ALMOST all opposition parties have joined hands in forming a new alliance – Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) to launch a country-wide protest campaign against the incumbent Government. Their leadership gathered in Islamabad on Sunday for an All Parties Conference (APC) convened by PPP leader Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, which was also participated and addressed by former Prime Minister and PML(N) leader Mian Nawaz Sharif through video link from London. The moot adopted a 26-point resolution calling for immediate resignation of Prime Minister Imran Khan and vowing to launch a three-phased anti-government movement under an “action plan” starting from October with countrywide public meetings, protest demonstrations and rallies in December and a “decisive long march” towards Islamabad in January 2021.
The spokespersons of the Government have termed the APC as ganging up of corrupt mafia, adding that it was a flimsy attempt to put pressure on the Government to back off on accountability but the process would continue unhindered. However, the decisions taken by the opposition and the reaction of the Government clearly point towards further rise in political temperature, which does not augur well for much needed continuity and stability. There are many ifs and buts as far as actual implementation of the plan announced by the APC is concerned and there are also indications that the Government was quite capable of managing the situation as was reflected in its ability to get crucial legislation adopted by the joint sitting of Parliament where the opposition apparently had numerical superiority. Similar threats and plans were also announced and launched in the past as well but they failed to help the opposition realize its goals and objectives as it stood divided on key issues. No doubt, now the opposition parties have formed a formal alliance but glaring divisions on important matters and differences over strategy to pressurize the Government still persist as they were highlighted during meetings of the Rahbar Committee. In fact, polarity of views of the participating leaders of APC has also been reported by the media especially on the issue of resignations from the assemblies.
The impression that Maulana Fazlur Rehman got from non-broadcast of his speech also highlighted split, lack of trust and mutual understanding among different parties. As for demands of the opposition are concerned, it is quite evident that the Government would pay no heed to the call for resignation of the Prime Minister as it did successfully in the past. There is also no major threat to the Government during the intervening period – from now onwards to January – when the opposition intends to rely on mass contact. Like the opposition, the Government too can mobilize public opinion on the basis of its own narrative that paid it during the last two years. However, the real challenge would be the proposed long march (and sit-in), which the opposition plans to organize as a last resort to pressurize the Government to resign and announce fresh elections. It is also a fact that none of the sit-ins of the past succeeded in achieving their real goals but the pressure built on the Government and due to disruption of the normal life, the writ of the Governments in power eroded.
Political analysts also believe the Government has certain leverages that it can use during the next few months to undermine strength and unity of the opposition parties. Irrespective of any gain or loss by the two sides during political confrontation, there are no two opinions that such postures add to the miseries of the people. This is particularly so in the present situation when people are striving hard to cope with the socio-economic consequences of Covid-19 and the Government too needs peace of mind to bring the economy back on rail. The opposition has surely raised the ante especially after the hard-hitting speech of Mian Nawaz Sharif, who broke his long silence to speak on his pet topics of political engineering, respect for vote and lop-sided process of accountability. Different views are being expressed on what prompted him to speak against institutions – non-fulfilment of pledges, utter frustration or part of the strategy to seek political asylum in the United Kingdom. Some circles claim his pronouncements belie the impression he went abroad under a deal while others believe he violated the understanding that culminated in his departure for the UK for medical treatment. Anyhow, as the two sides are unlikely to gain anything substantial from political confrontation, the sanity demands covert or overt contacts and dialogue to defuse the tension for the sake of continuity of the system that is a pre-requisite for success of welfare agenda of the Government.
