THE ongoing squabbling over the meeting of opposition parties called by Nawaz Sharif in London tells us why, over seven years after he seized power, Musharraf still rules the roost. Pakistan’s current crop of military rulers are, as their predecessors were, serenely indifferent to their civilian opponents.

The reason for this confidence is obvious: most political parties are panting to cut a deal, any deal, with the generals. And the ones who oppose the army do so not out of any high principles, but because they’ve been left out in the cold.

Perhaps this analysis is unkind and cynical. But the fact remains that over much of the 60 years of our independent existence, we have been ruled by generals who have exploited the divisions among power-hungry politicians.

In itself, this is not a slur: politicians the world over crave power. But unless this drive is accompanied by a sense of responsibility, it is reduced to naked ambition.

So central is the army to our political process now that instead of focusing on their constituents and their needs, parties are now fixated by the moves the GHQ is making or contemplating. They are thus forever reacting to Musharraf’s words and actions, instead of being pro-active and setting the agenda for the nation.

The reality is that without civilian collaborators, the army cannot rule for very long. Each time a uniformed saviour comes along, he is guaranteed any number of politicians dying for a place in the sun, even if it is obstructed by a khaki shadow. This is a pattern we have seen repeated time and again, and yet our political parties have not managed to evolve a common stand against military intervention.

Take the current confusion caused by the ambiguity surrounding the next presidential election as an example of disunity. Musharraf’s henchmen have floated feelers suggesting that the current assemblies will vote for the next president, in clear violation of the Constitution’s spirit, if not its letter.

Despite the grossly mala fide intention behind such a move, many parties will go along. While some leaders have spoken about resigning from the assemblies in such an event, this would be effective only if the entire opposition walks out. This is unlikely to happen, and it is entirely possible that Musharraf will indeed get himself crowned by the present legislators, rather than risk rejection by future assemblies.

Then there is the pervasive fear of rigging in the next general elections. As we know all too well, this apprehension is well-founded. But apart from going around wailing about the ruling party’s crooked plans and flapping their wings like headless chickens, what are the opposition parties doing to forestall the administration’s plans? Here are a few suggestions that might be useful in case politicians are really interested in fair elections.

Over successive elections where parties claim to have been robbed of their proper share of parliamentary representation, they have generally failed to produce solid evidence of rigging. Now they have the technical means to do so. But first and foremost, they should start a drive to ensure that voters have national ID cards that have now been made mandatory to cast a vote.

The problem with many people, especially illiterate men and women in the rural areas, is that they fear getting enmeshed in the red tape involved in applying. Here’s where parties with roots in the hinterland can help. They should send out activists to help people comply with the needed requirements. When the government does not issue the cards in time for the next elections, the opposition will have proof that a large, quantifiable number of voters were disenfranchised.

The most common way the administration rigs elections is by juggling the numbers after the returns are in from polling stations scattered over the constituencies. In rural districts, these are spread over large distances. Although polling agents of candidates are supposed to be given certified copies of the results, all too often these volunteers have been bribed or bullied, or just thrown out.

Once the returning officers have got all the tallies, figures can be (and have been) massaged to produce results different from the actual votes cast. If candidates feel they have been cheated, they are told to complain to the Election Commission. And we all know what happens to these complaints.

More often than not, this kind of skulduggery occurs in the rural areas, far from the prying eyes of the media and foreign and local election observers. Another common practice in the remote areas is the blocking of roads, and the seizure of public transport.

Administration favourites also deploy gangs of thugs who resort to firing in the air around polling stations located in villages known to favour an opponent. This scares away voters, especially women. In many areas of the NWFP and Balochistan, women are simply not allowed to vote.

But what has changed since the last election is the dramatic rise in the number of private TV channels. If the opposition can convince them to pool their resources so that their camera teams can fan out across the hinterland, and not just cover urban constituencies, this would be a considerable deterrent to the more blatant forms of rigging.

And if election agents carried cell phones to report any malpractices, and given the numbers of the closest media teams, this would empower them considerably.

They could also use the digital cameras on their phones to photograph the results, and send the images as SMS attachments to a central point in the constituency where they would be tabulated by the candidate’s team. Candidates would then have figures to challenge the Election Commission with if the result diverged from their figures.

And if candidates appointed friends and relatives as their polling agents, they might be harder to bribe or browbeat. In fact, political parties should organise training workshops for polling agents where they are shown the documents used, and explained their rights and their duties.

None of this is rocket science. There is enough time before the elections to take these and other steps to foil the inevitable rigging that will be attempted. But I fear that rather than undertake the hard work involved in being pro-active, our politicians will take the easier way out and wring their hands and complain. Already, their words and body language are those of a beaten team.