the top brass of the GHQ?

These things don’t go unpunished, not in Pakistan. The pressure on President Zardari was probably great. He president didn’t want to sack Gilani. That would be too blatant. So the plan to write the letter was shelved; Gilani left to the mercy of the court, not allowed to write the letter that Naek and Raja Pervaiz ultimately did. The consequences were known to all; the reasons, perhaps not.

A man who had ventured new territory in terms of taking a stand for parliament while in the top office of the country, Gilani has probably realised that his party, his co-chairman, bartered him for political expediency. They turned their backs on him. Instead, they brought in a compliant replacement.

And those who Gilani offended now hound his son.

Did he know? Did Aitzaz know? The frenzied meetings between the PPP’s leadership and Gilani after the court accepted the draft letter suggest that he probably didn’t.

Another masterstroke by the president; another willing sacrifice by the PPP at the altar of undemocratic forces.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 12^th, 2012.

“We have given our message – it has gone across the world,” Imran told an impromptu gathering of about 5,000 raucous PTI supporters who had come along with the PTI chief on the Peace March to South Waziristan.

“We have succeeded in raising this issue. We came here to raise this issue, we came here to take a stand against drones,” he said to his supporters in a dusty ground in Tank.

“The drones are inhumane,” Imran said, donning a white turban.

“Are these people not humans? These humans have names. Drone attacks are a violation of human rights,” the PTI chief said, adding that drone strikes only whip anti-American sentiments in Pakistan.

Journey to the brink

Despite the odds and the treachery of the tribal terrain, a positive vibe resonated through the Peace March from the start on Sunday morning.

Despite a late night, the convoy came back to life on Tank Road, just outside DI Khan, at 8 am.

The convoy had hit the road early, but almost immediately hit snags. The first police blockade came before Tank, stopping the convoy for over two hours. Here, families of drone victims alighted from their vehicles, carrying placards and pictures of children killed in drone strikes.

Naseem Khan Daur, from Mir Ali in North Waziristan, said he had brought a coach full of victims, most of whom had lost their limbs, for the gathering. He said that the concept of highly accurate strikes was a myth.

“It’s not that only one house is destroyed,” he said. “Our houses are mud structures; when a strike hits one house, even if we are to believe that terrorists are living there, it results in the destruction of dozens of houses. It results in dozens of deaths and injuries, too,” he added.

Another resident of Mir Ali said his brother had been targeted by a drone attack when he was travelling on the road. He said his brother had nothing to do with the Taliban or any other militants.

Eventually the first barricade relented in the face of the growing convoy, which was now stretching several kilometers on a single-lane road, led by the vehicle of the PTI chairman.

Powering through

The heat of day had begun bearing down on the participants of the convoy. But dust and scorching sun did nothing to dampen spirits. It continued marching on, having already breached a point that most expected it to turn back from.

“The captain is setting the field,” said a beaming deputy information secretary of the PTI, commenting on the strategy of the convoy.

“They’re pleading him to stop. They’re threatening him. But he’s marching ahead.”

The exuberance of the participants was epitomised in Gara Pathar on Wana Road, when a massive trailer-mounted container, parked across a bridge to stop the convoy was physically overturned by participants and locals. The convoy powered through.

Five blockades down, as the clock struck three, nothing, it seemed, could stop this convoy. It had approached the border of South Waziristan.

Two minutes later, a silver vehicle was seen zooming off in the opposite direction.

It was the PTI chairman’s SUV.

Turning back

After powering through a number of barricades, and defying various threats, the Peace March made a sudden turn at 3 pm on Sunday afternoon close to the South Waziristan border.

It is unclear what caused the sudden turn around, but the PTI chairman later said in his speech that he was told that the lives of those in the convoy, local and international peace activists, PTI workers, leaders and supporters, were at risk.

Khan said that the turnaround was only due to the time factor – given that the convoy, stopped along the way at so many points, would have made it to its destination after nightfall – a time when security would be almost zero.

