They have used pictures from the Balochistan earthquake and Gaza as evidence for their claim that drones killed innocent civilians in the recent Hangu drone strike
When I voted for the PTI on May 11, 2013, I did so for very good reasons and none of them had anything to do with drones. That Imran Khan, the tallest figure in Pakistani politics, was contesting from NA 122 — my constituency — was just icing on the cake. I felt that the PTI had not only managed to bring the apoliticised urban middle class into the democratic process but had also managed to wean a significant portion of the right wing vote from traditional right wing parties. The hope underlying my decision was that the PTI would become a party of the centre right and, with time, would absorb other right wing parties and lead Pakistan towards a genuine two party system.
The results, however, returned PTI as the second largest party of the right. Having been placed in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government and in opposition at the centre, the PTI positioned itself to the right of the centre right PML-N, which had the overwhelming majority. The impact therefore has been precisely the opposite of what one had expected of the PTI’s rise. Instead of pulling the extreme right to centre right, the PTI has allowed itself to be pushed into the extreme right. To be fair, the first indication of this came when the party abandoned its principled stance on equality of citizenship by targeting an already demonized group, the Ahmadis, just before the elections. Next came the angst on display in Lalak Chowk in DHA, Lahore. The hitherto apoliticised urban middle class was upset that, despite having voted for Hamid Khan — the PTI candidate from NA 125 — the PML-N’s Khawaja Saad Rafique won the election. He did so because the overwhelming majority in NA 125 was not of DHA dwellers but of the slums around it. Saad Rafique had done his homework. Hamid Khan failed to do his. Yet PTI supporters were unable to reconcile themselves with the results; they wanted to know why, when they had braved the heat in May to vote for their favourite candidate, he was not elected. This is a dangerous attitude in a democratic process.
The PTI won fair and square in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. It did so because its anti-corruption slogan and pro-development stance resonated with the people in that province, who were sick and tired of the previous government’s woeful performance. Admittedly the PTI’s government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has been unable to overcome the multitude of problems confronting their province, and it is also not their fault. Instead of working hard at delivering on the many promises of their manifesto, the PTI has chosen the easy route; the unconstitutional politics of agitation. The agitation has been centered solely on the drone issue. I do not wish to go into the merits or demerits of drones but suffice it to say that the PTI’s rhetoric on the issue is composed largely of false statements and outright distortion of the facts. They have used pictures from the Balochistan earthquake and Gaza as evidence for their claim that drones killed innocent civilians in the recent Hangu drone strike. The Hangu drone strike killed Afghan Taliban leaders but the PTI’s information secretaries, not just in Pakistan but also in places as far off as New Jersey, continue to mislead the ordinary rank and file of PTI supporters with false evidence.
These ordinarily intelligent and amenable folk become rabidly fanatic when someone holds a point of view contradictory to their own. Their charge is always the same: anyone who disagrees with them is being funded by the US. Imran Khan must share the blame for this. He has openly accused everyone who criticises him on his policies of being a US agent. I do not say that there are absolutely no critics with ulterior motives but to accuse everyone of being an agent is just plain wrong. In a democratic society there can be and there should be many voices. Dissent is the central feature and the strongest attribute of an inclusive and democratic country.
In comparison, we must consider the main attributes of fascism. Obviously, fascism in the 21st century is not going to be the same as fascism in the 20th century. The paraphernalia of the Nazi regime and Italian fascists may be the most enduring historical symbols of fascism but they are irrelevant to the modern reality. The three core ideological components of fascism are said to be the rebirth myth, populist ultranationalism and the myth of decadence. Let us see how the PTI fares on these. The rebirth myth is self-evident in the ‘Naya Pakistan’ (new Pakistan) slogan. Drone agitation is a classic case of populist ultranationalism. Finally, every PTI worker believes that the system is completely decadent and must be brought down by radical politics outside the constitutional realm. The nature of the radical politics that PTI supports is also opposed to all forms of anti-conservative nationalism. These are the makings of a genuinely fascist party.
Let me state here that I believe Imran Khan to be a humanist. His work with Shaukat Khanum Memorial Trust and Namal College indicates that he believes in positive and progressive change through education and provision of healthcare for all. His politics through the PTI in recent times, however, indicate otherwise. I hope Imran Khan can pause and reflect on where he is taking his political supporters and whether his political supporters in the end will overwhelm his humanist aspirations. Instead of committing PTI to an extreme agenda, would it not be worthwhile to focus on issues that have been entrusted to him? After all, foreign policy is not a provincial subject and the people of Pakistan have not given him a mandate on the federal level. Is it not prudent then to understand the limitations of the mandate that Imran Khan has received? Pakistan is bigger than any political party and the hour calls for statesmanship and not politics.
