Daily Times

Pakistanis are innovative in their field of interest, which currently is politics, after cricket. While Britain’s Westminster system stops at the concept of a shadow cabinet (formed by the Opposition in parliament) to have shadow ministers, Pakistanis have introduced the concept of a ‘shadow prime minister’ (PM) — though still in an inchoate form — in the opposition benches. On Sunday evening, Pakistan’s first shadow PM, Imran Khan, addressed the nation from his sprawling house in Bani Gala, Islamabad. The shadow PM, who also happens to be the chairman of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), also imitated some politicians for comic effect and scoffed at the rich who had made the poor of the country languish.

This development is not without any reason. With the leakage of the Panama Papers, some politicians in the opposition benches were under the illusion that the elected Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would leave the seat vacant for them, despite the fact that his name was absent in any such leak. Nevertheless, the damage to his reputation was done by the appearance of his picture in the constellation of names that appeared in the Panama Papers. His picture was included by the Pakistan chapter of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists for maximum media hype. That is one aspect that calls the objectivity of journalism into question.

Sunday evening also witnessed Khan claiming the status of the opposition leader to justify his act of addressing the nation. With that, the position of the leader of the opposition in parliament, Khursheed Shah, was challenged. Consequently, there are now two opposition leaders: Khursheed Shah (a de jure opposition leader), who was elected by the opposition parties in parliament, and Imran Khan (a de facto opposition leader), who claims that his party, PTI, secured the second highest votes in the 2013 elections. This is how the noble cause of holding the powerful accountable is ruined by consigning the cause to the struggle, for taking the credit and making the opposition divided. The same stance of sole flight imposed isolation on the PTI during the sit-in days in 2014, and finally drove a wedge between the leadership of the PTI and that of the Pakistan Awami Tehrik (PAT) in 2014, which led to the premature departure of the PAT from the 2014 sit-in. The sit-in lost its potency soon, and the solo flight bit the dust. Perhaps, the PTI still treasures its flaws.

Imran Khan’s address was overstepping the limits of a political leader, even if he is the head of a political party. The address showed an erroneous way to other politicians to follow; it was like sowing the wind before reaping the whirlwind. During the address, the enthusiasm to avail the chance of toppling the sitting government so overwhelmed Khan once again that he demanded the resignation of Nawaz Sharif. In this way, Khan disrespected the precedence of holding an investigation into the matter before drawing a conclusion. Nevertheless, in his address to the nation, Khan was successful in reiterating all those statistics that selectively indicated the failure of the government in different sectors. During the speech, while Khan mentioned the statistics, the voice of Chaudhry Ghulam Sarwar, ex-governor of Punjab, was quite audible in the background.

The speech was meticulously planned defending Shaukat Khanum Memorial Hospital in the name of philanthropic work, and stirring patriotic sentiments of the people by carefully mentioning Allama Iqbal, who was eulogised as an ideological leader, with Pakistan’s founding father, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, relegated to the position of just a political leader. The slant was effortlessly noticeable. This aspect of the address gives an idea how, in certain circles influencing Khan, the slogan of ideology is played using the name of Allama Iqbal, a poet who recited stanzas on several aspects of life, both social and political, and as per the need of the occasion to warm the hearts of the audience. In the 1920s, in the wake of the First World War, in the Northern India, there were several Indian Muslim personalities who were in race with one another to project a dream of divided India along religious lines, and Iqbal was just one of them. In this regard, the significance of Iqbal was that he became the president of the All India Muslim League (AIML) in 1930, and verbalised his dream of a divided India from the platform of the AIML in December 1930. It was that platform that made a difference between one dreamer and another. When Iqbal and other personalities were precipitating pan-Islamism in India, Jinnah was staying aside, even aloof of politics. Jinnah never abandoned the legal and constitutional discourse to achieve his objectives. No dream could create Pakistan if Jinnah’s legal and constitutional mind was not available. It was Jinnah who launched a practical struggle to safeguard the constitutional rights of the Muslims of India. Hence, Jinnah is the sole and undisputed founding father of Pakistan. Nevertheless, Pakistan has already honoured Allama Iqbal by declaring him a national poet, and justifiably so.

The would-be shadow deputy prime minister, Sheikh Rasheed, has also sprung into action; he is finally able to correctly pronounce the word ‘morality’. Whereas Rasheed is still pandering to the needs of one TV talk show gratis after another, his former boss, General Pervez Musharraf is reportedly paid $300,000 dollars per lecture abroad. It seems as if Musharraf’s intellect is not valued in Pakistan, but is certainly respected in other countries. Likewise, about 70 retired generals of Pakistan army are residing in villas in Richmond Hill, the Greater Toronto Area, an affluent town of Canada. It is yet to be seen when the morality brigade of Pakistan led by Sheikh Rasheed will join them.

The writer is a freelance columnist and can be reached at qaisarrashid@yahoo.com