DEMOCRACY’S DEADLY DANCE, BETRAYAL’S DEATHLY HUSH
Why journalists in democratic countries have let Pakistan, and their profession, down
Democracy, by its very definition, is about the will of the people. When that is blatantly trampled upon in full view of the world and the world looks the other way, how can the democratic countries expect to still stay credible?
This is what is going on in Pakistan today, and how the “democratic world” has dealt with it. Not just ignored it but misrepresented it, and therefore fooled its citizens. Fooled you too, in all probability.
Here’s why that should bother you. If the Imran Khan story is reduced to its very basics, it is actually embarrassing to see how its utter simplicity is being repeatedly glossed over. There is a failure across the board in presenting even the basic picture, let alone the truest one.
This failure can only be wilful, given its obviousness. Politicians in recent times in our quarters have been marked by a distinct venality and lately, even criminality, that sets them apart from the rest of their fellow citizens. But it is now well accepted that that is their nature; that is largely the expectation from them. However, people are still not used to journalists, especially those in the legacy media, indulging in large-scale lying and deliberate misinformation. Or the intelligentsia’s rapidly developing propensity to get caught up in detail (often insignificant, even pointless) and comprehensively miss the big picture. Given the rapid rise of payroll communication all around us, it is hard to distinguish between what is a genuine failure and what is deliberate misinformation. The scale at which it is prevalent now is simply not tenable beyond a point, and will be the source of sheer disbelief, and dismay, for future generations.
Below is a step-by-step demonstration of how the most important story of our time in South Asia and one of the most significant in the world, in many decades, is being wilfully ignored or misrepresented. By using six steps of painting a picture, here is what emerges of this story. You decide if the overall view even remotely resembles the one you are being shown in the media.
Step One: Outline
In its simplest form, this is the situation: in a country of 249.5 million people (the fifth most populous in the world), the vast majority want to be led by a specific individual. They have repeatedly made it clear, by coming out in unprecedented numbers in about 70 rallies in the last one year. It is widely believed that this leader winning by two-thirds majority is a conservative estimate in the event of an election. And that is all these people want, along with this leader and his political party — free and fair elections.
The emphatic victories of this leader’s party in 30 of the 37 by-elections that have taken place in the last one year embolden this trajectory even more. This scale of fervour is unprecedented in the country, in this region and most probably anywhere in the world, in terms of absolute numbers.
So, that’s the broad stroke — a country that claims to be a democracy, overwhelmingly wants to be led by a specific leader. It’s a no-brainer, right? So, how come none of the leading democracies in the world support these people? Why is the democratic West largely silent about this? Could it be that democracy is actually a misnomer in these countries, given its blatantly selective slant?
Step Two: Drawing
A more precise sketch now.
This emphatic preference in people for this leader and its expression is also a result of economic mayhem that has been unleashed on this country in the last one year, since this leader was removed by subterfuge from his position of PM. Since then, dozens of factories have shut down, unemployment is at an all-time high and inflation has sky-rocketed (the highest in the country’s history; buying power has reduced by about 35% in the last one year) and people are visibly suffering, and seething. No international institution or friendly nation is naturally willing to give loans to a country on the brink of obvious economic disaster and deep civil unrest unless they show signs of addressing this. There is a clear consensus around the world that free and fair elections are the only way forward for this country toward political stability.
Most significantly, the Supreme Court of this country also believes there should be elections. Even many opposition leaders do not disagree with this, as they have cautiously stated publicly. This is national election year in any case (in October) but before that, this leader dissolved two state assemblies to precipitate at least those elections further; the Supreme Court ordered elections there in 90 days (that were supposed to be held on May 14th).
But the ruling government (clearly backed by the Army) are not complying, not even caring about contempt of court. All because they know they will get annihilated in any election that takes place. For almost a year, they (fronted by the Army, not backed) have indulged in unprecedented violence against their own citizens and those sections of the media who question them — this includes the arrest and torture/harassment of several people (especially journalists) and the coldblooded murder of one of the country’s most respected journalists (whose funeral was one of the most attended in this country’s history — also a good barometer for the anger today).
