Like many Pakistanis, I admire Imran Khan and his sincerity. But supporting him politically is a different matter. He and his party – Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI) – have some serious soul searching to do before people give it their political support.
Imran Khan is one of the few principled politicians we have. There is no doubt that he truly cares about the country. His bold stance on May 12 and his consistent support for the restoration of the judiciary was unmatched by any other prominent politician. His cancer hospital and the projects he has started in the field of education have been praised even by many of his critics.
Someone like myself, who is dissatisfied with the politics and corruption of the leading parties, is naturally attracted to Imran Khan who talks about principles and accountability. However, as much as I like Imran for his honesty and devotion to the country, I have some concerns about him and can not help agreeing with Shafqat Mahmood’s statement that Imran never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
Being politically inclined, I have even considered joining PTI at times, but reservations about his politics prevent me from doing so.
Imran Khan has been in politics for 13 years, and this is a long enough period to develop the party into a vibrant, democratic entity. Unfortunately, PTI still comes across more like an Imran Khan fan club rather than a democratic political party. For the most part, there is an absence of grass roots forums that meet regularly where any party member can raise issues and be heard, and the party line almost completely comes from the top.
Secondly, Imran does not realize that politics requires an appropriate mix of idealism and pragmatism and confuses this balancing act with opportunism. If he wants to serve the people of Pakistan by coming into power, then his decisions should be geared towards that goal. He had an excellent opportunity to launch himself when Nawaz Sharif offered him 20 odd seats in 1997 and again when Musharraf was willing to help him become the prime minister. Instead of spurning these offers, he should have taken a few ministries and worked hard on demonstrating through performance that he was someone who could truly deliver if given a chance. This could have provided him with the impetus needed to launch PTI into a force capable of getting elected into power on its own and then implement its reform agenda.
This unwillingness to balance idealism and pragmatism also creates doubts about his ability to deliver even if he came into power some day. It makes one wonder whether he would really take a practical approach towards addressing the country’s problems.
On top of all this, Imran Khan has a very confused stance on the Taliban where he still falls well short of fully condemning them.
He has been very consistently and forcefully bashing the Americans in recent years but the same kind of condemnation for the Taliban has not been forthcoming. This sharp contrast, when the Taliban have killed many more Pakistanis than the American drones, and when they are directly trying to destroy the state structure to establish their own rule, is hard to understand. It has taken some strong criticism for Imran Khan to finally make a few “too little too late” statements criticizing the Taliban, whereas what one expects from a good leader is the ability to clearly identify and point out a problem well ahead of time.
His stance on the current situation in Swat has again left a lot to be desired. He first vehemently opposed the military operation but did not explain what the government should do when the Taliban break a peace agreement and keep on expanding into neighbouring districts as they blatantly did after the Swat deal. Only after coming under regular fire has he finally accepted that a military operation can also be an option. He rightly says that bombings should be avoided and the operation should be carefully targeted, but the national debate could have been more focused on discussing how military action can be carried out in a way that minimizes civilian suffering if he and others had not been creating confusion by insisting that there should never be an operation.
In yet another example of muddled thinking, he now argues that before sending the army, a group of politicians should have been allowed to go and try to convince the Taliban to abide by the Swat peace deal. This makes one wonder why he did not publically propose this in the days leading up to the operation and what he is trying to accomplish by undermining the military’s efforts now that the time for this idea has clearly passed.
I really admire Imran Khan for his sincerity, but these are some of the serious issues that he and his party have to come to grips with, before PTI can make serious headway in realizing its full potential.
@ Aqil
I agree with you in principle. It’s just that I have heard so many politicians claim that Mush offered the PM slot that I am inclined to believe none of them, except perhaps Amin Faheem (though I do not like him as a politician and nor do I respect him for his personal life) but that is the only one that made sense to me given that if he had taken it, Mush would have effectively broken the PPP (which every dictator has tried hard to do in Pakistan). Remember PPP had the largest number of seats in the 2002 election after the Q League and hence presented the greatest democratic challenge to Mush. But Amin Faheem was too loyal to Benazir.
I don’t think Mush could have seriously considered any politician who wasn’t pliable. If he couldn’t deal with Jamali’s timid assertiveness and replaced him with Shortcut, I doubt he would have even considered IK seriously. But, as you say, he could have easily offered him a ministry and IK should have taken it.
