Maulana’s muddle

Despite being bereft of political leverage, Maulana has forced the hands of a government

Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s march on Islamabad is rooted in contradictions. It begins on October 27, a Black Day when India forcibly occupied Kashmir in 1947, violating the principles of accession. This year it has taken on an ever more poignant significance as India unfurls its next phase of annexation. The Kashmiris continue to be denied the basic human right to live and breathe a free life.

Rather than voice the cause of the Kashmiris, Maulana seeks for himself and his cohorts an opportunity to win back political power by forcing the present government to resign. As rallies across the country will invoke the plight of the Kashmiris, the Maulana will conveniently slip in hundreds to proceed on to congregate in Islamabad to close the Capital down. At least that is the plan. You don’t close down the nation’s capital — only an enemy does that. Yet, here we are dealing with such juvenile aspirations. Those supporting the march and the likely sit-in — though Maulana suggests the decision will be taken upon reaching Islamabad — quote PTI’s dharna of 2014 as a kosher tool of political agitation which has since found relevance.

Marches aren’t unique and have been frequently used globally to express sentiment on an issue. Currently, there are demonstrations and marches in Hong Kong, Beirut, London and Ecuador, each with their own political voice and purpose. Where challenges to a government’s writ occur the law takes its course. Usually, violence ensues. Masterminds of the agitation hope that such recourse if it spreads and sustains, brings a government down. The 2011 Arab Spring is a case in point. Where these demonstrations remain within the ambit of law, they are seen as genuine democratic expressions.

PTI’s dharna though was unique for exactly the same reasons JUI-F’s dharna will ensue. These are disruptive and damaging to the national cause and do not accrue political benefit unless turned into nation-wide mass demonstrations. PTI’s dharna was unable to agitate large-scale support across the social spectrum and was limited to some circles only. It began to run out of oxygen in the latter stages when it had seemingly lost its sheen and purpose. Its novelty and deep resentment against the PPP and the PML-N’s failed governance underwrote the initial excitement which soon wore off after it seemed to be getting nowhere, reducing it to a sterile nuisance. It was ironic that the brutal APS massacre became its only face-saving escape from the closed alley it seemed to have pushed itself into.

Maulana’s probable dharna will be equally futile. IK may have added to his eminence but Maulana lacks such widespread groundswell in his favour. His past political conduct lends itself to widespread speculation over his intent and purpose. Currently, he rides on presumptive success with little to lose. He lost his election bid from the two seats he contested, and his party has only a nominal presence in the Parliament. Far graver is his apprehension that a prolonged time out of the political centre may cost him more political space, marginalising him in his home-base where PTI replaced him twice consecutively. To most, his personal animosity for IK underwrites this rather unpopular venture of a march; to others disliking IK or his brand, it remains a welcome challenge to him. Maulana may not have too much to lose here nor be the principal gainer, but he surely is paving the way for those eagerly waiting in the wings.

The complications this time though are far bigger than a simple downfall of a popular icon. The regional situation is more tenuous and any venture inside will surely take away focus from what is most important outside. Both Kashmir and Afghanistan are at critical junctures and need the undivided attention of those who will be distracted by Maulana. This will only pose a Hobson’s choice which would seek quick dispensation to the frivolity generated by the march to focus on the more important. This may not bode well for the marchers. Maulana’s dharna couldn’t arrive at a worse time. There is little likelihood that he is going to give in to such considerations; his political resurrection being more valuable to him.

The PML-N and PPP, both unconvinced of the efficacy of Maulana’s undertaking are only reluctant partners qualified to levels which are at best marginal or not-at-all, but they shall be looking closely. If an opportunity presents to down the sitting government or seeks an early election, they will pitch in with their weight. Yet all have a lot to paper over in internal contradictions and conflicts. More likely the march will proceed, albeit with reduced intensity and minus the lockdown, and then peter away, creating an environment of agitation which the two major parties will take over serially or simultaneously to pressure the government into an early election. It might take a while to materialise but a constantly faltering incumbent in PTI will only make their job easier.

The last time TLYR’s Khadim Rizvi & Co decided to capture a nodal point in Islamabad, it shut down the twin cities. A purposeless venture then had to be diluted with intervention from quarters such figures will listen to only. To preclude resort again to the same quarters, outside the political domain — which mars their image when later their conduct is called into question — it is of immense importance to nip or at least attrite and interdict another self-serving political adventure by someone seeking his spotlight moment. And perhaps some lost political space.

How may the government deal with what is developing? The script is pretty clear. Maulana would not be deterred. The best left is to strike at source and then incrementally restrict, attrite and interdict to reduce the weight of what may become the challenge in Islamabad. It could decide to defend Islamabad in strength which is what all governments think of but rarely with many effects. This government burnt its boats a long time back by cutting off contacts with most in the opposition. It thus lost its first line of defence. The ongoing last-minute effort seems a shot in the dark. This has left it the only option of steel-on-steel — something governments must avoid at all costs. Yet of its own making, this government has without appreciation walked into what should mostly be untenable.

Whatever now accrues must be resolved at the soonest. The real challenges are elsewhere. Give it to Maulana though; despite being bereft of political leverage he has forced the hands of a government. Introspection will help.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 27^th, 2019.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.