Pakistan’s political landscape is abuzz with allegations of treachery and treason. Things took an unusual turn when a former speaker of the National Assembly, Ayaz Sadiq, visibly piqued by the statement of a member of the treasury benches in a National Assembly session, said that Pakistan had released captured Indian pilot Abhinandan in capitulation, fearing an imminent Indian attack. Even more consequential was the response by Federal Minister for Science and Technology Fawad Chaudhry who retorted that far from buckling under any pressure, “we struck India in their home“. The climax of this episode, which sent shockwaves to India, was Fawad Chaudhry‘s reference to Pakistan‘s “success“ in Pulwama under [Prime Minister] Imran Khan’s leadership.”

There is no question that Fawad Chaudhry’s remarks were misconstrued by the Indian media to mislead public opinion. Indian Prime Minister Modi then said that the “truth“ of Pulwama attack had finally been “accepted“ in Pakistan‘s parliament. Modi was clearly referring to the statement of Fawad Chaudhry about Pakistan‘s “success“ in Pulwama under the leadership of Imran Khan. Fawad Chaudhry was unmistakably referring to the aerial dogfight. However, the remarks of a former speaker of National Assembly were clearly unbecoming a politician of his stature. Sadiq‘s subsequent remarks that he stood by his statement did not help the matters.

It is extremely important to understand that statements by people of national stature have a direct bearing on Pakistan’s security. Pakistan‘s internal and external security and its international image are the issues which are, unquestionably, of national importance. Any effort to make Pakistan‘s security a partisan issue hurts Pakistan. This truism applies not just to statements by politicians but also statements by other leaders.

The ISPR DG summarily rejected Sadiq’s statement but did not comment on the equally irresponsible and factually incorrect statement by Fawad Chaudhry. Does this mean that if you project Pakistan as the dominant force, it is okay, while if you point to a vulnerability of Pakistan, it is equivalent of undermining the morale of the forces? It is only a matter of time before it will becomes clear which of the two statements will haunt us longer.

What transpired subsequent to the statement by Ayaz Sadiq is the primary concern of this article. Federal Minister Shibli Faraz said in an ominous tone that the time was over for Ayaz Sadiq to apologise, and now law would take its course against him and his “cronies“ because his remarks had weakened the state. In this debate, it is important to remember that following the capture of the Indian pilot, Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, in an interview to a TV channel, had expressed fear that “the next few days, and especially tonight, are critical“, clearly alluding to the possibility of retaliation by India. In a related development, banners were displayed in Lahore declaring Ayaz Sadiq a traitor. One wonders at the asymmetry in the dynamics of national security which requires budget worth trillions of rupees to look strong, but is weakened by a single statement by a politician?

In Pakistan, the charge of being a traitor and being an India or Israeli agent is as old as the history of Pakistan. However, the recent spike in the allegations of treachery is inextricably linked to the recent emergence of the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM). Earlier, the information minister had said that the PDM was the “third piece of the axis of evil“, the remaining two being India and Israel. There have been repeated claims by the government that the sole agenda of the PDM is to get a veritable NRO for the corrupt former rulers. The irony must not have been missed when former rulers, who were accused of stashing away billions of rupees, were declared pickpockets by Imran Khan. What a change in fortunes for most wanted barons reduced to the level of pickpockets.

A careful look at the PDM‘s activities in recent weeks does not give any clear indication that their struggle is for an NRO. The PDM is being led by Maulana Fazlur Rahman who does not figure conspicuously in graft cases being pressed against several politicians by accountability institutions. The fact of the matter is that the opposition parties, most of which are now united under the banner of the PDM, have been crying foul over the outcome of 2018 elections. They have demand an end to the incumbent government arguing that it lacks legitimacy because the establishment was allegedly instrumental in bringing the PTI to power.

The recent spike in the accusations of treachery points to a simple fact. The PTI government has given an unequivocal impression that if you point to the role of the establishment in politics, you are a traitor and the third piece of an axis of evil. In other words, it is highlighting the role of the establishment in national politics, which is the singular act of treason and betrayal. Sadly, the government has taken few concrete steps to dispel this impression. In fact, government leaders have said and done many things that support the opposition‘s narrative. For example, the circumstances leading up to the arrest of Capt Safdar (retired) after the PDM public meeting in Karachi and subsequent consternation among the top brass of Sindh Police only support the opposition narrative.

The PTI government has given an unequivocal impression that if you point to the role of the establishment in politics, you are a traitor and the third piece of an axis of evil.

In a strange twist of circumstances, the prime minister said in Gilgit that the opposition berated the establishment of Pakistan, which was more than enough “proof“ that his selection was “absolutely right“. It is debatable whether the “selection“ of the prime minister was absolutely right or not. If his two and half years in power are any indication, few would agree that the selection was “absolutely right“. The statement meanwhile sounds like an unwitting admission by the prime minister that he was selected. This is exactly what is claimed by the opposition. In this respect, the PTI government and the PDM are on the same page.

It surprises few in Pakistan that holding a different political opinion than the government routinely exposes one to the charge of being a traitor and an “agent of India and Israel.“ Even Ms Fatima Jinnah was called a traitor by erstwhile military dictator Ayub Khan. A nonchalant misuse of terms like treachery has the potential to make a mockery of the concept of loyalty as well. Quite understandably, there has been a growing demand that a culture of issuing certificates of loyalty and treachery should come to an end.

The culture of declaring others a traitor has flourished in the sub-continent for long. One possible reason is that an accusation of treachery is an expedient tool to divert the attention of the public from messy issues. In this respect, India is no different from Pakistan. Spawning the culture of fear, intimidation, and hatred suits India because it has failed a large majority of its people racked with the pain of poverty and deprivation. Invoking the cow-slaughter as an existential threat to the Indian nation is more convenient to pacify the rank and file than to improve their living conditions.

Weak social institutions and issues of misgovernance in Pakistan also require some similar logic in Pakistan. A cycle of political instability and mayhem creates the right circumstances where ordinary people find in the fall of the larger-than-life like characters a cathartic activity. A quick look at some statistics shows how India and Pakistan have failed their masses.

World Bank uses various definitions of poverty. Poverty headcount ratio at $5.50 a day is the percentage of the population living on less than $5.50 a day at 2011 international prices. With purchasing power parities (PPPs) $5.50 come up to about Rs 161 a day. By this definition, around 75 percent of the population in Pakistan is poor. In other words, 75 percent of the people in Pakistan earn less than Rs 161 a day on the average. According to this definition, around 87 percent of the population in India is poor.

In 2018, 35.2 percent of the urban population of India and 40.1 percent of the urban population of Pakistan lived in slums. Mortality rate attributed to unsafe water, unsafe sanitation, and lack of hygiene (per 100,000 population) was 19.6 in Pakistan and 18.6 in India in 2016, nearly 86 times higher than in North America.

This situation explains why allegations of treachery are so widespread in India and Pakistan because some existential justification is required to divert the attention of people engulfed in the daily grind of a miserable life. So, if you challenge the status quo, you are a traitor.

The writer is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics at COMSATS University Islamabad, Lahore Campus