PTI founder Imran Khan’s breaking off of talks should not lead to an end of the process. The fallacy to which Mr Khan seems to have fallen prey is that if talks have not produced immediate results, then there is no point in holding them. From the PTI’s perspective, being ready for talks is itself a major concession, considering its previous take-no-prisoners attitude. However, it could feel that this had not been reciprocated by the government, that the minimum prescribed by the PTI, the appointment of judicial enquiry commissions into the 9 May 2023 incidents all over the country, and the November 26 incidents at D Chowk Islamabad. The recent raid for Sahibzada Hamid Raza, the PTI MNA and Sunni Ittehad Council Chairman, did not help. Mr Raza is also the PTI negotiators’ spokesman. He had several times warned that if the commissions were not set up, the talks would break down. The PTI is in the position of having presented its own charter of demands, but of not having received the government’s reply. Government spokesman Senator Irfan Siddiqui noted that the deadline for the government’s reply had not yet expired, and thus the collapse was premature. At the same time, more than one government spokesman had said that no commission could be set up, as both events were subjudice, and people were also facing cases in that regard.
Mr Khan might have felt that it could not be possible to hold talks without alienating his base, which had been attracted because of his obduracy and his refusal to become just another politician. At the same time, there is no placing preconditions on talks. At the same time, not only must there be a refraining from any continuation of harshness, but confidence-building measures should be carried out. The raid for Mr Reza must not be seen purely as an excuse for abandoning talks, but if it is seen as evidence of the government’s attitude, it can be seen as evidence of why talks should not continue.
The government should not forget that ‘administrative means’ (brute force) are not a very efficient tool of negotiation. It should also not forget that when in opposition, it constantly called for talks, only to be rebuffed. It is now faced with the problem of bringing the PTI back to the negotiating table. In doing so, it must not give PTI men a licence for wrongdoing, but it must remember that it has power, and the opposition does not.
