Imran Khan the politician- discussion

[Ahassan]

somehow i hate IK.........he is a born sick....

 

[Energon]

Ok, I attended the symposium and even got a question in, then chatted with him for a couple of minutes at the end; and then snuck into another small discussion group held by media personnel. Here are my observations:

1. His political strategy is flawed at its very core: He is essentially courting two groups: the tribals (on account of his heritage) and the educated urban youth who take to him on account of his celebrity status. The problem is that both these groups are pretty much the opposites of each other; and IMO he is using Islam as a common thread to somehow unify these two segments of his support base. I don't think its going to work because religion isn't nearly as strong and efficient a matrix as one would imagine (even in the Islamic world). Also, I found it a bit troubling that he completely sidestepped his Islam policy; to me it indicates that he radically shifts his bid based on the audience.

2. His ideas of democracy are a bit unrealistic in the foreseeable future. I asked him a question about this, and his entire response revolved around the independent judiciary. Now, I can see where he is coming from, and understand why an independent judiciary (something that Pakistan hasn't really ever had for most of its life) would be important; however I doubt if doing this will ensure or sustain a true democracy in the long run. He takes his inspiration from India and uses it as a model upon which Pakistan should be built. However this too IMO is an unrealistic goal since the basic governmental and social structures are nothing alike. If he really wants to recreate the Indian model (which has 60 years and a major economic boom behind it) then he has to push for a complete paradigm shift which goes way beyond just an independent judiciary. He isn't doing this.

3. Another person asked him about the economy and he really didn't have a good answer. I don't think he's really thought it through; and his plan of an economically liberalized welfare state is most likely unfeasible.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Excellent observations Energon.

I agree completely with your analysis of his intention/desire to somehow allow two worlds/systems to coexist in Pakistan. On one hand he is courting moderate Pakistanis, on the other he is in favor (from what I can tell) of a continuation of the Tribal system and its archaic values - what should be anathema to his other constituency (though they aren't in favor of the Military operation either) - all of this (as you correctly noted) united by this temporary cause of the "deposed Judiciary", and anti Musharraf sentiment.

While his strategy may be flawed in terms of actually bringing about any substantial change, I am not sure how ineffective it would be with the voters. It goes back to my impression that while Pakistanis may desire "shariah", as a utopian escape from the Governemnt failures of the past, they really don't understand the complexities that would follow. So IK just might be able to sell his plan by building upon the anti-Musharraf sentiment, and humanizing the Taliban, precisely as he did in this discussion. I doubt Mullah Omar could have done a better propoganda job.

Taliban arose because the army went in and started killing women and children (collateral damage) in a search for militants indeed!

Poppycock, and lies!

Thank you for sharing with us.

 

[Energon]

The UK has both,a capitalist/liberal economy and a welfare state.

I'm glad you brought this up. A quick look at modern history will show you that countries that are welfare states and/or economically liberal (at least up to a certain extent) fall into two categories:

1. Nations who can generate wealth outside open market economics; usually with vast caches of highly desirable natural resources. The GCC nations and Norway serve as good examples.

2. Nations with relatively: low populations that are somewhat homogeneous, have low rates of unemployment, high literacy rates and a fairly robust industrialized economy carried from the past. Most nations of Western Europe and Canada fall into this category.

As you can see, Pakistan has neither. The nation is extremely poor, the economy is in tatters and not nearly as industrialized as the BRIC countries. The population is fairly large and fractionalized and the natural resources aren't nearly as abundant as say Saudi Arabia or Iran. India has a similar situation and for many years they too tried to adopt a welfare socialistic outlook. But it is clear that this experiment has been a failure. And the current scenario is a rather unsavory mix of a government that is still living in the socialist past and a new breed of truly liberalized and globalized private sector that is leaving the public sector in the dust.

For impoverished developing nations with abysmally low human development(pretty much all of south Asia), being a welfare state is just not an economically feasible option. Likewise, a western style capitalistic model is also out of the question; and trying to jam both of them in a parallel system (like India) doesn't seem to work either. Which means that the answer is somewhere in between in the form of a unique system that has yet to be devised.

 

[Energon]

Excellent observations Energon.

