- Second Kermani
- BBC News, Islamabad
image source, Getty Images
Until now, Imran Khan had the covert backing of what is known as the “establishment” made up of the armed forces.
Pakistan’s prime minister, the popular former cricketer Imran Khan (69), was sacked after a no-confidence motion in parliament.
Congressmen will meet again on Monday to vote for the new leader who will lead the country until the end of the term in October 2023, when elections are scheduled.
But what led to his downfall?
When he was elected prime minister in 2018, Khan seemed to have almost everything going for him.
National hero for his days as a player of críquandhad transformed into a charismatic politician and, after years of struggle, succeeded in supplanting the two established rival political dynasties that had dominated Pakistan for decades.
It emerged as a new force, with vibrant political rallies full of catchy songs that, along with its massive social media presence, amplified its popularity. sign anti-corruption message.
Khan promised to bring “change” to the country, creating a “new Pakistan”.
No prime minister has ever completed a five-year parliamentary term in Pakistanand Khan looked like he could be the first.
However, the reason his position seemed so secure also helps explain his downfall.
Chosen by military power
Both sides deny this, but it is widely recognized that came to power with the help of the powerful army and intelligence services from Pakistan, and now he quarreled with them.
Without a doubt, Khan had significant and genuine support from the population in 2018.
But he also had the covert backing of the “establishment” of Pakistan, made up of the armed forces.
The military has directly or indirectly controlled the country for most of its existencewith critics calling the Khan government a “hybrid regime”.
Support for Khan was exemplified in many different ways. During the 2018 election campaign, the distribution of media outlets reporting sympathetically on their opponents was reduced, while some candidates running for office were persuaded or forced to join their party.
“It was created by them,” a defecting member of Khan’s party told the BBC, referring to the military. “They were the ones who brought him to power,” he added.
image source, Archyde.com
Imran Khan’s supporters staged massive demonstrations in the capital, Islamabad.
opposition and corruption
His main opponent, Nawaz Sharif, was first disqualified and later convicted on corruption charges.
Many suspected that Sharif had been involved in corruption in the past, but the real reason he was being punished at this stage was his own fight with the army.
Sharif had started his political career as a protégé of a military dictator before becoming more independent, drawing the ire of the “establishment“.
He has always denied being involved in corruption and said the accusations are politically motivated.
After coming to power, the Khan, on the contrary, proudly proclaimed that he and the army were in”la same page” when it came to political decisions.
The results worried civil society activists. A series of attacks and kidnappings took place in the country against journalists and commentators critical of both the Khan government and the intelligence services.
Both denied involvement, but no other culprit was ever identified.
image source, Getty Images
Opposition supporters celebrated outside the Supreme Court after the court ruled on Thursday that a move by Khan to block the no-confidence vote was unconstitutional.
Criticism of his management
Khan insisted he was focused on improving governance and made some impressive expansions to the welfare system, for example introducing a health insurance scheme to much of the country.
However, in other areas it faltered. His decision to appoint an inexperienced and unqualified political newcomer to a key post – the chief minister of Punjab, the country’s most populous province – was widely ridiculed.
Unable to explain why Khan refused to replace his appointee, Usman Buzdar, despite overwhelming criticism, rumors spread that the prime minister’s wife, a sort of spiritual guide, had warned him that Buzdar boded well. and, if he was fired, his entire government would collapse.
There were also other challenges. The cost of living in Pakistan skyrocketed, with food prices rising sharply and the rupiah depreciating against the dollar.
Khan’s supporters blame global conditions, but disapproval towards the It was on the rise.
“The Sharifs may have lined their pockets, but at least they got the job done” is a phrase that became a common complaint.
Still, for a time, the prime minister seemed like the best bet for the military.
He became an impressive figure on the world stage and his decision not to order a total lockdown during the coronavirus pandemic was vindicated as having fewer deaths than expected, although no one can be sure why that happened.
image source, Archyde.com
Army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa (left) and Imran Khan were at odds over the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Meanwhile, his opponents were increasingly expressing their rejection of the military, pointing fingers at the army chief, Qamar Javed Bajwaand the head of the intelligence services, Lieutenant General Faiz Hameedas responsible for “selecting” Khan for the position.
internal differences
The dynamic changed drastically last year.
Several observers told the BBC that the army became increasingly frustrated that Khan failed to achieve good government, particularly in Punjaband perhaps because of how the opposition publicly blamed them for bringing him to power.
More importantly, a rift began to emerge between Bajwa and Hameed, who was seen to be hoping to become the next army chief.
Hameed was apparently so sure of his prospects that he had even previously told officials in neighboring Afghanistan that he would be the next man in charge of the army.
However, a source close to the armed forces said that while Hameed was seen as someone who could handle “dirty jobs” effectively – a reference to manipulating politicians or silencing critics – he was not seen as someone fit to “run the institution”.
The tension between the two powerful figures was noted during a private interaction with influential commentators last summer. A journalist asked a question and was told by the intelligence chief that time was up.
“I’m the boss”, interrupted Bajwa in a dry way“Y I am going to decide witháwhen it endsmos“. Then he took the question and calmly answered it.
In October, the feud escalated and engulfed Khan. Bajwa reportedly wanted a new man in charge of the intelligence services, and the army announced a change in roles.
Nevertheless, Khan, who had developed a close relationship with Hameed, resisted.apparently wanting him to stay until the elections were held, assuming that he could once again help him secure victory.
The prime minister postponed issuing a formal notice approving the change of destination for nearly three weeks before finally relenting.
The now visible cracks between the military and the Khan government emboldened the opposition.
As they began planning a no-confidence vote and canvassing potential defectors within their party and coalition allies, multiple sources told the BBC that the military made it clear that they were going to be “neutral” this time.
A defector from Khan’s party told the BBC that he and other MPs often received “calls” from the intelligence services telling them what to do.
“We used to be mistreated,” he said indignantly.
However, once Hameed left office, the “calls” ceased. “Now the army is not interfering,” he added.
Journalist Kamran Yousaf told the BBC that the military had been involved in “managing” Khan’s allies and the slim majority in government.
“Once that support was missing, his downfall was inevitable”he claimed.
Other differences between the Khan and the army also arose, especially on foreign policy.
Although he defended visiting Moscow on the day Russian troops crossed into Ukraine and sharply rebuffed attempts by Western officials to condemn Vladimir Putin’s behavior, Bajwa said last week that the invasion “must be stopped immediately.”
Yousaf said Khan had earlier “destroyed” an attempt championed by Bajwa to partially restore trade with regional rival India “because of the political cost.”
Ironically, previous civilian governments have clashed with the Pakistani military because they have been in favor of improving ties with India, but at the time, the military was not.
Responsible for the EE.UU.
Khan has repeatedly said that he will not give up the fight. He alleges that he is the victim of an attempt led by EE.UU. to affect “regime change” in Pakistandue to the anti-Western slant in his foreign policy, which included criticism of Washington’s war in Afghanistan.
Most analysts dismissed it as a deliberate exaggeration of a diplomatic cable sent by Pakistan’s ambassador to the US.
Still, it’s a narrative that seems to be resonating with Khan’s supporters, tapping into an anti-American reservation in the country.
Ironically, the Pakistani military itself fueled an atmosphere ripe for conspiracy theories by repeatedly warning of the dangers of vague “foreign conspiracies” or “foreign agendas.”
Khan once told his cricket team to “fight like cornered tigers”. He now he seems destined to be a formidable opponent.
Remember that you can receive notifications from BBC World. Download the new version of our app and activate it so you don’t miss out on our best content.