Again: why is the democratic world silent? Why is the liberal class around the world, so quick to get heated about the invasion of Iraq, unrest in Syria or Turkey, injustice in Iran, or protests in Hong Kong, and so on, so quiet about elite capture and criminal violence against common citizens, journalists and the most popular leader in the country along with people from his party? All of this against the orders of the country’s Supreme Court?
Step Three: Blocking in
Now for painting areas in shadow, to help add some depth.
Is this leader really a clueless right-wing populist, as he is popularly painted?
First, the personal aspects of this leader. His most significant achievement is the free cancer hospital he raised money for with a missionary zeal in the 1990s, and made into a world-class hospital (Shaukat Khanum) that treats more than 70% of its patients free even now (the only privately-owned such hospital in the world). And the university he instituted (Namal) with a larger percentage of merit-based scholarship than anywhere else in the country. Both the result of his desire to improve the circumstances of the poor in his country, which also led him to enter politics in 1996, as much to help institute the rule of law in his country to prevent rampant corruption and elite looting that had been the bane there. He utilised his popularity here — of being an elite athlete, as one of the greatest to have played his sport (cricket, the most popular sport in his country) and inarguably amongst its greatest leaders, if not the greatest (he was also a World Cup-winning captain). Due to his international stature in cricket, he could have spent the rest of his life comfortably in any first-world country, which he chose not to do. Partly because of this, and partly because of his conduct, his personal probity is beyond doubt, even to his worse enemies (except when blatantly fake cases are being hurled at him to get him disqualified politically, but we’re getting ahead of the story).
Now, his professional aspects. Assiduously avoiding shortcuts, it took him 22 years to become PM (in 2018). The overwhelming cliche is that he came to power because of the largesse of the Army. But the fact is that most opinion polls before that election had his party winning. In fact, given the counting controversies in some constituencies (which were never resolved satisfactorily), many feel the tampering happened to ensure he didn’t get a clear majority because the Army wasn’t entirely comfortable with someone as famously independent minded as him in power, and therefore ensured he was in a coalition government. Which is the exact opposite of the accusation that is hurled even today, that it was rigged for this leader. However, it is true that the Army supported his election, and assured him of full cooperation — but isn’t that exactly how it should be? (In retrospect, this leader felt later that he should have rejected power as a coalition government and gone for fresh elections in search for a full mandate, but we’re again getting ahead).
He was PM for a little more than three-and-a-half years — and the following four can be unambiguously credited to him:
- Pakistan’s best economic performance in 4 years. Significantly, this was despite two years of Covid. (Some have expanded on parameters released in Pakistan Economic Survey and concluded it was the best performance in over a decade). Either way, given the distinct post-Covid recovery, the trajectory was very encouraging, which became even more evident after the new government took over, and the economy plummeted alarmingly.
- Pakistan being among the best countries in the world to handle Covid, according to the WHO, WEF and The Economist. This leader’s insistence on not enforcing universal lockdown (and crafting localised lockdowns instead), to save the poor from economic annihilation, played a big role in this.
- The fewest incidents of terrorism in or by Pakistan (or what it was accused of) in 15 years happened during his tenure. Mere coincidence?
- The Sehat Sahulat program (health card), which was his initiative in 2019 — this is what none else than The Lancet (considered the world’s highest-impact academic journal) said in its context — “Pakistan’s recent investments in healthcare coverage are laudable, especially when considering that much wealthier countries have not been able to achieve this sort of coverage for their populations.”
And yet, he was removed from power in April 2022 (18 months before his tenure ended) via a vote-of-no-confidence which, it appears now, was manufactured and executed by the then-Army Chief to install a severely discredited coalition government, which claimed this leader had failed economically and had lost the confidence of the people. Both claims have now obviously been proved to be overwhelmingly wrong. Neither is there any doubt now about this leader not having kowtowed to the Army at any stage — otherwise, he would simply not have been removed.
He had not come to power on the back of religious rhetoric or hate speech (despite being the world leader with the most interviews and features on YouTube by a distance, no one can find even one instance of any of that from any phase of his life in any context). His pacifist credentials were in full view as well, even as he became PM and famously said this and also visibly started to act on it. As his demeanour during the post-Balakot crisis also demonstrated — his conciliatory (yet firm) tone and the act of returning Indian prisoner, Wing Commander Abhinandan, that brought down the temperature between two nuclear nations.
