Opinion leaders in some quarters have suggested that Aitzaz Ahsan should have been named the new PPP leader to succeed Benazir Bhutto. On the face of it the idea, finding favour in media at home and abroad, has considerable merit and deserves serious consideration. For instance, the veteran Indian journalist Kuldip Nayyar was among those who mooted the idea of Aitzaz Ahsan being the best choice to take over the PPP leadership after Benazir’s assassination. He, and quite a few others, were prompted to vouch for Aitzaz as the PPP’s best bet for post-Benazir leadership largely because of Aitzaz’s meteoric rise to fame as a ceaseless fighter in the lawyers agitation for the restoration of deposed Supreme Court judges. And it was said he has emerged not only as the undisputed leader of the legal community but also a ‘national hero’, who the government considers such a dangerous individual that it does not risk releasing him despite the lifting of the emergency.
The bottom line of the case for Aitzaz’s elevation to the PPP’s top slot rested on the premise that his popular rating would ipso facto lend stature to the Benazir’s successor. Whether or not anyone from within the PPP ranks subscribed to this line of thinking is anybody’s guess, since one is not privy to what transpired as the Naudero gathering of the party high command, and nobody is publicly known to have expressed any reservations about what was projected as Benazir’s ‘will’. However, whatever information based on conjecture has trickled down to informed quarters does not account for Aitzaz’s name being mentioned at all as a possible successor. And anyone familiar with the PPP’s longstanding style of functioning would not be surprised if it was not considered a worthwhile option. Rules of dynastic politics do not permit an ‘outsider’ to grab the ‘prize catch’.
To accept a party leader as ‘first among equals’ is not the rule, he has to be seen as the ‘boss’, -- the ultimate benefactor, and the source of all power and patronage, and lineage is the only attribute that qualifies a leader to preside over a crowd bonded to a cult. One could ask Kuldip Nayyar why was Sonia Gandhi, an Italian born catholic, preferred over so many of Congress stalwarts for eventual succession to Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, even, though eight years had elapsed after Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination. And the dynasty is now back in business in Indian politics, as Rahul Gandhi is being groomed as the next heir in the line of succession. Ironically, the other ‘widow’ in the dynasty – Monika, the wife of Sanjay Gandhi, Indira Gandhi’s younger son who she had originally groomed as her heir apparent before he died in an air crash’, was also a contender for succession but was marginalised to a degree that she had to switch over to the BJP. An intriguing parallel in Bhutto clan is Ganwa Bhutto, the widow of Murtaza Bhutto who was like Monika sidelined from the PPP politics to lead a faction of her own.
V P Singh has been the only exception in Indian politics who led a revolt against the Gandhi dynasty leadership, was expelled from the Congress party but fought it back by spearheading a massive campaign against ‘corruption in high places to defeat Rajiv Gandhi in the 1989 elections.
Theoretically, there is a chance for Aitzaz Ahsan to emulate the V P Singh model and stage a come back in Pakistan’s politics. However, there are big ‘ifs and buts’, before Aitzaz could think of taking this course of action. In the Western countries he is seen a ‘national hero’, but in Pakistan a fighter for democratic rights does not ipso facto qualify for the coveted title. Ironically, Benazir Bhutto had bluntly told Aitzaz that he would have to choose between leading the lawyers’ agitation and following the PPP line. And Nawaz Sharif, who had vowed to seek the reinstatement of the deposed judges as a pre-condition for participation in polls, conveniently ditched Aitzaz and Co to renege from his boycott call. The fact remains that if Aitzaz had been acclaimed as a ‘national hero’ in Pakistan, as the analysts have been saying, he would not have been left in the lurch by the opposition parties.
The Western scholars, or their outspoken media persons, have no clue to understanding the ‘mindset of the people in this part of the world, as they wish to transplant their own system in a third world country without recognising the ground realities. A warrior for democratic rights in this country may or may not evoke popular response, depending on how the masses perceive his mission relevant to change in their mode of existence. An attempt to hold the higher judiciary in servitude may be considered by the intelligentsia an offence that should not go unpunished but may not provoke the ordinary folks into mass action. There were scores of active players in the 1969 mass agitation against Ayub regime, including, for instance luminaries like Air Marshal Asghar Khan, but the only person who infatuated the masses and emerged in the process as their hero was Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. What made the real difference between Bhutto and Asghar Khan was that ZAB had something more to offer to the people in addition to ‘restoration of democratic rights’.
Aitzaz Ahsan could not play another Bhutto because he was operating on a wavelength, which had a limited audience. And he could be easily bypassed by players who were not fixated with a one-point agenda. Leading the lawyers’ agitation may not let Aitzaz win more laurels than he already has. However, he being known for his political ambition would not be content with securing the prestigious job of president Supreme Court Bar, more so because the lawyers agitation does not appear to be poised to become the forerunner of a country wide mass movement. It may be a little too early to pronounce that Aitzaz has missed the bus. He still has a chance to renew his political career, even if the lawyers’ agitation comes to nothing. But the chances of his rehabilitation in the PPP hierarchy are slimmer than ever before. Long before he took up cudgels for the reinstatement of the deposed judges he was sidelined in the PPP, as Benazir Bhutto did not consider him a reliable aide to be trusted with a key responsibility.
Can he wait for his turn to stake his claim for PPP leadership, if and when Asif Ali Zardari fails to deliver as an effective party leader (which some critics apprehend may actually happen), and the dynastic regime in the PPP comes to a dead end? Prime facie it is an unlikely scenario, since Aitzaz would have to first work hard for his rehabilitation in the PPP before he can aspire for any leading position. And there would be formidable contenders for the job who are known to have a more substantial support base in the party than Aitzaz could ever hope to muster. In any case the PPP persists in following the Benazir Bhutto’s line of collaboration, rather than confrontation, with the establishment, Aitzaz would be an unwelcome intruder in the PPP’s scheme of things.
He has the choice to part company with the PPP and switch over to Nawaz Sharif but then he will have to start all over again the process of building his leadership in an unfamiliar political environment. And to form a new party would be too ambitious a project, rather late in life for Aitzaz Ahsan when the political space is already overcrowded with mushroom growth of political parties and he has nothing new to offer to the populace, other than what he has already been raising as a ‘mantra’ for arousing the masses.
