The government-PTI negotiations are in the doldrums because of the trust deficit on both sides, the PTI’s deep interest in holding talks with military leaders instead of political figureheads, the nature of the PTI’s demands, and the ruling coalition’s reluctance, especially the PML-N, to meet them.
When the dialogue caught momentum after the PTI submitted its written demands in the third meeting, the PTI’s incarcerated supremo Imran Khan revealed to the media about the meeting between the Army Chief Genereal Asim Munir and the PTI-Chairman Gohar Ali Khan in Peshawar. Gohar, who earlier denied having any such meeting, stated that he met the army chief and discussed the PTI’s viewpoint about the political temperature with him. The news strengthened the rumours about the PTI-establishment deal, causing discomfort among the PML-N leadership.
However, informed sources privy to the meeting say that the army chief discussed the terrorism-related issues in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa with the PTI leaders, Gohar and Ali Amin Gandapur. When they tried to discuss political issues with General Munir, he told them to take up the issues with political leadership.
The PML-N chief, Nawaz Sharif was also unhappy about the meeting, however, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif called on him on Sunday and briefed him about the facts.
Now, the game is again confined between the ruling coalition and the PTI for bringing down the political temperature. The PTI demanded two separate judicial commissions of the incidents related to the May 9 and November 24-26 incidents including the arrest of Imran Khan and the PTI’s activists.
The PML-N insiders say that the leaders thoroughly discussed the PTI’s demands and observed that they cannot be met since every issue mentioned in the PTI’s draft is under proceedings.
According to sources, the PML-N leaders discussed the draft clause-by-clause and concluded that a judicial commission cannot be formed regarding the events of May 9. They opined that judicial commissions are constituted for matters not under discussion in courts. The May 9 cases are already in the courts, and some accused individuals have even been sentenced by military courts.
They further said that details and a list of missing persons and detained individuals related to November 26 should be provided. Without the names and details of the detained individuals, how can any action be taken for their release? Likewise, PTI claims there were fatalities but details of them have not been provided.
The ruling coalition and the opposition had started a dialogue to bring down the political temperature a few weeks ago. The PTI has withdrawn its two key demands which endorses the perception that the PTI fears IK and other leaders’ military court trials. Since the military courts have convicted 25 PTI activists in the May 9 cases and Former Spy Master Faiz Hameed is also facing field court-martial, the PTI seems to be going to back-foot. A few weeks ago, the PTI’s hawkish leaders, who are known for their proximity to IK, repeatedly rejected the idea of dialogue with the political leadership, saying that the power lies with the military establishment, therefore, holding talks with the political government is useless.
Some of them like Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur are included in the PTI’s panel, constituted for the dialogue. Gandapur had said during the November protest in Islamabad, that PTI will hold the dialogue after the release of IK.
Interestingly, another perception exists – the government’s fear of the hypothetical pressure by the US Administration after Donald Trump’s oath as the President. The army’s spokesman said on multiple occasions that the army would not hold talks with miscreants, indirectly referring to PTI. It is believed that the government cannot take big leaps in the state’s affairs without taking the military leadership into confidence. Still, the Speaker National Assembly gathered the two sides at his place and urged them to hold the dialogue. Speaker Ayaz Sadiq’s initiative is, undoubtedly, backed by the military leadership and the PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari while IK also gave the go-ahead to his leaders.
Initially, the PTI demanded the withdrawal of the 26th Amendment, restoration of the constitution and democracy, return of the allegedly rigged mandate to the PTI, and release of all innocent political prisoners including Imran Khan. However, PTI budged from its stance on the 26th Amendment and the election rigging.
Defence Minister Khawaja Asif, in a TV show, said, ‘I am not against the dialogue but several questions arise after PTI agreed to the talks. Why are they, who did not want to hold talks with us, now willing for the dialogue? Do they want a deal with the establishment through us?’
Asif Zardari said that the government must be cautious about the change in PTI and IK’s behaviour because their willingness to dialogue with political forces is a U-turn from their previous stance. They can make another U-turn after the dialogue, he added.
It might be pointed out here that IK is showing political flexibility against his instinct. Previously, he rejected all offers and advice for political dialogue. He repeatedly said that he would not hold the dialogue with the PML-N and the PPP, but now he has signaled his party to join the negotiation table with the ruling coalition, which shows his flexibility of thoughts.
Secondly, he reduced his party from a four-point to a two-point agenda. He withdrew demands about the ‘mandate’ and ‘26th Amendment withdrawal’ which is another sign of flexibility that is always beneficial in politics.
People may translate this flexibility into a sign of weakness, but it is a good omen because a political dialogue mostly ends with a positive outcome. Even if there is no outcome, the dialogue opens a new room for further negotiations, which is the democratic way of conflict resolution.
IK’s lawyer, Faisal Chaudhry says that if a judicial commission is not formed, the negotiations will not proceed.
The PML-N is throwing tantrums for various reasons, but Irfan Siddiqui, a member of the government’s negotiation committee says that nothing is final yet. ‘We are discussing the demands with our coalition partner and will come up with a collective response.’
Prime Minister’s Political Advisor Rana Sanaullah says that the government’s committee will submit a written response to the PTI’s demands. ‘Our response will reveal if the government forms the commission.’
The PML-N insiders categorically say that there would be no commission. A question arises here: what after the government’s refusal? Will the dialogue between the political forces continue or the establishment will replace the political forces on the negotiations table with PTI?
Ps. This article was written after first three talks between the government and opposition. A fourth talk, marked with controversy, is to be held on 28 January.
The writer is a senior journalist.
