His confrontation with the establishment has just begun.
His confrontation with the establishment has just begun.
Former Pakistan Prime Minister injured in bullet injury, Imran Khanmay have created a wave of sympathy and added to his growing popularity. But it could also derail his campaign for an early election through a long march on Islamabad. An injured Mr. Khan may not be able to lead his supporters’ protest rallies and in his absence, his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) may not attract enough crowds.
tragedy averted
Pakistan averted yet another tragedy in its long and bloody history of assassinations and executions of prime ministers when Imran Khan narrowly survived the attack, Beginning with the assassination of Pakistan’s first Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan in Rawalpindi in 1951, this tragic history includes the judicial assassination of former President and Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1979 and the murder of his daughter. Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in 2007.
Fact Check: Old pictures being linked to gun attack on Imran Khan
Averting the final calamity that would have struck several civilian Pakistani leaders before him, Mr Khan still hopes to make history by successfully challenging the country’s military establishment. By refusing to bow down after being removed from office via a parliamentary vote of no-confidence, and waiting for elections to be held next year, he is challenging the all-powerful armed forces to either allow the democratic process to go unhindered. Give or implement Marshal directly. law.
Since his ouster from power, Mr. Khan has relentlessly stepped up his efforts against the establishment’s ability to influence politics from behind the scenes. His statement, not supported by any evidence, is that his removal was the result of a conspiracy by the United States and military leadership. This conspiracy theory has found resonance with the traditionally pro-military right-wing elements of Pakistani society.
politics of complaint
Most of Mr. Khan’s supporters are saddened that their ‘patriotic’ leader has been ousted, and under Mr. Khan’s influence, they blame the removal of the army chief and certain generals. He disliked the country’s two traditional democratic parties – the Pakistan Muslim League (PML) and the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and was not against military conspiracies in the past against those parties.
In some ways, Mr Khan and his supporters represent the attitude of some supporters of Brazil’s right-wing former president, Jair Bolsonaro, who recently lost his bid for re-election. Radical Bolsonaro supporters took to the streets demanding that the military keep him as president because his left-wing rivals were not patriotic enough. Mr Khan, too, is effectively calling on the military to intervene directly in the democratic process to conduct premature elections, which he feels can win because of his current popularity.
Most political analysts agree that Pakistani Army Khan’s political position and brought him to power in 2018 under democratic guise. They were expected to provide civilian cover for policies supported by the military. For nearly three years, both Mr Khan and the military leadership insisted they were “on a page”. But now it is a unique moment in the history of Pakistan where Creator and Srishti are face to face.
an unusual press conference
Mr Khan has made remarks to the effect that he would prefer martial law to the current political system of his political rivals. His remarks came after an unprecedented press conference on October 27 by Lt Gen Nadeem Anjum, chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) and Lt Gen Babar Iftikhar, Director General of Inter-Services Public Relations. The main aim of the press was to deny involvement in the murder of pro-Imran journalist Arshad Sharif in Kenya.
Read also | Attack on Imran Khan: Pakistan Police arrests two more suspects
The generals tried to claim that Pakistan’s army chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, and the army as an institution decided to become apolitical and expose Mr. Khan’s two-pronged approach to his relationship with the army. was. Mr Khan continues to seek help from top officials in private while publicly condemning him.
From the military’s point of view, Mr. Khan’s refusal to bow down without causing anarchy is interfering with efforts to restore Pakistan’s economy and its ties abroad, which have been adversely affected by their democracy. According to a World Bank report released in October, Pakistan’s economy is expected to grow by only 2% in the fiscal year ending June 2023.
Reasons for the economic fallout include recent devastating floods, high inflation and a difficult global environment. But the political uncertainty created by Mr Khan’s movement has also played an important role. The World Bank report also warned that poverty would worsen in areas most affected by floods and could increase the national poverty rate by 2.5-4 percent.
This harsh economic reality has put a lot of pressure on the current Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif and the coalition government led by him. Ironically, this has refreshed Mr Khan’s popularity which had started to decline after three-and-a-half years of rule. Mr Khan’s dealings with the media, his autocratic rule, and allegations of corruption, which recently disqualified him by Pakistan’s Election Commission, ceased to be a story once he was removed from office and took to the streets.
riding on populism
Mr Khan’s populism combines Islamist and nationalist slogans with a strong civic image. His autocratic style and his changing political positions attest to the fact that he has never been more democratic. He appeals to the unemployed youth of Pakistan facing difficult times and serving and retired soldiers and government employees troubled by Pakistan’s declining international status. But their appeal is similar to that of other populist powerhouses in countries facing decline.
Its success, if it comes, will not strengthen constitutional governance, civic supremacy or democracy. The result would be the rise of an ultra-nationalist, neo-fascist era under a civilian rather than just a military leader. Mr Khan’s threat to set Pakistan on fire does not reflect a willingness to act within constitutional limits. Pakistan’s traditional democratic parties understand the need to compromise with all their flaws. Mr Khan is not.
PML and PPP leaders have all experienced the personal consequences of standing up for the establishment. They have survived the continual weakening of democratic institutions such as the Parliament, the Constitution and the Supreme Court. They have fought for free and fair elections and faced executions, murder, prison sentences, torture and deportation. Mr Khan and PTI are yet to face such anguish.
Mr Khan was recently disqualified from membership for the current term of the National Assembly by a five-member panel of the Election Commission of Pakistan. He is injured in a shooting incident, possibly an attempted murder, which is yet to be fully investigated. But his struggle with power is just beginning.
, Farahnaz Ispahani is a former member of the National Assembly of Pakistan and editor of the forthcoming book, Politics of Hate: Regional Majoritarianism in South Asia.,