His propensity to speak carelessly at times has sometimes got him misunderstood and he has been painted as anti-woman and far-right by intellectually lazy or dishonest people, who quote him out of context (his clarifications are never spoken of) or simply attribute motivations to him that never ever play out as per his actions. And when they are proven to not do so, they never ever come out and own up to their misfired rants. The simple way of checking if he’s any of these things is to check if he is responsible for a single anti-woman policy during his tenure as PM, or gave preferential treatment to his religion over any other; all evidence suggests exactly the opposite, even before he became PM.
Pakistanis themselves have the best responses as to why he is hated in their “liberal” quarters. Here is some clarity on this. Here’s another interesting take.
The idea that a man of faith (which he is) can also be a humanist (of which there is overwhelming proof) seems to be something way too many people in the “intelligentsia” are unable to fit their heads around. They keep painting him as an “Islamist” with the soubriquet “Taliban Khan” still being bandied around. All because he had stated years ago that the Afghanistan situation wouldn’t be sorted without talking to the Taliban, and it wasn’t; even the US had to do so in the end. Please see this Al Jazeera interview (it is cued to the relevant point, if you have less time, but worth seeing the full thing). Some hyperventilate because he said he wants to build Pakistan in the image of seventh-century Medina — which is not an invocation to go back to the middle-ages but to build a welfare state, for which he gives the Scandinavian countries and Great Britain as examples ahead of any other in the world today. A clear reference to social welfare, that actually places him more Left than even those hysterical critics.
It’s not that this leader does not have any flaws, both personally and politically; of course he does. But what does the balance sheet suggest? What do his actions demonstrate?
Do the above facts (most easily verifiable in the public domain) make him sound like the inefficient, clueless, right-wing leader he is painted as in the Indian media? Or indeed, in the Western media?
Step Four: Adding colour
The drama and subterfuge around Imran Khan’s ouster in April 2022 also involved the US (which suspiciously resembled a regime change operation by the US, given a cipher that undeniably exists, but Khan appears to have tempered that accusation reportedly on the request of non-resident Pakistanis in the US, but not retracted on it as was claimed by gleeful payroll journalists and picked up the rest) along with two disgraced political families who came together to illegitimately replace this leader (recounted in detail here). The outcry that followed hasn’t ceased more than a year later.
Not only has the government (with 60% of the cabinet fielding criminal cases — a true world record for the ages) doubled down on its attempts to avoid elections, with the active connivance of the military establishment. After reports of disproportionate income against the previous Army Chief surfaced, the motivations of their power centres also became clear.
The attempts to subjugate the public began when those record-breaking rallies commenced in April 2022, days after Khan’s ouster. Initially, it was just in the realm of placing obstacle hoops (like containers) for people to go to rallies. It later graduated to harassment, threats and outright violence (that included using expired tear gas shells on PTI supporters, including woman and children). Journalists who were reporting the truth were either coerced or bought out, and if neither worked, severely harassed. One of Pakistan’s most influential journalists, Arshad Sharif, was murdered in cold blood in October 2022. Literally, everyone knows that the Pakistani Army is responsible for that; it is the worst-kept secret in the country.
A claim of blasphemy from a random individual was run on the state-run television channel against Khan, who stated in multiple rallies that grounds for an assassination attempt on him (by a supposed fanatic) were being laid. In November 2022, that came dramatically to pass, as he was attacked by what is now believed to be three gunmen from different positions. Due to a brave supporter, he survived the attack, though was badly injured. Again, no one has any doubt anymore about the Army having ordered this. Subsequently, crucial records pertaining to the case were stolen and the panel probing the case, who pointed to there being more than one would-be-assassins were changed and more pliant replacements installed. But, at no point, was an FIR, that is the legal right of any victim, registered for days even though Imran’s own government was in power in Punjab province! It is very obvious that the Army’s pressure was fully in play here.
Meanwhile, case after bogus case has been piled on Khan by the government in an attempt to disqualify him from the elections. Treason, sedition, terrorism and corruption cases, all absurdly flimsy. But with over 150 cases against him, he is still being forced to go from courtroom to courtroom (which keeps throwing each case out) exposing himself to further danger. In March 2023, he narrowly avoided a second assassination plan in one of those judicial complexes. There was also a large-scale attack on his home that involved shelling and teargas.
