Fazail-e-Amaal
The political class of the country is not self-aware enough to be a willing pawn of any foreign-sponsored campaign
There are many ways to read the political situation we are in. Now that Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s march has reached Islamabad, some are obviously fearing the worst — a disruption of some kind. Then there are those who have convinced themselves that the movement has already lost steam and will not be able to hold out for long. There are those who think that it is a broader conspiracy against the state. Then many believe that the dying old political order is trying to recapture lost ground from the incumbent civil-military collective. And of course, how can there be any dearth of people who seem convinced that nothing noteworthy can happen in the Islamic Republic without the tacit support of the country’s security establishment. Finally, some of our colleagues are even convinced that the change at the top is just a matter of formality and they don’t mind discussing alternatives with the foreign press.
Maulana’s own platform is also a source of controversy. Despite the political savvy of the man at the top, it essentially is a religious outfit. When the JUI-F led MMA alliance rose to power in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P), its first act was not to improve governance but to attack and destroy billboards with the pictures of female models. For a country that has endured almost two decades of religion-driven terrorism, this cannot be a source of comfort. While he himself has been a victim of terrorism and has survived a suicide attack, his ideology is not dramatically different from that of the Taliban. So his arrival in the federal capital with a large number of devoted followers is bound to give many quite a headache.
Then comes the question of finances. While he is not a poor man, the kind of resources needed to pull off something as massive is not found lying around in any household. Over time, three theories have emerged. First, of course, the establishment’s backing. Second, financing by the country’s trading community which was at loggerheads with the federal government back then. Third, the money given by the two major opposition parties — the PML-N and the PPP. Strangely enough, our mainstream television media does not believe in asking such questions. Its main interest lies in counting the number of participants, glamorising and sensationalising such events. In short, our television media digs bad boys and does everything to romanticise their acts of defiance.
The theories about collusion between the deep state and the protesters or the silent sponsorship by the traders fall apart when you see that shortly before the arrival of the march, the protesting traders reached an agreement with the government. Had this been delayed by a few days, the protest by the traders could have a snowball effect on Maulana’s march. And since apart from preserving its own interest, the trading community is traditionally found quite amenable to the establishment’s concerns, there is a zero chance that an agreement could have been reached if the establishment was out to get the incumbents. The truth is that he had used very crude language against the state and its institutions which are unlikely to be forgotten in a hurry. Hence, nothing to report there.
At the time of filing of this piece, he had not given his first speech in Islamabad. Consequently, there is room to dispute his true intentions. However, if they are to be judged by his recent interviews, he does not intend to wind things up too soon. And even if he did, the amount of attention given to his march would ensure that he shortly returned with more men.
The working hypothesis right now is that the leaderships of the PML-N and the PPP (the Zardari and Sharif families) pooled together their resources in hopes of seeking reprieve from further prosecution and the main impulse for the entire episode came from Asif Zardari. Be it as it may, there are other more complicated and far-fetched hypotheses silently being shared by the critics of the march. Before we get to them, let me share with you a personal conclusion based on my own interactions with the political class. I am confident that the political class of the country is not self-aware enough to be a willing pawn of any foreign-sponsored campaign. There are, of course, those who do not want to rule out the theory in its cruder form and would cite Zardari’s closeness with a former Pakistani ambassador who serves at a foreign think tank now. But that is reminiscent of similar theories about a former intelligence chief during the current ruling party’s own sit-ins. It is better to ignore such speculation.
However, if you factor in a foreign power’s ability to mould atmospherics on both sides of the divide especially based on its own security adviser’s pronouncements, you get a broader appreciation of the kind of tactics that might be at play. Politicians react to local dynamics. If you have even a remote influence on such dynamics, you can predict what kind of response you are likely to elicit. And strange things are often known to happen in this country. For instance, just before the country’s prime minister, along with the army and intelligence chiefs, is to visit the US, the video footage of a judge whose verdict imprisoned the former premier emerges out of nowhere. Once the trip is over, the entire issue dissipates dramatically. Likewise, an unprecedented intensity is witnessed in the opposition activities when the same prime minister delivers an effective speech at the UNGA. This is the subtle art of manoeuvring winds and images.
Let me also remind you how a certain country’s media has been shaping up its narrative on Pakistan. During the previous government’s rule, sensing a degree of gullibility, it incessantly talked about the civil-military divide. Under the current dispensation when an effort was made not to let cracks appear between the civil and military sides, gears of narrative shifted. Now the incumbents were brought in by the establishment itself. Even the Foreign Office of the said country would use derogatory language against Pakistan’s PM on record. Spin such tales, introduce small and confusing interventions through some low-level operatives and then in a polarised environment, watch people go after each other’s throats. Just a cut here and a pinch there. A country whose media pundits are not keen to apply the scientific method to their analysis or to appreciate the link between causes and effects is more prone to lap it up. Remember how just before the signing of the JCPOA that would have seen the activation of Chabahar Port which could be accessed by this country, Pakistan was expecting the arrival of the Chinese President who was to arrive to announce CPEC commissioning Gwadar port; and then a journalist was attacked, the intel chief was immediately blamed for it and dynamics were significantly altered? Now take stock of how many of those who put an effort into rebuilding relations with the US had to endure an unceremonious end to their career. Far-fetched right? But then I am not one who has constantly been talking about defensive offense. You know who is.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 2nd, 2019.