I agree completely with your analysis of his intention/desire to somehow allow two worlds/systems to coexist in Pakistan. On one hand he is courting moderate Pakistanis, on the other he is in favor (from what I can tell) of a continuation of the Tribal system and its archaic values - what should be anathema to his other constituency (though they aren't in favor of the Military operation either) - all of this (as you correctly noted) united by this temporary cause of the "deposed Judiciary", and anti Musharraf sentiment.

While his strategy may be flawed in terms of actually bringing about any substantial change, I am not sure how ineffective it would be with the voters. It goes back to my impression that while Pakistanis may desire "shariah", as a utopian escape from the Governemnt failures of the past, they really don't understand the complexities that would follow. So IK just might be able to sell his plan by building upon the anti-Musharraf sentiment, and humanizing the Taliban, precisely as he did in this discussion. I doubt Mullah Omar could have done a better propoganda job.

Taliban arose because the army went in and started killing women and children (collateral damage) in a search for militants indeed!

Poppycock, and lies!

Thank you for sharing with us.

First of all, thank you for the kind words.

His whole movement (if I can call it that) is based around Justice. I can totally understand and respect that. However IMO for one to take this movement to a national scale, there has to be a realistic understanding of the complex issues surrounding injustice.
On one hand IK is fighting for an independent judiciary (a goal I highly respect) but then on the other hand he is also fighting for the decentralization of the entire legal system by promoting the independent tribal justice organizations in about 2/3rds of the country by falsely glorifying them. He needs to have a little chat with Mukhtaran Mai to find out how "effective" these tribal "courts" really are prior to endorsing and promoting them. Also, it is clear to anyone with half a brain that the two are mutually exclusive and hence incompatible. Either you have a nationally institutionalized judicial system that is independent and ensures the code of law and justice for all; or you have a de-centralized area specific judiciary system which uses its own varying tribal codes to dispense justice. You can't have both.

Having said all of this, I do believe now after meeting with some of the other journalists today (the event was co-sponsored by the South Asian Journalist Association) that Musharraf has in fact done a lot of damage that has gone unreported on account of his subversive media policies; and IK does make some good points regarding this issue, and there is a genuine reason why the anti-Musharraf stance has been working well.

Unfortunately nobody has been able to put forth a meaningful alternative; and so although I am not by any means a Musharraf sycophant, I do not see a realistic way out of this mess without him.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

I don't think much of Imran as a politician.

He is too out of touch with reality.

Nonetheless, a great cricketer!

 

[Energon]

I don't think much of Imran as a politician.

He is too out of touch with reality.

Nonetheless, a great cricketer!

He is also a great philanthropist, and certainly deserves a lot of credit for all that he has accomplished in this arena; but otherwise yea... not exactly a good politician.

 

[dabong1]

For impoverished developing nations with abysmally low human development(pretty much all of south Asia), being a welfare state is just not an economically feasible option. Likewise, a western style capitalistic model is also out of the question; and trying to jam both of them in a parallel system (like India) doesn't seem to work either. Which means that the answer is somewhere in between in the form of a unique system that has yet to be devised.

I think the system you are referring to is the islamic system.

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

NO thank you dear i was invited by someone but i dont consider him worth listening in current position


BTW there is a news today with headline

"Imran and Asma Jehangir (sick) will greet Musharraf with Protest in London"


If that was the solution to all our problems.

Imran is sick minded like those who can not see too far

I thought you were a fan of IMRAN KHAN! ........

 

[Spring Onion]

Ok, I attended the symposium and even got a question in, then chatted with him for a couple of minutes at the end; and then snuck into another small discussion group held by media personnel. Here are my observations:

1. His political strategy is flawed at its very core: He is essentially courting two groups: the tribals (on account of his heritage) and the educated urban youth who take to him on account of his celebrity status. The problem is that both these groups are pretty much the opposites of each other; and IMO he is using Islam as a common thread to somehow unify these two segments of his support base. I don't think its going to work because religion isn't nearly as strong and efficient a matrix as one would imagine (even in the Islamic world). Also, I found it a bit troubling that he completely sidestepped his Islam policy; to me it indicates that he radically shifts his bid based on the audience.

Exactly my point of view. Excellent observasion.

1.As far courting tribals as indeed he is trying that but not on account of his heritage as he is Niazi and Niazis though they call themselves Pathans but there isnt much evidence of that but even if he claims to be one, there is no support he can gather from tribals.
2. AS far yousing youth that is a strong point he wanted to exploit and made headways into popular politics, but looking at the current crises created by terrorists i dont think so any youth is coming to support him on streets that too when Imran as you had observed, lacks any realistic approach.

