Imran Khan’s political campaign related to the alleged 'foreign conspiracy' is based on the premise that people of Pakistan will be attracted towards a strongly anti-American narrative. But there is an apparent contradiction in his public position on this issue. He and his associates call for 'independent foreign policy' while clarifying, in the same breath, that they are not 'anti-America'.
Therefore, his rhetoric seems to be aimed more at maligning his political opponents than opposing the US administration for their alleged interference in Pakistan’s internal affairs. We can draw two conclusions, a) His remarks about wanting to be friends with America seems to indicate that he wants to keep this statement as an exit strategy. In other words, this would mean that he is not ready to go out all against Washington. b) His campaign for an 'independent foreign policy' is specifically aimed at a domestic audience and should not be treated as an anti-American narrative. After all, someone who is accusing Washington of dislodging him from power through bribing his opposition would never want to be friends with the United States. Someone who truly believes that Washington has used his opposition to dislodge him from power would never want to be friends with America or say that he is not anti-American.
Secondly, an analysis of Imran Khan’s rhetoric and narrative on this issue would clearly establish that he intends to use this campaign for a domestic political purpose, a) to destabilise the government and b) to destabilise the society. He doesn’t want his campaign to be the starting point of concerted efforts or move to pursue an independent foreign policy. In fact there is nothing in his campaign to indicate that he is even treating this matter as a foreign policy issue.
Matters pertaining to foreign policies are not decided on the streets. The direction of a country's foreign policy is decided among political and representative institutions established under Pakistan’s constitution. These institutions include parliament, parliamentary committees and Foreign Office. Has Imran Khan or any member of his party made any move to launch an initiative in any of the representative institutions to debate and discuss the country's foreign policy? No, they never did, but they could argue that this is because they are no more in the government. Counter argument is that they were still in power after the alleged 'threatening letter' was made public by Imran Khan. Has he made any foreign policy decision or launched any initiative while in power to strengthen Pakistan’s position vis-à-vis the US?
Clearly, Imran Khan’s rhetoric and narrative are aimed at destabilising the society and government, and it has got nothing to do with the foreign policy of the country. Likely outcome of his call for mass agitation would be destabilisation and deterioration of economic and financial situations, thus further increasing Pakistan’s dependence on foreign capitals, especially Washington. Imran Khan has not done anything since he started the melodrama of alleged 'threatening letter' which would strengthen Pakistan’s position vis-à-vis foreign capitals. In fact, his plans to launch a mass agitation seems to further destabilise Pakistan.
The path to independent foreign policy is through economic and financial stabilisation, growth and economic progress. Political agitation will never lead to an independent foreign policy. Independent foreign policies are a product of stable economic and political conditions in the society. But Imran Khan plans to disrupt civic life in the country while claiming to want an 'independent' foreign policy.
The factors of chronic political instability and economic stagnation have played a critical role in limiting Pakistan's political role at the regional and international stage. Throughout our history, we have been both politically and economically dependent on foreign powers in our quest for achieving our political objectives. Lack of economic strength and financial independence have always been deficient in allowing us to take an autonomous path in our foreign relations. Independent foreign policy could not simply be a function of pious wishes—as Imran Khan pretends to nurture the wish of running an independent foreign policy after a bad experience with Washington. This is a true response of a college student who is not at all familiar with the world of diplomacy and international politics and who after a bad experience with someone who possesses hard power, starts throwing family sliver into the street in anger.
Pakistan needs political stability and for that it needs a functioning political system—and the likes of Imran Khan and their naïve responses are making this system dysfunctional and ungovernable.
The slogan of independent foreign policy was first raised by Zulifikar Ali Bhutto in 1967 agitation after a decade of close military and intelligence cooperation between the military government of Ayub Khan and US defense establishment. The context of this slogan was the Cold War: Bhutto wanted to get better deals both from Moscow and Washington, which the Pakistani military establishment failed to secure, during the decades of 1950 and 1960s, when they put all their eggs in American Basket.
Bhutto was also one of the architects of close relations with Beijing, and Chinese then were highly anti-Americans. So in this situation, the slogan of independent foreign policy worked for Pakistan and its ruling elite. Look at Pakistan’s situation now: Relations with Washington are cold. None of our other friends are generous enough to ensure a flow of cash into our coffers to save us from bankruptcy. We need cash more than anything else. And our ruling classes are not likely to rally behind Imran Khan’s naïve slogans. All he can do is attract a naïve and thin layer of emotional urbanite voters behind him.
