Stopping Maulana's march

Pakistan has travelled a long political distance since the introduction of the 8th Constitutional Amendment (by General Zia) to the 13th (by prime minister Nawaz Sharif) and then the 18th (by president Zardari's government).

While the American 13th, 14th and 15th amendments were relating to the abolishment of slavery, extending birthrights and giving the right of vote to its citizens, our "coalition of democratically willing politicians" remained focused on how, for their personal benefits, they could accumulate, sustain and retain power.

The constitutional amendments in Pakistan have not been to protect the rights of the people but to protect and safeguard the political right of the "Empire Builders" to rule the people.

We have been so professionally and amicably ruled that we have never drifted away from it and almost always find ourselves being perennially entrenched in those decisively crucial and vital junctures of our history — with one such juncture again arriving in the form of the "Maulana's March" and sit-in in Islamabad.

Leaders and political parties are given votes on the basis of their political programmes. What is Maulana's political programme? Given an opportunity, would Maulana be able to bring an economic and industrial revolution in this country?

Imran Khan and his government have also not been able to turn the economy around but they need more time. After a very long time, Pakistan has a leader and a prime minister who operates outside the politics of status quo and the family core — he may be loved, envied, hated or despised but he is not corrupt or a dynastic leader.

He is a prime minister of the poor, continuously propagating his great desire to bring a meaningful change in the lives of the poor, which so far he has not been able to do. But his message is clear — "being poor is not a shame, being a slave is".

Unfortunately, it is not only the poor who have been enslaved by many political parties but the political parties' first and second tier leadership as well.

The blind following of the political leadership has not only murdered the concept of any reform in the internal democratic system or order within the parties, but externally also all they give back to the nation is an imperfect democracy boiling under the heat of "depravity of institutional loyalty" and "abundance of political mediocrity", all seeking self-serving aims and objectives and not the national interest.

"Political decay occurs when political systems fail to adjust to the changing circumstances," says political theorist, Francis Fukuyamma; and politics in Pakistan fails to adjust to some of these changes.

Two profound changes have taken place in Pakistani politics and they must be acknowledged before formulating opinions on the current method of conducting politics in Pakistan. One — like anything else the identity of the military has undergone a change and it must be viewed as a "post-Musharraf military."

Those who keep digging in the past to relate to the military method and behaviour may unearth nothing but "dead skeletons" that have no relevance to how the military's apolitical stance now defines the threats to national security and how it is prepared to meet them.

Two — the identity of politics has also changed and no matter which spin the parties put on the process of democratic accountability, it is the most meaningful and profound change that has come to stay.

The introduction of this important democratic function limits the accumulation and use of absolute power and sufficiently explains why today all political forces that have a habit of remaining unaccountable, are now joining hands to participate in Maulana's March.

As the Maulana saddles his political horse that will now pull the PML-N and PPP carts (which is strange given both are major political parties) to take a ride to Islamabad, the government has little choice but to take a Machiavellian approach of "being effective rather than being nice."

The whole idea of political patience is a media-proliferated idea. There is no action through inaction or controlling a situation by not controlling it. In fact, you cannot ensure the rule of law by abdicating rule. Surely, the government cannot afford to make a faulty political judgement, but if Maulana's "error of political judgement" is allowed to proceed, accommodated and facilitated to settle down in the form of a dharna, then it is most likely to get the government in deep trouble.

Maulana leads while the "discredited politics" extends him all-out support from behind prison walls. Sniffing and smelling the scent of political success in the air, this leadership is ready to pounce on the created opportunity and fill in any political space that the current government may cede.

The majority of us, unfortunately, have been accustomed to living a way of life that has clearly been very selfish and self-rewarding and which previously gave little or nothing back to the state.

Many "movers and shakers" of politics in Pakistan would rather opt to go back to the same self-rewarding political world rather than be part of the "one in the making" which obviously requires time, patience and sacrifices and also "economic buckling up" that comes with a cost.

Maulana is not the only fish that has resided in the previously stagnant, muddy and unclear political pond of this country. There are many others who don't like the switch to the transparent water out of the fear of being seen, observed and being caught.

What the government needs to do is clearly read and identify the growing political threat and then meet it upfront, without any political hesitation. It needs to maintain a clear balance both at the strategic and operational level. At the strategic level, the political idea of meeting this threat has to be absolutely clear and once that decision is made, the government must utilise all instruments of power at its disposal to mitigate and eradicate it.

Ours like many others in the world is a very imperfect democracy. Protection of rights, liberty, freedom and equality are very good political slogans but when these very slogans are raised to muster negative political forces that seek to hurt the state, then the state must act — and act in time. In our political culture, the legitimacy of any government rests more on good governance and ensuring the rule of law first. The rights that a government must protect must come later.

It was under different conditions and circumstances that the present government proceeded to execute a sit-in in Islamabad. That cannot be taken as a precedent by anyone to repeat it. In fact, dharna politics should permanently end and the state might use all coercive means at its disposal for it.