If we pick up any Pakistani daily newspaper, especially Urdu newspaper, a large part of political news comprises the statements of the political leaders. Invariably there are several bitter and hard hitting statements by the political leaders against each other. Some of the political leaders make irresponsible statements and engage in shouting matches against each other.
Other feature of political statements is that the political leaders often make contradictory statements. Some of them may say one thing today and change it the next day. A politician would cover up contradiction by arguing that he was misquoted or the press did not understand what he actually meant.
The political leaders do not recognize that the selection of words and phrases in political discourse reflects their political background and orientation. This has a direct impact on the political environment and shapes the political style and disposition of the society. It is not possible to evolve and sustain democratic and pluralist character of the society if the political leaders pursue their political agendas as a frantic struggle for power and use crude language or threaten periodically to launch street protests.
The PPP and the PMLN engage in unnecessary political bickering from time to time. As the leading opposition party, the PMLN leaders have found it easy to launch a massive propaganda campaign against the federal government from time to time. Though none of these efforts succeeded in dislodging the government it caused much uncertainty in the political system.
The latest series of tough talking between the PMLN and the PPP started after the Supreme Court judgment on the NRO on December 16, 2009. Some PMLN leaders demanded the resignation of President Asif Ali Zardari. Chaudhry Nisar Ali makes the most hawkish and anti-PPP and anti-Zardari speeches in the National Assembly and outside. Some other PMLN leaders like Ahsan Iqbal, Khawaja Asif and Rana Sanaullah (Punjab Law Minister) also make strident statements against the PPP and especially President Asif Ali Zardari. They would like to force him out of office against the backdrop of the Supreme Court judgment.
Nawaz Sharif often makes careful and moderate statements. However, from time to time he also criticizes Zardari in tough tone. Of late, Shahbaz Sharif has taken to giving tough statements against the PPP and Zardari.
Tough talking is not the exclusive preserve of the PMLN. The PPP leaders often match the PMLN tough rhetoric. Of late the PPP leaders engage in hard talking as they found themselves under political siege after the December 16th Supreme Court judgment on the NRO. Though the PPP had 12 names in the list of NRO beneficiaries which numbered 8041, the PMLN and other opposition parties targeted the PPP for criticism. One of the PMLN leaders was quick to demand the resignation of Zardari. Even up to now, the top PMLN leaders have not talked about the MQM that has a lot more beneficiaries or mentioned the bureaucrats, bankers and others on the list. The PPP leaders countered this campaign by mentioning the charges of financial malpractices during the two Nawaz Sharif governments. The PMLN rejected these charges as false.
President Zardari in his address on December 27 talked of conspiracies against him and the PPP government from unnamed quarters. However, if we take into account the speeches and statements of other PPP leaders in the post judgment period, it is clear that the unnamed quarters were the PMLN, the military, the judiciary and a section of the media. Later, Zardari also adopted somewhat conciliatory tone but he returned to tough talking during his latest Lahore visit (January 13-20)
Every political party and leader in Pakistan vows repeatedly to support democracy. The question is if every leader wants democracy why is there a serious democracy deficit? The answer is simple. Democracy cannot be strengthened by expressing verbal commitment. At the operational level, democracy’s viability depends on how political parties and leaders interact and how far the institutions are relevant to conflict management and resolution. Another key issue is how far democratic institutions and processes are able to address the problem of the common people
Pakistan’s democracy is also under pressure from the political fall-out of judicial activism. The judges may be talking purely in legal terms but their remarks are interpreted by the political circles to serve their political agendas. For example, a Supreme Court judge remarked on January 6 that “no institution is working properly, system is on the verge of disaster and someone has to intervene to save it.” The political circles view this as a politically loaded statement because it amounts to censoring the current government and the civilian political order. The opposition must be happy and is expected to use it as an argument for promoting their partisan interests. The government is likely to be perturbed especially because it is suggestive of someone’s intervention. In the current context only the military or the judiciary can intervene in their own ways. This will not promote the cause of democracy.
Author: Hassan Askari
