The political scenario prevailing in Pakistan has dampened the democratic climate and landscape in the country. Divisions are intensifying, which has led to ever-increasing uncertainty due to instability. Pakistan for the last 70 years has been in a ‘tug-of-war’ between pro and anti–establishment forces, with some interval periods witnessing deals between the two factions; defining status quo representation. Today, the pro and anti establishment factor has become part of pro and anti Nawaz Sharif forces. There have been role reversals. Once anti-establishment, PPP, has now become its front cavalry, replacing PTI. Imran Khan was used as reserve firepower. From the surface view, it seems that PML-N intends that PPP should return to its previous role but it won’t be easy. Zardari seems interested in exploiting any opportunity that comes along. Meanwhile, PML-N has to tread carefully. Zardari captured PTI vote during Senate polls and he stated that PPP will also form government in after General Elections 2018. Though, Zardari delivered on what he promised about Senate elections but he couldn’t fulfill on his bickering when he challenged undemocratic forces – as he had to surrender and live abroad for two years. The dangerous game being played to dampen the democratic spirit only deterministically leads to a ‘force-factor’ that soul of Pakistani nation is potently democratic. Any attempt to derail the democratic process will only be accounted for the last time, rather, in a complete manner as deep state wants to grip tightly on the unsustainable status quo.

PPP (Zardari) has endeavoured to win the upcoming GE 2018. That can be done in two ways: either delay the elections through the technocratic caretaker government set-up (with PPP leaders representing major share) OR intensify the illusion of ‘head-on’ collision by reversing the pro and anti-Nawaz Vote to a platform more suitable for the hidden and manifest forces, who undermine the democratic process. PPP wants PML-N to play along the manner that pro-Nawaz faction would be forced to give positional allegiance to PPP in upcoming General Elections 2018 and also the selection of their cabinet representative in the caretaker technocratic government set-up. PML-N has geared up for this encroachment and Maryam Nawaz responded that PTI and PPP are two sides of the same coin.

PPP intends to capture the credit of opposition from ‘Deep State-induced’ PTI whilst adjusting its mechanism for greater role in the political set-up of Pakistan. Today, as PPP has opted for role-reversal with once pro-establishment PML-N; the factor upon which PPP seeks to weaken PML-N is inherently present in the timing and manner of upcoming GE 2018. Asif Ali Zardari will be forced to demean PML-N’s moral, democratic and constitutional struggle by narratives built upon undemocratic behavior of anti-Nawaz forces. At this point in time, same situation about undermining system or ‘hacking democracy’ is prevailing between Russia and US. There are contextual lessons within it. Putin won the Russian presidential elections. He was being framed by Pro-Israeli Nato countries. Russia and UK/US/EU have resorted to aggressive diplomatic tactics as mutual rivalry deepened. The militaristic status quo of Pro-Israeli Nato has always aimed at humiliating Russian leadership in order to force it to surrender. Nawaz Sharif has followed idea propagated through actions which depict as signal that Putin’s Russia has a strategic policy of ‘democratic diplomacy’. It rests upon the realistic impression that pragmatic and principled approach within a plan are two distinct lines of action but each can be used to leverage the other in order to cover in terms of strategic position when one approach is targeted. The militarism of Pro-Israeli Nato is an oppressive tool. Russia and China will not bend to the oppressor. In such manner, an exemplary stand and courageous approach was witnessed through Erdogan’s visionary leadership as Turkey denied Pro-Israeli Nato’s insistence to attack Bashar’s Syria in 2016 for purpose of regime change. Hence, the ‘failed coup’ in Turkey. The role-reversal was mere rehearsal for a time to come.

Turkey, today, has penetrated Kurdish dominated region of Afrin in Syria. The Syrian National Defence forces also kept its presence. However, there is no doubt about Russian-Turkish deal on Syria. Both actors have agreed that the goal of Pro-Israeli Nato doesn’t revolve around only achieving regime change but rather, targeting Iran. More likely is the case that both allies, Russia and Turkey, have worked to convince Syria about the means to an end-goal. An outcome based on this development is not acceptable to the militaristic status quo of Pro-Israeli NATO. The Pro-Israeli Nato’s doctrine of militarism lusts for war with Russia and her allies; devising strategic methods and ways to seed discord and division in order to spread further destruction and devastation in SyRaq and AfPak. Question arises about sovereignty and national interest. Hence; Kurdish-Turkish rivalry is being exploited in Syria. In this context, Iran also made a strategic move inside Iraq after Kurdistan Independence Referendum Vote was held in September 2017. Calculated steps are need of the hour and the only solution is ‘democratic diplomacy,’ as an answer to militaristic status quo of Pro-Israeli Nato’s militarism. The emphasis on militaristic terms association with Nato is to highlight Israel’s advancement from regional to global military dictatorship. As a response, democratic diplomacy utilised as the strategic policy of Nawaz Sharif’s PML-N plan of ‘development and principles,’ has been intertwined in his election slogan: Vote Ko Izzat Do (Respect My Vote). The accuracy of the events in context and content is explained in detail in the further paragraphs, highlighting the underlying importance.

