Pakistan: Shehbaz Sharif caught between a rock and a hard place

Reportedly, the PML-N-led coalition government appears unwilling to take the blame for any unpopular decisions it may have to take to fix the economy. It wants guaranteed backing of the powerful military establishment to help it see through the remaining period of its tenure till August 2023.

The coalition, despite pressure from within its ranks to clear the air about the possibility of early polls or taking unpopular decisions, is looking to the powers that can make its tenure peaceful. With each passing day, the government’s indecisiveness is taking a toll on the already sinking economy, as well as governance.

The current rulers appear reluctant to take up a ‘perceived offer’ from the establishment to enter into a bailout deal with the IMF, present the federal budget next month and immediately announce the date for polls.

This is a sticking point at the moment, the coalition parties are of the view that taking difficult decisions on the economic front for a short term will cost them dearly if elections are held early.

It appears that all allied parties have agreed on completion of the 15-month term. The problem is that if the IMF agrees, the economy can be revived. But raising petroleum prices does not seem acceptable. PML-N wants the support from ‘all sides’ to steer the country out of the crises, without being blamed for taking unpopular decisions.

Shehbaz Sharif, who has a reputation of being an efficient administrator, could not assert himself. His role seems to have been reduced to an ‘interlocutor’ among his elder brother Nawaz Sharif, the establishment and the coalition partners — PPP and JUI-F in particular.

Sharif looked very enthusiastic during the first couple of weeks after assuming charge, now seems to have lost the steam and is finding it hard to negotiate the difficult position his government finds itself in today.

The dire situation facilitates the ‘architect’ of the ruling coalition, PPP co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari, to once again reach out to the heads of all allied parties to come up with a fresh strategy. On Saturday, he called on Shehbaz Sharif and discussed the challenges in detail.

The meeting also assumed importance as Zardari flew in to Lahore from Islamabad in the backdrop of the denial of relief to Prime Minister Shehbaz from a special court in a money laundering case that declined to confirm his bail.

A brief statement issued after the over 90-minute meeting said, “The meeting discussed the current situation, especially the economy, in the country. The coalition partners expressed their complete confidence in the leadership of the premier and praised the incumbent government for its steps for the welfare of the people.”

The fast-changing political scenario, followed by ousted premier Imran Khan’s pressure through massive rallies and an impending long march on the capital, has forced the main players of the coalition to review the strategy they formed before toppling the PTI government early last month.

The coalition believes it can handle the PTI march if other things are sorted out with the establishment. Interior Minister Sanaullah has expressed his wish to arrest Khan provided he gets the ‘go-ahead’, as he thinks even one day in prison would make the ousted premier forget politics.

PML-N Vice President Maryam Safdar also voiced her father’s views on it, saying “Nawaz Sharif is ready to say goodbye to the government, but not pass on the economic burden to the people of Pakistan, as there is no point in carrying the weight of the blunders of Imran Khan. It’s better to go to the masses to seek a fresh mandate.”

The coalition government is likely to take a decision about whether to stay in government or go for fresh polls after its final ‘backdoor talks’ with the establishment next week. The perception is, “If things don’t work out, the coalition will immediately rush for electoral and accountability reforms and to announce the date for elections.

How does an Indian analyst see Imran Khan ouster?

“Imran Khan’s shortened tenure and the crisis his ousting offers a sharp reminder of the tenuousness of its democratic institutions in face of the mightily powerful political force wielded by the military,” Mahima Duggal tells the Tehran Times.

Following is the text of the interview

Pakistan's Prime Minister Imran Khan has been ousted from power after losing a no-confidence vote in his leadership. What are the main reasons for such a decision?

The main reason behind Prime Minister Imran Khan’s ousting from the leadership of Pakistan is the escalating tensions between Khan and the top-level military leaders. Reports of frictions between the political and military establishments of Pakistan caused intense turmoil and fuelled further panic and tension in the country in the weeks prior to Khan’s no-confidence vote. In fact, recent reports suggest that alongside deploying his allies to filibuster the no-confidence vote and call the opposition traitors for going against the Prime Minister, Khan also sought to dismiss Pakistan’s army chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, a highly influential and powerful figure in Pakistani politics. Although, his efforts to sack Gen. Bajwa were blocked by a pre-emptive petition to the high court, this botched attempt only went to show the extent to which ties between Khan and the military had soured, especially considering the fact that in 2018, when Imran Khan assumed leadership, it was with the help of the army and intelligence establishments of the country. Ultimately, following a highly tense situation – even by the measure of Pakistan’s turbulent political history – wherein he fiercely fought to retain leadership, Khan lost a no-confidence vote in his leadership.

Imran Khan claims that Washington was behind a conspiracy to remove him from power. To what extent this allegation is true?

