Pakistan's PM Has Political Woes

By Steve Hynd

News today that the second largest party in Pakistan's governing coalition, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) has withdrawn it's support for the government, ostensibly due to "a hike in gasoline prices and new taxation measures" but more likely because the government won't use it's paramilitaries to intervene on MQM's behalf in its ongoing blood-feud with rivals the Awami National Party in the city of Karachi.

While both agreeing that a vote of no confidence is now possible which would topple the Gilani government, especially in light of Pakistan's cratering economy, McLatchie and Reuters have quite different takes on the situation.

McClatchie's Saeed Shah seems to think that military boss General Kayani is pulling strings here to destabilize the civilian government and that eventually main opposition leader Nawaz Sharif will be unable to resist the temptation to call for a vote of no confidence in parliament which would go against the government and thus cause a general election to be held. Sharif would probably win the majority of votes in any new elections.

However, Reuters' Zeeshan Haider feels that Sharif will hold off any such moves. While his party would "win" any general election it wouldn't do so with an overall majority, and the PML-N "does not enjoy close ties with other opposition parties". Sharif, therefore, would have nothing to gain by forcing an election at present. Haider also pours cold water on conspiracy theories concerning Kayani's machinations, writing that "Gilani is known as one of the few officials who managed to avoid making too many enemies in Pakistan politics. He enjoys good ties with Pakistan's powerful military, which has ruled the country for more than half of its 63-year history."

I'm inclined to go with the Reuters assessment myself, particularly because Saeed Shah begins his McClatchie piece with a ridiculous argument:

Political instability likely will take the government�s focus off the fight against extremism and leave it weak. Pakistan�s co-operation is believed to be vital in battling al Qaida and in finding a solution for Afghanistan. Washington has worked hard to build a close relationship with Asif Zardari's pro-Western government and showered it with billions of dollars of aid.

Pakistan's co-operation in the "war on terror" has never been anything more than two-faced and half-hearted and no amount of political change will alter the underlying dynamics. Zardari, Gilani, Kayani and Sharif are all united in believing that India really is a threat to their nation, that the U.S. will never be more than a sometime-friend and that only while it thinks it is getting what it wants, and that Pakistani influence in Afghanistan via their proxies in the Taliban is essential to Pakistani national security. Ignoring that dynamic in the lede of an analysis of Pakistani politics and their ramifications immediately calls into question the integrity of anything else written, for me.