By: Abu Hurrairah
The political approach of our former premier, Imran Khan, appears to be riddled with contradictions and confusion. But upon closer inspection, it is motivated by a single objective: to maintain his base of support in a perpetual state of mobilization in preparation for general elections whenever they take place.
Khan gave instructions for the National Assembly resignations to his party’s representatives. For the seats, they vacated; nevertheless, PTI ran in by-elections. Khan has also declared he will run in each of the upcoming by-elections for the nine NA seats. His personal electoral appeal is intended to be demonstrated. The senatorial seats held by his representatives are still held. PTI members are now seated in the provincial cabinet due to his support for his ally Parvez Elahi in the race for the chief minister of Punjab.
This tactic seems contradictory. However, it is a move motivated by political expediency and created to put the coalition administration under both external and internal pressure. The fact that he chose not to request the dissolution of the Punjab Assembly or the PTI-controlled KP Assembly, which would have mandated the calling of elections by the federal government, has surprised many.
Khan’s primary demand since being removed from power has been for immediate polls. After winning control of Punjab, he has continued to issue “ultimatums.” Still, he seems prepared to wait and exploit the opportunity to energize his support base, gain political momentum, and attempt to undermine the coalition administration. He most likely believes that the PML-N-led administration is losing political support due to the stringent IMF-mandated economic policies it is being forced to implement. The country may avoid default due to this, but a high political cost is being paid.
Khan and his party’s credibility have undoubtedly suffered dramatically due to the ECP’s decision in the foreign funding case. PTI’s self-righteous claims that it has the sole leadership with integrity who upholds the law have been disproved by its receipt of “unauthorized donations” from foreign nationals, which is against the law. Its response to the verdict has been typical, consisting of both legal objections and displays of “power show.” That, however, might not be sufficient to end Khan’s problems on this matter, which could involve a grueling and protracted judicial battle.
Regardless of his party’s political gimmicks, such as accusing the neutrals and chief election commissioner of political bias and organizing demonstrations against the ECP, Khan cannot hold himself above the law. There are repercussions for the false statement he gave to the ECP. The constitutional process must be followed, notwithstanding his repeated attempts to stir controversy by accusing it of being a part of a conspiracy against him. The coalition government has instructed the FIA to look into the case of the illegal funds. However, it goes too far when some federal ministers assert that the ECP decision is sufficient justification for banning PTI. Such conduct is unlawful, as numerous constitutional attorneys have noted. A move like that would be terrible politically. The history of Pakistan attests to the futility of such an endeavor and the long-lasting adverse effects it would have on the country’s political landscape.
That doesn’t mean PDM parties won’t appeal the decision and ask the Supreme Court to rule on Khan’s status as “sadiq” or “amin,” utilizing the same constitutional provision that rendered former prime minister Nawaz Sharif permanently ineligible. Even if it was a dubious and politically motivated decision, bringing it up today would be contentious. Despite this, the law must be followed; thus, PTI must answer ECP’s show cause notice and justify why the unlawful monies should not be seized.
Khan’s plan to overthrow every institution of the country is proving foolish and ineffective in the meanwhile. He has attacked the ECP, the judiciary, and those he refers to as “neutrals,” or the army, with venom. He has also lambasted the judiciary when it has rendered an opposing decision. His chief of staff crossed a line on television by encouraging military personnel to defy instructions, fueled by his aggressive attitude, which encouraged him to speak aggressively. A request for justification was sent to the private news channel that aired his remarks for spreading “hateful and seditious” material that could “incite the military forces towards revolt.” Shahbaz Gill was detained, and the channel was shut down. If PTI is using this as part of a pressure campaign against the establishment, it is failing.
The nation celebrated its 75th anniversary of independence against this depressing backdrop, with the potential of additional political unrest looming large in the distance. Rarely has the nation been so split. A show of support and togetherness among the country’s citizens should have been held to commemorate its diamond jubilee. Instead, Pakistan marked this momentous occasion in a climate of political divisiveness and instability in the economy.
No political figure, inside or outside of government, has offered a long-term strategy or a roadmap for the country’s future at this crucial juncture. All recent governments have been more focused on politicking, working in crisis management mode, delaying reform, and seeking quick, painless economic “fixes” than taking a longer-term approach to address the country’s underlying fundamental issues.
The country’s future depends on how politics and the economy interact—Pakistan’s current dilemma results from decades of corrosive political and economic practices that have reinforced one another. Political leaders must put aside their partisan allegiances and decide to halt their conflict to find a solution to this dilemma. Instead, they should concentrate on the country’s enormous problems.
Over the years, most problems have overlapped, been feeding off of one another, and supported one another. They include the fundamental economic crises, the deterioration of the state’s institutional capabilities, the education gap, unchecked population expansion, environmental deterioration, and rising intolerance in society. Instability in Afghanistan on the country’s western border, hostility from India on its eastern flank, and a rise in militant organizations domestically all pose security challenges.
When such enormous concerns are waiting to be handled, can the country afford the current political turbulence and power conflicts in play? The united response of all political stakeholders should be “absolutely not.” If not, these misunderstandings and contradictions will cause chaos.
The author is a freelance writer and working with the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad. He can be reached at [email protected]
