Daily Times

The PEW Research Centre’s survey about Pakistan was a bit surprising as it showed Imran Khan being the most popular leader of Pakistan with 68 percent approval rating followed by Mian Nawaz Sharif with 63 percent and as expected President Asif Zardari at 11 percent. Political observers have been anticipating such a pro-Imran Khan shift for some time. The problem with the pro-Imran Khan swing is that it is more due to repulsion at the existing ruling political parties and less for his elusive political agenda.

Up until now, we know what Imran Khan does not want, but we have no clue about what he wants! In addition there are serious problems with Khan’s dichotomous reasoning: his criticism seems to be based on misplaced assumptions and lack of thought-out future plans. He is a reflection of the pattern that Pakistan has been afflicted with from its very inception.

Imran Khan has been concentrating in the better part of his political rallies against the US drone attacks, preaching that such an outside intervention is the root cause of suicide attacks and Taliban-jihadi violence in Pakistan. We can concede that Imran Khan is not a front for the Taliban’s political defence or an active pursuant of a theocratic state. However, in practice his political statements and actions have been providing the rationale and justification for Taliban destruction. He has been usually reticent about condemning suicide attacks too. Probably he believes that if the drone attacks are stopped, the Taliban will become peaceful citizens and settle into their traditional tribal lifestyle.

Imran Khan has been arguing that suicide attacks started because of drone attacks. What he does not realise is that Taliban and jihadi violence was always lurking around and it came to the surface when the state of Pakistan, under US pressure, stopped full cooperation with different Islamic militias. If military action against the Red Mosque was the initial trigger for suicide attacks, then he should know what operations were being undertaken and planned from that religious monastery. In other words, if the Pakistani state had allowed Pakistan to be turned into a theocratic state, the Taliban and jihadis would not have deployed suicide bombers against innocent citizens. Could that be true and is that Pakistan the one he wants to live in?

If the US stops drone attacks, can Imran Khan give the guarantee that the Taliban — ardent adherents of an anti-democratic political system — will stop coercing society into theocratic chaos? If he deliberates for a few moments on this prospect, he will be as silent as he has been about religious terrorism. So, does it mean that he is ready to turn Pakistan into a theocratic state? Probably yes, whether he knows/acknowledges it or not. In private conversations he has been an admirer of the tribal jirga system, which shows that the idealisation of tribal institutions has been part of his mindset.

Besides opposing the US intervention, his political campaigns have been criticising and exposing the ruling political elite. Again, we know what he does not want but we do not know what he wants the Pakistani socio-political system to be. Mysteriously, he has not been very vocal about the role of the Pakistani military in the disaster-ridden evolution of Pakistan. He has not articulated the genesis of the socio-political ills that have proliferated under military rule.

Imran Khan is emerging as an extension of a political pattern prevailing in Pakistan from day one. The founders of Pakistan knew that they did not want to live with the Hindus, but they had no clue how to run a “Muslim” state. Mohammad Ali Jinnah and many other Muslim League leaders were persons of highest integrity but that was not enough to run a newfound state. Therefore, we see Pakistan as a laboratory of random political experiments by conflicting ideologies and personalities, where the military takes over just because it was the only organised institution.

Pakistan’s history has seen successive political experiments where every time the new aspirants, military or civilian, came to power highlighting the negativities of their predecessors without having any positive political agenda. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto may be taken as an exception to some extent but when he started implementing his agenda the outcomes were not in conformity with his liberal viewpoint. Ziaul Haq was clear in his mind about ending un-Islamic practices through severe punishments in Pakistan but unprecedented corruption, drug and gun culture prospered under his very nose. The recent mantra has been that the strengthening of the democratic system is the ultimate good. Almost every mainstream party has been preaching that once the democratic order is established, everything will fall into place. It has not because the reform of the system needed much more than a simple slogan of abstract notions of democracy.

Imran Khan is another face that is appearing on the political horizon through merely negating the ruling elite without knowing a bit how a complex, multi-ethnic Pakistani society can be managed by an efficient state. We know for sure that his idealisation of tribal values are irrelevant for modern Pakistan and we also know the Islamic extremists are going to keep on using violence to establish a theocratic order even if the US leaves the region. In conclusion, if we take Imran Khan’s integrity as high as that of the founders of Pakistan, his lack of vision and erroneous political assumptions will lead to another period of disaster if he comes to power.

The writer can be reached at manzurejaz@yahoo.com