Volume 6, No. 11, November 2024
Editor: Rashed Rahman
Haal-e-chaman par talkh nawaee
Murgh-e-chaman kuchh iss se ziyada
(Bitter song on the state of our garden
Nightingale, say something more than this)
– Faiz Ahmad Faiz.
There is a view that even if the recent elections were stolen we should move on and make the best of a rotten situation in order to put the country on the path to recovery and progress. According to this view even phony elections can do a lot of good if Pakistan’s real issues are addressed. However, phony elections of the kind witnessed by the people of Pakistan and, indeed, the entire world exclude any possibility of such issues being addressed. They are specifically designed not to allow any such thing, especially in a country with a ‘hybrid’ political history such as Pakistan’s. There can be no question of ‘moving on’ from the electoral farce that constituted brazen contempt for the people, the nation and the Constitution of Pakistan. Unless this situation is corrected, Pakistan will never be able to resolve any of its multiple national crises.
The mainstream national political parties are, by and large, collaborators in the preservation of the lethal status quo. Accordingly, no good can come from phony elections except in short term spurts that add up to precisely nothing in the longer-term, as proven over and over again by our experience and as precisely intended by the praetorian, political, business, religious and bureaucratic upholders of the status quo. According to many – in fact the vast majority of Pakistanis – Imran Khan is the exception to this observation. Others – mostly from the upper and middle business and professional classes – insist he would be even worse than the “old faces in the new government”. However, these old faces were overwhelmingly rejected in the recent elections only to be revived – Lazarus-like – by a praetorian Shabkhoon (night ambush).
Even if some of the alleged egregious errors of Imran Khan’s premiership are accepted – and many of them cannot be summarily dismissed – counterarguments and explanations can be credibly advanced given the circumstances that prevailed during his tenure. Nevertheless, despite some notable achievements, he did disappoint many of his most ardent supporters – especially from the middle and professional classes – and it is not obvious to many of them that given a second chance he would be able and willing to bring about the radical structural changes he promised. Such reservations are fuelled by his apparent willingness to assure the military top brass they have nothing to fear from his return to power. This suggests a possible acceptance of ‘hybrid governance’, which is a rejection of civilian supremacy that is an imperative of the Constitution of Pakistan and the core of democratic governance. Moreover, the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI) appears to have been split by ‘offers that can’t be refused’ between ‘realistic compromisers’ with the establishment who claim they will disrupt the government from the opposition benches of parliament on the one hand, and ‘true believers’ who deny the legitimacy of the new parliament and insist Imran’s unique selling point (USP) with the electorate lies in his fidelity to the interests of the vast majority of the deprived and impoverished of Pakistan on the other. They also insist decades of criminal governance have demonstrated such fidelity to be completely incompatible with the appetites of the governing praetorian, business and political elites.
Irrespective of whether or not reservations about Imran Khan are justified, the people have an indisputable right to choose their Prime Minister, their party and their representatives in a free, fair and credibly monitored election. To deny them this fundamental right is to commit a high crime against the nation. To say that accepting the electorate’s choice would be a still worse outcome, as some do, may represent the personal opinion of individuals, to which of course they are entitled. But such perverse opinions can never excuse the denial of the right of the people to a government and a leader of their choice. Should he fail them a second time they can wash their hands of him – or not, as they choose.
Nevertheless, this denial of the right of the people has occurred. The worst possible outcome has occurred. As a result, a crudely selected government brazenly masquerades as an elected government. From losing by a landslide not only has a majority been manufactured, but a Constitution-changing two thirds majority for the landslide losers has been produced from a magician’s hat! To expect to build a modern economy upon a cheated and defeated people and a regressive socio-political dispensation is just another magical illusion. The guardians have openly declared their intention to suppress the basic political rights of the citizen, and as such, they have become an occupation force. Moreover, they remain confident they have all the magicians on their side.
The right, indeed the obligation, to challenge this state of affairs is paramount. One may ask why isn’t the Great Wall of China straight? Because the ground on which it is built is not straight. Similarly a crooked – or magical – brick provides the foundation for crooked – or magical – governance in Pakistan today. Nevertheless, some say what is done is done, let us move on. Others insist what was done was wrong and must be undone. That is the choice before the nation. And there is only one correct choice. If it prevails – as it must – it will be time for Imran Khan to undertake an agonizing reappraisal of his past performance to ensure he does not flounder again. While many may entertain doubts about his capacity and character to improve upon his past performance, none can justify his deliberate and forced exclusion from the options of the people of Pakistan. His imprisonment and electoral denial are accordingly a mockery of good governance.
In light of the above, Imran Khan can no longer afford to be the ‘least bad’ option for the country. Even being the ‘best available’ option will be insufficient given the existential challenges confronting Pakistan. He must now dedicate himself to the fulfillment of his potential to be a servant of the people to the exclusion of all other considerations – including the risks of failure. How he deals with the challenges of population growth; investment in human development; redesigning the tax regime and budgetary allocations to break free of the debt trap; significantly reducing defence expenditures to create space for more essential social expenditures; reducing poverty and income inequality; generating well paid jobs and educating a labour force to fill them on a nationwide scale, and building an inclusive nation and a participatory democracy will determine the quality of his governance. Unlike politics, economic development and national transformation provide little room for illusory magic.
The personal qualities of Imran Khan alone will not be sufficient for such a heroic and indispensable undertaking. He will need to co-opt the best minds and the most dedicated, fearless and honest characters and encourage, facilitate, build, and integrate several movements into a national transformation movement. ‘Tabdeeli’ (Change) will have to become more than a rallying slogan. It will need to inform every aspect of governance. This will entail high adventure, serious risks, significant setbacks, transcending commitment and unfailing faith in ultimate success.
Since this is necessarily a longer term undertaking, Imran Khan will also need to lay the foundations for good governance beyond his political tenure. He will need to cultivate sincere younger servants of the people like Manzoor Pashteen, Jibran Nasir and many others who languish in jail or whose names are less well known or even unknown. Imran will also need to partner the best of the middle classes in the service and uplift of the vast majority of Pakistanis. He will, accordingly, need to rise above himself – which is essentially a moral undertaking. He has demonstrated his indomitable will. He must now show the way towards good governance, radical reduction in corruption and ‘whole of the people’ prosperity. The establishment is betting all of its resources, indeed its existence, against any of this happening, with the help of a cynical intelligentsia at home and the ‘benign contempt’ of arrogant puppeteers abroad. A government rejected by the people and defined by its record of insatiable avarice, greed and fear of the people cannot even begin the task of national salvation. Its talk about plans and projects fools no one.
The people have no option but to demonstrate how wrong is the calculation of such friends. They have to rise to the challenge flung in their face by their adversaries at home and abroad. They are in fact being challenged by their betrayers and oppressors to decide whether they are friends or foes of themselves, their children and descendants. The fate of Pakistan depends on whether or not those betting against them will win the day. Whether or not they are a free people who will not be denied their freedom. With patience (sabr), determination (‘azm) and faith (iman) their victory is assured.
The writer is a former Ambassador.