Daily Times

There have been mixed reactions from international media to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan’s victory in the general elections held on July 25. Citing his alleged support for anti-India terror groups, Indian media was particularly disturbed over possibility of the cricketer-turned politician’s becoming Pakistan’s PM. Following confirmation of a PTI majority in the elections, Indian news channels began questioning Imran’s sincerity to the war on terror. Some also claimed how he was ‘selected’ and not ‘elected’.

In his victory speech, Khan commented on Indian media’s portrayal of him and said they made him look like a Bollywood villain. The PM-in-waiting advocated peace and emphasized on the importance of having friendly relations with India, but Indian commentators do not seem to take his word for it. An op-ed in Indian news website First Post, after Imran Khan’s victory speech stated, “He [Imran Khan] mentions the word ‘terrorism’ only once, and that too while using it as a victim card to absolve Pakistan’s role in fostering the global scourge. He does not mention even once the issue of ‘cross-border terrorism’ – the bone of contention between the two nations and the only issue over which there is bipartisan consensus in India – no mean feat given India’s fiercely competitive multi-party democracy.

Imran cannot be so naïve that he is unaware of the fact that any rapprochement with India is impossible unless ‘cross-border terrorism’ is not addressed. It is at the front and center of the problem.”

Hindustan Times, however, termed Khan’s victory ‘a step ahead in the democratic transition’. “Election 2018 was a big snub to conventional politics, i.e. the status quo which has ruled Pakistan for nearly seven decades, and which Imran Khan has been relentlessly attacking”, read an opinion piece in HT.

Many Indian figures who know Khan from his cricket days, on the other hand, welcomed his victory. In an interview, former Indian cricketer Kapil Dev, praised Imran. “Imran was the first captain to push for neutral umpires, I knew it then that he was a good man,” he said.

Meanwhile, Western media lashed out at the PM-in-waiting for his alleged soft corner for the Taliban. Washington Post said, “Pakistan’s likely next leader is a Taliban sympathizer”. The editorial further says, “He is indeed an enemy of the major political parties that have dominated Pakistani civilian politics for decades – but he is also the favorite of the Pakistani military, whose overweening power the mainstream parties have been trying to curb.

If Mr. Khan takes office, he will have the support of many Pakistanis who want to see reforms that distribute wealth more equally or that disempower the old political dynasties. But he will owe his position largely to the army and its powerful intelligence service, which helped him win so that they can more easily pursue their own interests – which include siphoning off the lion’s share of the national budget, supporting the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan and encouraging other extreme Islamist groups. That means Pakistan, which has been one of the most difficult countries for the United States to work with over the past two decades, is likely to become still more so.

The editorial further says, “Mr. Khan, a former cricket star and playboy who now portrays himself as devoutly religious and a nationalist, seems to have few foreign policy views other than antipathy toward the United States and its war on terrorism; he has endorsed the Taliban cause in Afghanistan.”

The Guardian claimed that despite Khan’s victory, the real power still lies with the army. “Khan’s victory comes against a troubled backdrop. Over the past few months, the country has seen drastically ramped up censorship, with widespread allegations of military interference in favour of Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party. Every single opposition party has rejected his win, alleging vote-rigging.”

The Economist termed Imran Khan’s win ‘unsportsmanlike’. “The PTI’s disappointed rivals could mirror Mr Khan’s own past example and take to the streets, as he did in a four-month protest following the last election. That protest, however, enjoyed the sympathy of the army, keen to clip the wings of the Sharif brothers. This time the soldiers have in their sights their ideal outcome: a pliable leader and a minority government that will not be too powerful.

Rival parties may be persuaded to desist, and a tenuous stability take hold. If so, Pakistan’s growing current-account crisis may look more manageable.”

Another narrative being carried in the Western media is that Imran Khan’s win may not be good news for Pakistan’s women considering his open denouncement of feminism.

“If, as Imran Khan claims, his party — the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) — is victorious in the Pakistani general election, the women of that nation may face a disastrous era of gender discrimination and repression. The clues that Khan’s ascent bodes poorly for Pakistani women can be found in the lead-up to the election. In one recent interview with Hum news, Khan denounced Western feminism as an impediment to motherhood. And his promise of making Pakistan an Islamic state, something that has in the past meant heightened restrictions on women, is also making Pakistani feminists shudder”, read a piece in CNN.

Published in Daily Times, July 30^th 2018.