Why Zardari is acting as a bystander

PPP co-chairman is silently observing developments from outside the country

ISLAMABAD: When it comes to the ongoing tussle between the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), the main opposition Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) is keeping its cards close to its chest.

PPP Co-Chairman Asif Ali Zardari — who practically calls the shots in the party — is silently observing developments from outside the country without drawing any decisive lines so far and letting his party play in ‘grey areas’.



According to insiders, Zardari wants to focus on political advantages emanating from whatever the outcome of the Panama leaks saga is in the run-up to the 2018 general elections. They revealed the PPP co-chairman prefers using Panama leaks as a political issue instead of dragging his rivals to court.

Background interaction with several PPP leaders also suggests the party is suffering from internal divisions and its leaders hold different views on Panama leaks and accountability.

As the second-largest party in terms of numbers in parliament, the PPP likes to portray itself as a potent opposition force. For the PML-N’s three years in government, however, it has effectively acted as a ‘friendly’ opposition.

The public statements of its two key parliamentary office-bearers reflect this contrast.

Leader of Opposition in the National Assembly Khursheed Shah and his counterpart in Senate Aitzaz Ahsan appear to be representing two different factions, if not parties. Meanwhile, their young chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari appears suspended somewhere in between.

PPP’s stance on Panama leaks investigations has remained elliptic. It has appeared even more indecisive since the matter landed in the Supreme Court on November 1.



Publicly, PPP is demanding that a bill it has tabled in Senate to investigate Panama leaks be passed. The bill stipulates that investigations should start from Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his family, if not limited to his own person. Others maybe included once the first step culminates, if the scope of accountability is enlarged to others named in the leaks.

To be enacted, the bill needs to be adopted by both houses of parliament either separately or through a joint sitting. Such a development is impossible unless the ruling party supports the legislation and PPP knows that very well.

Off the record conversations with senior PPP leaders also revealed that the party is split on accountability in general. “One reason is that it won’t get anywhere. It is [like] playing a game,” said one PPP leader when asked what apprehensions his party has about a Supreme Court judge-led commission probing the Panama leaks.

A strong faction, comprising mostly younger PPP members from Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, wants the party to adopt a clear line of action. It favours a tougher stance and wants PPP to take the government head on in order to revitalise the party’s presence in these provinces. But some people in the PPP Punjab and K-P chapters allegedly have business interests tied with the PML-N government.

“Some of these people get their share indirectly though their construction firms or other businesses. They defuse any move whenever a situation arises where PPP can give [the government] a tough time” remarked a key leader from Punjab.



These people are close to Sindh chapter which makes core group in the party. This stronger group comes up with something that dilutes the situation as the party tries to take any tougher stance. Aitzaz, Kaira and other leaders in the largest Punjab province show leniency towards PTI for possible future cooperation to save the party from the existential threat in Punjab, but their efforts are spoiled by the top tier leadership. This is leading to clear resentment on Khursheed Shah’s role in some PPP circles.

The PPP Punjab chapter was trying to convince its leadership to join PTI’s lockdown campaign at a certain stage. Their campaign crumbled when Imran Khan abruptly called off the dharna plan after Supreme Court intervention.

Once the matter landed in the court, PPP developed apprehensions over the outcome of investigations. They cite examples from previous commissions. They fear consequences could be disastrous if the prime minister gets some benefit of the doubt. In case something tangible comes out of inquiry, it would kick off a process where others including many in the party would be next in the line.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 7^th, 2016.