THE stage was meticulously set for the grand, generous gesture by the gods of democracy in Pakistan. There was so much praise already for the exemplary restraint that the PML-N government had shown as the victors who had just been provided a second mandate by the judicial commission.

The occasion was being built up now for a royal pardon to the erring no, blundering Imran Khan`s wards. A meeting of the parliamentary leaders was called for Wednesday, and as expected, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif emerged from it in all his magnanimous glory. He had asked the MQM and the JUI-F to withdraw their resolutions to de-seat members of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) from parliament for their extended absence from the house.

In recognition that both Altaf Husain and Maulana Fazlur Rehman might want to prolong the affair before they bowed to the ideals of promoting democracy in the country, the prime minister set up a four-member committee. This meant that we could be in for some more parleys before we moved on to the next item on agenda.

This was almost Zardariesque except for the fact that the PML-N, as the party not just in power but also in relatively better control of a few crucial things, was doing it much better than the PPP model of national reconciliation. Just a few days earlier, many of these parties had technically ended up on the losing side after the judicial commission was unable to see any conspiracy or scheme of rigging in the conduct of the 2013 elections which brought the PML-N to power so spectacularly. Now, they felt much more comfortable advising the already converted prime mister about the merits of sticking together.

In the leading role, once again or permanently, was Khurshid Shah. He pursued, to the acknowledgement of sections of the pro-democracy and anti-PTI sections, the role of an opposition leader who politely pointed out issues to the government but was in no mood to rock the boat.

Actually, if a remark attributed to Mr Shah was to be believed as his mission, he seemed to be loving his part and could have been targeting anothereight years as the opposition leader. The statement had him predicting another 10 years for the PML-N in power provide d it was ready to emulate the PPP`s example.

There were, as usual, an abundance of other PPP sayings that captured the submissive mindset of the party but a listing of those will unnecessarily take the focus off the very deserving and increasingly selfless entity by the name of the PML-N. This is the moment for Saad Rafique and his cabinet and party colleagues to address Pakistanis about the positives of having the PTI around.

The words of encouragement now sound quite similar to those which were used in trying to dissuade the PPP recently from committing suicide.After Asif Ali Zardari made that threatening speech in Peshawar some time ago in which he targeted the army, the PML-N leadership administered him his own reconciliation medicine to bring him in line. At that time as well, a few PML-N voices were heard wanting, willing the PPP to continue as a political party.

That is a question the PTI should be asking itself.

Whereas the PPP appears to be happy playing appendage to Prime Minister Sharif`s Zardari-style politics, the PTI, as the new or surviving rival of the PML-N, can ill-af ford to be dependent on allowance from the PML-N at this moment for moving forward and beyond the extremely damaging judicial commission report.

Coming so soon af ter the `embarrassment` caused by the judicial commission report, the PTI must have been happy to be generating the acrimony that it did initially. But as the PML-N shifted to a more polite note and condescendingly expressed itsdesire to allow the PTI to sit in the assemblies, the reaction from the Imran Khan camp was not strong enough.

This was reminiscent of the dull PTI existence immediately following the 2013 general election.

There were murmurs about and mild objections to election `rigging`, but the stream of protest was too long to swell and have an impact on everyone from friends to opponents. And if the lack of purpose then was blamed on Mr Khan`s sidelining because of an injury, the weak PTI protest at being patronised by the PML-N could indicate an unwanted habit that may cost the party dear.

The reactions have to be spontaneous, even if they continue to be built upon and reñned after having been first voiced. A delayed reaction can be seized upon by rivals as was done by the PML-N after the PTI was unable to promptly dispute the 2013 election. If that was something which the new and inexperienced party had failed to anticipate, the PTI should have learnt its lesson and it ought to have been more forthcoming in offering its version on the judicial commission report.

The PTI should have seen it coming rather than acting innocent, uninitiated a novice yet one more time. It shouldn`t have been too difficult for Mr Khan to have his version ready instead of pinning all his hopes on getting a favourable report out of the judicial commission. It can be argued that whereas the PTI was constrained in its criticism of the report, many of its supporters that were free from the discipline imposed by the rules under which the judicial commission had worked were very vocal in their dismissal of the inquiry`s findings.

Given their tone, the more diehard among these supporters would be offering Imran Khan one simple piece of advice, whatever its merits: he must maintain a hostile, adversarial posture and must be seen to be constantly challenging all attempts at reconciling with what is there and what he has been vowing to replace. He must learn to do without these post-event thinking breaks. • The writer is Dawn`s resident editor in Lahore.