Therefore, his rhetoric seems to be aimed more at maligning his political opponents than opposing the US administration for their alleged interference in Pakistan’s internal affairs. We can draw two conclusions, a) His remarks about wanting to be friends with America seems to indicate that he wants to keep this statement as an exit strategy. In other words, this would mean that he is not ready to go out all against Washington. b) His campaign for an 'independent foreign policy' is specifically aimed at a domestic audience and should not be treated as an anti-American narrative. After all, someone who is accusing Washington of dislodging him from power through bribing his opposition would never want to be friends with the United States. Someone who truly believes that Washington has used his opposition to dislodge him from power would never want to be friends with America or say that he is not anti-American.
Secondly, an analysis of Imran Khan’s rhetoric and narrative on this issue would clearly establish that he intends to use this campaign for a domestic political purpose, a) to destabilise the government and b) to destabilise the society. He doesn’t want his campaign to be the starting point of concerted efforts or move to pursue an independent foreign policy. In fact there is nothing in his campaign to indicate that he is even treating this matter as a foreign policy issue.
Matters pertaining to foreign policies are not decided on the streets. The direction of a country's foreign policy is decided among political and representative institutions established under Pakistan’s constitution. These institutions include parliament, parliamentary committees and Foreign Office. Has Imran Khan or any member of his party made any move to launch an initiative in any of the representative institutions to debate and discuss the country's foreign policy? No, they never did, but they could argue that this is because they are no more in the government. Counter argument is that they were still in power after the alleged 'threatening letter' was made public by Imran Khan. Has he made any foreign policy decision or launched any initiative while in power to strengthen Pakistan’s position vis-à-vis the US?
Clearly, Imran Khan’s rhetoric and narrative are aimed at destabilising the society and government, and it has got nothing to do with the foreign policy of the country. Likely outcome of his call for mass agitation would be destabilisation and deterioration of economic and financial situations, thus further increasing Pakistan’s dependence on foreign capitals, especially Washington. Imran Khan has not done anything since he started the melodrama of alleged 'threatening letter' which would strengthen Pakistan’s position vis-à-vis foreign capitals. In fact, his plans to launch a mass agitation seems to further destabilise Pakistan.
The path to independent foreign policy is through economic and financial stabilisation, growth and economic progress. Political agitation will never lead to an independent foreign policy. Independent foreign policies are a product of stable economic and political conditions in the society. But Imran Khan plans to disrupt civic life in the country while claiming to want an 'independent' foreign policy.
The factors of chronic political instability and economic stagnation have played a critical role in limiting Pakistan's political role at the regional and international stage. Throughout our history, we have been both politically and economically dependent on foreign powers in our quest for achieving our political objectives. Lack of economic strength and financial independence have always been deficient in allowing us to take an autonomous path in our foreign relations. Independent foreign policy could not simply be a function of pious wishes—as Imran Khan pretends to nurture the wish of running an independent foreign policy after a bad experience with Washington. This is a true response of a college student who is not at all familiar with the world of diplomacy and international politics and who after a bad experience with someone who possesses hard power, starts throwing family sliver into the street in anger.
Pakistan needs political stability and for that it needs a functioning political system—and the likes of Imran Khan and their naïve responses are making this system dysfunctional and ungovernable.
Throughout our history, we have been both politically and economically dependent on foreign powers in our quest for achieving our political objectives. Lack of economic strength and financial independence have always been deficient in allowing us to take an autonomous path in our foreign relations.
The slogan of independent foreign policy was first raised by Zulifikar Ali Bhutto in 1967 agitation after a decade of close military and intelligence cooperation between the military government of Ayub Khan and US defense establishment. The context of this slogan was the Cold War: Bhutto wanted to get better deals both from Moscow and Washington, which the Pakistani military establishment failed to secure, during the decades of 1950 and 1960s, when they put all their eggs in American Basket.
Bhutto was also one of the architects of close relations with Beijing, and Chinese then were highly anti-Americans. So in this situation, the slogan of independent foreign policy worked for Pakistan and its ruling elite. Look at Pakistan’s situation now: Relations with Washington are cold. None of our other friends are generous enough to ensure a flow of cash into our coffers to save us from bankruptcy. We need cash more than anything else. And our ruling classes are not likely to rally behind Imran Khan’s naïve slogans. All he can do is attract a naïve and thin layer of emotional urbanite voters behind him.