THERE may be two ways of looking at the latest episode involving an angry Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan. It could be frowned upon as fresh proof of old tribal tendencies, of how personal egos can make individuals act in strange ways in the most demanding of times, with Chaudhry Nisar pulled up for making a habit of it. Or it can be taken as an example of someone asserting his democratic choice to dissent within the party, rather than submitting blindly to the leadership. In either case, it is ill-timed, and in both scenarios, it can be presumed that we are far from having seen the last of it. ‘Informed’ reports about the meetings in Rawalpindi and Lahore, which pictured the PML-N leadership as trying to pacify an old party lieutenant, indicate only partial success. Chaudhry Nisar, who happens to be in charge of the interior ministry of a country that is fighting a crucial battle, is said to have been persuaded to continue in the post even when he stands by his right to disagree. Thus, this could well be momentary relief rather than a long-term solution. With speculation about factions within the PML-N filling the vacuum created by silence on the actual reason behind the differences, the problem could resurface soon.

If a democracy is strong enough to allow visible disagreement between a prime minister and his interior minister, the next level should be where these differences are identified and are seen to be discussed. Also, it is inevitable for a party of the parliamentary size of the PML-N to have groupings. But by creating the impression that the Chaudhry Nisar issue is something that can only be resolved by secret parleys and a resort to old notions of loyalty, the PML-N is fanning all kinds of rumours. At this stage of his long political career, the prime minister must be able to display not only tolerance of intra-party dissent but the skill and patience to address and resolve it.

Published in Dawn, July 8th , 2014