Not a false start
The seemingly endless political battle within Pakistan between the government and the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), read Imran Khan, seems to have entered a lull — though not a complete ceasefire. There has been a delay in announcing likely convictions in some cases, including the £190 million Al-Qadir Trust case against Imran Khan. Nevertheless, rounding up and intimidating PTI supporters continue and the controversial military courts have rapidly handed down dozens of convictions.
So for now between the government and the PTI it’s the Maoist dictum: da da tan tan — fight fight, talk talk.
The government which had sought to ban the PTI is now emphasising the significance of dialogue. Meanwhile, the PTI leadership too has held back on its previous “all or nothing” approach. It no longer demands the “immediate return of mandate” nor gives unrealistic deadlines to the government to deliver on the PTI’s demands. And above all, the PTI has entered into a dialogue with the government and not the “real power-wielders”, as it would earlier insist upon.
The dialogue is a consequence of multiple factors. Both sides having taken maximalist positions to knock out the other, now know that a zero-sum outcome for neither side is possible. The government has deployed all the powers available at its command, often stepping outside constitutionally set legal parameters. It has prevented the PTI’s street power but has failed to weaken public support for Imran Khan, who alone commands public support for the PTI. Imran Khan has refused, despite multiple pressures, a safe exit from imprisonment.
In addition to these is the flurry of tweets from US President-elect Trump’s camp, which must likely influence the establishment-guided government’s policy on dialogue with the PTI. Richard Grenell, a long-time Trump foreign policy adviser now to take over as Trump’s special mission’s envoy, is regularly shooting off “Free Imran Khan” tweets.
Similarly, “thinking heads” within the PTI too realise that an all-out win against the establishment-supported government is not possible. The PTI’s call to street protest including the “final call” may have cost the party at least 12 political martyrs, yet there is no chance of the PTI’s street power against the state. Interestingly, the PTI’s active participation as parliamentarians and as the KP government in the very post-election system that it seeks to wrap up also to some extent blunts the logic of fiercely battling the government.
Fortunately, the fight-fight-talk-talk approach has been one that has consistently been adopted by the two principal parties in this almost two-year-long political confrontation. Accordingly whatever public display, through words and actions, of anger and confrontation, several informal channels of communication between the PTI and the establishment/government have remained active. Perhaps the establishment’s principal communication channel with the PTI has remained unbroken with Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi and the KP chief minister conducting the establishment-PTI dialogue throughout the last year. The government-PTI December 23 dialogue was preceded by the Gandapur-Naqvi day-long December 20 meeting. Perhaps major differences were ironed out so the dialogue was not aborted at the start.
So now after a 20-month hiatus, the PTI has entered into talks with the government over thorny political issues including the release of political prisoners and setting up judicial commissions for the May 9, 2023, and November 26 incidents. In terms of the process and substance of the talks, three things will be critical. One, agreeing on some ground rules, avoiding personalised attacks, not seeking to “defeat” each other through informally feeding negativity to the media, making an effort to remain positive in public about the talks etc. It appears an agreed code of conduct between the interlocutors is already at work.
Two, that the government demonstrates that it is willing to address the concerns behind the PTI’s demands which means that you would engage with the PTI on the possibilities that can be made available to address those concerns. Obviously, the talks cannot provide an immediate instant one-round solution process that needs to be started where commitment from both sides is transparently conveyed in the public arena. Three, the environment and the context need to be kept calm during the talks.
Significantly, many post-talk positive statements have been made from both sides. For example, seasoned Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Rana Sanaullah emphasised that there is no reason why the confrontation between the government and the opposition can’t be converted into a positive process dialogue solution. Similarly, when asked about likely developments, Asad Qaiser wisely refused to say anything about it and said he would only talk about demands. This seems to mean that some understanding has been reached to remain positive and not speculate too much.
The track record of dialogue between the PTI and government has been mixed. In the case of the 26th Amendment, several rounds of dialogue took place and initial reports did build up hopes of arriving at a common position. Perhaps given that the government was committed to setting up the constitutional court, and ensuring the appointment of judges whose observations it was comfortable with, arriving at a common position between them and the PTI was not possible. Still, the dialogue diffused tension and also led to the PTI finally becoming part of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan. That process of political engagement on the 26th Amendment enables the PTI to build bridges with the JUI.
The specific negotiating teams actually directly address crisis issues and that improves the climate of politics in the country. For example, around May or June 2022, the negotiating teams led by Ishaq Dar and Shah Mahmood Qureshi, over the question of elections, actually managed the breakthrough. Having talked to members of both teams, it had become abundantly clear that the government had agreed to resolve parliament and fresh elections around August but Imran Khan demanded an immediate step. This was not possible and at the same time, the government in Punjab went full throttle against PTI President Chaudhary Parvez Elahi. So, while breakthroughs are possible, the 2022 negotiation clearly demonstrated that patience had to be exercised by both sides.
Clearly, as indicated by Imran Khan’s statement that the offer of shifting him to house arrest had been made, the Naqvi-Gandapur dialogue has helped to create some understanding and a modicum of ceasefire. While multiple issues will still have to be agreed upon to arrive at some common ground for an implementable agreement, there is some hope of a political breakthrough on Pakistan’s long-embattled political horizons.
The writer is a senior journalist. She tweets at @nasimzehra and can be reached at: [email protected]
Disclaimer: The viewpoints expressed in this piece are the writer’s own and don’t necessarily reflect Geo.tv’s editorial policy.
Originally published in The News