Call from ‘high-ups’

Quarters privy to the central leadership’s decision-making process said that Khan had, almost certainly, gotten a frantic call from “high-ups” warning of a plan to ambush the convoy not too far from the place it had already reached. The quarters spoke of intercepts that had revealed such a plan.

The turnaround didn’t seem to be pre-planned, given that at least two central leaders of the PTI seemed to be completely in the dark.

After the sudden turnaround, a visibly distressed Dr Arif Alvi told The Express Tribune on the road that he had “no idea” what had just happened and why.

Another leader, Naeemul Haq, who talked to a couple of media personnel, said he was not aware of the fresh threats received by the convoy at that point in time, nor what prompted the volte-face. However, he did indirectly say that the PTI and its chairman had been asked by the Army to turn around.

“We didn’t adhere to the initial roadblocks because they were placed by the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa government, which is constantly working against the PTI,” said Haq, but added that the PTI “didn’t want to go against the Army’s wishes in an area were it is fighting a battle for peace.”

The decision, however practical, was inexplicable to some. Arshad and his companions, 18 vehicles in all, had come from Loralai, Balochistan to join the rally. He said he was confused at the turning around, believing that there was no danger ahead. “This is a peace march,” he said, distressed.

With additional input from agencies.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 8^th, 2012.

But the novel initiative was under threat of fizzling out even before it started.

Starting as a small group of vehicles, the convoy gathered steam as it moved from the city centre on to Islamabad Motorway’s Toll Plaza. Imran arrived there at about 10am in a silver bullet-proof SUV. Workers and supporters showered the convoy with rose petals – many vehicles, buses and vans, joined in, giving the smallish convoy some impetus.

Another, bigger, reception awaited him at Balkasar interchange, by which time the mood had begun to change. Loudspeakers made their first appearance.

“Halat ke kadmon mein kabhi girta nahi qalandar.”

More joined in. Peace activists. Journalists. Workers. Supporters.

Then it was on to Talagang by afternoon, a little further up from which there was yet another gathering of PTI supporters. Fireworks sounded, and rose-petals rained. The PTI anthems became louder, the flags more prominent. The convoy grew larger still – evidenced by an increasing frequency of traffic jams.

School children stood by the roadside, waving, trying to catch a glimpse.

The fear and uncertainty had begun to dissipate.

Familiar territory awaited.

The convoy crossed the recently inaugurated NAMAL campus, nestled just off the River Indus on the hills of Musa Khel – an institute that the PTI chairman leads. At Mianwali, Imran’s hometown, he rose out of his vehicle to address what had, by that time, become a sizable convoy filled with charged supporters, who greeted the PTI chairman with rousing applause.

“No one can stop us from going to Waziristan,” he thundered, promising that he would raise a voice against drone attacks across the world.

Onward the convoy went, refueled by their chairman’s determination, snaking over the Chashma Barrage, growing in strength and vigour.

Onward to DI Khan. Onward to South Waziristan.

Head-on with JUI-F

At DI Khan, the PTI convoy hit an unforeseen roadblock. A road that could accommodate only one vehicle at a time had the PTI convoy heading in one direction – and a Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) convoy heading in the other. It took close to an hour to resolve the literal deadlock. But an understanding was reached, and the convoy finally broke free and moved on.

Anti-climax

The threat of the anti-climax had started before the convoy even began moving. Reports of threats by Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) continued to trickle in on Saturday morning. The foreign media had already dropped out the night before – as had a number of prominent local media persons. Reports of blockades by authorities were also making the rounds. PTI scrambled to keep the hope alive, its media team rubbishing threats.

At the PTI headquarters, journalists began gathering at about 8am. Questions of the rally’s success began. An early turnaround. An abortion.

The size of the initial convoy, which left the PTI headquarters by about 9:30 gave credence to these fears.

But the PTI chairman seemed confident despite the gloom, and the party seemed to feed of him. Interestingly, there was no visible security for the rally – at least not the sort that cocoons leaders in Pakistan these days. Punjab police mobiles were seen intermittently.

