IS removal of Nawaz Sharif the means or the end for Imran Khan? Even if Khan’s argument is that the ouster of Sharif is a prerequisite for the change he champions, should he squander other means to promote his agenda if Sharif isn’t going anywhere for now? PTI’s insistence that it won’t return to parliament is now counterproductive. If PTI withdraws its resignations, there will be some jeering. But PTI will only hurt itself by resigning its National Assembly seats if Khan lets his ego trump other rational considerations.

In calling off his dharna, Tahirul Qadri did right by himself. Being worldly wise he would rather live to fight another day. But in continuing its flaccid dharna and resigning from the National Assembly, is PTI thinking its options through? The dharna was meant to engineer the collapse of PML-N’s regime. For that there was also needed a saviour eager and willing to intervene using the spectacle of an imminent civil war as an excuse. That didn’t happen. The dharna still remained useful for it provided Khan with a bully pulpit and opportunity to build a scathing narrative against Sharif.

Khan used the opportunity masterfully. He did to PML-N at ‘D’ Chowk what former chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry did to PPP during the NRO hearings: refreshed public memory about the self-serving politics of the ’90s and scandals of corruption. But at some point the law of diminishing returns kicked in. PTI decided to go national with jalsas and began attracting huge crowds. It could have declared success at the massive Lahore jalsa and given itself an exit from the dharna. But Khan returned to ‘D’ Chowk and insisted that he’ll stand there till eternity, alone if need be.

Notwithstanding Imran Khan’s resolve, attracting massive crowds will not force Nawaz Sharif out.

The idea of resigning from assemblies was problematic from the start. If PTI deemed elections 2013 illegitimate, why did it join the assemblies or form government in KP based on such elections? Even if it had an epiphany during the dharna, wouldn’t logical consistency require it to resign all public positions linked to the 2013 election and not just National Assembly seats? If a non-performing parliament was the cause of action, wouldn’t the problem get aggravated with PTI members gone?

PTI’s decision to resign from the Assembly seats was always driven by realpolitik. The object was two-fold: inflict another cut on a vulnerable PML-N government at a time when its fate was hanging in the balance; paint parliament as illegitimate and irrelevant before the public because it had Sharif’s back. What has happened since is this: Sharif didn’t fall; no other party elected to resign alongside PTI to try and force midterm elections; the Multan by-election established that this parliament remains relevant for everyone including PTI.

It is now clear to most that despite having been severely debilitated, Sharif has survived the ferocious attack mounted by Khan. PTI’s overall message of change has resonated across Pakistan. But notwithstanding IK’s resolve and rhetoric, pulling in massive crowds across the cities of Pakistan will still not force Sharif out. Khan’s politicking and rabble-rousing has helped PTI emerge as a serious contender for power even in PML-N’s Punjab. But absent divine intervention, the benefit will have to be garnered at the next general election that is unlikely to happen anytime soon.

In this backdrop, neither the acceptance of PTI’s resignations will trigger the fall of Sharif, nor can the vacation of 30-odd seats force midterm elections. If resignations are accepted and by-elections ordered, PTI won’t have any logical basis to contest. We will witness a re-run of Multan: PTI-backed independents battling it out with candidates from other parties. PTI’s best-case scenario will then be denying the vacant seats to others. How will that leave PTI better off than today when it actually holds those seats?

Also of relevance to resignations is the larger chicken-and-egg problem in PTI’s demand for immediate national elections. PTI has never been able to answer how electoral reforms would transpire and who would reconstitute the Election Commission if the National Assembly was dissolved and snap polls called. But if the Assembly isn’t about to be dissolved and electoral reforms need to be pushed through this parliament, would replacement of PTI stalwarts with independents improve the prospect of pushing through PTI’s reform agenda?

And then there is the Senate election coming up in March 2015. Being a new party PTI has no presence in the Senate. Will it boycott Senate elections on the basis that the right to elect Senate members also springs from the same flawed elections that it has rejected? If it doesn’t do so (having shown no interest in dissolving the KP Assembly or government) would it then send a few senators to the same parliament from which it has elected to pull out all its National Assembly members?

The space and yearning for constructive socio-political change has expanded significantly due to Khan’s efforts (amongst other factors) over the last 70 days. But it can also contract if this opportunity is squandered.

During the lawyers movement our nation stood united behind the need for rule of law, which opened up a tremendous opportunity to fix our broken justice system. But the movement remained obsessed with the return of Iftikhar Chaudhry as the sole means to that desired end. The judges got their jobs back, but the justice system remained moth-eaten. Today the ordinary Joe is even more cynical about rule of law than he was prior to 2007 because his hopes were shattered after being nourished by idealism.

Waiting for Sharif to depart before agreeing to begin work on electoral reforms that have tailwind behind them would be a mistake. If a functional Pakistan is the end and Khan-as-PM a means, why not take the steps in the right direction that are possible today? Use of rhetoric by a leader as a strategy to motivate his support base can be useful. But for a leader to begin believing such rhetoric is dangerous. One hopes for PTI’s sake that Imran Khan’s ability to distinguish rhetoric from reality and personal ego from party interest is still intact.

The writer is a lawyer.

sattar@post.harvard.edu

Twitter: @babar_sattar

Published in Dawn, October 27th, 2014