Khan’s Scarlet Letter: A new lease of life or swan song?
A letter or memo allegedly citing dire consequences for Pakistan in case its Prime Minister remains at the helm of affairs has surfaced out of nowhere in the quagmire of Pakistan’s political scene wherein the Prime Minister, Cricketer turned politician Imran Khan is facing a deeply divisive No Confidence Motion in Parliament. The said motion is constitutionally protected should the opposition wish to exercise it and establish a majority in the house. Whilst carefully pretending to not name the source of the letter, Mr. Khan and a section of the media sympathetic to him have all but pointed the finger at the United States and linked it with Mr. Khan’s leanings towards Russia in the recent Ukraine crisis. In a quickly retrieved slip of the tongue in a live televised address to the nation, Khan suggested the messaging originated in the United States. The denial from the US has been swift and unequivocal. The US official spokesperson vehemently denied the accusations and reaffirmed their respect of Pakistan’s constitutional mandates.
Rather more openly prior to the surfacing of this crisis, Khan had criticized the European Union ambassadors for what he positioned as dictates on how Pakistan must act in the wake of the Ukraine war. Khan alleged that the West has a discriminatory attitude towards Pakistan and although India has a similar policy on the issue, it does not face the West’s wrath. It is pertinent to mention though, that Khan’s interludes were more conspicuous as he visited Putin right on the eve of the war, quite literally in what many at home labelled as particularly bad timing given Pakistan’s economic interests vis-à-vis the International Monetary Fund (IMF), The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the US and the EU as key decision variables for Pakistan’s economic viability. The EU is Pakistan’s biggest trade partner followed by the US and China. Exports to the US are over 4 to 5 Billion Dollars (roughly a fifth of the total volume) compared to about 0.3 Billion Dollars with the Russian Federation.
It is pertinent to mention that the cable, letter or memo in question and the likes of these are regularly shared by diplomatic missions for all countries summarizing their discussions, informal, formal or otherwise with representatives of foreign Governments and other State and non-State actors. These routine assessments are punctuated with individual interpretation and do not always accurately depict policy. Thousands of such communications surfaced as a result of the WikiLeaks episode in November, 2010 with the leaks of many diplomatic cables numbering in the thousands.
The one raised by PM Khan is by some accounts on media a communication from a certain ambassador summarizing his discussions with a representative of a powerful western country. Whilst such communications are rather routine, this one is being leveraged by Khan for a very specific political reprieve he is desperate to secure at the moment on account of the no confidence vote. The timing naturally raises a question or two. To what extend is this being blown out of proportion is left to our better judgement. To maximize his political leverage as a result of this, Khan is singling out the currently self-exiled Nawaz Sharif, his biggest rival in terms of strength in the parliament as the principal co-conspirator in the design of the letter received. No evidence has been provided to the media or his allies to substantiate this. With Nawaz Sharif currently not having any executive power either, such as scenario where Nawaz could impact western foreign policy is also highly unlikely. The current opposition against Khan is as strong as its ever been with two of the largest opposition parties including the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, historically center of right and Mrs Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples Party, left of center. The united opposition also includes the largest right wing religious party and a host of smaller nationalist and regional parties. Some of these have recently defected from the ruling coalition.
The politically cornered Prime Minister has apparently lost the support of the majority in parliament. His deeply puritanical and populist political philosophy of religiously mandated ‘good’ and ‘evil’ failed the test of practical implementation on ground in terms of the Caliphate of Medina (First Islamic State) that he had envisaged to create. His coming to power was supported in the eyes of many by the country’s establishment. He promised to tackle rampant corruption and revamp the structural inadequacies in Pakistan’s judicial and administrative sphere within his tenure. To push that agenda, after a struggle to 22 years, Mr. Khan put together a team of carefully selected ‘King’s Men’ largely collected from the spoils of the allegedly corrupt parties he sought to root out. That proved in many ways to be his Achilles’ heel as the system that emerged in his ‘New Pakistan’ was but a chip off the old block in terms of corruption whilst being less efficient in administrative terms as a new team without a previous working relationship was hastily put together.
Whether or not Khan survives the no confidence motion is less significant in the longer run as general elections are scheduled in 2023. His removal via the motion may pre-pone them by a year. The real implications of this crisis are manifold for Khan’s political future and Pakistan’s foreign policy regarding the West in general. Will this escalation in diplomatic tensions with the West become his scarlet letter to carry or will it have a more permanent impact on Pakistan’s foreign policy and afford him a new lease of life? That question is fundamental to Pakistan in terms of its geo strategic future in the comity of nations and its struggling economy which can falter to irreconcilable levels should the US and EU decide to react in kind and reconsider trade and economic relations.
