Govt's siege mentality hurts Pakistan

Arricading the capital, using cargo containers to block roads, closing highways, breaking up protest rallies, banning public gatherings, arresting opposition supporters, raiding homes of opposition leaders, policing the media, orchestrating internet outages, suspending mobile network services and instituting cases against political opponents.

- MALEEHA LODHI

That being the state of play today, what does it all indicate?

It speaks of a siege mentality on the part of Pakistan's government and establishment – a state in which they see themselves in constant danger and fearful all the time of being overwhelmed by opponents. This urges them to take strong-arm measures, not occasionally but incessantly.

Strong-arm actions do not signify a strong government. Instead, they signal weakness, a lack of self-confidence and, above all, a failure to address a political challenge by political means.

It lays bare a government unsure of itself that has no political solution to a political problem. This, some would say, is not new and merely a throwback to past periods of repression and use of high-handed tactics from a familiar playbook. That may be so although one can argue that the present scale of authoritarian actions go much further than those witnessed under a civilian government before.

But the more important question is what it signifies about the present ruling hybrid coalition. When measures aimed to contain the opposition and dissenting voices involve the government routinely locking itself up, laying siege to itself and shutting itself off from ground realities, what does that really say?

It reflects a government that desperately seeks to preserve power but implicitly acknowledges it does not have popular support or legitimacy and can only deal with opponents by using the state's machinery of repression. It also tries to over-insure itself by efforts to control the streets, courts, parliament, media and the digital space.

The irony is that the more authorities try to control the more they feel they need to but the less they are able to. It becomes an endless game of whack-a-mole in which the presumed gains are transient and keep warranting more actions without any assurance of success in subduing the opposition or stifling criticism.