FROM A RINGSIDE SEAT

Our majority of politicians have become the real fear mongers. They speak in the National Assembly with one point agenda to make the people believe that the country's existence is in real danger. Nothing new will you hear when you watch them talking at various shows aired by different news channels.
This exercise of most of these elected representatives make one believe that they have been elected to the assemblies in the last general elections for informing the people about the dangers our homeland is facing. The sad part of this exercise is the absence of providing any solution by current lot of our rulers as well as opposition.
If you compare their statements with those uttered by Hilary Clinton, you will find no difference. Like the Americans, our politicians do not have a strategy to steer this country out of the present mess. The good suggestions given by senators Raza Rabbani and Zahid Khan of having an open dialogue with establishment are not workable in the present scenario.
Majority of our present lot of politicians have started the Taliban criticism publicly. This might be the result of an advice given to them by Mrs Clinton. On Wednesday, she was quoted as saying, "And I want to take this occasion to state unequivocally that not only do the Pakistan government officials, but the Pakistani people and the Pakistan diasporas need to speak out forcefully against a policy that is ceding more and more territory to the insurgents." On Wednesday Maulana Fazlur Rahman said something different by saying that Margalla hills is the only surmountable block in Taliban's coming to the federal capital.
Besides his speech, you need to look into what the MQM deputy parliamentary leader Haider Abbas Rizvi said in the National Assembly on Thursday. Compare his speech with what the US secretary of State Mrs Clinton's statement a day earlier. There is no major difference. I will not suggest that his speech was influenced by Mrs Clinton's statement and the similarities between the two could be just coincidence. The reason I am saying this is because the MQM is against the Nizam-i-Adl Regulation (NAR), implementation in Swat from day first. Their stance was the same when there were no clear instructions from Washington.
Rizvi successfully demanded the ruling of chair about Maulana Sufi Muhammad's statement, terming the Parliament and the superior judiciary "unlawful" under Islamic Sharia. He got the ruling from Deputy Speaker National Assembly, Faisal Karim Kundi, who chaired the proceedings of the house. One would have appreciated the MQM demand if it had taken the same stance on the derogatory remarks of "uncivilised parliament" by former President General (Retd) Pervez Musharraf.
The same party had supported the peace deals Musharraf government had signed with the Taliban in the twin agencies of Waziristan. They fear that Swat Pact will result in Taliban expansion. Their assertion looks to be true as Taliban already marked their presence in Buner and Mardan districts.
But one can argue with MQM that Musharraf's peace deals were primarily responsible for Taliban penetration in other tribal areas like Bajaur, Mohmand and the settled Swat district and other areas. MQM had not created any fuss at that time.
This is how our political parties behave. Rizvi's speech was the best of Thursday's proceedings of the National Assembly. One must not criticise the contents of his remarks. Only one thing could be said that such outburst should have been uttered when Musharraf government had signed almost similar deals in Waziristan. There is no objection to proposed amendment for provincial autonomy, but one can ask why had this party supported the former military ruler when he had launched a military operation in Balochistan. Mere shedding of tears on Nawab Akbar Bugti killing was not enough.
PML (N) is considered to be the most popular party at present. Even its policy is full of contradictions as far as Swat peace deal is concerned. I still remember the support given by Chaudhry Nisar, the PML (N) strong man supported the NAR after it was tabled in the house. Individually, he might still have the same opinion. There was only one voice of Ayaz Amir, the PML (N) MNA, who expressed some reservations on NAR. By and large, the PML (N) parliamentarians and the party supported the government move.
I do not know what has actually happened in the past few days that forced the party leadership including its Quaid Nawaz Sharif to come up with changing stance on Swat accord. One thing is a bit clear, that the PML (N), which is based mainly in Punjab, has been made to believe that the Taliban are their way to the central province. It had no problem if Taliban are contained in the NWFP. The party also wants to dissolve the impression of right wing political force for the sake of getting support of the west. By starting a campaign against the Taliban and Swat deal, the party leaders can improve their credentials with the west that really matters when politicians are concerned with the issue of coming to power.
The government is no mood to own NAR in the National Assembly. He was continuously nodding his head in affirmative when Haider Abbas Rizvi was busy in pinpointing the lacunas of the Regulation. He was among the few PPP parliamentarians who thumped desks after Rizvi concluded his speech. He was also the one who went to shake hand with the PML (N) MNA Sahibzada Fazal Karim after his speech. This indicates how much the government is sincere in the implementation of the accord. We know that the government would hold the Taliban responsible for the possible collapse of the deal as he pressure is mounting from the US to act against the Taliban.
The government will be more than happy to have this situation in hand. The rulers will, no more, be accused of taking ahead the Musharraf war on terror policy. NAR in Swat was the first policy shift of the present government. By and large, the parties sitting in the ruling coalition as well as in opposition are not happy with this deal. Military operation is the only option. The political forces will not oppose even if they remained shy of coming clear in the support of using force against the militants. The US is telling us that we are in serious trouble due to Taliban. One does not understand the rationale why Washington is silent on Indian and Russian involvement in Balochistan. Definitely it is the failure of the present government to have taken up this issue at international level. But neglecting this issue by the US is more fatal. Stable Pakistan is in the interest of the region and the US as well. Certain elements in the province have started raising their voice for independence. But our major threat, according to the US, is the Taliban. On the real threat, which I believe is Balochistan, we had in camera session of the Senate. By and large our politicians believe what is said by the US. They might go after insurgents instead of giving a healing touch to Balochistan's wounds.