In uniform, he appeared in form. The President is now in a fix, rather in a mix. His confidence, frankly, is past. While a general, you had to bear with his firmness. Alas! He could did not discover that he was rigid than firm. Today, he is neither so rigid nor that firm.
Things and eras have changed. Instead of asserting his military dress, he now needs to address the issues and redress the grievances. In the process, his schedules may be redrawn.
Barely days after his re-installation the President is worried. His anxiety can even tax his guests. We are told he requested his Turkish counterpart to persuade his rivals and “be so kind” not to boycott the polls. The noble visitor kindly obliged but the problem persists. Majority is perplexed.
If you are reading these lines in search of clarity, you may loose your time. Sorry, clarity can’t be acquired this week.
By the way, what sort of clarity are you looking for? Are you seeking answers to all the questions being raised about elections? Or you just want to confirm that the promised elections would be held according to the schedule? But first let’s determine your status/interest: Are you a silent spectator or a serious voter? The most important question this December is whether you just want an election or a credible election? For that, are you strongly supporting the election schedule or inclined to re-schedule the polling? Tell us if you are simply puzzled because in that case you are with the majority.
This is the hour that would judge you by your attitude. There is a class of people who are still as rigid or firm as the President was in uniform. They would prefer him to strictly follow the letter than the spirit of the Constitution and blow the whistle much like the railway guard without bothering to see the mess at the platform. In short, they are inclined to ignore and disregard the other intending passengers who may have purchased the tickets but are yet to board. The power train, remember, has a limited capacity and there is a crowd of candidates. To capture a seat is the name of the game but elections are least musical chairs.
Originally we were required to elect the kind of people who can work with the President and let him continue with whatever he was doing during the past eight years. Broadly speaking, we were supposed to pick the finest liberals one could find in Pakistan. A perfect election, by official standard, was a phenomenon that filters out the orthodox and religious extremists that have mushroomed since 9/11 and were infesting the legislative bodies. Soon thereafter we discovered a different brand of liberals who were spelling out their own terms than toeing the line. Their liaison in Washington had duly earned them the accreditation and they could hardly be ignored. The Kings Party and pseudo liberals began to feel uncomfortable by the ‘affair’. The Orthodox, too, were hardly sleeping. They rushed to form alliance with the conservatives in Punjab and began blowing the bugles of boycott.
You have been watching all this for the past several months. And you have noted the fluctuations in different political camps. Everyone on the platform is essentially worried about his own seat but the likely looser or unsure winner can, at times, share a sentiment in a game of visible handicaps. And the handicaps are more than visible.
One of the teams has been playing on the turf for the past five years and was determined to retain the crown by its performance while two others had their skippers in exile. Leave alone the fielding they did not have the space even for the net practice. This is far from a level play field and no honest referee would allow a kick off unless all the players are settled. And there is hardly an honest referee in the field. The President has apparently halted his campaign for the crony liberals but his words still echo in the public memory. Obviously, the President and his handpicked caretakers would keep a guarded distance with their favourites during the election campaign and the state run electronic media may as well wear an umpire’s outfit but that would not make the match a fair event.
The bargainers do know the weakness of the umpires this critical hour and now they have decided to join heads to formulate a charter of demands. And what sort of demands do you make to justify a boycott? Obviously something that should be quite difficult to meet. Anything less would compel you to go by the schedule.
The bargainers do have mutual competition and they can’t unite to oust the King’s Party. The late comers want more preparation time while the liberals aren’t willing to postpone the match or miss the opportunity. Yet they have reconciled to work out some sort of coordination that can make it difficult for the President.
