Pakistani politics has often been compared to a shadow game in which the military establishment controls the levers and prevents an actual game from being played by the civilian players. Events this week brought this to the fore.
According to Fahd Husain, recent judgements in both the Supreme Court and a sessions court have vindicated former prime minister Imran Khan. Khan looks strong and his opponents weak. However, Husain cautions “tactical weakness needs to be seen from a strategic perspective. Beyond shrieking headlines and breathless analysis, and beyond hyper-partisan commentary echoing across the landscape, there lies the hard reality of power. The exercise of state power against citizens has always been a one-sided contest. These traditional dynamics, though, have come under significant strain since Imran Khan started weaponising populism against the establishment. The results of the February 8 elections and the ensuing panic within the power structure afford plenty of such evidence.”
As Husain points out, “populism, though, has its limits. It cannot spring Khan from jail. It cannot bring the streets to boil. It cannot strengthen fractured PTI ranks. And it cannot – for now – overturn the reality that the government in place is in no mood to go away any time soon. The hard state triumphing over soft populism is, therefore, no real surprise. Predictability can breed complacency. It can also generate hubris.
In this “shadow war” Husain argues “no one will say anything, acknowledge anything, or admit to anything. But shadows loom larger even as whispers get quieter. Nothing is connected—until it is. And amid all this, something deeper and scarier has happened: the conflict between power and populism has pivoted towards becoming a conflict between power and power.”
According to Husain there are two options: “Option 1: System goes into a self-correction mode, and power is re-balanced within the institutional framework. This means the establishment takes a few steps back, eases the pressure alluded to in the IHC letter, engages with the judiciary to address genuine concerns, and pushes for a re-set as a new chief justice prepares to take charge at the Supreme Court. Option 2: Contestants continue to climb up the escalatory ladder in the belief that this has now become a zero-sum game. The protracted and live-broadcast hearings of the reserved seats case in the Supreme Court amplified the mood – and divisions – of the top court in clear terms. The final judgement has reinforced such perceptions. The ladder of escalation can only go so high before something snaps. You can climb and climb till there is nothing left to climb. Then someone falls.”
In conclusion Husain warns “Which option will be exercised? We are whizzing across the highway to the danger zone. The engine is overheating. Mach 10 is approaching. Avionics are flashing red. But egos are throttling up for altitude and speed.”