Right through all of this, his supporters repeatedly kept forming human obstacles, putting their own safety on the line. This included women and even senior citizens, who made it clear again and again that the arrest of this leader was their “red line”. Their desperation has its roots in their belief that there is simply no other way out of this economic and civil crisis besides elections, and their faith on this one individual’s intent on guiding them out of this.
So, when, without showing him a warrant, on May 9th 2023, Khan was picked up from the high court, literally abducted, and that too, in a very provocatively violent manner by (which seemed suspiciously deliberate — the Rambo act of breaking windows to enter the room when they could just enter from the door, for example) in front of the world at large, it was fait accompli. Of course the public reacted, but the vast majority seem to have done so peacefully, as they have for 27 years, as PTI supporters. Some of them did go off the boil but even then, there is strong evidence now that the incidents of ransacking and destruction to public property and government buildings that happened were carried out by outside elements with the singular objective of blaming Imran Khan and his party PTI for it. So that they could be disqualified and thus prevented from fighting the elections (and now, the recent survey shows him winning 71% of the vote in Pakistan, without even needing to campaign, and 92% of the vote if non-resident Pakistanis are also included, which is a strong movement, given their enormous contribution to the Pakistani economy through remittances).
To witness the eagerness with which one media outlet after another blames Khan and his party for this unrest is truly staggering. That too, despite the context in which they are operating and the well-known events that have led to this. When these people ran out of reasons to pin down the blame on PTI supporters (curiously, not a single piece of CCTV footage evidence from anywhere has surfaced, for obvious reasons; there is a photo of a man instigating this, who the authorities do not seem the least bit interested to trace or summon, again for obvious reasons), they started howling about how neither Khan or his party members condemned the violence — which is completely false. In pretty much every single speech or interview, both Khan and every single PTI leader or spokesperson, at every single stage, stressed on peaceful protests. Not just because it is their ethos but also because they’re very well aware of how any unrest can be turned around against them. What’s most curious, but perhaps not so surprising in these times, is how journalism does not entail doing any groundwork anymore, but just hurling questions in an accusatory tone. It has become a worldwide phenomenon and perhaps the main reason why traditional media is being so rapidly superseded by online commentators (as has so emphatically happened in Pakistan).
The Supreme Court released Imran Khan, and passed an order that he could not be arrested for a specific amount of time. And yet, his house was surrounded by police just a day later, and the authorities claimed that there were “40 terrorists” being given shelter there, as they seemed to be getting ready for another attack. Literally everybody knew this was a laughable accusation, and merely a pretext to arrest him again, and yet the authorities had the audacity to do this in full view of the world, while the “democratic” world pretty much looked the other way. The courts again came to Khan’s rescue — their courage and efficacy in these deeply troubled times a beacon of hope that history will remember them for. Then, a minister in the current government (Maryam Aurangzeb) actually talked about setting fire to the houses of Supreme Court judges including the Chief Justice, and the world has still stayed silent.
But the people have not — and this is why this is the most inspiring, and important, part of this story. It is straightforward that the youth, who naturally tend to be more idealistic, are the most appalled about the blatant wrongdoing. All kinds of people came out and protested — people of all ages (for a while, there was even propaganda on the state-run television channels that these were RSS activists from India). Women, particularly, were at the forefront — and they were treated brutally. A woman who threw her dupatta in the direction of the police was brutally dragged by her hair, a physically disabled woman was yanked off her wheelchair, a senior citizen physically assaulted, there were dozens of such violent incidents (some of it has been captured and collated as a Twitter thread here, which will also stand as court evidence some day). People were (and still are) being dragged out of their homes and beaten up in front of their wailing children; abducted (not arrested) for the flimsiest of pretexts — threads like this are appearing constantly. Conservatively, 25 people have been confirmed killed, all 25 circumstantial victims of protesting while the police opened fire on them. In fact, the unofficial figures are expected to be much more. This kind of terror has not ever been seen in Pakistan’s history, not on this scale, not for this protracted a time period. And yet, common citizens are willing to come out in support, despite the price they’re being forced to pay. Being a poor country helps, as far more people have very little to lose. This kind of courage should be, needs to be, celebrated around the world. This is what makes it among the most significant stories of our lifetime — such a bloody attempt towards true democracy against so many odds for such a long time, on this scale (and the scale is the real differentiator: it is useful to remember here that Pakistan’s population is more than 10 times that of Chile, 3 times that of Argentina and 2.5 times that of Columbia, for example). The number of protesters who have come out in Pakistan cumulatively over the last one year have to far outnumber what happened during the Arab Spring (which got enormous international coverage).
