Imran Khan-Ever the Lone Ranger

Posted on July 6, 2006
Filed Under >Fawad, People, Politics
13 Comments
Total Views: 28440

Guest Post by Fawad

Everyone seems to be talking about Imran Khan’s interview in the Sunday Observer (2 July, 2006).

It is interesting and well worth the read. The piece captures Imran’s essential persona; fiercely independent, consistently principled and completely committed but a little self-righteous and indeed somewhat politically naive.

It has to be said that, despite his muddle-headed ‘spirituality’ that sometimes brings him close to unsavory elements like the Jamaat-e-Islami, his ideas for Pakistan’s political system are fundamentally sound.

He is most insistent on an independent judiciary, election commission and accountability bureau; all institutions whose strengthening is critical for Pakistan’s democratic advancement. Despite his early support for Musharraf, he is now vehemently opposed to military’s role in government. In Pakistan, there is almost no disagreement in thinking circles now that as long as military remains the dominant force on the Pakistani political scene, democracy has little chance of taking root.

Imran’s instincts in the arena of foreign policy are reflexively anti-western and many times flawed. Of course, there is plenty wrong with Musharraf’s self-preserving genuflection to the West and a harder Pakistani line toward the west if it is in its national interest (such as free trade agreements, opposition to the roughshod execution of the ‘war on terror’ etc.) is entirely appropriate. However, Imran’s public utterances extolling local virtues and criticisms of ‘kala sahibs’ seem to me a raw reflection of his personal evolution from a playboy to a politician and not any well thought out views about the virtuous life or a hard-headed understanding of foreign policy goals and objectives.

Some excerpts from the interview:

On his farmhouse outside Islamabad: “This place was just a jungle area when I found it… It was very cheap… I sold my London flat to buy this whole place and build this house… I have fruit trees. Cows for fresh milk, yoghurt. My own wheat. I’m basically self-sufficient. I have made my boys a little cricket ground.

On elections: “It is not easy to win against a military dictator in an election that is being run by the security services… My contention now is that there is no way anyone should fight an election while Musharraf is in charge… Therefore I will be out on the streets beginning in September against him. It is the only way. I am preparing my party for a street movement. What we are hoping is that the other parties will come out too.”

On his ‘political naiveity’: “A lot of people here in the press call me naive… Musharraf told them I was his prime ministerial candidate in 2002 but had turned him down, I was too full of myself. He said I was a terrorist without a beard. But I would have failed if I had joined them. Look at the way they live: big palaces, Lear jets. People here have no drinking water; 70 per cent of the schools are closed in my constituency. But I’m more hopeful than ever. One of the reasons I was a successful cricketer was I felt nothing was impossible. I never signed more than a one-year contract, because I always thought I would be better the next year. I feel that now, too.”

On ‘extremists’ and democracy: “The pseudo-liberals here will tell the West: save us or the mullahs are coming; that is not the problem. You will have no problem with extremists in Pakistan if you have democracy.”

On spirituality: “Spirituality does two things for you. One, you are forced to become more selfless, two, you trust to providence. The opposite of a spiritual man is a materialist. If I was a materialist I would be making lots of money doing endorsements, doing cricket commentary. I have no interest in that.”

On marraige and divorce: “I decided I would never marry while I was playing cricket. I watched other cricketers and saw the wives going through a torrid time, and the children, which was even worse. When I had my children I was completely hands on…. I always thought I would marry a Pakistani girl just because it would be so difficult for a girl to come here. To try to balance everything was certainly the hardest thing I ever did. The hospital opened, I was involved in politics and then kids came. I had known pressure on the cricket field, but that sort of pressure was very new to me. And though she tried for a long time, it was very difficult for Jemima to live that life… For one-and-a-half years she was in England and I was here. She felt she could not live here, there was increasing difficulty, and I could not be anywhere but here. I am rooted to a cause. I hated the divorce and the last thing I wanted was for my children to grow up without me. I would like the boys to be Pakistani as much as they are English. And they are Muslims; I take them to Friday prayers as often as I can…. There is never really a positive side to these things but, if there is, at least being alone allows me to be more fearless…. My marriage was tough, but I still think the highs I got in marriage were much greater than those I got as a bachelor.” [Would he like to marry again?]: “One day, but not now.”

Fawad is based in California and manages the blog ‘Moments of Tranquility,’ where a version of this was first posted.

13 responses to “Imran Khan-Ever the Lone Ranger”

  1. Ali Imam says:

    No. It was never illegal to import computers, either under Zia or Bhutto (I assume you mean Benazir). That is just plain wrong.

    You are also wrong on the democracy issue, but since that is your opinion I will not argue. After all, everyone should have the right to be wrong.

    On economic development, you may be only half right. It is important, but it is NOT all-important. Even if it were, there is no indication that the economic situation has improved. Inflation is high and rising, job statistics are down, and they just had to first the Chief Economist of the country so that they could fudge the numbers on poverty.

    I am not a fan of Benazir or Nawaz, but lets not twist the facts. the real problem for Musharraf today is not that the US is losing interest in him, it is that the myth of economic development that he and Shaukat Aziz have created has blown away. Remember, what got Ayub down (he had similar rhetoric of economic growth) was the price of Sugar… Mush may go down on load shedding here in Karachi.

  2. Jay says:

    Why is everyone negative about Musharaf and so positive about Democracy?
    Pakistan is a much better place with Musharaf…the economy is growing, we have new roads, new construction, better telecommunications, etc etc etc. He is not doing enough but at least something is happening; unlike in the past. What work did the former governments of the last 30 years do? Did you know it was illegal to import a computer for personal use under Bhutto and Zia?
    The amount of corruption overall has gone down and some people (like myself) are coming back from the West to start export business’s here.
    What is so great about Democracy? Do we get to eat Democracy? Does Democracy help us teach our childern for a better future? Why is Democracy so great?
    All that matters is economic development. India was not a great place 20 years ago even though it was a world-class Democracy. India is a great place today because her childern have a great financial future. China is a great place today but she is a great place to live not because of something silly like Democracy.

  3. Altamash Mir says:

    Imran Khan is the guy who was talking about “Planting Trees” & “Environmental Pullution” back in the 80’s…His mind is definitely on the right track as far as ideals are concerned. A lot of his ideas (post-entrance into politics) and agendas were adopted by other Political parties, which proves that his agendas were correct.
    Now as far as him turning his ideals into votes, its is definitely not easy. That is if you are not lying to your constituents. Imran Khan has taken the long route of politics and if he succeeds in accomplishing what he promises (along the way) he will gain a respect of the public that doesnt exist for any other party. By refusing a position as a puppet Prime Minister, he has done himself a favor. First of all he can sleep at night with a clear conscience.

  4. Asad says:

    Ideals are fine, but if they cannot be turned into votes then they are no good. Why didn’t he take on the PM job? Maybe he coudl have made a difference. Or tried to. The fact is that he has NOT shown the leadership in politics that he was known for in cricket.

  5. Khalid-s says:

    i wonder if being politically niave is really a bad thing… i will not mind a few more politicians who are politically niave but stick to their ideals.

    This man has convictions. It is a pity that we as a society do not have enough conviction ourselves to make his party win in elections.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*