The rally rolled through DI Khan, onto its outskirts, Tank Road, where the convoy set up camp. The rest will be needed.

A herculean effort as it may already be, this was the easier part. In the morning, the convoy will try to move towards Tank and then Kotkai in South Waziristan. That’s when the real struggle will begin.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 7^th, 2012.

It is difficult to come up with reasons why the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) selected Ashraf in particular. Let us ditch the ambiguity: Not only does it make little political sense, it is the making of a miscalculation of potentially disastrous proportions.

Consider that the next general elections are, at most, less than a year away. One, if not the main, issue that will dominate the election campaign is the power crisis. Rightly or wrongly, Ashraf is the face of misgoverning in the power sector. For a public that remembers one-liners, his “load shedding will end by 2009” will reverberate not only during his tenure as premier, but past his potential disqualification, past even the caretaker set-up and well into the polls.

On the off-chance the public forgets, a rapacious media will ensure that they do remember.

Also, consider Ashraf’s constituency: Gujjar Khan, NA-51. Located along the GT Road, considered the stronghold of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), the region is a hotbed of discontent. If the PPP wants to make inroads into the area come the next polls, it just had to sit back while the provincial government of the PML-N took the blame for massive and prolonged power outages from a highly emotional and miserable public. For a sample, you have to go back just three days to the rioting in Rawalpindi, the district of which Gujjar Khan is a part, and other areas along this belt where public representatives’ houses are being attacked.

At worst, and despite the Punjab chief minister’s tactic of joining the protests, the blame would have been shared 50-50 – which still works in favour of the PPP electorally. Throw in the vote-cutting capacity of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf and the PML-Q, and the PPP could have been even looking at the possibility of forming the next government in Punjab thanks to their gains in the south.

Now, the PPP has entered the limelight in a region that is politically corrosive at the moment, where any sort of publicity will only evoke ire. In fact, this works in the PML-N’s favour, no matter how short a time he lasts.

Third: when and if you see him ousted once he refuses to write the Swiss letter, or if you see the charges against him in the rental power scandal rise again, the PPP will not garner any political sympathy. Will anyone feel sorry about the SC showing the door to a man many see as the sole cause of their primary woe: power outages? In fact, if anything, the SC and the ouster and/or haranguing will be celebrated.

In Yousaf Raza Gilani’s disqualification and Makhdoom Shahabuddin’s arrest warrants, the PPP had enough conspiratorial material to whip up a sympathy storm strong enough to see them select another prime minister in the aftermath of the next polls and keep President Asif Ali Zardari in office for another five years.

Ashraf’s entry has the potential of overshadowing this – at least in Punjab.

Then there is governance. I will not go to deep into this, because the chances are that Ashraf will not last very long.

Then there is the US. We are in the midst of crucial negotiations with Washington. We need a charismatic and credible front man, or one that is good at politicking. How seriously will he be taken if he is perceived to be a stop-gap arrangement, that too one that has no experience in this regard? Or if he is at constant risk of being on the Exit Control List (it happened before when he was meant to travel to China).

How about coalition building? Ashraf is not particularly liked by any of the PPP’s political allies.  The MQM and the PML-Q are said to have initially taken exception to his candidature. He doesn’t get along with key ally in the opposition, JUI-F. In fact, going by the number of absent PPP MNAs, he isn’t particularly liked within his own party either.

Yes, stranger things have happened. But not always out of choice.

Published In The Express Tribune, June 23^rd, 2012.

The ruling party now has in front of it a number of questions and puzzles. For starters, whoever the new prime minister may be, he will immediately have to deal with the apex court’s demand to write a letter to the Swiss authorities regarding graft cases against President Asif Ali Zardari. The court will almost certainly take this issue up instantly – given that the case pertaining to the implementation of the SC’s verdict on the National Reconciliation Ordinance is very much alive and well.