3. As far as Banking on Islam, well as you said his own charachter is very much in opposition.
Its merely that he is currently supporting APDM which consists of JI and ANP and PML-N and Achakzai's party hence Imran is trying to cash in the POV of these parties which themselves miserably failed to do so.

2. His ideas of democracy are a bit unrealistic in the foreseeable future. I asked him a question about this, and his entire response revolved around the independent judiciary. Now, I can see where he is coming from, and understand why an independent judiciary (something that Pakistan hasn't really ever had for most of its life) would be important; however I doubt if doing this will ensure or sustain a true democracy in the long run. He takes his inspiration from India and uses it as a model upon which Pakistan should be built. However this too IMO is an unrealistic goal since the basic governmental and social structures are nothing alike. If he really wants to recreate the Indian model (which has 60 years and a major economic boom behind it) then he has to push for a complete paradigm shift which goes way beyond just an independent judiciary. He isn't doing this.

3. Another person asked him about the economy and he really didn't have a good answer. I don't think he's really thought it through; and his plan of an economically liberalized welfare state is most likely unfeasible.

I dont think so he is inspired by Indian model of Judiciary or he is much in pain to fight for Judiciary in Pakistan as before there was no protest movement by Lawyers Imran had never talked about having a democracy based on judicial system.
Its same like cashing on the current protest of lawyers just like Nawaz Sharif is trying to do by reviving lawyers protest.

 

[Spring Onion]

I thought you were a fan of IMRAN KHAN! ........

What makes you think that

i do like oldies but not idiots

BTW when funds for his hospital were being raised i was in shcool and i my friends did massive fund raising.

 

[Energon]

I dont think so he is inspired by Indian model of Judiciary or he is much in pain to fight for Judiciary in Pakistan as before there was no protest movement by Lawyers Imran had never talked about having a democracy based on judicial system.
Its same like cashing on the current protest of lawyers just like Nawaz Sharif is trying to do by reviving lawyers protest.

Listen to the webcast. He says that India is the model Pakistan should be looking at and not the Middle Eastern Islamic one.

He then discussed this further in the meeting with the journalists. The reasoning behind this is that the South Asian culture is very different from Arabia and so it makes more sense to pursue something that has already been done in the consanguineous social setting. Again, I can see where he is coming from and this point on the outset is very logical, however what he isn't taking into account is that political systems of governance are dependent upon many other factors transcending cultural similarity. And in that respect, the model Pakistan has adopted is very different from India's... and making a switch will be extremely difficult if not impossible without a radical shift in social policy.

 

[Energon]

I think the system you are referring to is the islamic system.

Not at all. The Islamic system has been defunct for many years and it would be highly detrimental to a developing nation in a globalized economy if it were to be adopted today.

What I am alluding to is a genuine system designed for region specific developing nations which take into account some aspects of capitalism and socialism where the roles of government and private sector are clearly defined and arranged with the sole intention of augmentation and not conflict.

Religion if anything should be turned over to the private social sphere in its entirety and kept out of governance and economics altogether.

 

[dabong1]

Not at all. The Islamic system has been defunct for many years and it would be highly detrimental to a developing nation in a globalized economy if it were to be adopted today.

So islamic banking,one of the fastest growing markets is somehow a system that is defunct?

What I am alluding to is a genuine system designed for region specific developing nations which take into account some aspects of capitalism and socialism where the roles of government and private sector are clearly defined and arranged with the sole intention of augmentation and not conflict..

So a system that gives a certain amount of rights to the person and certain amount of rights to the state,a place where individual/buisness ownership is allowed and nationalized industries that serve the basic needs of the people......yeah sounds like the islamic system to me!

Religion if anything should be turned over to the private social sphere in its entirety and kept out of governance and economics altogether.

Pakistan has done the above....it got it nowhere.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Pakistan has done the above....it got it nowhere.

That is because some are dead against separating religion from governance and they are out to create law and order problems to divert the state resources from the public good!

The terrorist abetted by the radicals and fundamentalists are the ones who are like crabs in a pail - pulling the others down who wish to get out of the pail and nearly succeeding to do so, but for the crabs below, pulling them back into the pail!