As of now, there is little evidence to suggest that the effort to remove him from power is anyway a result of a US-led conspiracy, despite strong allegations by Prime Minister Khan alleging this. The assertions first emerged at a rally in Islamabad on March 27, when Khan stated that he held a letter containing a threat by the US directed toward his government. Thereafter, he specifically pointed to Donald Lu, US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, as being a part of this alleged conspiracy. The various (and vague) factors mentioned as reasons for US supposed action range from refusal to allow a US base on Pakistani soil to maintaining neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict – but no confirmation or verification has been provided, with Khan relying on rumors to spur support for his leadership. In other words, his intention was to tap into the simmering anti-American sentiments prevalent in the nation, whose people frequently view the US as unfairly scapegoating Pakistan in its post 9/11 war on terror. Members of his political party, Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), have supported Khan’s stance – with PTI member and Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri even attempting to block the initial motion for a no-confidence vote earlier in April by claiming that the alleged letter showed interference by foreign forces. 

Khan could very well succeed in pushing for an earlier ballot that allows him to capitalize on the public support he has gathered and reattain office. Yet, the US has bluntly and categorically and repeatedly rejected such assertions of a conspiracy to overthrow Khan’s government, saying there was “absolutely no truth” to them. While it is certainly possible that Khan’s foreign policy of pursuing a closer partnership with China and recent actions like his visit to the Kremlin on February 24 – just as the Ukraine invasion began – upset Washington, there is little real evidence to credibly suggest that the US instigated the no-trust vote in Khan’s leadership. By all accounts, Imran Khan’s ousting is more a result of cracks between his administration and the country’s military establishment, and one reason for these gaps could be Khan’s pivot away from the U.S.

Apparently the Pakistani army supports close ties with America rather than Russia. Given the army’s long role in Pakistani politics, do you see any attempt by the army to remove Imran Khan?

Interestingly enough, Pakistani Army Chief, Gen. Bajwa, has given several statements in support of expanded relations with the US – in addition to those with China – by building on their “long and excellent” history of strategic ties and America’s status as Pakistan’s largest export market. In the same vein, a day before the no-confidence vote, Gen. Bajwa also asserted that the Ukraine invasion was a “huge tragedy” that must be “stopped immediately”. This came in stark contrast to statements by Khan which depicted neutrality and his efforts to carefully avoid siding with either camp. Khan’s policy came as part of the tone his government had adopted over the past four years that saw Pakistan move closer toward China and further away from the US For many, Pakistan’s guarded stance was unexpected considering it shared considerably strong trade ties with Ukraine and has only looked towards a new improved era of bilateral ties with Russia since 2014. However, in view of regional security and a focus on Afghanistan, building better relations with Russia as well as China, both key players in Afghanistan, has become not only prudent but also critical for Islamabad. Although this clash of positions may have been a spark prompting the Pakistani military establishment to move to remove Khan from office, it was only a symptom of a steadily heightening rift between the political and military institutions.

What will be the future of government in Pakistan after Imran Khan? 

Shehbaz Sharif, leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and the rainbow coalition of opposition parties, was elected prime minister two days after Imran Khan’s ouster, via a parliamentary vote that was widely boycotted by over 100 lawmakers of PTI. Notably, Sharif was the only contender for the post after PTI, and its candidate Shah Mahmood Qureshi, the former foreign minister of Pakistan, staged a protest and walked away from the vote altogether. Sharif was a three-time chief minister of the Pakistan Punjab province and is renowned for his positive administration style. As chief minister, he worked closely with Beijing to attract and implement developmental projects funded by China. He also enjoys good relations with the Pakistani military, which is likely to continue at least in the immediate future, as he looks to appease the traditionally powerful army chief and top military leaders so as to cement his political position. Accordingly, we will likely see the Pakistani military be a strong driver of the country’s foreign and security policies. Notably, after the walkout by PTI parliamentarians, Sharif is faced with a considerably smaller 174-seat assembly which comprises primarily of his supporters; this number exceeds the simple majority required to pass laws, which will make it considerably easier for Sharif to speedily implement any regulations, unchecked by an opposition that is critical to the democratic process.

At the same time, it is worth noting that through his show of strength in the days before the no-confidence motion, Imran Khan has managed to garner incredible support from the nation’s public, especially youth voters who resonated with Khan’s conspiracy theory narrative and blamed the US for his removal from office. On April 10, footage showed hundreds of thousands of citizens gathered in protest of the no-confidence vote, calling any new administration a forcefully “imposed” government. Although the Pakistan general elections are only due at the end of 2023, Khan could very well succeed in pushing for an earlier ballot that allows him to capitalize on the public support he has gathered and reattain office – although any such endeavour would be highly complicated without the support of the country’s military.

How do you think about the fate of Pakistani prime ministers in Pakistan’s history? 

Pakistan’s politics has long been dominated by a handful of powerful, influential, wealthy, and well-established political dynasties, especially the Sharif and Bhutto factions – a trend that Imran Khan vowed to break when he was elected in 2018. At the time, he had everything in his corner; not only was he a populist leader, enjoying fame as a cricket star that had hailed him a national hero, but had also proven to be a charismatic political leader with promises to bring change to forge a new Pakistan. Most importantly perhaps, he also enjoyed the favor of the support of the all-influential Pakistani military. No prime minister in the history of Pakistan has ever been able to complete their full term of five years in office; but it seemed that with his rapport with the army and public, Khan could be the first to do so, thereby ushering in a new era. Yet, post the pandemic, which left the Pakistani economy in tatters with slow growth and double-digit inflations, Khan was ousted with still another year to go.