The point behind the revelation of facts is that discussion is not about ‘manifest’ aspect but it has become an established and known ‘reality,’ recognising it as a factor leading to emergence of new deterministic function, established through ‘democratic diplomacy’ as an idea. Nothing is more powerful or stronger than an idea whose time has come. Such an idea takes form of a phenomena. The practices of Putin in SyRaq represent the latent, potent,manifest and existent forces as part of a phenomena. This can also be applied in AfPak through democratic diplomacy-hence, challenging militaristic status quo or any form of oppressive militarism.This time around, PPP will have to revert to its democratic role and abandon its appeasing of hidden undemocratic forces. PML-N will have to relieve itself from its past pro-establishment image. There are forces which want PPP and PML-N to draw out daggers at each other but the people and leadership of Pakistan will reject it and embrace the phenomenon. There have been role-reversals for new regional and global evergrowing /developing geopolitical theatres. As Turkey had to embrace Russian friendship, soon, the Kurds will have to return historical role. As mentioned earlier – ‘role reversal.’  Nato’s oppressive militarism serve oppressive lies which soon will be defeated. Kurdistan Independence Referendum VOTE would be a surprise to EurAsia and nightmare to Pro-Israeli Nato.

The Kurdish-Turkish war is a trap. Pro-Israeli Nato will leave no stone unturned in bringing an unprecedented and new war to the Middle East. At such a time, either Kurds and Turks should unite or lose their ground, possessions and gains. It will be done to retain militaristic status quo. In order to meet the challenge, Kurds and Turks should unite through a common narrative. There are few steps that can be taken to address the situation prevailing in Middle East. The Kurds were exploited by US/EU/Israel and oppressed by the states in which they reside. A new policy of ’democratic diplomacy’ would ensure that Kurds are given special status in nation-building in order to achieve a strategic objective through provision of platform for democratic struggle (Public Interest) and constitutional/Parliamentary struggle (National Interest). This will lessen the uncertainty and instability. Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Jordan should draft and finalise ‘Kurd Plan’ with the inclusive consultation of Kurdish representatives within respective Nation-States. This level of trust cannot be developed without relieving Kurds from the clutches of militaristic status quo of Pro-Israeli Nato’s, which serves oppressive militarism for Israeli advancement from regional to global military dictatorship.

The manner in which Erdogan’s Turkey dared to embrace risk by abandoning its role of Pro-Israeli Nato, the leadership can also potentially lead Turkey to deliver on Kurdish initiative. What would ensure success of such an endeavour? The principle is that Highest Law is the Moral Law. All these situational developments have a striking similarity to how the scattered Muslims of sub-continent waged a moral, constitutional and democratic struggle to achieve a separate homeland (Pakistan) through power of VOTE. The idea which can be developed is that Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Jordan and other neighbouring states join forces to form a Union; involving countries who pivot around the Kurdish corridor. This is where the public and national interest receive the due ‘contour’ recognition for the Kurds. For e.g., the Kurdistan Independence Vote should be treated as legitimate concern and certain measure of importance should beattributed to Kurdish aspiration. The fall-out scenario is that failure to do so would eventually impact upon Russia & Chinese - led alliance as they lose ground in SyRaq (Middle East) and AfPak (Greater Middle East). It would be the ‘point of no-return’ situation for them as they lose sovereignty as they areplunged deeper into trap. The trap would be placed to work when Turkey stations its forces close to Southern border but risk losing its link to the Northern part of its territory. Istanbul would be strategic post as rival camps clash for control over cities and ports. The inevitable scenario is that whether such Union succeeds or fails; Nato will inevitably react to undermine Turkey’s status in SyRaq. It would send a strong signal to Russia and her allies in the region. The phenomena behind Kurdistan Vote should be influenced to sway towards ’democratic diplomacy,’ and sidelined from the aspect of militarism or influence of Militaristic status quo.