And yet, the world is silent. US President Biden and UK PM Sunak both, when questioned, called this Pakistan’s “internal matter”. Sure, like Iraq’s was, maybe? Or Libya’s? Or hell, Ukraine’s? The fact is, the West does not expect, and therefore like, independent-minded leaders from third-world countries like Pakistan. (In the US, Noam Chomsky did speak out for Imran Khan — calling him the best choice in Pakistan and later, doing a more detailed interview about why the West is ignoring him. In the UK, Jeremy Corbyn spoke out for him).
India has a history of maintaining an admirably independent foreign policy because of its size, and it bears the fruits of it now. But a country like Pakistan, with as sordid a history as theirs, with as ignoble a set of leaders as they’ve had, someone like Imran Khan is a jolt to the system. He does not want to sacrifice his country to the whims of the West (which is what the death of 70,000 people in terrorist attacks in Pakistan since 9/11 has proved to be), and his very act of leaning China-wards, because he feels that is more advantageous to his people (which was actually proved during his tenure), melts down many in the West. Khan has also repeatedly mentioned that he admires how China pulled out by far the highest number of citizens from poverty in human history, something that he aspires for Pakistan to achieve as well.
As it happens, Imran Khan is not just a Pakistani leader today, but a global political figure. Here’s a little example — his speech at the World Government Summit in Dubai in 2019 (where he spoke about his political origins and vision). Know many world leaders whose full speeches get 6.7 million views and 7000+ comments from all around the world? When many of whom do not even know about his athlete days?
Step Five: Adding layers
Meanwhile, the entire leadership of PTI, second and third rung are all in jail, picked up unlawfully, as Imran Khan was. That’s apparently about 10,000 PTI leaders and workers currently (this number is increasing all the time), many of whom are women. The authorities justify all this brutal violence as a reaction to those “breaking the law”, even though the courts do not agree with them! The idea is apparently to “split the party” (even military trials have been threatened against many of those “arrested”, where the biggest punishment is death by hanging), but the stupidity of that is that this expectation is from the same people who accuse PTI of being a one-man-party — his biggest weakness is then his biggest strength, as per this. In any case, in the face of several people being forced to publicly claim that they’re leaving the party, Imran Khan himself acknowledges the kind of pressure people are under and holds nothing against anyone who chooses to opt out. Everyone has a family to think about. Which is also why those who speak out should have a historic place.
Meanwhile, a High Court judge has no qualms in telling a PTI leader Asad Umar on record that he is ordering his release but the Army would not let him go until he does a press conference announcing his resignation from PTI! Well-known designer Khadija Shah, a PTI supporter, has been arrested for rioting and ransacking on May 9th, that many know is a fake case, while she is treated like a terrorist. Meanwhile, attempts seem to be on to isolate Imran Khan physically, which obviously can have alarming repercussions (he has told his supporters to lie low until this violence ceases; which also means there are apparently just four personal security guards around him and his wife at home currently). It is only social media that appears alive to the situation.
Mainstream journalism in Pakistan has been pitiful for a while. Journalists who are not coerced appear to be paid off. Even publications with a prestigious past, like the newspaper “Dawn”, appear to have compromised alarmingly, perhaps in a battle for survival — the overt and covert manipulation by the security establishment is common knowledge now (even though this publication was anti-Imran even when he was PM, sometimes viciously and irrationally so, that Khan has also offered as evidence that he was not trying to throttle the press as he was accused of by some.)