How patient will the bench be? The court will be keen to keep the pressure up to portray the pressing nature of the matter – given that it did, after all, lead them to disqualify a sitting prime minister. Any lowering of the pressure will raise too many questions. Consider that the process of disqualification will not be as drawn out as was in Mr Gilani’s case – given that there is now a clear legal precedent in this matter, which can be invoked almost instantly if there is any more noncompliance on the new government’s part.

The strategy of hiding behind petitions and challenges to buy time is now obsolete.

On the face of it, there is little or no breathing room left for the ruling party. Either they continue to see their candidates shown the door, or they write the letter. The option of announcing a caretaker setup will indeed buy them time – but certainly not absolute reprieve. If the current direction of the political winds is to be trusted as a gauge, then the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) will return for another stint after the general elections – which would then have to be held latest by October or November. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry is not going anywhere up until 2013.

And even once he’s gone, the camaraderie on show between the apex court justices means that the ‘cause’, so to say, will not go anywhere. Surely we cannot see prime minister after prime minister disqualified.  Unless, of course, the caretaker prime minister writes the letter – or, if we see the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz back in power. But that’s another case. The letter will ultimately be written, and attempts to not write it will only lead to more crises of governance.

This is not a sustainable path – particularly if they really believe they can emerge victorious from the next polls as well. Something’s got to give.

As of June 19, 2012, the real test for the ruling party is not selecting a new prime minister. Given the powers of the PPP co-chairman, enshrined in the 18th Amendment, who the new premier will be is a moot point, really. Nor is it actually the shorter-term problem of getting indemnity for the prime minister’s actions since April 26 – such as the budget. The powers that be will not let the country step onto this slippery slope.  Something will be worked out – if nothing else then in the detailed judgment. It has to be – else the consequences will be disastrous, and not of the here-and-now, breaking news variety.

The country is dealing with a host of issues that need immediate attention and concrete policy-making – Nato routes, power crises, to name a few – and can only be solved by continuity of governance. Notions of political martyrdom may be useful when it comes to bringing a party to power – but nothing more.

If the plan is to take the face-saving, but cowardly, route of getting the caretakers to write it, then they should just pull the plug now – because the country cannot take this game any longer, and the PPP has already done all it needs to win the next election.

This is now a matter of governance versus ego. This is the true test.

Published In The Express Tribune, June 20^th, 2012. 

Located at the coast of the Mediterranean, Monaco is a part of the glamorous French Riviera – known to be the haunt of the world’s rich and famous.

According to the details provided to the court on Tuesday, Dr Arsalan is alleged to have travelled from London to Monte Carlo on July 25, 2010 – along with two companions, one of which is a “female” whose name has been kept “confidential.” The British Airways’ (BA0348) tickets cost 1,011.51 pounds – an amount alleged to have been paid by Riaz’s son-in-law Salman Ahmed through his debit card from Natwest Bank. Dr Arslan and his companions are said to have stayed in Monte Carlo for four days.

The four days in marvelous Monte Carlo were at no less than the 150-year-old historic Hotel de Paris – two rooms with a “superior courtyard view” at a cost of 8,120 Euros. Monaco is known for having the first few casinos of the region, and the most glamorous ones at that – and Malik Riaz claims Dr Arsalan “heavily gambled” and lost some 10,000 Euros, which were paid in cash. No other expenses are detailed of the Monte Carlo expedition, which cost a cool Rs2,138,160. Not bad for four days without any other expenses – all allegedly borne by Riaz’s son-in-law.

Back in Pakistan, this was the weekend following the three-year extension given to our very own chief of army staff, and at a time there was a heated case underway in the Supreme Court over the legitimacy of the 18th Amendment. While in Monte Carlo, Dr Arsalan would ostensibly have also allegedly learnt of the Airblue crash, which claimed the lives of over 150 people.

The first trip

This foray to Monte Carlo was during one of three alleged fully-paid trips to London – two of which are alleged to have included the chief justice’s family.

