 |
The Friday Times, 72 FCC Gulberg 4, Lahore, Pakistan |
|
Everybody loves Raymond?
|
|
| Erum Haider The Davis case casts a long shadow over issues of foreign policy and security |
|
|
|
|
|
Raymond Davis is a godsend amongst a baffling barrage of events that threaten to render even mainstream parties redundant in their helplessness: blasphemy and minority rights abuses, rising inflation, and political instability. Issues such as unemployment and inflation are notoriously difficult to build consensus around. On the other hand, even the most hardened rationalists have trouble arguing that the core of the Davis issue was not inherently unjust. The Davis case casts a long shadow over issues of foreign policy and security, on which many good articles have been written already. It has exposed fissures in the US-Pakistan relationship, something which observers have been pointing out from the very beginning. And it is one of those rare cases where the entire parcel of the incumbent government is so thoroughly complicit in the crimes it allows on its territory that only those parties which have nothing to lose and no alternatives to put into practice can afford to take a stand. Enter Imran Khan. Skillfully lumping together the army, the central government and sitting political parties, Khan reserved the worst of his vitriol for his rivals in Punjab, the Sharifs. The “rich factory-builders” who promised to try Davis in court were in all likelihood aware of the American’s eventual release. There was also almost certainly an expectation that religious parties will make a cause célèbre out of such issues. What few people in Pakistan were expecting is that PTI would be leading the charge. Amidst the contempt heaped on Imran Khan for colluding with Syed Munawarul Hasan of JI (although this isn’t the first time such an alliance has been made), and the outright ridicule of Khan’s young, urban (read: “burger”) supporters; is a deep, underlying insecurity. Has the Khan, with his Oxford roots and ostensible “enlightened moderate” leanings, finally “gone fundo”? The hundreds of people who showed up on Friday in various parts of the country were not the tens of thousands who came out on the 9th of January in support of the blasphemy laws, although many of them may support a more conservative view on the issue of blasphemy. From blogs and various forums it appears that PTI’s nationalistic rhetoric which is big on ideals and shy on particulars is especially appealing to young people and those in the upper-middle class who are deeply distrustful of mainstream politics. As one supporter in Karachi noted, the entire draw of Khan’s party is that it is different from the horse-trading that takes place in Islamabad: “we need to show that we haven’t been bought out, like the other parties.” And yet, as Khan reaches out to religious parties and “opens dialogue” with mainstream parties, as his party members like to put it, PTI finds itself struggling to remain the only “clean and non-corrupt” party in town. Perhaps his followers, contemptuous as they are of dirty politics, will abandon Khan as his party begins the messy business of electoral campaigning and bargaining in 2013. However, some supporters have already begun to reconcile themselves with the idea of going mainstream. The strike call on Friday last week was one such example. According to the PTI, it was a necessary show of strength for all the threats made during the Davis trial. For parties outside the fold during a period of civilian rule, such protests are the bread and butter of their work. The Jamat e Islami echoes this view: “we took a principled stand during the trial,” says JI Secretary of Information, Sarfaraz Ahmed. “We can’t face our constituents if we do not follow up on these threats, no one will take us seriously.” Such is the lot of minority parties during civilian rule. In the absence of seats in government, whether incumbent or in opposition, they are constantly on the verge of total anonymity. During times of prosperity they may support mainstream parties, adding to numbers on the street during rallies. During times of distress they distance themselves, calling for radical change. So far, such calls for change by the PTI and the JI have been ridiculed by mainstream parties and the press. However, the anger that these parties opportunistically exploit, and thereby amplify, is not completely insignificant. Davis’ case falls into a lowest-common-denominator agenda between parties on the left and right, conservative and liberal: national sovereignty. The JI calls it “anti-Americanism” and adds it to the general idea that American “involvement” is the root cause of problems facing Pakistanis today; PTI stands for respect for human rights and autonomy writ large. Such opportunities for agreement and street mobilization are few and far between. The argument is not, therefore, whether this tiny victory will matter, if at all, to the PTI’s miniscule voter base in 2013. However, it is almost certain that the chairman of the party was left with little choice but to take this opportunity in order to be in the running for the polls. His supporters, similarly, have little choice but to ignore their own logical inconsistencies – benefiting from the gains of globalised Pakistan while wanting to distance themselves from a superpower, despising political parties but struggling to be taken seriously at the same forum. Such is the nature of politics everywhere, and they will be no worse off for attempting to learn the rules of the game. As always, the clear winner in this round (besides, I suppose, Raymond Davis himself) is the Pakistani intelligence. Artfully playing the same game they’ve perfected over the last three decades, they reiterate private assurances of support for the war on terror as their anthem of “national sovereignty” is chanted over by the media and “popular movements.” Digging deeper trenches of mistrust between the people of the two countries, they’ve convinced both that they are the last bastion of freedom against the animals on the other side. |
|
It seems that Imran Khan has gotten his wish. A suitably ambiguous yet highly contentious issue? Check. A slow and blundering civilian government? Check. A no-objection certificate from rival party the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) and finally, a tacitly acquiescent Army? Check.
Advertisement
