The Sharif-Zardari Meeting: Slow, Soft Steps To Nowhere?
Posted by Arif Rafiq on February 21st, 2008People’s Party Chairman Asif Zardari and Muslim League President Nawaz Sharif held a press conference less than an hour ago at Zardari House in Islamabad. It was largely conducted in English, suggesting a given importance for international consumption.
Nawaz Sharif’s body language and voice suggest that he was a bit subdued or disappointed, though he did make several jokes. Zardari seemed more upbeat and in the driver’s seat.
In short, both Sharif and Zardari were fairly vague. They agreed in principle to form governments in the center and the provinces, but there are significant differences between their two parties. They skirted discussion of these issues, though Zardari was more willing to admit them.
Sharif is in a more difficult political position. Acknowledging these differences and political cooperation with the PPP would demonstrate his compromising on his uncompromising campaign positions. Sharif’s clear and uncompromising stances on the major, largely Musharraf-related issues have revived his political career. Why would Sharif compromise when he’s not the largest member of the coalition and recipient of the spoils of power? If the PPP clings to Musharraf, then Sharif would likely part ways with the PPP and continue his anti-Musharraf and pro-judiciary stance.
The two parties disagree on three major issues:
- working with Musharraf;
- having the PML-Q and MQM as part of the national ruling coalition;
- restoring the deposed judges to their positions.
On the first two issues, pressure from Washington is a major force dividing the PPP and PML-N.
Zardari blatantly refused to answer a question about pressure from Washington to work with Musharraf. He also didn’t directly address the issue of Musharraf’s impeachment or resignation, simply stating that all issues would be handled constitutionally via the parliament. Sharif agreed, but said, “the nation today has given out its verdict [against Musharraf]…The sooner he accepts the verdict, the better.” In other words, Sharif still wants Musharraf to resign. Zardari is backtracking from his similar statement on Tuesday.
Washington wants a coalition including the PML-Q, and prefers the PML-N remain out. They are actively pushing this in negotiations with the PPP and Musharraf’s aides. Zardari did admit Sharif has “reservations” about who should be part of the coalition. He said he’s looking to create “a government of national consensus,” and in the national interest, is trying to include “all political forces in and out of parliament.” When Zardari was asked about whether or not he’ll work with pro-Musharraf forces, he evasively replied, “I don’t believe that pro-Musharraf forces exist.”
On the judges issue, Sharif pulled out a paper and awkwardly read this statement: “In principle there is no disagreement on the restoration of the judiciary. We will work out the modalities in the parliament.”
There were, however, areas of agreement between the two parties. They agree on:
- reviving parliament as the strongest institution in the country and a restoration of the 1973 constitution.
- the primacy of politics as a means of dispute resolution. Zardari said, “All the issues facing Pakistan can be solved by the political forces.” He specifically mentioned the issues of Balochistan and provincial autonomy.
- requesting the United Nations to help investigate the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.
Sharif said that his party respects the PPP’s mandate “wholeheartedly” and will support its government in Islamabad and ensure that it completes its five year term.
Zardari also admitted the process of forming a government will be extended. He said there is no deadline for forming a government and that there are “a lot of modalities to cover.” Nonetheless, his party and the PML-N have “in principle…agreed to stay together.” Sharif noted that their “agreement is on the restoration of the 1973 constitution.” He emphasized the failed Charter of Democracy signed by Sharif and the late Bhutto. Zardari never mentioned the document.
Recent Comments