This one-month trip took place in June-July 2010. Arsalan and the rest of the chief justice’s family are said to have stayed at “Flat no 63, Fitzharding House, 12-14 Portman Square, London.” That’s not quite as glamorous as the Hotel De Paris, but it’s central London, no less – and close to Bond Street station. The relatively less luxurious stay was seemingly offset by what seems to be a staggering shopping spree – the entire amount coming to 40,000 pounds (Rs5.8 million). The stay and shopping was accentuated by the month-long hiring of a sleek Range Rover Sport HST for the alleged use of Dr Arsalan at a cost of 5,350 pounds (Rs775,750).

While the receipt of the Range Rover has been provided to the court, there seem to be no details of the 40,000 pounds worth of stay and shopping.

Adding the London vacation to the Monte Carlo foray, the total cost came to a whopping total of “Rs8,860,579.”

Second sojourn

The experience would have had to be a great, given that two more alleged trips were to follow in 2011.

The first of these was a solo trip at the end of March 2011 – when Dr Arsalan allegedly stayed at the ritzy Hilton at Park Lane from March 25 to April 3 in “Room 2413” at a base cost of over 400 pounds a day.

This trip was relatively ‘cheap’ – costing 4,778.96 pounds (Rs692,949). Apparently, according to the detailed bill, Dr Arsalan was nice enough not to raid the minibar, which cost only 4.50 pounds per day. The receipts have been provided to the court.

The last of the three alleged trips was once again with the chief justice’s family – once again a one-month long trip (“four weeks and two days”) from June 18 to July 18, 2011. This time they are alleged to have stayed at Park Lane’s Marriot Hotel Flats at the rate of 4,000 pounds per week – totaling 17,342 pounds. Seemingly meticulous, Malik Riaz’s statement bothers to detail that, though the flat was booked from the 18th of June, the family arrived on the 19th. Once again details are provided of the flat lease and the money transfers for the payments from Salman Ahmed’s bank account in Habib Bank AG Zurich’s London branch.

Interestingly, a copy of the tenancy agreement is shown to be signed by Dr Arsalan. Given that the last time Dr Arsalan allegedly asked for a Range Rover Sport, this time he is alleged to have asked for a month-long rental of a Ranger Rover Vogue. But it apparently cost less than the sport – 4,800 pounds as opposed to the Sport’s cost of over 5,350 pounds. The rental agreement is shown to have Dr Arsalan’s driving license.

The month-long stay was extended by two nights – for which two rooms were booked at the Marriot Hotel, Park Lane, at the cost of 3,376.80 pounds. The payment, it is once again alleged, was made by Mr Salman Ahmed through his Visa Platinum Card. The receipts were also provided to the court.  Showing that he was a good host, Malik Riaz’s son in law also says that Dr Arsalan was provided 15,500 pounds in cash – seemingly for ‘kharcha paani.’ That’s a family vacation costing “Rs5,947,726”. And that’s three trips costing Rs15,501,254.

The rest of the alleged Rs340 million?

Simple: Rs327 million in alleged cash in four installments of Rs157, Rs20, Rs80 and Rs70 million. But there’s no evidence attached for this whopping cash generosity.

Published In The Express Tribune, June 13^th, 2012. 

In the build-up to the last budget before the 2013 general elections, it had been widely expected that the government would be bending over backwards to announce ‘relief’ measures. But that never happened. There were no grandiose announcements of half-baked projects whose sole purpose was to provide punchlines for the election trail in coming months.

Indeed, some reports suggest that legislators from the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party and its allies were not happy at all when they saw the numbers on Friday – crying foul about not having anything to take back to their voters. President Asif Ali Zardari, it seems, is playing for the long haul. The decision-makers in the ruling party do not want to go on a spending binge and then have to clean up the mess after they (presumably) win the next election.

This is why the budget appears to be targeted towards satisfying not the average Pakistani voter but rather the executive board of the International Monetary Fund to whom the government will likely have to turn to this coming year in order to finance its foreign debt repayments (including, somewhat comically, a $1.2 billion loan repayment to the IMF itself.)

