As Imran Khan tore his nomination papers to show his disdain for polls under Musharraf and said, "I will boycott the elections and so will others”, critics believed the mercurial Khan was living in a 'fools paradise'. He can afford to stay away from the election process, they said, since his one-man party did not have much to lose, but if he thinks others in opposition will follow his lead he is sadly mistaken. He was called the only 'idealist' among a crowd of pragmatic politicians for whom lofty ideals of democracy and civil rights were circumscribed by their vested interest. Nonetheless, he has on the face of it proved his critics wrong. The APDM, which met in Lahore to consider the ‘boycott option’ endorsed what Imran Khan, had been urging the opposition to do, even though the PPP and the JUI-F are not a party to the boycott decision.
Would Imran Khan have the 'last laugh' is yet uncertain, since the critics are not convinced that the APDM's refusal to take part in elections is indeed the final ‘No’. As Nawaz Sharif announced the boycott decision saying, “we would not take part in elections unless the deposed Supreme Court judges were rehabilitated, observers noticed a catch in his ‘do or die’ posture. There was no move by the APDM component parties to withdraw their nomination papers. Critics were intrigued by what they saw as ‘keeping a door open’ for a U-turn. Apparently, the APDM's next mission is to persuade Benazir and Fazlur Rehman to join the boycott, but it under the circumstances appears to be an ‘impossible mission’. And one cannot rule out the possibility that instead of roping them in on the boycott option, Nawaz Sharif and Co may lose some of their partners known to be 'reluctant boycotters', such as the ANP.
The pragmatic politicians in the opposition, according to critics, did not ever seriously consider boycott of elections as an option. The threat was meant to improve their 'bargaining counter' and also to keep the people guessing which of the multiple options would eventually be exercised. Maulana Fazlur Rehman was the first to make an early break with the so-called 'boycott lobby', followed by ANP which said it was ready to contest the elections. Benazir Bhutto who had returned to Pakistan in the wake of a power-sharing deal with Musharraf belatedly jumped on to the boycott bandwagon to gain respectability in the opposition quarters. But no one took her U-turn seriously, since it is an open secret that she is desperate to return to the corridors of power. “We are filling our nomination papers ‘'under protest’,” was her innovative ‘alibi’ to retract from boycott call.
Nawaz Sharif has been the most belligerent of all Musharraf adversaries. “We will have no truck with Musharraf regime under any circumstances”, he had all along been saying during his exile. His bitterness became all the more vocal when his bid to return to Pakistan in the wake of Supreme Court ruling was foiled by the regime and he was forcibly sent into exile for the second time.
Understandably he was the architect of the ‘boycott option’. Nevertheless, his eventual return to Pakistan under ‘mysterious circumstances’ raised many eyebrows, as quite a few critics ascribed his safe passage to the political scene to some kind of an understanding, if not a deal ala Benazir, with the regime. His rhetoric is still more aggressively anti-Musharraf than anyone else in the opposition. “I would not like to become prime minister of Pakistan if Musharraf is the President even if he has doffed his uniform,” Nawaz Sharif said, as he kept on insisting that the boycott option was still open, and he was trying to persuade other parties in the opposition, including the PPP, to take a united stand on the issue. However, ever since his return to the country, he and his party men have been primarily pre-occupied with electioneering, rather than mustering support for the ‘boycott call’.
The hardliners in the opposition have come a long way from expressing their resolve to fight the ‘dictatorial’ regime until it was overthrown to accepting the imperative of taking part in the elections overseen by the regime which they call unconstitutional. In rhetoric the opposition parties had claimed that they would not settle for anything short of "Musharraf stepping down and restoration of the 1973 Constitution". However, in terms of precise demands which they have been raising from time to time as a pre-condition for 'peaceful coexistence with the regime's doffing of Musharraf's uniform had topped the list, subsequently followed by the demand to restore the deposed Supreme Court judges, and lifting of the Emergency.
Ironically, Benazir Bhutto accused Musharraf of not keeping his promise about shedding his uniform before November 15 and held out this reason for changing tracks from reconciliation to confrontation. Imran Khan is fixated with the issue of reinstating deposed judges, which he says should be the pre-condition for participation in elections. Interestingly enough Benazir has a different perspective on the matter, “We will restore the judges when we come to power”, she said, making it quite clear that she had no intention of raising the issue right now as a bone of contention with regime.
By doffing his uniform and handing over his military job to a new Army Chief of Staff before taking oath for his second five-year presidential term, President Musharraf has stolen the thunder from the opposition. As the Americans called it 'good first step', Benazir made haste to echo it, though she said she was in no 'hurry' to accept him as civilian president. However, Nawaz Sharif had far more reservations about Musharraf's move, which he termed "meaningless", until the Supreme Court was rehabilitated to its power and prestige. Needless to say President Musharraf was one-up again vis-à-vis the opposition as he announced the lifting of the Emergency. The opposition has run short of key issues to confront the regime and discredit it as an authoritarian set up prone to arbitrary mode of functioning.
To sell boycott of polls as a desirable course of action was under the circumstances indeed a tall order. Now the real question is what issues would the opposition raise during the election campaign to outbid the 'Kings party' in the vote-catching exercise, since it has been deprived of the stick with which it could beat the regime as the villain-of-the piece in the demolition of the democratic order.
Over a month is left when the people would go to the hustings to give their mandate to one or the other contender for power. Much of the time will be spent on finalising the list of candidates and brokering local seat adjustments wherever it is possible, and then the time would arrive for seeking broader electoral alliances. The parties have yet to issue their election manifestos, which should on the face of it, spell out their election agenda. It is however a different matter that, according to critics, the party manifestos will have little bearing on the actual campaigning. In any case the actual time for a running the campaign will be short and regulated by the Election Commission which has already notified that the parties should refrain from holding prolonged election rallies in view of the security situation. Thus, from all accounts the focus will remain on maneuvering for votes, rather than soliciting public support on 'issues'. And only the slogans would matter in catching attention of the electorate.
A disunited opposition is not poised to offer a viable alternative to Musharraf camp. However the King's party also does not seem to have the capability to significantly win over the voters. The impending polls appear to be a free-for-all contention for power, with no one assured of emerging as the ultimate winner. The prospects of a hung parliament would give President Musharraf another leverage to play the arbiter in brokering a coalition, or bringing it down if it does not serve his purpose. On the other hand, the 'boycotters' if they persist in their stand till the Election Day could run a parallel show of agitation while others are engaged in electioneering. How real is threat that the election process may be disrupted and how would the regime cope with the situation are the key questions.
