The ex-president says democracy is at stake. The present Prime Minister (PM) says his job is at stake. MQM leaders say the “authorities” are trying to reduce their stakes in Karachi. Is this just rhetoric? Is this just political point scoring? Is this just perception? Is this a new narrative in the making? Or is this reality? These are the questions being asked by the public and analysts, and other political science students. The answer is that even if it is perception or a narrative it matters because perception is based on some reality and has the power to mould events to support that perception to become total reality. The problem is that the rationale given by both party leaders to substantiate their fears that the democratic structure is going to be invaded by a third force is too weak to hold. Both these governments have used saving democracy as a guise to save themselves; hiding behind this plea bargain of an army takeover they have been busy taking over public money and public assets to further their own interest. The formula is that we will have a mutual cover up for mutual wrongdoings and cry loud and shrilly against any intrusion in this treasure island full of cases of land mafias, power misappropriation, mega project payoffs, etc. It all started with the operation of the Rangers against the MQM to clean up Karachi on this party’s insistence. However, when their own people were being convicted in this drive, they started shouting murder. They complained that they were being targeted by the Sindh government while the PPP said that due process was being followed. As the heat turned towards the PPP, it started shouting first against the army and then against political victimisation by the PML-N. The PML-N denied this and said due process was being followed, till the operation entered Punjab. As ministers and MNAs from Punjab are now being investigated, the PM has started stuttering about “somebody” trying to remove him from his position. Thus the theme is that as long as operation ‘Zarb-e-Ghazab’ is not against our party, welcome, and as soon as we become part of this ‘Ghazab’, cry foul and plead in the name of democracy. They quote the Charter of Democracy (CoD) where they had signed on not committing political victimisation but conveniently forget the accountability clause where they were supposed to make a commission that would do regular accountability of wrongdoers. Instead, a lame National Accountability Bureau (NAB) existed, which has finally given in to the command by the commander-in-chief to shape up and do the job of exposing corruption rather than covering it up. Fear is a very nasty feeling. It scares, it disturbs and it frustrates. Previously, political parties could sing a song of autocrats taking over and get public sympathy for themselves. The problem now is that the song does not hold true in the present political scenario. The army is taking most of the actions that political parties should have taken but without the intent to takeover the government. The reason why the cry for democracy being endangered is not ringing the same alarm bells is due to the fact the perception of the public about the two narratives is different. While the political parties’ narrative is about victimisation and unconstitutional forces, the armed forces’ narrative is about not being interested in power but very interested in public interest. This narrative has gone down very well with the people generally. To substantiate this fact we must look at the latest PILDAT survey on people’s opinions about the government and state institutions in Pakistan. The highest rating obtained is by the armed forces where 75 percent of the people perceive them to be the best institution, delivering results. On the other hand, political parties in general have lost the trust of the public and only 35 percent people feel that they are delivering on their promises. This contrast may ring alarm bells and give politicians a chance to scream over the dangers to democracy. However, public opinion on democracy as the best system to govern denies all this. As much as 66 percent of the people feel that democracy is the way forward and an overwhelming 80 percent want local elections as a solution to their everyday problems. What do all these perceptions reveal? It is very simple: the people of Pakistan, with the digital and social media revolution, have accepted that military takeovers are not the answer but they want institutions to be stronger and more empowered to ensure that those political parties that cannot deliver are held accountable. In the same survey the lowest rating went to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and police. The police are the lowest with 32 percent and the ECP is at 37 percent, expressing extreme dissatisfaction towards the electoral system and the law and order management of these institutions. Not far ahead in this ranking of the lowest are civil courts that score 43 percent. The High Courts and media score 62 percent and 53 percent respectively. This analysis clearly shows that the old excuse of crying wolf by political parties when their performance and corruption is exposed will not work. Thus, the present operation against political parties over corruption is more than welcomed by the public as it is not being done after dislodging democracy. Thus, the two narratives, one by the politicians and the other by the armed forces, present a very interesting picture. Politicians have not learned from their past and are repeating the same old stale spin that is completely off the pulse of the public. Their approach, messages, tone and strategy are all so predictable that it is at best some fodder for parody shows. The armed forces have done their homework and learnt from the past. The lesson they have learnt is that, be it Zia or Musharraf, even if the country performed better economically, public perception turned negative against them in the long run. Also, when in power, they needed politicians and had to compromise on corruption, which loosened their grip on corruption and public perception. Therefore, their approach, messages, tone and strategy are fresh, innovative and spot on the public pulse. However, the real test of this perception turning into reality will be whether it is based on just the Raheel Sharif phenomenon or, after his retirement, continues as an institutional code of conduct. The writer is secretary information PTI Punjab, an analyst, a columnist and can be reached at andleeb.abbas1@gmail.com