A SEVERE blow has been dealt to democracy. Balochistan has become the laughing stock of the world — a virtual unknown from the province has been made Senate chairman whereas celebrated nationalists have been left protesting. Politicians have been discredited as never before in Pakistan’s history. The PPP is dead (yes, it is dead one more time).

This outcry in the wake of the Senate election would have made a lot of sense if the basic framework within which Pakistani politics is allowed to operate had changed. The rules remain unchanged. Sorry to sound anti-democratic, but all the noise created makes little sense.

The Senate elections had been destined to culminate the way they did. Long before the Balochistan Assembly was wrapped up — long before the nationalists were allowed to take part in the general election in Balochistan in the presence of those who wanted to sabotage the polls or those who were indifferent to any vote taking place in their midst.

It would do no one any harm if a cursory glance were to be cast at the PML-N’s own conduct.

Likewise Hasil Bizenjo makes no revelation when he says that defeated in the Senate on Monday last were Z.A. Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto. The two, or the grandiose imaginary avatars of theirs, are deemed to have died every time the PPP is guilty of performing an act that, somehow, despite all evidence to the contrary, cannot be associated with this most popular, or the most naturally popular political party, of the country.

A real earnest reading of history gives us an altogether different answer. Asif Ali Zardari has done with the Senate exactly what was expected of him. He was painfully open about his intent and the Senate win is just one small landmark on the path that he has so assiduously followed. He is looking for a state where he, and by virtue of this union his party, become one with what we call the establishment.

You may choose to decry the PPP — and for the matter, the PTI, too — for their selfish politics here. In a bout of rage you might want to declare the PPP dead, even though, in the eyes of many of its detractors, a more satisfactory revenge on the party may be where it is left to exist in its present, spineless condition.

You might be inclined to, as some others are, remark that the PPP is replaying its ‘1970 role’: Then it joined forces with the generals in a conspiracy to keep out Sheikh Mujib, just as now it is a willing partner in the scheme against the PML-N, the party with the mandate. You may make all the accusations yet you can’t possibly hide one fact: Zardari is conveniently at it since the rules, the framework, the role the system assigns to the politicians, have not changed.

The politicians must change the rules and roles themselves, so the argument goes, leading to the next question: how does one know that there is a consensus amongst politicians at a particular moment that now is the time for a decisive push, which could give them the deserving crucial driver’s part in the set-up? How does one know that no one amongst the politicians will betray the cause and slip over to the other side at the most vital stage to tip the balance in favour of the establishment?

There is — there has always been — disagreement over this most important point in the discussion. The PPP with all its faults and its indifference and ineptness, did feel the need to introduce some curbs on these ‘real’ masters’ when the party was last in power, 2008 onwards. It got no support, shattering yet again the myth about politicians moving towards any kind of consensus and towards real power-wielding in this beloved land of ours.

The charge against the PPP is that its politics today is heavily influenced by the personal affront Asif Zardari must have felt at being ‘snubbed’ regularly by Mian Nawaz Sharif. This is a serious allegation and has inevitably led to pronouncements of yet another death for the party and to the inevitable laments by those who insist that things would have been different had BB or ZAB still been at the helm of the party’s affairs. But in the midst of the taunts that fly towards the merchants who turned the august upper house into an auction house during the recent election, it would do no one any harm if a cursory glance were to be cast at the PML-N’s own conduct in recent times. Did it encourage consensus?

Before its leadership gave — or was forced to give — a call for revolution, the PML-N on its own was seen doing things in a way that created an impression just the opposite of what it wants to convey now. Under prime minister Nawaz Sharif, this country hardly appeared to be approaching a point where its most maligned politicians could assert themselves for a pivotal role.

Perhaps no summing up is needed to stress just how ready and willing Mian Sahib was to carry out instructions, even if he must be given credit for initially showing some resolve for change. The PML-N slogan of ‘mujhay kyun nikala’, or ‘why was I was thrown out’, is open to interpretation against the background of how willing the then prime minister was to play by the wishes of those who are now being accused of turning the Senate into a mandi. Indeed, his ‘accommodating’ presence did have some pundits predicting that there was no reason why anyone would want to throw him out.

The attitude changed after Mian Sahib’s disqualification. But still, for a PPP under a self-serving Zardari wanting to go against the spirit of democracy, there are many compelling reasons for the party to conduct itself according to the old framework. Since it is a season of repeats let it be said again: pro-establishment politics is justified today in no small measure by a guy named Shahbaz Sharif, the current president of the PML-N.

The writer is Dawn’s resident editor in Lahore.

Published in Dawn, March 16th, 2018