Imran Khan: Impressed by Saudi Anti-Corruption Model

[Kabira]

KSA is to Pakistan like what Israel is to USA. Every government will wax lyrical and go about how great the country is and both are peas in the pod ....

If we followed Saudi system then Imran Khan wouldn't be sitting there right now.

 

[WaLeEdK2]

I was being facetious. KSA cannot be used as a sample for issues in Pakistan. KSA budget is about 50 times bigger and the accordingly MBS has massive resources available to go after the bad eggs. He can even bend and blackmail foreign countries in helping him. Pakistan can't. The state is nearly bankrupt and is too weak led by a coalition government that is everything to all but nothing to one. I am afraid PM IK does not have the mandate MBS has - the latter by being absolute royalty.

It doesn’t matter what powers he has or not. MBS was never supposed to be the crown prince in the first place but here we are today. At some point a nation has to make a decision: will the country be spared or will the corrupt elite be spared? A make or break situation. Them and their crap supporters can cry and howl all they want it shouldn’t deter what is right.

It’s a good to point out that there’s a reason IK made himself minister of interior

 

[Kabira]

That is correct. The cohesion in KSA is also greater due to the system in place and Arabia being a well-defined civilization and a homogenous (by large) society in comparison with Pakistan where there are a lot of distinct ethnic groups that speak their own languages and have their own political agendas. For instance, from what I have noticed, ethnic groups tend to vote for their own parties mostly etc. That's at least what you hear of complains from users on PDF on a weekly basis.

There is little sense with comparing in this regard. Although it would not hurt Pakistan to do a "MBS" in terms of corruption. It worked wonders in KSA. Some 150 billion USD were collected overnight.

Corruption isn't ethnic issue in Pakistan. But duo process most be followed. Not even military dictators could do MBS like thing in Pakistan.

The difference between UK and Pakistan is our institutions are not as well developed to curb corruption or follow it up in courts. But its changing for better in last decade or so.

 

[Hrk19]

If we followed Saudi system then Imran Khan wouldn't be sitting there right now.

no he would be.
if you mean the accusation that imran is a fornicator then you should know you need 4 male muslim witnesses who saw the act take place in person
failure to produce such will result in the accuser to face the same punishment,
which if you were the accuser would mean you would get a hundred lashes.
how about that.
oh also since you spread fassad and lies you would be sentenced to death as that is the punishment prescribed in islam for spreading corruption
or crucifiction,
take your pick.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

If we followed Saudi system then Imran Khan wouldn't be sitting there right now.

Do you think that Pakistan's current system is better than authoritarian systems like KSA and China? I have seen little on the ground that convinces me of such a claim.

If anything Pakistan would most likely be doing better under a more authoritarian system. Think something along Ataturk (not sure if that would work in a religious society like Pakistan) and Kemalism (which was authoritarian in nature as well) rather than the existing tribal policies.

That's what I have heard from many Pakistani expats in KSA and the GCC. They always lament how ineffective the system is and how everyone is conspiring against each other based on ethnicity, sect, region etc.

I witness it on PDF as well.

 

[Kabira]

It doesn’t matter what powers he has or not. MBS was never supposed to be the crown prince in the first place but here we are today. At some point a nation has to make a decision: will the country be spared or will the corrupt elite be spared? A make or break situation. Them and their crap supporters can cry and howl all they want it shouldn’t deter what is right.

It’s a good to point out that there’s a reason IK made himself minister of interior

You don't lockup your elite on hunch. You make a case that will stand test of time and in any court in the world. Imran Khan always talked about independents institutions and not locking up people like a dictator.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

Corruption isn't ethnic issue in Pakistan. But duo process most be followed. Not even military dictators could do MBS like thing in Pakistan.

The difference between UK and Pakistan is our institutions are not as well developed to curb corruption or follow it up in courts. But its changing for better in last decade or so.

What MbS and the government did, what was so special about it? It did not occur overnight. The people arrested had been investigated for years. The courts dealt with each case separately hence why many people who were initially arrested were later released.

What MbS did was a "first of a kind in modern-day KSA". China, Russia and countless of other countries have been doing that for years. Regularly.

I am quite sure that the Pakistani military (which are the de facto rulers of Pakistan, if we are to be honest) could do something similar and I do believe that most people would support such a thing seeing the average living standards of the people compared to the rich and corrupt elite.

Unless it works like in Iraq where some Mullah (aligned to the failed Iranian regime of course) has entire militias under his control but even they are no matches for the Iraqi army. The Pakistani army is much more solidified and powerful than the Iraqi one. Ever since 1947.

 

[HAIDER]

There's no model. Only surety of punishment and that's enough to control the crime .

