The rise in the number of attacks targeting political parties’ rallies and candidates’ meeting venues and offices has given way to doubts whether elections will even take place in Pakistan. Scheduled for May 11, the coming polls seem to have given an ideal opportunity for vested groups to indulge a free hand in targeted killings and revenge tactics. A series of attacks in Karachi, Peshawar and in the settled areas adjoining the tribal belt in Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa (KP) province in the past few weeks are a grim reminder of the tough challenge ahead. Following Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan’s (TTP) targeting of a Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) office in Karachi last Saturday, which killed nine people, three more attacks on Sunday in Kohat, Swabi and Peshawar have proven that the TTP intends to deliver on its promise of targeting the outgoing coalition parties.
Most of these targeted operations are against political parties that were part of the Pakistan Peoples Party-led coalition. As per the TTP Shura Council’s decision, secular politicians who were also part of the last government and thus responsible for the military operations against the Taliban, would be targeted. This selective targeting thus includes the PPP, MQM and the Awami National Party (ANP). The Taliban have also issued warnings to some independent candidates, perceived by them to be secular, to abstain from participation in elections all together. So widespread is the fear in Balochistan that teachers have refused to work at polling stations citing threat to security.
What is hard to reconcile with is that this is not a sudden Taliban-prompted scare, but a continuation on the same lines as the attacks on ethnic and sectarian minorities one witnessed over the past year, especially in Quetta and Karachi. Worse is the fact that despite the gains made over the past five years owing to military operations in Swat and parts of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), the government was not able to impose its writ. The results of the outgoing government’s political indecisiveness to execute a consolidation strategy in the areas cleared of militants and to extend the ambit of operations to flush out the Taliban from remaining strongholds are now clear.
Ironically, it is the Taliban, who, for the first time in Pakistan’s electoral history — dismal as it is — have arisen as a potent and disruptive factor that will inadvertently influence not only the ballot, but also any future government policies. But the next government, however pro-dialogue and in favour of reconciliation it may be, will have to deal with the issue of militancy in a firm and comprehensive manner. Any dithering or retreat will have major repercussions not only on Pakistan’s foreign policy, but domestic strategy as well.
At the same time, clear lines will have to be drawn in the war on terror and public acknowledgement of Pakistan’s ongoing cooperation with the US, whether it is the tacit agreement on allowing drone strikes on its own people or other hidden agenda.
The reason why Taliban have decided not to target Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) or religious parties like the Jamat-e-Islami (JUI) or Jamat-e-Ulema Islam Fazlullah (JUI-F) or even the Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaaf (PTI) may be because they do not feel threatened by their leadership. TTP spokesperson Ehsanullah Ehsan’s categorical statement that his organisation was “neither against nor in favour of the PTI, PML-N, JUI and JUI-F ... but why they are not targeted is our own prerogative to decide” could be taken with a pinch of salt.
PML-N leader and former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, while adopting an anti-terrorist stance on occasions where the Taliban have struck, has never spelt out any clear policy on dealing with militancy except blaming it on the counter-terrorist alliance former president general Pervez Musharraf had forged with the US. His election mantra has been aimed at fixing the economic ills and creating employment opportunities for a highly disgruntled electorate whose sufferings in the last PPP tenure seem to have grown exponentially.
As for the JUI and JUI-F, their role in decision-making will depend on the gains they make in parliament. However, any expectation that they may target militancy should be put aside. Public ire with the ANP’s provincial government in KP, whose poor governance and penchant for setting new records in corruption, is likely to play to the advantage of the religious parties.
Similarly, PTI chairman, former cricketer and philanthropist, Imran Khan, has always spoken out against military operations and advocated the return of the tribal elders system and dialogue with the Taliban. He has even gone to the extent of promising to send the Pakistan armed forces back to the barracks from Swat and parts of Fata on assuming power. No wonder Imran’s main selling points, his celebrity cricket past and his opposition to military operations, have endeared him among the rural populace in the tribal belt and the frontier. However, how he envisages a reinstatement of the traditional tribal elders system and empowering the Maleks and Masharaan (elders) to deal with armed militants in the absence of the army remains a mystery.
Imran may yet have to face his own reality check if and when time comes, but it may be best for him to leave policy-making till the time his party gets a chance at the helm. It will also depend on how many seats the PTI can secure to swing a coalition government in parliament. So far, Imran has refused to form a coalition with either of the two mainstream parties, the PPP or PML-N, but how long he withstands future pressure from among his own party members remains to be seen.
In the midst of this political turbulence is the drama involving Musharraf. Judicial dealing of the ex-army chief in the Benazir Bhutto assassination case can prove crucial as any arm-twisting or blame game at this juncture can open a Pandora’s box. His return to Pakistan last month has already sparked a debate and divided public opinion about accountability of ex-army bigwigs, institutional impartiality and persecution.
While elections are being anticipated with varying degree of feelings among the people — ranging from scepticism and resignation to enthusiasm — the period post-elections will prove to be the litmus test for any party burdened with the task of leading the country for the next five years. The biggest question is what remedial measures any new setup will undertake to turn things around. Unless a drastic U-turn is taken on matters of public policy and security, continued dichotomy among the executive, judiciary and military will only deepen tensions and create unrest.
More important, what no political party can afford is further procrastination on issues of national interests — whether it is countering homegrown militancy, imposing stringent measures to put the ailing economy back on track or targeting corruption. It is high time that politics of expediency is put aside.