An array of spokespeople represent their government now, who give interviews to foreign channels, including in India. A week ago, the BBC, to their credit abruptly cut short one of those interviews when they realised they were dealing with propaganda (the spokeswoman was also so inept that it was embarrassing to watch, let alone transmit). Meanwhile, absolutely no one takes any Pakistani television news channels seriously, except the handful who stood up against the targeted harassment of this regime, like ARY did for a while.
On the night Arshad Sharif (who was a senior anchor on ARY) was killed, Pakistan’s most popular political voice Imran Riaz Khan (who has over 4 million YouTube subscribers), had called up (as he revealed in the video blog he had done then) perhaps the most respected Pakistani video blogger — Moeed Pirzada, and broken down, wondering what was in store for them now, since there is no way either of them were going to stop speaking the truth the way they saw it. Pirzada immediately left the country, but Riaz Khan continued speaking fearlessly. Last week, he was picked up and has vanished since then (this was his last video, released on his YouTube channel after his arrest). There are fears of him being severely tortured or perhaps worse, since he is not even being produced in the court. His father appeared in public and said that he should be the one punished as he made the mistake of teaching his son to speak the truth. If Imran Riaz Khan does not come out unscathed after all this, there will be a fevered reaction from the people again (among the 4 million who are his subscribers, at the very least), likely even greater than with Arshad Sharif. But hopefully it will not come to that.
Orya Maqbool Jan, a columnist and former civil servant, did the first comprehensive video on the Al-Qadir case for which Imran Khan was abducted, exposing its bogus status. The very next day he was picked up and has not been heard from since. Meanwhile, even the journalists who left the country are feeling the heat. Here is a conversation between Pirzada (now based in Washington) and Wajahat S. Khan (based in New York) cued in the end where they discuss the threats to their safety, despite being so far from home. Moeed Pirzada was apparently later directly threatened as well.
There is no help coming from their international counterparts for sure. Newspapers in many countries seem to be avoiding any of this coverage without slant, ostensibly because of governmental pressure (which apparently includes pressure from embassies). “Time” did put him on their international cover recently (with the line — “The Astonishing Saga of Imran Khan”), but the story inside had its share of mistruths and half-baked facts, as if self-consciously trying to be “balanced”. At least, the accompanying interview allows Khan to give out his version without distortion, but are modern-day journalists simply unable to sift the truth from the bullshit anymore? CNN did the same recently, an anodyne interview with Fareed Zakaria, but at least they’re giving him space.
Maybe it’s Imran Khan’s greater engagement with China (which, ironically, also has had its troubled aspects in the quest for greater balance) that has caused this disconnect, maybe it’s his pushback against American foreign policy (that, according to him, used Pakistan as a convenient pawn). And in India’s case, it is Khan’s plain-speaking condemnation of the current government, for spurning his peace efforts when he became PM, and turning belligerently aggressive (that culminated in a near-war-like situation in 2019, that many feel won this current Indian government the last election) and his continuous references to Kashmir’s status. All said, it is very clear that Imran Khan is persona non grata for the current Indian government, and that they actually appear to prefer dealing with the Pakistani Army and the current dacoit government, who will play ball in keeping conflict between the two countries alive, so that it can be milked in their respective constituencies.
Accordingly, the Indian media’s coverage has been, to put it mildly, nauseous, for the level of bile, hatred and sheer, spectacular lies about Imran Khan. Most of the time it is all about how India is much better than Pakistan, opportunistic jingoism. (Actually, the answer is simple to why Imran Khan is also good for India — because he is a pacifist; his commitment is to people, not to the political class, which makes him the likeliest political leader to actually help resolve decades-old conflict).
The surprise is not the likes of Gaurav Sawant spewing his sing-song trademark untruths on “India Today” or Sushant Sareen saying Imran Khan is the best thing for India as he’s “unhinged and so dumb” so it is apparently “good for India” (and then spending so much time in putting him down, so typically hypocritical, and well, dumb), or Arnab Goswami’s unmistakable banshee cries about Imran Khan threatening law and order in Pakistan literally three seconds after playing a clip where Khan is exhorting his followers to ensure a peaceful protest (even stressing on the word “peaceful”!), or Shekhar Gupta saying Imran Khan’s comeback would be a triumph of democracy but a disaster for Pakistan (do try to spot the reasoning in the piece), or the bizarre “experts” who come on Rediff or multiple other publications cheerfully spraying their blatantly biased (or pitiably ignorant) views. That someone pays them for saying nonsense like this is its own level of batshit crazy. But they’re not the surprise — in this age of payroll journalism.