 

[Kabira]

Do you think that Pakistan's current system is better than authoritarian systems like KSA and China? I have seen little on the ground that convinces me of such a claim.

If anything Pakistan would most likely be doing better under a more authoritarian system. Think something along Ataturk (not sure if that would work in a religious society like Pakistan) and Kemalism (which was authoritarian in nature as well) rather than the existing tribal policies.

That's what I have heard from many Pakistani expats in KSA and the GCC. They always lament how ineffective the system is and how everyone is conspiring against each other based on ethnicity, sect, region etc.

I witness it on PDF as well.

Yes its better get everyone on same page then forcing your way out.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

There's no model. Only surety of punishment and that's enough to control the crime .

How has that worked out in Pakistan for 70 years?

A country of 200 million people, with a relatively strategic location, a British-ruled heritage (that helped shape the security guarantor that is the Pakistani army) a large diaspora in the West, fertile land along the Indus river and a culture of English as a second or third language, should be doing way, way better than it is. Irrespective of having no oil, gas or few minerals (I doubt that Pakistan has no valuable minerals).

Look at South Korea. It was poorer than any Middle Eastern society and Pakistan pre-WW2. Yet look at them now.

Has Pakistan not been a democracy for decades as well (another British heritage)? I often see Pakistanis here point fingers at Middle Eastern users for not "understanding" how democracy works and how they are not democracies unlike Pakistan. You included.

So how has that "experiment" worked out so far?

Maybe the hard cold truth is that authoritarianism or some kind of it, is needed in Pakistan.

I know that KSA and China would not be where they are today, irrespective of natural resources and population size, if the system was a "Swedish buffet". It would turn into a wild west. Political parties would be centered around regions, clans, tribes etc. Similar as in Pakistan.

A few decades of "democracy" in Pakistan won't be able to remove centuries if not millennia of history and local practices.

 

[Kabira]

What MbS and the government did, what was so special about it? It did not occur overnight. The people arrested had been investigated for years. The courts dealt with each case separately hence why many people who were initially arrested were later released.

What MbS did was a "first of a kind in modern-day KSA". China, Russia and countless of other countries have been doing that for years. Regularly.

I am quite sure that the Pakistani military (which are the de facto rulers of Pakistan, if we are to be honest) could do something similar and I do believe that most people would support such a thing seeing the average living standards of the people compared to the rich and corrupt elite.

Unless it works like in Iraq where some Mullah (aligned to the failed Iranian regime of course) has entire militias under his control but even they are no matches for the Iraqi army. The Pakistani army is much more solidified and powerful than the Iraqi one. Ever since 1947.

Didn't MBS just lock up people in hotel rooms and forced them to surrender certain amount of money?

Army in Pakistan tried to pull something similar in the past when they wanted to impose martial law. Eventually people also get tired of military rulers. Doubt any dictator in Pakistan lasted more then 10 years.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

Didn't MBS just lock up people in hotel rooms and forced them to surrender certain amount of money?

Army in Pakistan tried to pull something similar in the past when they wanted to impose martial law. Eventually people also get tired of military rulers. Doubt any dictator in Pakistan lasted more then 10 years.

Yes. At the Ritz Charlton. Those that were guilty (as I wrote the suspects had been investigated for years prior and many of the individuals arrested were known, even by the public, to be corrupt and incompetent) were. The ones that were not guilty were later released.

Law enforcement in the West are within their rights to lock people up before a final verdict and to prevent them from escaping the country.

BTW has Pakistan not been ruled by dictators and the army for most of its existence? Vast majority of it in fact.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

BTW has Pakistan not been ruled by dictators and the army for most of its existence? Vast majority of it in fact.

Yes. But there are dictators and dictators. Not all are the same. In Pakistan's case the military dictators took over by using the 'fist' or army but then to prolong their rule they had to garner political support. This would normally involve of inviting the opposition to join the 'dictator' to form the new 'elected' government with the 'dictator' going as the 'president'.

Such government were not that strong and with exception of Gen. Zia fell apart when they lost control of the political groups. This mostly happened when they did something that was controversial etc. You can see how President Ayub Khan resigned in 1969. In 2008 Gen. Musharaf was pushed out. Why this is so is beyond the remit of this thread.

 

[EpiiC]

Its about law. I ser every muslim country who has Islamic shariat law are developing country and are bless with oil or some great resources.

They are developing country but not developed though! They haven't become that great even with Oil.... Canada has economy which is x3 larger than KSA, with only few million higher population...

 

[Indus Pakistan]

They are developing country but not developed though! They haven't become that great even with Oil.... Canada has economy which is x3 larger than KSA, with only few million higher population...

True. KSA is a oil superpower. Over 90% of the countries exports are petroleum and petroleum products. Without oil KSA would be a third world be poverty stricken state.