Assessing the Long March
Following the long march, Zardari got everything, Nawaz got something but Imran got nothing.
The writer is a PhD Scholar at West Virginia University in the US
There is voluminous literature in social sciences regarding genuine people’s protests or movements, rebellions and revolutions. There are also numerous examples in history of when dictators or authoritarian regimes created fake political forces in order to belittle or eliminate real political actors. Dr Tahirul Qadri’s Long March does not fall into the first category of a genuine people’s protest. Therefore, it can only be assessed in terms of a political gain or loss perspective. The political gain or loss is judged in relative terms, i.e., the non-zero-sum game when one’s profit is the other’s loss. Moreover, in economics and decision theories, psychologically, the losses are twice as powerful as the gains. As far as the financial losses are concerned, the shareholders at the Karachi Stock Exchange had to bear major losses worth hundreds of billions of rupees due to a drop of over 500 points in a single day. The biggest financial beneficiaries of this march, other than the Minhajul Quran, were the owners and anchors of TV channels. Which political figure or force is the biggest beneficiary of Dr Qadri’s march? This is a billion dollar question. In this piece, I try to find the answer, focusing on the following seven points.
First, the happy ending of the March was a surprise to anti-democratic forces, which are already desperate. Mirza Ghalib, the great Urdu/Persian poet depicted the situation as: Thi khabar garm ki Ghalib ke udenge purze/ Daikhne hum bhi gaye thay, par tamasha na hua
Second, all political forces agreed to let the government complete its term. Since the 1985 elections, no ‘dismissed government’ has come into power again in the following elections. Psychologically, Pakistani voters do not vote for the ‘dismissed party’, knowing that the military establishment would not allow it to come into power again. On the other hand, those ruling parties that completed their terms in office, achieved victory or significant electoral success in the elections that followed. The PPP’s comeback in the 1977 elections and the electoral gains of the PML-Q in the 2008 elections are examples. In other words, the theory of ‘political martyrdom’ projected by the Pakistani media is absolutely incorrect. President Asif Ali Zardari knew this and tried his best to avoid political martyrdom because it could absolutely finish his chance to make a comeback. But now, the ruling alliance has a chance to come into power again.
Third, this token Long March also eliminated the chances of a genuine political march/revolution against the ruling elite, such as the PTI’s tsunami. Fourth, it also served the interests of international players as it helped maintain the status quo by preventing any kind of revolution like the ones that happened in the Middle East. Fifth, during this march, the ruling alliance showed its unity and solidarity, indicating that its policy of ‘reconciliation’ is still alive. On the other hand, the major opposition parties are still divided, particularly the PML-N and the PTI. There are also chances of new ‘alliances’ for the coming elections but not with major shifts. Sixth, despite all the criticism heaped upon Dr Qadri, it is highly unjust not to accept his emergence as an influential political leader after this march. In the upcoming elections, he can damage the ruling PML-N in Punjab by splitting the anti-PPP vote, particularly in rural Punjab. If Dr Qadri decides to make an alliance with likeminded parties, such as the PTI, this will also damage the PML-N.
Finally, the ruling coalition has also shown its capacity and courage to fight the opposition through political means. As there are always chances of public protests after elections, President Zardari is trying to ensure that no party sabotages the political process even after the elections. In 1977, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto failed to reply to the opposition by utilising his political capital. He did not mobilise political forces, either before or after the elections. As a preemptive action and as a precautionary measure, President Zardari is taking care of this phenomenon, too. Let me sum up the outcome of this March through this equation: President Zardari got everything, Nawaz Sharif got something, but Imran Khan got nothing. Thus, there shouldn’t be any doubt about who the producer, director and writer of this drama are.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 23rd, 2013.
First, the happy ending of the March was a surprise to anti-democratic forces, which are already desperate. Mirza Ghalib, the great Urdu/Persian poet depicted the situation as: Thi khabar garm ki Ghalib ke udenge purze/ Daikhne hum bhi gaye thay, par tamasha na hua
Second, all political forces agreed to let the government complete its term. Since the 1985 elections, no ‘dismissed government’ has come into power again in the following elections. Psychologically, Pakistani voters do not vote for the ‘dismissed party’, knowing that the military establishment would not allow it to come into power again. On the other hand, those ruling parties that completed their terms in office, achieved victory or significant electoral success in the elections that followed. The PPP’s comeback in the 1977 elections and the electoral gains of the PML-Q in the 2008 elections are examples. In other words, the theory of ‘political martyrdom’ projected by the Pakistani media is absolutely incorrect. President Asif Ali Zardari knew this and tried his best to avoid political martyrdom because it could absolutely finish his chance to make a comeback. But now, the ruling alliance has a chance to come into power again.
Third, this token Long March also eliminated the chances of a genuine political march/revolution against the ruling elite, such as the PTI’s tsunami. Fourth, it also served the interests of international players as it helped maintain the status quo by preventing any kind of revolution like the ones that happened in the Middle East. Fifth, during this march, the ruling alliance showed its unity and solidarity, indicating that its policy of ‘reconciliation’ is still alive. On the other hand, the major opposition parties are still divided, particularly the PML-N and the PTI. There are also chances of new ‘alliances’ for the coming elections but not with major shifts. Sixth, despite all the criticism heaped upon Dr Qadri, it is highly unjust not to accept his emergence as an influential political leader after this march. In the upcoming elections, he can damage the ruling PML-N in Punjab by splitting the anti-PPP vote, particularly in rural Punjab. If Dr Qadri decides to make an alliance with likeminded parties, such as the PTI, this will also damage the PML-N.
Finally, the ruling coalition has also shown its capacity and courage to fight the opposition through political means. As there are always chances of public protests after elections, President Zardari is trying to ensure that no party sabotages the political process even after the elections. In 1977, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto failed to reply to the opposition by utilising his political capital. He did not mobilise political forces, either before or after the elections. As a preemptive action and as a precautionary measure, President Zardari is taking care of this phenomenon, too. Let me sum up the outcome of this March through this equation: President Zardari got everything, Nawaz Sharif got something, but Imran Khan got nothing. Thus, there shouldn’t be any doubt about who the producer, director and writer of this drama are.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 23rd, 2013.