Note, for instance, that the government announced (once again) that it would be eliminating all electricity subsidies, except those on the very poorest of consumers. This was a key demand of the IMF and one that Finance Minister Abdul Hafeez Shaikh will no doubt be sure to highlight in bold, block letters at his next presentation to the Washington-based lender.

The IMF is not the evil monster it is often portrayed to be. It is brought in by governments to tell a truth they are often too afraid to tell their people: that their government either spends too much or taxes too little and needs to mend its ways or else it will go down in flames to bankruptcy, taking the rest of the economy with it. In Pakistan’s case, we very clearly tax too little. But we also spend in the wrong places, subsidising current power consumption rather than investing in future generation capacity for cheap electricity.

The relation between sound economics and strong politics has long been debated, but for possibly the first time it has manifested itself positively in a democratic government.

Let there be no doubt: the relatively realistic and even-handed approach by the government reflects just how comfortable it is politically. A strong ruling party has bobbed and weaved its way out of a number of crises, kept political continuity going with its survival, and has dexterously driven home even the smallest political advantage that appeared during this time. It did not get caught up in any one crisis.

At the end of the day, the incumbents have consolidated their position, and are well placed to take the next elections, too – even the notion of which would have been considered ludicrous in democracies past.

The PPP may yet lose the next elections – but the fact is this: this budget was kept within limits because of the political confidence of the incumbents, who did not need the sort of cheap economic jugglery to impress the masses in a desperate last ditch effort to win votes that the past weak government did. The economy is better for it. This is long-term and poised politics – the only bridge leading to rational, long-term economics. Let’s hope that bridge is taken.

Looking ahead, the ruling party must continue to translate its political advantage into economic prudence – particularly when it comes to dealing with problems such as the energy sector, which could yet prove to be their political downfall.

There are rumours that Water and Power Minister Naveed Qamar may be replaced by Ahmed Mukhtar, currently the defence minister. Given the reports that he enjoys the confidence of the president, one hopes that this means the big man is lining up a solution to the energy crisis. The finance minister did say the government was willing to spend whatever it takes to get the nation’s power grid humming again.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 2^nd, 2012.

Returning to the country for the first time since the Supreme Court released a long awaited detailed order on his contempt case, the prime minister told The Express Tribune that he would soon be consulting his legal team regarding the judgment – and whether they would appeal the verdict or go for a review.

Interestingly, the prime minister did not rule out the possibility of not filing a review or an appeal – giving credence to reports that the government will maintain the line that the conviction would necessarily entail disqualification.

Speaking to The Express Tribune in a brief one-on-one meeting on the flight back to Islamabad from London, the prime minister said he knew that the order would be released when he was in the air. “It’s all in front of you. You can see it for yourself.” Because of this, he said, the courts have been “exposed”.

“I took a stand, and I will continue taking a stand,” he said – adding that the events of the last few weeks had resulted in an outpouring of support for his party.

The result is there for everyone to see, he said, calmly gesturing an upward trend with his hand. He also took the opportunity to reiterate that he would not listen to the verdicts of the “Sharif courts” – referring to the calls by the principal opposition, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), to step down.

He said despite the opposition’s best efforts, he was accorded hospitality and respect during his trip to the UK. The cradle of democracy, he said, had shown confidence in him, voicing satisfaction with the outcome of the state visit.

The prime minister’s five-day trip had generated tremendous controversy back home because of his conviction.

The visit is being seen as successful, given some important meetings and even a joint statement by the prime ministers of Britain and Pakistan.

The joint statement recognised Prime Minister Gilani’s role in reviving democracy and even noted that he had become the longest-serving civilian prime minister in the country’s history. The British prime minister even stated that any enemy of Pakistan is an enemy of Britain and vice versa – a key statement at a time that Pakistan is facing the prospect of isolation from the US and its allies due to the continued closure of Nato supply routes.

Aside from this, Premier Gilani also held some key meetings with investors at the London Stock Exchange and the headquarters of global banking giant Standard Chartered.

There were expectations of big protests in London upon the prime minister’s arrival. However, the protests were muted, and barely visible when they did occur initially.

