Politics as the art of the possible, attributed to Otto von Bismarck, is an adage that Pakistani politicians appear to be dedicated to revalidating. Forming alliances to save one's government against those one has accused of murder, corruption and poor governance has certainly not been unique to the present dispensation.
On the other side of the coin the obvious attraction for the coalition partner is the chance of manipulating the decision-making process with considerable financial benefits. Prospective coalition partners have, over time, begun to require protection/amnesty from previous 'indiscretions' ranging from murder to manipulating the procurement/bidding process. Such protection was extended in the past through a subordinate judiciary (skeptics should revisit the taped record of Musharraf's last Attorney General when he was a judge) and since the reappointment of Iftikhar Chaudhry as the Chief Justice, through manipulating the state's investigative branch. The outcome of coalition politics in Pakistan has been indifference to the politics of principles, except rhetorically. Nawaz Sharif's claims of adherence to principles can be easily challenged given the party's alliance first with the PPP and now with the breakaway faction of PML (Q).
Another factor that has impacted on the politics of coalitions is the personality and the overarching objective of the decision-makers. In Pakistan, irrespective of whether we were ruled by an army dictator or a democratically elected party with a central executive committee or raabita committee ostensibly taking key decisions after consultation, the decision maker of any party has remained one individual. In addition, most parties with representation in parliament today, barring MQM, did undergo a change of leadership - a change that would naturally be accompanied by a change in strategy due to evolving socio-economic conditions and/or political compulsions. The MQM has not undergone any leadership change yet and many argue that this may perhaps explain the continuation of a strategy that may no longer survive the test of these trying times.
Be that as it may, one must ask whether the quality of party leadership has improved over time in those parties where the party chairman has changed? There will be few, if any, takers for the view that the bulk of the current membership of various factions of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML), including their leaders, would be absorbed in the party if Jinnah were alive today? By that same token one may well ask how many members of the present PPP would be members of the central executive committee if Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was alive today? Or, Benazir Bhutto for that matter? However Asfandyar Wali Khan would, no doubt, have exerted considerable influence on his predecessor, his father. So much for the political giants of today!
Pakistan today is suffering from a range of deep malaise that should definitely make it next to impossible for any one to place one prevailing malaise ahead of anther: does one consider sustained profligacy displayed by members of the executive that accounts for highly inflationary burgeoning budget deficits above massive loadshedding that leaves billions without power for half the day in the sweltering heat third year running? Would one place the billions of rupees of financial scams sourced to appointments by the current executive over and above the steady rise in utility tariffs that are partly premised on the government's inability to enforce payment for electricity consumed by entities that come under its jurisdiction? Isn't the spread of dengue due to lack of appropriate measures, criminal negligence which may not be ahead of the complaints of government indifference by Sindh's flood-affected? What about the ongoing war on terror that has left thousands dead, including members of the armed forces, and that continues to take its toll? Difficult as it is to identify one single negative factor prevailing in our country today the fact remains that there is some agreement that all these major issues have taken a back seat to the problems in Karachi which, according to DG Rangers, is more complex than Waziristan.
Karachi gives representation to three major political parties. The Karachi pie as per the Sindh Assembly official website is shared as follows: 33 seats to MQM, 6 to PPP and 2 to ANP. Karachi clearly belongs to the MQM. These numbers suggest that MQM can bring Karachi to a halt if it so wishes and needless to add MQM has demonstrated this repeatedly. This has been acknowledged by military-led governments as well as PML (N) and PPP-led governments of yesteryear and the present. With Karachi shut down, the economic fallout on the rest of the country is simply untenable for Islamabad: Karachi is the undisputed financial and commercial capital of the country with 20 percent contribution to GDP, accounting for 53.38 percent of total Federal Board of Revenue collections in one year and 30 percent of value addition in large-scale manufacturing (LSM). There is bi- or in this case tri-partisan agreement that Karachi is in turmoil and in this instance, the loss to the depleted treasury is incalculable.
However Sindh province, the 2008 elections reaffirmed, belongs to the PPP and to complicate matters a bit further Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa belongs to ANP, a coalition partner in the centre. Thus while one may accept the fact that the PPP controls the administration in Karachi, namely police, yet given MQM's overwhelming representation in the city the PPP would find it a challenge to control the city without at least tacit MQM support.
Be that as it may, the six PPP seats and the 2 ANP seats from Karachi may reflect a disturbing political trend for the MQM high command: that its strength may erode as the city's ethnic mix changes over time. To migrate to Karachi in search of jobs is attractive and doable for Sindhis, Pushtuns, Punjabis and Balochs, however, the Mohajirs cannot attract numbers from outside the city with their numbers limited. The only option for MQM in that case, so charge PPP and ANP, is to ensure that migration to cash flush Karachi does not take place.
The MQM has publicly accused Zulfiqar Mirza, considered by many Karachiites as the whistleblower irrespective of who if anyone is pushing his buttons, and the media of fuelling anti-Mohajir sentiments with charges of breaking up Pakistan thrown in for good measure - charges that seem to be rather commonly hurled at one's political opponents in this country with little or no repercussions. Mirza says he has proof of MQM complicity in criminal activity, a view supported by the Joint Investigation Team reports that have been presented to the Supreme Court. The MQM's defence so far, including the four-hour long press conference by Altaf Hussain, is to proclaim 'not guilty' on all counts. What is necessary is for the MQM to acknowledge that conditions - socio-economic, political, and media-related - have changed in the aftermath of Mirza's tirade which necessitates a change in strategy: from outright denial to clarification backed by verifiable proof. A map, however incendiary, can be drawn with ease by a third grade student today on his computer until and unless it has verifiable signatures.
There is no doubt that MQM jalsas are markedly distinct from those organised by other political parties: the crowds are never unruly and patiently seat themselves on the floor to listen raptly to their leadership (be it telephonically delivered or live). In marked contrast other political leaders address unruly crowds though they do have some audience members who are obviously planted. The reason, so claim other parties, is because MQM continues to rule Karachi by fear even though many of its members have delivered much appreciated public programmes. Whatever the defence and attack positions taken by the MQM leadership and other political parties in the current imbroglio, one extremely significant PPP and ANP public admission must compel the MQM to change its tactics: the admission that they extend political patronage to criminals in Karachi (inclusive of those engaged in torture, murders and bhatta collections) but maintain that this is in retaliation or response to similar activities by the MQM.
So what is the solution? Army operations in the past have failed to bring sustained peace to Karachi. Even if the ongoing operation in Karachi is non-partisan and across-the-board, and political parties have already expressed their reservations on this matter, the political players must draw some valuable lessons from the resolution of what was regarded as the intractable Irish problem. After decades of terror attacks on English targets on 28th July 2005, the Irish Republican Army announced an end to its armed campaign stating that it would work to achieve its aims using "purely political and democratic programmes through exclusively peaceful means".
Perhaps the MQM will be guided by a few chosen proverbs. Voltaire stated, "I don't agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Will Durant, a philosopher of note, said " The political machine triumphs because it is united minority acting against a divided majority". In this instance MQM is increasingly isolated as a political entity. Nikita Krushchev stated, "Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river." Texas Guinan, a US saloonkeeper and actress, stated: "A politician is a fellow who will lay down your life for his country" and Napoleon Bonaparte admitted that "in politics, an absurdity is not a handicap" but surely absurdity must not be limitless.