...the
Godfather of the Taliban,leader of his own faction of the JUI. Known as
Mullah Sandwichfor his habit of having two young boys at a time...
, long dubbed the 'father of the Taliban', do not even attempt to hide with which side their sympathies lie. But Imran Khan
... aka
Taliban Khan, who who convinced himself that playing cricket qualified him to lead a nuclear-armed nation with severe personality problems...
?
When dubbed Taliban Khan by sections of the media and public, the PTI and Mr Khan hit back claiming that they were thoroughly misunderstood and that they are very much committed to being part of mainstream Pakistain. But if the TTP themselves see Imran Khan as a negotiator on their behalf? At least, the PTI chief has acted quickly to turn down the Taliban nomination and in doing so has deliberately tried to put some -- though perhaps not enough -- distance between his party and the TTP. Yet, that still leaves a fundamental question about the direction the negotiations will take once they begin in earnest. If on the government side, there is already a PTI negotiator and the TTP want to include the PTI chief on their team, then just how much will the state bargain away in some desperate notion of a limited and perhaps only temporary peace?
The problem of course is not limited to the PTI. The PML-N federal government has at virtually every step so far seemingly played into the hands of the TTP. Even now, there are no explicit red lines or timelines laid down by the government. When key government representatives like the interior minister argue that there are some demands of the TTP that can be considered, which demands precisely is he referring to? The TTP's list of ultimate demands is very clear and straightforward: no democracy, no constitutionally guaranteed rights, just a particular, extremely intolerant version of religion that has to be implemented in totality. While an elected government has the right to pursue its own vision and policy, does that mean it can also bargain away the very foundations of the state? And whatever confusion there is in the politicianship and the public on the lam about what the Taliban ultimately stand for, the history of electoral politics has indicated that Paks always choose moderate and centrist politics when they are allowed to vote relatively freely. Can this government really reject the collective weight of history and the voice of the people?