Reports had it that PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif had asked his party not to create too big a scene in London. The last day of the trip saw a small protest by activists and supporters of Hizbut Tahrir outside the hotel of the prime minister. However, supporters of the Pakistan Peoples Party also showed up in good number to express solidarity with the premier.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 14^th, 2012.

ON BOARD THE PM’S AIRCRAFT: In her short tenure as foreign minister, the young Hina Rabbani Khar has already developed a striking ability to answer questions without answering them.

Speaking informally to a few journalists on board the prime minister’s aircraft back to Islamabad from the UK, Foreign Minister Khar delivered some interesting sound bites on Pakistan’s relations with the US and Nato. However, the important queries went without concrete answers.

Given that it was coming at the end of a five-day state visit to London, the foreign minister was particularly keen on highlighting the healthy state of ties with the UK – drawing a parallel with the current Pakistan-US relations.

The UK and the US have the same objectives in Afghanistan, she mused, yet only the latter that seems to have issues with Pakistan, while the former has no such problems. She has a point. After all, a joint statement issued after a meeting between British and Pakistani prime ministers did quote David Cameron as saying that Pakistan’s enemy is an enemy of the UK, and vice versa.

That’s a pretty strong statement by most standards – particularly in the context of a supposed ‘troublemaker state’.

Foreign Minister Khar was also keen on stressing that she personally believed that Nato supply routes through Pakistan, closed for some six months now, should be reopened.

On one hand, she says that it is in Pakistan’s interest to facilitate an international operation, while on the other she says that there are many friendly countries whose supplies are also blocked.

Nato and Isaf supplies, she said, should not be seen in the context of relations with the US. After all, added the foreign minister, Nato and Isaf are umbrella organisations for over 40 countries, including close friends such as Turkey, the UK, et al.

She had some interesting things to say about Pakistan’s role and its perceived importance globally. The young foreign minister insisted that the school of thought that said Pakistan should do whatever it takes to remain “relevant” internationally was flawed. “I’d rather be irrelevant than negatively relevant,” she said.

She hastened to add that the decision to close the supply routes was the correct one, recalling not only the Salala strikes, but also the US’ Abbottabad incursion – which she termed an effort to take sole credit for finding Osama bin Laden.

Regarding Pakistan’s supposed obligation to keep supply routes open, given that Afghanistan is an UN-mandated mission, she said that Pakistan was not “bound” as the UN resolution only called for “facilitation.” She also rubbished the chances of sanctions being slapped on Pakistan because of the blockade.

However, the foreign minister was not forthcoming on when exactly the supply routes would be reopened – and was hesitant to even give a timeframe.

When questioned on what the stumbling block was, the foreign minister said simply that negotiations are under way and that “goodwill” was needed. She negated reports that the US had now declined to apologise to Pakistan. Why the routes had not been reopened was a question that remained unanswered, despite several attempts to get a concrete answer, with the foreign minister saying, surprisingly, that she was not privy to silent backroom discussions on the matter reportedly under way in Islamabad.

Inevitably, this segued into a question regarding the Army’s role in foreign policy. The foreign minister had a unique – and obviously painfully prepared – answer for this: saying that the role of the army should not be overplayed, or, for that matter, undercut.

Interestingly, at no point did the foreign minister attempt to dispel notions put forward by journalists that Pak-US relations are at an extreme low.

On the latest controversy in Pakistan-US ties – whether or not Pakistan would be invited to the Chicago conference on Afghanistan – Khar’s reply was surprisingly straightforward. On being asked who would be representing Pakistan at the conference, she said Pakistan had to actually first be invited before deciding on who would attend.

The comment is somewhat surprising, given that just two days ago she whispered into the prime minister’s ear at a press conference that Nato had retracted a statement by its Secretary General which suggested that Pakistan will not be invited to the conference.

On the other hand, the foreign minister said that Pakistan has taken the high road recently on a number of issues and has acted responsibly, regardless of what may be said about it. She quoted the example of the aftermath of the assassination of former Afghanistan president Burhanuddin Rabbani. There were a lot of negative things said about Pakistan at that time, she said. It would have been easy to react, but Pakistan didn’t – and instead handled the matter diplomatically.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 14^th, 2012.