The surprise is the likes of Scroll (who publish propaganda pieces from “Dawn”) or “The Wire” that interviews several of Khan’s opponents without the balance of the other point-of-view, at least not from the more credible voices. If this is the finiteness of outrage in play (“they stand up against fascism in their own country; why do they need to do so everywhere?” goes one argument), one would understand the lack of coverage, but such biased coverage? Such lies? Has Ravish Kumar said a word on this subject, after Khan’s ouster (even though he had so much to say when Khan was PM)? Meanwhile, in the last one year, Barkha Dutt has interviewed the most vicious opponents of Khan (including his UK-based ex-wife, whom no one in Pakistan takes seriously due to her bonafides) and even put up doctored videos on her YouTube channel mocking him. No one in India interviews the likes of Moeed Pirzada or Imran Riaz Khan or the few who actually speak out for, go out on a limb for, what the vast majority of people want, no, demand in Pakistan today. As if the people don’t matter at all, but the largely homogeneous point-of-view of the spineless intelligentsia does.
Then, there is the low-hanging-fruit mass brand of slick informational disc jockeying that the likes of Dhruv Rathee do — by taking the most socially accepted point-of-view through his own idealogical filter, often providing teenage level insights in a simplistic collage, as he does on this subject here. And at the other end of the spectrum, you have the cream of intelligentsia talking in this shallow, half-baked way, spouting low-hanging-fruit banalities, with absolutely no homework on Khan’s thinking and mindset for which there is so much material online, no consideration to the difficult context in which Khan operated in as PM. He even decides Khan is done now, going by his “body language” in the last few days based on what he has seen in videos, after his release (later on in this interview, Sadanand Dhume admits to not being properly informed and there are probably strong arguments against his misgivings, even tells the interviewer that he gets a lot of his information from him!) — this is so ridiculous — journos who quote and cover each other, while massaging each other’s biases. Between these two spectrums, you get the picture — these are the kind of people shaping opinion on Imran Khan in South Asia and internationally. Probably yours too.
Still, the worst Pakistani journalism seems to be worse than India’s worst today, perhaps also because of the undue pressure they are under (even the likes of ARY are palpably bending currently). Meanwhile, their intellectual class seems much like ours in India, seemingly oblivious to the big picture as they seethe about some detail or the other, often the far less significant ones (and sometimes even reading those wrong — like the whole Taliban red herring not very long ago). And they have their own share of Left-inspired characters too — with that perfection-demanding, reality-challenged, half-baked view of the world, expressed with full-blown outrage. A strangely feudal mindset also seems to prevail in the Pakistani media scene, an insular kind of arrogance that is not fact-friendly at all. They all seem even worse than before in these difficult times; but then, to be fair, it is hard to think of anything else when the shit in your pants is yours.
But their best journalism, the sort that the likes of Arshad Sharif, Moeed Pirzada, Imran Riaz Khan, Siddique Jan and a few others demonstrated, standing up against severe pressure, putting their lives at risk, with clarity and intent — we have not seen that kind of work in India yet. Maybe because India has not yet been tested on that scale yet, but somehow, that doesn’t seem awfully likely even in that eventuality. Speaking up for one’s neighbour, for its people, perhaps would have been a good start?
But India, one can understand; the country is going through its own moral crisis, a generational one. But where is the international condemnation of what is going on, beyond the political sphere? Amnesty International did speak out, but they seemed more concerned about the ban of Internet than the lives in danger. Human Rights Watch also came up with a banal statement, but not much else. Much like UNHR, but without any recognition of the elite capture and blatant banditry going on. PEN International? Reporters Without Borders? HRC? OHCHR? CPJ? UNESCO? IFJ? What about UDHR and ICCPR? Does this deafening silence not discredit every single such well-meaning organisation? When the dust settles, how will they live this down? How will they justify their existence after this?
Step Six: Final touches
Nature has its way of mocking human endeavour when it goes grievously wrong, as does history. The Constitution of Pakistan was approved in April 1973 and ratified in August 1973 — so this is exactly the fiftieth anniversary, when it seems so missing.