Imran Khan’s shortened tenure and the crisis of his ousting offers a sharp reminder of the tenuousness of its democratic institutions in face of the mightily powerful political force wielded by the military. It is an indication, and a confirmation, of how deeply compromised the country’s politics is while powerful military leaders, like the army chief, are ultimately in control. It was the military that eased the way for Imran Khan in 2018, reportedly by tactics of gross coercion and intimidation of PTI’s opposition; now, after Khan moved away from the priorities set forth by the military to pursue closer ties with China and challenged the military leadership over certain top-level appointments, it is the military that holds the reins and has helped choreograph his ouster. The Pakistani military’s role in the fall of the country’s political administration is not unprecedented but has frequently occurred in history whenever a sitting prime minister lost the favor of the military. What is unique with Khan’s case is perhaps the use of constitutional mechanisms to enable a change of guard rather than outright coups. It remains to be seen whether the chaos caused by the military’s interference and Khan’s blatant and malicious violation of constitutional procedures for personal political gains will result in lasting chaos and deep damage to the country’s democracy.

Pakistan: Who is pulling the strings?

PML-N leader Shahbaz Sharif has warned the caretaker prime minister not to make appointments to certain key posts at the behest of President Asif Zardari. He reminded him to respect the people’s mandate as he was legally, morally and politically obliged to respect this mandate and warned of a stern stance if the caretakers did not change their attitude.

Ahsan Iqbal, the PML-N’s deputy secretary general, wonders what is forcing the interim government to take important decisions while the new set-up is going to change within 10 days.

MQM has announced to boycott the re-poll in NA-250. In a press conference held on Friday evening, MQM’s senior leader Raza Haroon said that efforts were made to snatch the party’s mandate in Karachi. The ECP on Friday rejected the MQM petition which sought re-polling in the entire NA-250 constituency of Karachi.

The ECP declared that re-polling would only be held in 43 polling stations of NA-250 out of total 180 polling stations where allegedly polling was not held or delayed these stations on 11th May.

In a surprising development, the lawyer who had filed a petition in the judges’ detention case has withdrawn his complaint against former president retired Gen Pervez Musharraf. The decision by Advocate Chaudhry Mohammad Aslam Ghumman came a day before the hearing of the case on Saturday by the Islamabad Anti-Terrorism Court at former president Pervez Musharraf’s Chak Shahzad farmhouse which has been declared a sub-jail.

Lately, Wazir Ali Khoja was removed from his post of Chairman and Managing Director National Investment Trust (NIT). Before his dismissal the government had removed three heads of public sector organizations: 1) Arif Hameed, MD, Sui Northern Gas Pipelines (SNGPL); Zuhair Siddiqui, MD Sui Southern Gas Company (SSGC) and retired Brigadier Khalid Khokhar, MD Pakistan Mineral Development Corporation (PMDC). 

One completely fails to understand that the power has not been transferred to newly elected members, elected members have not taken oath and even the names of new prime minister and finance minister have not been announced officially but posting and transfers are being made.

Many political parties have been talking about pre-poll and during the poll rigging but none have raised voice against such terminations. If such moves are being made at the federal level one just can’t rule out such violations at the provincial levels.

Almost all the political parties, PML-N being on the top, were accusing PPP-lead coalition of posting the favorites, but dismissal of those even before assuming charge creates even worst examples of nepotism by PML-N.

There were complaints that PML-N that ruled Punjab for five years, kept the favorites in key position during the interim set up to influence polling results.

It is often said that appointment of professionals as heads of public sector enterprises was aimed at improving performance of these entities. However, often these heads are appointed to serve the political agenda of appointing authorities.

The key items on agenda are: 1) paving way for appointment of party activists, 2) allocating advertisements to favorite media houses and above all 3) siphoning of funds by granting contracts to favorite entities.

The public sector enterprises that have been ruined include PIA, Pakistan Steel, and electricity generation and distribution companies. Entities that have been used to generate funds to meet shortfall in revenue collection are OGDC, PPL, PSO and Sui twins.

Interestingly nepotism, corruption and violation of good governance continued during the PPP led government despite the fact that Chaudhry Nisar Ali belonging to PML-N occupies the top slot of Chairman Public Accounts Committee.

Therefore, it may not be wrong to say that political parties criticize each other but have common motives. Surplus staff of PIA and Pakistan Steel just can’t be removed because activists of many political parties are there that follow the rule ‘I scratch you back and you scratch my back’.

Critics say political parties play ‘musical chair game’, let their favorites plunder and the next government allows them to go home without any accountability. Some cynics say that loyalties of turncoats are bought so that they could also help the new bosses in siphoning out funds of the public sector enterprises (PSEs).

It is o record that annually PSEs swallow around half a trillion rupees of tax payers’ money. A cynic commenting on metro bus project of PML-N said, ‘it was only to facilitate Ittefaq Steel (own by Sharif family) to sell its products’. 

It is only half truth because the project serves residents of Lahore only, whereas the condition of public transport throughout Punjab remains pathetic.