Addressing a detailed press conference after laying the foundation stone of a new consular hall at the Pakistan High Commission in London on Friday, the premier added that “PCNS recommendations were passed unanimously – the government was told to negotiate with the United States on this basis. That is what we are doing. There is no outcome yet.”

When the premier was first asked the question, Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, who flanked the prime minister, immediately whispered in his ear: “they have retracted it.” The premier’s official statement was vaguer, and not as direct.

He said that the foreign minister had taken him into confidence that “there is no such statement.”

“Our negotiations are on. When they end, then we can say something [on such things]. We are in the middle of discussions,” he said.

Asked if Prime Minister Cameron had pressed the capture of Hafiz Saeed and the presence of Ayman al Zawahiri and/or Mullah Omar in Pakistan, the premier recalled that his counterpart had already said that any enemy of Pakistan was an enemy of the UK. He also said that the courts were “totally independent”, and if there is any concrete evidence against Hafiz Saeed, it should be presented before the courts. It is not up to the government to take a decision on this matter, he said.

Regarding the increasing US insistence that Ayman al Zawahiri and/or Mullah Omar are present in Pakistan, he said that relations between the CIA and ISI have always been “excellent” and still are – stressing that the two had hit many al Qaeda high value targets together because of this cooperation.

He said the US and Pakistan are still in “partnership mode” and are looking out for each others’ interests.

He urged that, if there is any “credible” and “actionable” intelligence, the US should share it – so that the ISI and CIA can “jointly achieve the target”.

Local politics

There was plenty of local politics, too.

Hitting out at the criticism by the opposition, the prime minister said that the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) had tried its utmost to discredit him and to have him disqualified. However, he said, all these attempts had been futile.  He said he didn’t believe in the interpretation of the “Sharif Courts”.

The prime minister said that the PML-N had gone to the Election Commission of Pakistan to seek his disqualification – but, he said, there had been no response. He added that the PML-N also tried to “pressurise” the speaker of the National Assembly, but she too had not said anything on the matter yet.

In fact, claimed the premier, they even wrote a letter to British authorities asking that he not be welcomed as a prime minister – yet he was given full protocol in the highest offices of the UK.

Expressing his disappointment with the conduct of the main opposition party, the prime minister said that they were only harming the image of the country.

He said that the “notion” of a clash of institutions is only being created by Nawaz Sharif, adding that if all quarters work within their ambit there can be, and will be, no clash.

Questioned on the PML-N’s move to introduce a resolution seeking the formation of a South Punjab province as well as the reinstatement of a Bahawalpur province, the premier said he did not think the party’s intentions were “sincere.”

He pointed out that the PML-N had long opposed the division of Punjab – evidenced by the refusal of the Punjab Assembly speaker’s refusal to take up resolutions to this effect by PML-Q legislators. He said the Punjab government had been pushed by the federal government’s “consensus” initiative, which he stressed was constitutional, as well as by public opinion and the will of the people.

He said the PML-N’s move was an “afterthought.”

Power protests

To a question, the prime minister said that Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif had purposely rejected recommendations from a recent power conference participated in by all provinces – claiming that Shahbaz wanted to have reasons to protest against the federal government, such as the ones currently underway against power outages.

He said the government had taken a number of steps to assuage the power shortfall situation, which would begin to bear fruit with time – adding that there was no “switch” that could be turned on to fix the situation overnight.

The prime minister goaded the PML-N, telling them that if they wanted him gone so badly, they had two options: Either bring a no-confidence motion against him in the National Assembly or resign from the assemblies and announce a mass protest.

The second option, quipped the premier, would even appease Imran Khan and his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) – and the two parties could then join forces. He said that “if” the PTI and PML-N got together, there was a chance that there could be “some” impact – but added that he didn’t think such an alliance would be possible.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 12^th, 2012.