@ wsd
I have been giving you too much credit I think. Clearly, we are not on the same page when you bring up scum like Zardari in an argument about pragmatism and intelligence. Clearly, you don’t understand what the rest of us are talking about. I will just say a couple of things in response to what you have written and then have no further desire to continue this conversation—you are free to have the last word.
The fact that Aitzaz is a known lawyer or Ayaz Amir a known columnist doesn’t mean too much if they contest elections. Without a winning party ticket, the only way one can be successful in an election is if you are doing inherited politics and your family is assured votes even if you stand as an independent. Incidentally, the stronghold of family politics is becoming less and voting patterns suggest that Pakistani incresingly vote along party lines. Personality matters but second to which party ticket you hold. So when I talk about no one would have known them, I don’t mean as a lawyer or a columnist but as a politician.
And yes, the lawyers’ movement was a collective effort but Aitzaz’s role was crucial. It was not for nothing that the lawyers made him key national coordinator after Kurd’s election. Aitzaz’s political acumen served him very well in his decision to get Nawaz Sharif and PML-N on board fully. Others less politically aware were critical of him for that and for not doing the dharna but I think he made the right politically astute decisions and it made the difference in the result.
Finally, what I find most unreasonable about your arguments is the fact that you discount Pakistan so entirely. According to you, nothing is right, everything is wrong. But I disagree. If 80% of our politicians are corrupt and insincere, 20% are not; if 80% of our bureaucracy is corrupt and insincere, 20% are not; if 80% of our generals are corrupt, 20% are not. It is that 20% that has managed to sustain Pakistan, where many things need change, but it is by no means a failing state. I would like to focus on that 20% rather than the 80%. Do I want reform? You bet I do. But I am willing to support the existing 20% and plough through the system to do it. I believe the best way to build institutions and nations is through internal reform. Which is why I look upon Obama as a symbol of hope and change as well. I don’t have unrealistic expectations. Mind you, revolutions don’t always result in positive changes. Iranians, even those who opposed the Shah, are quite disappointed with the revolution.
But, you my friend, deserve to back your Ayotallah Imran Khan and keep on waiting for that revolution!
@Aqil:
I was referring to their parties which have a mix of both types but let me be more specific.
All these “opportunist” had “pragmatics” with them as well. What abt J Rahim, Mairaj Mhammad Khan,Mubashir hassan,later on Aitezaz, Javed Jabbar, SM Zafar,Iqbal Haider all these folks i think fall into the category of “pragmatics” but when got mixed with “opportunits” what did they deliver.Most of them were very ineffective in their parties ,some left and some are idle ducks with their pragmatism burried deep inside.Over time they tend to lack the moral courage of resigning from their parties even over blatant blunders !!!!!!!!( Mushahid on Akbar Bugti and SM Zafar on judiciary issue ….just to mention two names in a long list.)
@Faraz:
I hope and pray we can control Taliban with army operation…….But to me having a different strategy on this issue does not mean that PTI is protaliban……..Time will tell
@WSD:
I have answered your question earlier. The examples you are giving fall in the category of opportunism, not pragmatism. Do look up these two words in a dictionary (possibly dictionary.com) and compare their meanings
WSD: Let me tell you. Most of us do knew all problems with Imran; his super-ego; his lack of brain or brainers around him but we still used to have soft corner for him as he speaks from his heart.
But enough is enough. The way he opposed millatry operation and the way he praised justice system of Taliban and shown soft corner for Taliban is enough to make people sick of him. Taliban are threat to existence of Pakistan and there can be no place for Taliban apologist in our hearts.
@Aqil:
My question to you and others who thnik PTI is not pragmatic is that what the other pragmatics have achieved and delivered? ZAB, the icon ,followed by BB andNS, Add to this list the saviours ( mard e momin,mard e haq) and Liberal of liberals Mush………What is the collective result of all these? Even if you separate elected vs non elected why people did not get any benefit,why the decay is going on? You are declaring Imran a failure after 13 yrs but this “pragmatism”is going on for much longer has been tried and failed multpile times and once again it is failing in fron of our eyes…………..