As for the political parties, they have shown that even when the results of the electoral exercise are not entirely indeterminate ex ante, they would rather play the game than opt out. While this is easy to understand in systems where democracy, as “organised uncertainty”, allows political players to determine, rationally, that it is more profitable to stay in the game rather than opting out, the reluctance on the part of major political players in Pakistan to exit the system and subvert it from outside shows they want a non-violent transition.

This is why it is important for the civil society to continue to agitate the issue of the rules of the game while the political players remain wedded to the electoral process, that being the only viable, even if flawed and tainted, mode of political expression.

The two strands are in fact complementary. When the next parliament comes into being, civil society will be addressing and pressuring it, just like it did the previous government.

How the next government will behave towards these demands must be seen in the context of the signals coming from the army. The new army chief has already distanced himself from politics. That is a signal to Musharraf, the former army chief, that the latter may not bank on army support for too long and in all eventualities. This opens up many possibilities in favour of the next parliament.

Let it be said that Musharraf himself is not unaware of the undulated terrain ahead. When he came on national television in the wake of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination and called her “mohtarma” and “shaheed”, he signalled an understanding of new realities, including limits to his own power and its exercise.

... contd.