So, let’s sum up this freakish moment in history now — the final picture, as of now. Through violence and intimidation, the current government in Pakistan is terrorising its own citizens. And the Pakistani Army is enabling this. All because both want to keep Imran Khan out of power, despite his once-in-a-lifetime popularity for any leader in any country in many years. Defying even the Supreme Court, they are trying every trick in the book to avoid elections.
They’ve tried to kill Imran Khan twice and attempted to put him in jail once, and they’re not done yet. The Supreme Court of Pakistan has, however, again to its great credit, stood up to this bullying and succeeded in setting Khan free (for now). Khan’s party PTI is not a militant organisation, as it really needs to be, to combat this repeatedly; it is merely an electoral party. Khan’s biggest weapon is the street power of his citizens, young and old, men and women, who are willing to put their lives on the line to safeguard Khan’s well-being, because they directly link theirs to his. This kind of courage will be remembered by history.
In essence, Imran Khan is also standing up against the self-given right of the Army to run civilian affairs, let alone interfere in them. In 1969, 1977 and 1999 — the three occasions when the Army imposed martial law, common citizens had no great issue with that; there were even celebrations in many quarters. But when Imran Khan was removed in 2022 (very obviously with the tacit acquiescence of the Army), the vast majority of the country came out on the streets, as leaderless crowds, in his support. This is the first time such a thing has happened in Pakistan’s history and it is very foolish of the senior Army personnel to not realise that they have fundamentally lost all moral authority (a popular slogan now goes — Pakistan Army. Lost every war. Won every election.) In such an unprecedented moment in their history, by acting as per previous rulebooks, they are hastening the diminishing of their own stature. There have been reports, during the recent protests and the suspicious rioting and ransacking, about the Army being divided, about certain personnel refusing to follow orders and shoot at their own people, and a pushback to that. In fact, now, there are even direct accusations that the Minister of Interior, Intelligence Bureau and the Ministry of Defence planned and executed the 9th May riots and arson (which means the Shehbaz Sharif government). Whether this leads to action against the government or a mutiny in the Army or not, time will tell. (There are reports that 12 cops have been dismissed for apparently celebrating Khan’s release on the Supreme Court’s orders on May 10. The cops claim they were simply relieved after long hours of never-ending duty!)
Even though Khan insists his fight is not against the institution of the Army but against specific individuals (especially the current Army chief), no one in Pakistan has come this far in such an attempt, to reach out for true democracy. And yet the democratic world is not speaking out for him; in fact, many are maligning him through mistruths. It is ironic, because there can be a very good case that Pakistan’s status as a failed state for so many years is largely due to the interference of the Army in civilian affairs. Even if Khan’s only contribution is to get the Army out of civilian governance in his country, it would be a historic contribution. And yet, when someone is actually trying to change that, instead of hailing this, the world seems to be mocking or simply ignoring that person.
Meanwhile, the people continue their struggle. Just this week, the Army brought out schoolgirls to raise slogans in their favour at Islamabad’s famous Democracy Chowk. Instead, the schoolgirls started chanting slogans of “Imran Khan Zindabad.” They want to fight this?
As a final thought, for those who wonder which side the truth might really lie, consider this: when literally millions of people are willing to undergo harassment, terror and face the fear of losing their lives for something, it is very likely to be the right side of history. When a small proportion of courageous journalists defy all kinds of pressure and even risk their very lives to speak out for what they believe to be the true picture, it most probably is. When a political leader, in these cynical times, does not shy away from physical danger again and again and again, it is worth paying very close attention to. (This was Khan’s last video just before he was arrested, rather, abducted; he appears to have had information about that possibility, he even feared the worst, but did not flinch.)
Falsehood does not, as a rule, inspire such conviction. Not in so many different quarters, not with this kind of depth, or in such volume. This is a law of nature.
Jaideep Varma,
Mumbai, India
May 2023
(jebbit@gmail.com)
Previous pieces on this subject
Democratic uprising (September 2022)
Unparalleled (August 2018)
(FB) Removing Imran Khan as PM (April 2022)
(FB) Arshad Sharif’s assassination (October 2022)