Khan’s predicament and consequently that of Pakistan is akin to the protagonist in the American classic by Nathaniel Hawthorne entitled The Scarlet Letter, wherein a woman carries the sole burden of having a child out of wedlock in an outwardly puritan society. The father of her child, and the religious authority, a Reverend remains largely unscathed, though guilt consumes him just as well. Eventually the Scarlet Letter that she wears on her bosom as a sign of censure and shame, becomes her very liberation and she starts wearing it voluntarily. The piece of fiction is a brilliant microcosm of society’s dualisms and contradictions. Khan’s rise to power was allegedly conceived by elements within the country’s powerful establishment. Yet in the puritanical pursuit of a model State, a new political creature of sorts has been created that is willing to wear the disapproval of the West on his forehead albeit only to save his skin for now as the letter or memo has been around for weeks but only pulled out when his eminent departure as a result of the vote was crystal clear. His scapegoating of the opposition is also very symbolic of the authoritarian populism that he thrives on.
Suddenly, Khan feels his religiously spiced populism against neo imperialism is a scarlet letter that discredits him in the eyes of the West but allows him a new lease of life within an overwhelmingly conservative following that he has, one that peaks in Pakistan’s north west province along the Durand Line border with Afghanistan. Khan has also been a mouthpiece for international acceptance for the Taliban regime in Pakistan’s western neighbor much to the chagrin of some in the West.
Khan is now depicting a particularly Trump like narrative based on the aftermath of this ‘Lettergate’ crisis with the resounding claim that he, and only he, represents the ‘real people’ or also the ‘silent majority’ whilst the opposition are what he labels as ‘rats’ and ‘stooges’ who thrive on financial corruption and are puppets of the West. But this narrative simply cannot fly as Khan’s party is crumbling at the base, thick and fast. Of the 155 members he has elected to parliament for his party, The Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf (self-styled Justice Party), some two dozen have defected to the opposition. Two of his staunchly allied parties have also deserted him and for all intents and purposes, he has a minority Government in place.
His rhetoric is getting more virulent by the day as there is a wide spread perception the country’s powerful establishment is neutral and confined to its constitutional role. All those on the other side of the fence are being labeled as western conspirators or traitors. Much like Hawthorne’s fetishizing of puritan religiosity in a very complex and hypocritical society, Khan harks on self-righteousness and an almost divine motivation to fight back against the so-called traitors and their alleged corruption. Not much has been proven in court against the opposition and a third party hired in the United Kingdom to help convict members of the opposition has had its head apologize publicly to Nawaz Sharif and declared that they found no evidence of money laundering.
Khan is playing the victim and the crusader card simultaneously to keep his rhetoric based political franchise intact, at least on the street, if not in parliament. Evidence of which was clear in a massively charged rally he pulled off in Islamabad on the 27th of March. In front of a massive rally Khan waved his Scarlet Letter, revealing it as so-called evidence of his predicament in regards to the No Confidence Motion in parliament. His antics drew comparisons with former PM Zulfiqar Bhutto and his fire brand speeches against western imperialism in the 70s. Interestingly, both Bhutto and Khan are western educated and drew a lot of inspiration from western justice and parliamentary systems!
For saner minds not politically aligned to Khan’s over-zealous and arguably self-destructive rhetoric, the surfacing of this letter and its public positioning is a huge diplomatic faux pas. For short term personal political gains, Khan is risking Pakistan consistent foreign policy which seeks to balance dependence on the US, EU and Gulf Arab states alongside a traditionally strong all weather association with China. The economic fall out notwithstanding, an outright dismissive stance against Pakistan’s western allies to save Khan’s Prime Ministerial scalp may be a huge gamble for the powers that be in Pakistan and indeed Pakistan’s long-term interests.
For this term at least, Khan cannot last long on the political scene. Even if he survives the No Confidence Motion on April 3rd or thereabouts, he has to face up to an election in 2023. Most of his promises for economic and social reform have not yet materialized and criticism is rife in the media and within the strong and united opposition camps. Therefore, sans this letter and its allegedly contents, Khan’s political future was bleak for all intents and purposes. He is desperately trying to wear this letter on his forehead as a symbol of his puritanical steadfastness in the midst of others that he labels as cronies of foreign powers and corrupt sell outs.
Only time will tell for sure whether this letter is his new lease of life as a Bhutto like populist who can defy world powers albeit at huge cost to his country or a sordid swan song as he signs off and creates a narrative to become a political martyr who did not compromise on his principles, however misplaced in the eyes of his adversaries. One thing is for sure, Pakistan needs political, economic and law & order stability right now. In an increasingly polarized political landscape, it needs domestic reconciliation and international help with the IMF and FATF. It needs friends and not foes. It needs real development on ground rather than mindless and divisive self-serving and self-righteous rhetoric.
Can Khan really redeem the situation on a global platform? Based on recent evidence, only a highly partisan romantic in unconditional love with Khan will agree. The implications for Pakistan’s political and economic stability are huge. And that is a rather considered and cautious understatement.