Maulana’s own platform is also a source of controversy. Despite the political savvy of the man at the top, it essentially is a religious outfit. When the JUI-F led MMA alliance rose to power in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P), its first act was not to improve governance but to attack and destroy billboards with the pictures of female models. For a country that has endured almost two decades of religion-driven terrorism, this cannot be a source of comfort. While he himself has been a victim of terrorism and has survived a suicide attack, his ideology is not dramatically different from that of the Taliban. So his arrival in the federal capital with a large number of devoted followers is bound to give many quite a headache.
Then comes the question of finances. While he is not a poor man, the kind of resources needed to pull off something as massive is not found lying around in any household. Over time, three theories have emerged. First, of course, the establishment’s backing. Second, financing by the country’s trading community which was at loggerheads with the federal government back then. Third, the money given by the two major opposition parties — the PML-N and the PPP. Strangely enough, our mainstream television media does not believe in asking such questions. Its main interest lies in counting the number of participants, glamorising and sensationalising such events. In short, our television media digs bad boys and does everything to romanticise their acts of defiance.
The theories about collusion between the deep state and the protesters or the silent sponsorship by the traders fall apart when you see that shortly before the arrival of the march, the protesting traders reached an agreement with the government. Had this been delayed by a few days, the protest by the traders could have a snowball effect on Maulana’s march. And since apart from preserving its own interest, the trading community is traditionally found quite amenable to the establishment’s concerns, there is a zero chance that an agreement could have been reached if the establishment was out to get the incumbents. The truth is that he had used very crude language against the state and its institutions which are unlikely to be forgotten in a hurry. Hence, nothing to report there.
At the time of filing of this piece, he had not given his first speech in Islamabad. Consequently, there is room to dispute his true intentions. However, if they are to be judged by his recent interviews, he does not intend to wind things up too soon. And even if he did, the amount of attention given to his march would ensure that he shortly returned with more men.
The working hypothesis right now is that the leaderships of the PML-N and the PPP (the Zardari and Sharif families) pooled together their resources in hopes of seeking reprieve from further prosecution and the main impulse for the entire episode came from Asif Zardari. Be it as it may, there are other more complicated and far-fetched hypotheses silently being shared by the critics of the march. Before we get to them, let me share with you a personal conclusion based on my own interactions with the political class. I am confident that the political class of the country is not self-aware enough to be a willing pawn of any foreign-sponsored campaign. There are, of course, those who do not want to rule out the theory in its cruder form and would cite Zardari’s closeness with a former Pakistani ambassador who serves at a foreign think tank now. But that is reminiscent of similar theories about a former intelligence chief during the current ruling party’s own sit-ins. It is better to ignore such speculation.
However, if you factor in a foreign power’s ability to mould atmospherics on both sides of the divide especially based on its own security adviser’s pronouncements, you get a broader appreciation of the kind of tactics that might be at play. Politicians react to local dynamics. If you have even a remote influence on such dynamics, you can predict what kind of response you are likely to elicit. And strange things are often known to happen in this country. For instance, just before the country’s prime minister, along with the army and intelligence chiefs, is to visit the US, the video footage of a judge whose verdict imprisoned the former premier emerges out of nowhere. Once the trip is over, the entire issue dissipates dramatically. Likewise, an unprecedented intensity is witnessed in the opposition activities when the same prime minister delivers an effective speech at the UNGA. This is the subtle art of manoeuvring winds and images.
Let me also remind you how a certain country’s media has been shaping up its narrative on Pakistan. During the previous government’s rule, sensing a degree of gullibility, it incessantly talked about the civil-military divide. Under the current dispensation when an effort was made not to let cracks appear between the civil and military sides, gears of narrative shifted. Now the incumbents were brought in by the establishment itself. Even the Foreign Office of the said country would use derogatory language against Pakistan’s PM on record. Spin such tales, introduce small and confusing interventions through some low-level operatives and then in a polarised environment, watch people go after each other’s throats. Just a cut here and a pinch there. A country whose media pundits are not keen to apply the scientific method to their analysis or to appreciate the link between causes and effects is more prone to lap it up. Remember how just before the signing of the JCPOA that would have seen the activation of Chabahar Port which could be accessed by this country, Pakistan was expecting the arrival of the Chinese President who was to arrive to announce CPEC commissioning Gwadar port; and then a journalist was attacked, the intel chief was immediately blamed for it and dynamics were significantly altered? Now take stock of how many of those who put an effort into rebuilding relations with the US had to endure an unceremonious end to their career. Far-fetched right? But then I am not one who has constantly been talking about defensive offense. You know who is.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 2nd, 2019.