Pakistan is going through a constitutional crisis after Prime MinisterImran Khan avoided a no-confidence vote on Sunday which was initiated byopposition legislators late last month in an attempt to oust him amidaccusations of economic mismanagement and spiralling inflation. Inresponse, Khan claimed that a “foreign conspiracy” was being hatched by theUS to overthrow his government over its “independent” foreign policyposturing which was steering the country away from the West and closer tothe Sino-Russian axis.
The opposition, led by political dynasties the Pakistan People’s Party(PPP) and the Muslim League-Nawaz (PMLN), said that they have the supportof 195 members of parliament, well over the 172 needed to oust Khan’sruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) coalition government. However, DeputySpeaker Qasim Suri, an ally of Khan and fellow PTI member, dismissed theno-confidence motion, citing Article 5link of theConstitution concerning loyalty to the state. This was followed by theprime minister advising President Arif Alvi to dissolve the NationalAssembly and calling for a snap election, to be held within three months.
Khan will continue in his role until a caretaker prime minister isappointed in accordance with the Constitution. The former cricket star’sfate now rests with the impending decision of the Supreme Court, which hasdelayedlinkitsverdict on the legality of his move, although there have already beenconcerns raised regarding the court’s partiality.
Whatever the judgement and the outcome of the early election, Khan is thelatest prime minister to fail to complete a full five-year term in office.Indeed, no prime minister has done so since Pakistan was created in 1947.
Worryingly, if either side refuses to back down in spite of the courtruling, the country’s powerful military, which is arguably in chargelinkofthe country’s political affairs, could intervene in order to maintain peaceand stability. There is a very real risk of yet another military couplink.
In Pakistan’s 75 years since gaining independence, there have been threesuccessful military coups leading to decades of authoritarian rule andmartial law. When the army hasn’t been in direct control, it has pulled thestrings behind the scenes. Even Khan’s premiership, which began in 2018 onthe campaign promises of fighting the corruption and cronyism that havelong plagued Pakistani politics, is widely believed to have been enabledwith the tacit approval of the military establishment.
Yet during his time in power, Khan’s relationship with the historicallypro-Western army has waned, especially due to differences over foreignpolicy and in the wake of the US withdrawal from neighbouring Afghanistanlast year, and the Pakistani government’s decision to decline to take partin the US-led Summit for Democracy in December. Since taking office, Khanhas increasingly espoused anti-American rhetoriclink,although on Monday he explained: “I am not against any country. I am notanti-Indian or anti-American. But we can be against policies. I wantfriendship with them and there should be respect.”
These tensions were exemplified recently in the current crisis and Khan’svisit to Moscow on the eve of President Vladimir Putin’s decision to invadeUkraine in February, resulting in the signing of bilateral agreements and tradedealslinkincludingthe importing of natural gas and two million tons of wheat from Russia. Aday before the ill-fated vote of no confidence, though, Pakistan’s armychief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, appeared to take a conciliatory tone whenspeaking about Islamabad’s relationship with Washington, which he describedas “excellent link”and went on to make a measured criticism of the war in Ukraine. Thesecomments may well have an impact on military cooperation between Russia andPakistan, something that the latter’s arch-rival India will welcome.
Bajwa was careful, however, to say that the country was not siding with theUS over important ally China, with which Pakistan has a “close strategicrelationship”. This is in line with the army’s balancing act between thetwo superpowers, but the on-off US-Pakistan relationshiplink whichdeveloped during the Cold War and expanded after 9/11 cannot be discounted.The general discussed foreign policy in a very statesmanlike manner, andtherein lies a hint about which institution is really calling the shots inPakistan, which serves as a reminder that the overthrow of a civiliangovernment is always a possibility.
Read Top Stories
While China, Russia, Iran and Turkey have supported Imran Khan’s allegationabout a US regime-change plot, it has been disputedlinkbythe Pakistani military. Khan’s implied dig at the army’s neutralitylink lastmonth is unlikely to win him any favours, and there are rumours that he maylook to appoint former intelligence chief General Faiz Hameedlinkhead of the army, while recent reports claim that he wanted to sacklink.Not only did Hameed help facilitate Khan’s rise to power, but it is alsospeculated that he may be a useful supporter in the upcoming electioncampaign. Nevertheless, Khan’s attempts to win over or gain influentialallies in the army may be a case of too little, too late.
In this regard, Khan should have learnt from Turkey’s President RecepTayyip Erdogan and his dealings with the military, which he purgedfollowing a failed coup attemptlinkin2016. After all, both leaders are thought to be ideologicallylinkalikeand, significantly, Turkey pre-Erdogan had a similar power structure toPakistan, with the army in charge and, seeing itself as a guardian ofdemocracy, toppling four civilian governments.
Unlike earlier Turkish leaders, Erdogan refused to be intimidated by themilitary and purged the army and other political rivals gradually whileriding a populist wave. Even before the 2016 coup attempt, the first majorchallenge to Erdogan’s ruling AK Party was the 2013 Gezi Park protests inIstanbul. The military was nowhere to be seen, due to a large extent to thecontroversial Ergenekon and Balyoz trials that saw hundreds of suspectscharged with conspiring against the government, including current andreturned military officers as well as politicians and journalists. It mayhave been detrimental for Turkish democratisation, and would be a majorconcern if replicated in nuclear-armed Pakistan, but it ensured Erdogan’ssurvival and kept the military out of Turkey’s politics.
Prime Minister Khan spoke in solidaritylinkErdogan’s Turkey when it commemorated the 5th anniversary last year of thebotched coup and “Democracy and National Unity Day”. This was a day “whenthe entire Pakistani nation spoke with one voice against the attempt toundermine Turkey’s democracy and progress towards prosperity.”
The problem for Khan, though, is not only the immensely powerful andinfluential army in Pakistan, but also the considerable support that hismain rival parties have in parliament and the electorate. Speaking at agathering in Lahore this week, the embattled prime minister ruled outlinkforminganother coalition government, as they are susceptible to “blackmail” bycoalition partners.
Khan’s political career is on the line and the coming days will be criticalfor all sides. Ever ready to safeguard the state from turmoil, be in nodoubt that the military will be keeping a close eye on developments.
Source:link
