In the last week of January, President Zardari categorically stated that local bodies elections in Karachi will be held "within three or four months" which means sometimes in April or May. The announcement came after a series of meetings with the MQM representatives in Islamabad and Karachi. The local bodies issue happens to be the biggest bone of contention between the PPP and the MQM in Sindh and the latter has been very uncompromising in its support of the Musharraf-era local bodies system.

During the last quarter of 2009, two very sad events took place in Karachi which may leave their mark on the future course of events. The first, chronologically, was an altercation on the plotting and sale of land which was in the limits of a public park in Old Golimar area contiguous with Lyari. This turned into a full-fledged confrontation between the PPP and the MQM having distinct ethnic overtones, resulting in serious damage to life and property.

Civic life was disturbed for more than a week in the area. The official version of the incident, as given out by Mr Rehman Malik was a politically expedient fairy tale. President Zardari, during one of his trips to Karachi, brokered a compromise which helped defuse the tension temporarily.

The second and the most regrettable incident was the explosion in the Ashura procession on M.A.Jinnah road which was followed by well organised looting and arson in the biggest wholesale market in Pakistan. The indifference and inefficiency of the law enforcement agencies during the entire episode is sufficiently documented on city government’s footage aired by various TV channels.

It was also during the last quarter of 2009 that political activity in Karachi picked up its pace with all the political parties in Sindh holding rallies and mass meetings, no doubt keeping their eye on the forthcoming local bodies election. The rallies staged by the coalition of nationalist parties are noteworthy since this is the first time that they have made their presence felt on the political scene in Karachi.

The ANP also held a public meeting though their political presence is in evidence in Karachi. Elections in Karachi are a very complex affair; they are contested on the basis of ethnicity, clans, religious sects and political affiliation.

Therefore any phenomenon that affects these factors will certainly affect the outcome of the polls one way or the other. Karachi has a long history of violence and a cursory glance at the past happenings would reveal that every round of violence has resulted in tangible changes in the political scene.

It is in this milieu that the clashes in Orangi Town and its neighbourhoods have been taking place causing great damage to life and property. What we see now is the killing of poor innocent people seen busy in the struggle to win their daily bread, and the loss of property acquired with the sweat of their brow. The political leaders and leaders of the ‘civil society’ will, as usual, express grief and condemn the incident, appeal for peace, and come forth with impractical suggestions to solve the problem of violence in Karachi. Soon, it will be business as usual till the next round.

The most important question here is the process under which political differences degenerate into hostile acts of violence leading to murders and arson. Any person of average intelligence can understand that the use of fire-arms as a means of terrorising the rivals and the recalcitrant is a reflection of fascistic mindset that operates at this level.

These elements do not understand the transient nature of political ascendency acquired in this fashion. Sadly, in our political culture, this attitude is a common denominator in most political parties. One can say that this mindset is a legacy of the prolonged periods of military dictatorships in Pakistan's history.

But the stunted and warped political culture that is a product of authoritarian rule needs to be changed if there is to be meaningful politics in the country. To tolerate dissent and bear with a different opinion is an essential requirement of democracy.

Similarly, winning and losing seats in any election is important but not something to place the survival of the democratic system, such as it is, itself at stake.

The solution of a problem depends on taking ground realities as the starting point. There are many solutions floating around, as it happens every time a crisis of this nature occurs, such as, more stringent laws as if the Statue Book is devoid of the relevant laws. The fact is that there is a great void as far as implementation is concerned, whether it is due to indifference, inefficiency or insufficient manpower.

Then there is the question of de-weaponisation even if we turn a blind eye to the abysmal law and order situation and rampant crime in our society. What is there to stop the forces that supplied them with the arms in the first place, from rearming the lawless elements, even if, supposing for argument's sake, the de-weaponisation is hundred per cent successful.

There are other solutions going around as well but the two mentioned above are sufficient to illustrate the point. The problem though chronic has a very simple solution. The political parties in Pakistan must realise that their present conduct is responsible for determining the future course of history of the country.

If they themselves throw democratic norms overboard, how can they expect other institutions of the state to follow these democratic norms? Needless to say, the way things are in Pakistan, the leadership of all the political parties in Pakistan bear prime responsibility for resolving the issue in a democratic manner.