The writer is a lawyer based in Lahore and the author of the book Mr Jinnah: Myth and Reality. He can be contacted via twitter
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan
When I voted for the PTI on May 11, 2013, I did so for very good reasons and none of them had anything to do with drones. That Imran Khan, the tallest figure in Pakistani politics, was contesting from NA 122 — my constituency — was just icing on the cake. I felt that the PTI had not only managed to bring the apoliticised urban middle class into the democratic process but had also managed to wean a significant portion of the right wing vote from traditional right wing parties. The hope underlying my decision was that the PTI would become a party of the centre right and, with time, would absorb other right wing parties and lead Pakistan towards a genuine two party system.
The results, however, returned PTI as the second largest party of the right. Having been placed in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government and in opposition at the centre, the PTI positioned itself to the right of the centre right PML-N, which had the overwhelming majority. The impact therefore has been precisely the opposite of what one had expected of the PTI’s rise. Instead of pulling the extreme right to centre right, the PTI has allowed itself to be pushed into the extreme right. To be fair, the first indication of this came when the party abandoned its principled stance on equality of citizenship by targeting an already demonized group, the Ahmadis, just before the elections. Next came the angst on display in Lalak Chowk in DHA, Lahore. The hitherto apoliticised urban middle class was upset that, despite having voted for Hamid Khan — the PTI candidate from NA 125 — the PML-N’s Khawaja Saad Rafique won the election. He did so because the overwhelming majority in NA 125 was not of DHA dwellers but of the slums around it. Saad Rafique had done his homework. Hamid Khan failed to do his. Yet PTI supporters were unable to reconcile themselves with the results; they wanted to know why, when they had braved the heat in May to vote for their favourite candidate, he was not elected. This is a dangerous attitude in a democratic process.
The PTI won fair and square in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. It did so because its anti-corruption slogan and pro-development stance resonated with the people in that province, who were sick and tired of the previous government’s woeful performance. Admittedly the PTI’s government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has been unable to overcome the multitude of problems confronting their province, and it is also not their fault. Instead of working hard at delivering on the many promises of their manifesto, the PTI has chosen the easy route; the unconstitutional politics of agitation. The agitation has been centered solely on the drone issue. I do not wish to go into the merits or demerits of drones but suffice it to say that the PTI’s rhetoric on the issue is composed largely of false statements and outright distortion of the facts. They have used pictures from the Balochistan earthquake and Gaza as evidence for their claim that drones killed innocent civilians in the recent Hangu drone strike. The Hangu drone strike killed Afghan Taliban leaders but the PTI’s information secretaries, not just in Pakistan but also in places as far off as New Jersey, continue to mislead the ordinary rank and file of PTI supporters with false evidence.
These ordinarily intelligent and amenable folk become rabidly fanatic when someone holds a point of view contradictory to their own. Their charge is always the same: anyone who disagrees with them is being funded by the US. Imran Khan must share the blame for this. He has openly accused everyone who criticises him on his policies of being a US agent. I do not say that there are absolutely no critics with ulterior motives but to accuse everyone of being an agent is just plain wrong. In a democratic society there can be and there should be many voices. Dissent is the central feature and the strongest attribute of an inclusive and democratic country.
In comparison, we must consider the main attributes of fascism. Obviously, fascism in the 21st century is not going to be the same as fascism in the 20th century. The paraphernalia of the Nazi regime and Italian fascists may be the most enduring historical symbols of fascism but they are irrelevant to the modern reality. The three core ideological components of fascism are said to be the rebirth myth, populist ultranationalism and the myth of decadence. Let us see how the PTI fares on these. The rebirth myth is self-evident in the ‘Naya Pakistan’ (new Pakistan) slogan. Drone agitation is a classic case of populist ultranationalism. Finally, every PTI worker believes that the system is completely decadent and must be brought down by radical politics outside the constitutional realm. The nature of the radical politics that PTI supports is also opposed to all forms of anti-conservative nationalism. These are the makings of a genuinely fascist party.
Let me state here that I believe Imran Khan to be a humanist. His work with Shaukat Khanum Memorial Trust and Namal College indicates that he believes in positive and progressive change through education and provision of healthcare for all. His politics through the PTI in recent times, however, indicate otherwise. I hope Imran Khan can pause and reflect on where he is taking his political supporters and whether his political supporters in the end will overwhelm his humanist aspirations. Instead of committing PTI to an extreme agenda, would it not be worthwhile to focus on issues that have been entrusted to him? After all, foreign policy is not a provincial subject and the people of Pakistan have not given him a mandate on the federal level. Is it not prudent then to understand the limitations of the mandate that Imran Khan has received? Pakistan is bigger than any political party and the hour calls for statesmanship and not politics.
The writer is a lawyer based in Lahore and the author of the book Mr Jinnah: Myth and Reality. He can be contacted via twitter
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan
