Skip to main content

Who is the movement against?

The impressive gathering in front of the parliament in Islamabad in the early hours of Saturday is supposed to have sent a particular message to certain quarters. What did the message contain? Was there one message or more than one? For whom was it meant? What impact did it have? If there was a message or messages, were they being articulated by one party or many? Who were the people in the big crowd in Islamabad ? Unfortunately, the answers to these questions are not clear. There are as many answers as there are contenders in the movement.

Analysts of the phenomenon are of two kinds: those who support the gathering with a cool and rational head and those who cannot prevent their anger and passion from slipping into their assessments. So there is virtually no impartial observer.

There are 130 district bars in Pakistan and the total number of lawyers in the country is just over 100,000. The long march and gathering was supposed to be of the lawyers’ movement but it was forcefully strengthened by support from a clutch of political parties and sections of civil society formations. There were men, women and children and babies, too, suggesting that overwhelmingly the mass of the people was from the local population of Islamabad and Rawalpindi. There were political parties too, led by the dominant PMLN which rules in Punjab. The APDM rejectionist group was there too, with the Jamaat-e-Islami of Qazi Hussain Ahmad and Tehreek Insaf of Imran Khan making their presence felt.

Some political parties were conspicuous by their absence. The largest party, the PPP, was not there although it was claimed, without proof, by some observers that some PPP lawyers from Gujrat had joined the march. From among the religious parties, the peripheral Khaksar Tehreek was there but not the JUI of Maulana Fazlur Rehman; nor was the MQM represented, which actually has been designated by the movement as a “hostile” entity. The PMLQ sitting in the opposition was not there either although its stance is carefully non-hostile to the lawyers, despite the way their leader from Mianwali, Dr Sher Afgan Khan, was treated in Lahore.

What was the message? The movement had decided that instead of the residence of President Musharraf, it would target the parliament. Although “go Musharraf go” was the collective slogan of the evening, the lawyers said they wanted the deposed PCO-2000 judges reinstated through an executive order and they wanted the PCO-2007 judges ousted. The PMLN, thanks to whom the Long March could gather steam as it passed through Punjab, was clearly asking the president to quit. The party firebrands who addressed the crowd left no ambiguity in their statements that they wanted the president to face impeachment and a trial for high treason. But Mr Ahsan said the march was to pressurise parliament to do the needful.

The people who listened to the speeches included citizens who wanted to hear negative things about a past regime that had given them prices they could not afford and the suffering through loadshedding that was beyond endurance. Among these, most were from the lower middle class who thought the lawyers and the political parties would together bring the prices down, make essential goods easily available, and banish loadshedding. But the message from the leader of the lawyers, Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, was that the restoration of the judges under the deposed chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry would lead to an economic upturn in the short term which would alleviate the people’s suffering.

On-the-spot analysis on TV said the gathering was not against the sitting government and one senior editor said that, like the anti-Qadiani movement of the 1970s, it was based on principles desiring change of constitution and policy. Another analyst said that the rally was against the PPP and the show did not belong to the lawyers as much as to the PMLN which was sending a message to its ally the PPP. It was also opined that in the coming days, the gulf in the coalition would widen and the PPP would be required to show as much, if not more, strength or lose the support of the masses. More emotionally, the print media analysts blamed the PPP and its leader Mr Asif Ali Zardari of being “on the wrong side of the people of Pakistan”.

The PPP thought it could blunt the direction of the onslaught by facilitating the Long March inside Islamabad. It even offered food to the crowd but the lawyers turned it down, clearly indicating their intent to make the PPP change its mind on the methodology of restoring the judges through its constitutional package. Discussions on TV did focus on the matter of the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) which is supposed to balk the PPP, but no one suggested that the lawyers’ movement, instead of pushing the PPP into a suicidal decision, should show it the way out, which of course will have to be the middle way.

The movement is clearly converging to confrontation with the PPP, which will create undue instability and hurt the economy currently being discussed in the National Assembly. After the PMLN ducked out of it, the PPP emerges as the sole custodian of the budget 2008-09, and the hardship it promises even as it tries to alleviate the suffering of the poor with concessions will weaken Islamabad’s will to fight all the battles facing it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Siege - A Poem By Ahmad Faraz Against The Dictatorship Of Zia Ul Haq

Related Posts: 1.  Did Muhammad Ali Jinnah Want Pakistan To Be A Theocracy Or A Secular State? 2. The Relationship Between Khadim & Makhdoom In Pakistan 3. Battle for God; Battleground Pakistan - a time has finally come to call a spade a spade 4. Pakistan - Facing Contradictory Strategic Choices In An Uncertain Region 5. Pakistan, Islamic Terror & General Zia-Ul-Haq 6. Why Pakistan Army Must Allow The Democracy To Flourish In Pakistan & Why Pakistanis Must Give Democracy A Chance? 7. A new social contract in Pakistan between the Pakistani Federation and its components 8. Birth of Bangladesh / Secession of East Pakistan & The Sins of Our Fathers 9. Pakistan Army Must Not Intervene In The Current Crisis - Who To Blame For the Present Crisis in Pakistan ? 10. Balochistan - Troubles Of A Demographic Nature

India: The Terrorists Within

A day after major Indian cities were placed on high alert following blasts in the IT city of Bangalore, as many as 17 blasts ripped through Ahmedabad, capital of the affluent western Indian state of Gujarat . Some 30 people were killed, some at hospitals where bombs were timed to go off when the injured from other blasts were being brought in. (Later, in Surat, a center for the world's diamond industry, a bomb was defused near a hospital and two cars packed with explosives were found in in the city's outskirts.) Investigators pointed fingers at the usual Islamist suspects: Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT), Bangladesh- based Harkat-ul Jihadi Islami (HUJI) and the indigenous Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). But even as the police searched for clues, the Ahmedabad attacks were owned up by a group calling itself the " Indian Mujahideen. " Several TV news stations received an email five minutes before the first blasts in Ahmedabad. The message repo...

Pakistan Army Must Not Intervene In The Current Crisis - Who To Blame For the Present Crisis in Pakistan ?

By Sikander Hayat Another day of agony and despair as Pakistanis live through a period of uncertainty but still I believe that army must not intervene in this crisis. These are the kind of circumstances when army need to show their resolve of not meddling in the political sphere of the country. No doubt that there will be people in the corridors of power and beyond who will be urging the army to step in and ‘save’ the country but let me tell you that country will only be saved if army stays away and let the politicians decide the future of the country, even if it means that there will be clashes on the streets of Islamabad. With free media in place, people are watching with open eyes the parts being played by each and every individual in this current saga. They know who is right and who is wrong and they will eventually decide who stays in power when the next general election comes. Who said that democracy was and orderly and pretty business ; it is anything but. Democracy ...