The writer is vice-chairman of Sindh National Front and a former MPA from Ratodero. He has degrees from the University of Buckingham and Cambridge University.

This government is being sustained in power by three main factors. Firstly, unbridled corruption which the parliamentarians of the ruling party and their coalition partners have been licensed to enjoy, in return for which they are expected to unquestioningly support the present setup. The government understands that the electorate have no say in their political fortunes till the next general elections and it only need to keep the assembly members happy to survive in power for now. The consequence is record-breaking corruption, including the Steel Mills scandal and the Rental Power Project fiasco, to mention but two instances. Ministers are relieved of their responsibilities and portfolios are reshuffled without adequate explanation of the reasons for doing so in the shadow of serious allegations of graft amounting to billions of rupees. The government has turned a blind eye to all this and has not taken action against a single responsible official. This is the sort of stuff that causes governments to fall in enlightened societies, but the present lot does not bat an eyelid over it.

Secondly, there is the support of the Western powers as the wages for being pawns in their proxy war on terror. It is Pakistan’s misfortune to be located at a highly sensitive geopolitical location along the fault lines of history, which has made it a target for manipulation by the superpowers. Musharraf lost his utility for his Western masters due to his reluctance to engage the fundamentalist miscreants militarily and his opposition to the US drone attacks. His replacement satrap has eagerly obliged his benefactors on both counts.

A number of US senators, the most recent being Senator Carl Levin, have revealed over the last two years that, whereas the Pakistani government makes a lot of noise for public consumption over issues like the drone attacks, it never raises such matters in private meetings with US authorities.

For its comprehensive and unconditional obedience, Senator John McCain issued this government a certificate of loyalty to the United States during his recent visit to Pakistan and for this reason they continue to prop up a highly unpopular setup, because they understand that one which genuinely represents the aspirations of the people of Pakistan would only deal with them at arm’s length.

Thirdly, there is the spin being generated about the indispensability of this government for democracy and its threat to use the Sindh card. It is mind-boggling how anyone can lap up such dribble that this government exceeds at churning out. The general principle around the world is that corrupt, inept and harmful regimes must be made to make way for new faces in whom, despite past experiences to the contrary, hope might be invested for a better outcome. But such a crucial mechanism for requisite change and adjustment does not seem to be desirable for some who prefer to cling on to the status quo and go down with the sinking boat. We have to contend with all kinds of political, constitutional and legal storms in Pakistan.

If the present system is so fragile and brittle that it cannot even withstand a mere change of faces to jettison the corrupt and unworthy and bring in at least a relatively palatable leadership, then something is very wrong with it and needs rectification. However, with the web of circumstances and law tightening around the government, claims of indispensability and threats of various cards are unlikely to save it from legal proceedings at home, fresh investigations underway in France and the Swiss cases.

The apprehension that Sindh will self-combust at the first sign of an attempt to dislodge this government is mere fantasy. The February 2008 polls produced a larger majority for the People’s Party in Sindh than ever before. Are we to deduce from this that Zardari is more popular than even Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto? The very idea is insane. That result was the outcome of extraordinary events more than anything else. There is no such thing as a Sindh card.

Sindhis are burning in the same fire as the rest of the country and they are fed up. They are not taken in by the People’s Party’s opportunistic and expedient surge of Sindhi nationalism. It is not the support of Sindhis but that of the fat cats in the Assemblies, whose own vested interests are directly linked with the survival of this government, which is helping this government survive in power.

So severe has the drain of public support been since February 2008 that, after failing to produce an impressive display of strength at the party’s founding day on Nov 25 at the Quaid-e-Azam’s mazar, the People’s Party is constrained to lean on other purchasable elements in Sindh to exploit Sindhi nationalism by celebrating the Sindhi topi day and paying homage to the Indus River. However, these were entirely non-political events in which civil society as a whole, including the opponents of the People’s Party, participated en masse and cannot be construed as an indication of support for the People’s Party. It is even less likely to translate into street power should the People’s Party issue an SOS call to the people of Sindh in the event of its dismissal.

No one wants to destroy the democratic system, such as it is. But where are the people and their interests in all this wheeling and dealing? Should they not be the paramount consideration in democracy rather than the survival of a government or any leader? Should a genuine democratic government not feel obligated to interact intimately with the people rather than hide behind iron gates and concrete walls?

The practice of inaugurating new projects not on the site but by having the foundation stones brought to the safety and comfort of government palaces is a farcical innovation of this government, something which could not have been believed had it not been seen. Through its actions, it has clearly illustrated that this is not a government of the people, by the people, for the people but is, in fact, a government against the people. It used the Bhutto name and legacy to get into power and is now using the ruse of democracy to survive.

In any case, what exactly has this government done to strengthen the democratic system which it uses as a shield? While so many seem obsessively consumed by the imaginary “what ifs” associated with the collapse of this government, few pause to consider the serious harm being done to the system with the continuation of this dispensation.

Is its defiance of the judiciary, and virtually every other major institution of state, not harming the system? Is its clinging on to power despite its being thoroughly discredited not harming democracy? Is looters being allowed not only to get away with looting, but being rewarded with elevation to positions of high authority not making a mockery of democracy? Was the dismissal of the elected Punjab government and imposition of governor’s rule, just because of a personal gripe with the Sharif brothers, done in aid of democracy? What does it do for national honour and sovereignty when the president comes under investigation by French authorities for the murder of their naval personnel? How does compromising national sovereignty to earn the support of Western overlords help democracy? Does none of this matter? Is all this insubstantial, irrelevant and without grave consequences for the system and the state?

Without any tangible positive accomplishments to show after nearly two years in power, this government is reduced to issuing hollow threats against the nation of using imaginary cards to survive. If a government can do no better than this, then it must be deemed unfit to rule. By the same token, if a nation succumbs to such blackmail instead of standing up to it, it deserves no better.