AT a time when Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari is busy trying to establish a social democratic party, an act by the prime minister has bamboozled everyone. It has hit those in the traditional mould harder than the rest.

The prime minister has been able to secure front-page coverage for a certain Abdus Salam by naming a centre at the respected Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad after him. The act promises to add many inches to the growing image of Mr Nawaz Sharif. He may be facing a tough battle in the courts but he has, apparently, just won a tense fight of attrition with those who desired that the tenure of Gen Raheel Sharif as the army chief be extended beyond what the Constitution allows. The freedom he gives himself soon after — the freedom to be seen hobnobbing with the likes of Dr Salam, may certainly have a staggering effect on those longing for an expedited weakening of Mr Sharif.

The Salam declaration created a positive example to rival the ground realities at the grass roots, and it left many wondering about how to tackle the latest Sharif stroke. And the old-mould thinking had a lot to do with how various people dealt with the unexpected in this case.

The Jhang comparison first. As expected, so many found ready irony in the fact that the QAU dedication came close on the heels of the ‘shocking’ victory in a by-election of Masroor Jhangvi, a rabid cleric accused of calling for cleansing and genocide on the basis of sect. The cynical remark came without effort. The prime minister’s bestowing honour on Dr Salam, a minority member, has no meaning at all in a country where the Jhangvis are not just free to contest but also win elections.

The Salam declaration created a positive example to rival the ground realities.

The fact that Mr Jhangvi went on to join the JUI-F, an ally of PML-N, must have provided some solace to those left aghast by the prime ministerial move regarding Dr Salam, yet the unease remained, not the least because of just who the prime minister was — Mian Nawaz Sharif, the ardent follower, in fact an invention of Gen Ziaul Haq, honouring an Ahmadi? That’s got to be ludicrous.

Over and above the debate about who had declared the Ahmadis non-Muslim and who actually was the father of Islamisation in this country it seemed that people could not rise above the long-entrenched definitions. Who was the progressive, the liberal and who was the bearer of the ultimate conservative label? The latest, delayed and inherently controversial salute to Salam initiated a debate so many were keen to use to quickly debunk the other.

There was the usual, but by our grand standards, subdued, attempt at taking the credit away from Salam. The scientist was accused of, like most scientists who have ever had a claim on research are, of unjustifiably hogging the glory by denying his associates the accolades due to them. There were even a few names of quite well-known scientists thrown around.

They were identified as the real heroes whose contribution to the cause had somehow been obscured to the benefit of Salam. There was qualitative change. He was now being described as unworthy, not on the basis of his faith but with the assertion that upon scrutiny he wasn’t quite the great scientist some of his fans would have us believe.

That was some change but the wishful and very impossible transformation being forced upon Dr Salam wasn’t quite the match for the makeover some of the old faithful believed Mr Nawaz Sharif was currently undergoing. I have not read it myself, but the latest I have heard from a source is that one a column writer known for his left-wing views has admitted that more and more of the ‘liberal’ and the ‘progressive’ segments are pinning their hopes on Mr Nawaz Sharif for change for the better. If true, this is as drastic as it gets.

Where does this leave the dreamers chasing a social democratic party carved out of whatever material that is available? Where does it leave BBZ and the workers at his command? And what impact would reconfirmation of such realities have on Imran Khan?

The truth is that the Pakistani analysis is overly reliant on terms related to the old ideological era. This might often lead to oversimplification. Socialism. Minority. State. Faith. Secularism. On and on and on. These are all words that help us understand a situation whose application must not provide us with the excuse and luxury of presupposing and prejudging.

Had he survived the brutal Zia regime, BBZ’s grandfather would in time be asked just how far apart he himself thought he was from our ‘everyday’ comrade — except that there was never a single model of a socialist politician. His violent death at the hands of the dictator precluded that question and it is one of the major factors behind the sustained stereotyping of Pakistani politics and politicians as backward or forward-looking.

Z.A. Bhutto was desperate to be on the side of the people and suspected, with reason, that the socialists didn’t quite have the wherewithal for him to last long in power and he worked accordingly, weighed down by the increasing gap between his perceptions of what the people wanted and his own original manifesto.

Nawaz Sharif has, on the other hand, been trying to come out of Zia’s shadow in order to secure a long reign. He has proved that it is all about having the elements of the country’s politics by your side and you may eventually reach a stage where you feel empowered enough to recognise someone potentially as problematic as Dr Salam.

This will embolden those who say Mr Sharif must know just how powerful he is — bar, of course, the possibility of an unfavourable decision by the court. There will be greater demands to perform impossible feats. Thinking about his promise two days after a minister in Punjab falsely declared a return of the great kite-flying festival, the progressive prime ministerial streak could soon have him talking fondly about Basant.

The writer is Dawn’s resident editor in Lahore.

Published in Dawn, December 9th, 2016