Pakistan’s fractious politics entered a new phase last week when the president dissolved the National Assembly. The constitution stipulates that general elections must be held within 90 days, but few believe that will happen. Instead, many expect a long period of technocratic rule by a caretaker government, allowing the military establishment time to decisively remove former Prime Minister Imran Khan from politics.
Indeed, in its final month, the National Assembly passed dozens of bills without debate or opposition, including amendments that have empowered both the military and the Inter-Services Intelligence to crush dissent. Meanwhile, Mr. Khan was convicted of corruption and transferred to a high-security prison. With its figurehead barred from elections, prospects for Mr. Khan’s party, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), are dim.
Why We Wrote This
A story focused on
Central to a functioning democracy is the freedom to choose one’s own leaders. But as Pakistan enters a transition period, many see familiar cycles of disenfranchisement.
Many argue that the PTI crackdown robs voters of free and fair elections and has also allowed the army to reassert its control over the country’s fragile democracy. But veteran journalist Zebunnisa Burki finds hope in the awakening of PTI supporters, who tend to be younger.
“When they’re over the toxicity of all of this,” she says, “perhaps there will be some kind of reckoning of what has gone wrong in Pakistan over the years, and perhaps … the younger lot can demand a little more.”
The people of Pakistan celebrated 76 years of independence from the British Raj Monday with fireworks and commemorative ceremonies. But amid the pomp and celebration, there was a palpable sense of unease about the country’s future.
After five years of instability, Pakistan’s fractious politics entered a new phase last week when the president dissolved the National Assembly on the advice of outgoing Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif.
The constitution stipulates that general elections must be held within 90 days of the dissolution, but it is difficult to find anyone who believes that will happen. Instead, it is expected that a long period of technocratic rule by a caretaker government will give the military establishment time to decisively remove former Prime Minister Imran Khan from the political process.
Why We Wrote This
A story focused on
Central to a functioning democracy is the freedom to choose one’s own leaders. But as Pakistan enters a transition period, many see familiar cycles of disenfranchisement.
Indeed, in its final month, the National Assembly passed more than a hundred bills without debate or opposition, including amendments that have empowered both the military and the Inter-Services Intelligence to crush dissent and persecute civilians. Meanwhile, Mr. Khan was convicted of corruption and transferred to a high-security prison.
Journalist and dissident Taha Siddiqui, who is no fan of Mr. Khan or his party, says these developments are evidence that Pakistani democracy “exists on paper but not in practice.”
“Unless and until the military lets go of its hold over the country, it is difficult to see Pakistan being free,” he says. “And given that the military is so entrenched – its footprint is everywhere from business to politics to religion – it seems almost impossible for Pakistan to be free and truly independent.”
In the aftermath of the May 9 riots – when supporters of Mr. Khan laid siege to military installations in a show of anger at his initial arrest this spring – the Pakistan army cracked down on Mr. Khan’s party, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). Thousands of activists were thrown behind bars, and virtually the entire top leadership was forced to defect. With Mr. Khan barred from contesting elections for the next five years, prospects for a PTI comeback are dim.
For Sayed Zulfiqar Bukhari – who served as a minister in the PTI government – Mr. Khan’s absence from the political arena will mean voters are deprived of their freedom to choose.
“How can you classify something as a transparent democracy when you’re dismantling the largest national-level party … and the most popular leader in the country is in prison?” he asks. “For Pakistan to become a free and democratic country, what needs to happen is free and fair elections. The people have to pick their leaders and the government that comes in has to have the mandate of the masses.”
By contrast, members of the outgoing coalition government believe that the greater threat to Pakistani democracy would be a failure to prosecute Mr. Khan. That is the view of Ahsan Iqbal Chaudhary, a former planning minister who served in the coalition government led by Mr. Sharif. “No one is above the law … [and] what happened on May 9 was not democracy but an attack on the state,” he says. “Does America forgive the attack on Capitol Hill?”
Observers point out that the reckoning after the May 9 attacks has allowed the Pakistan army to reassert its control over the country’s fragile democracy and that the civilian government has ceded space to the military as an act of self-preservation.
But for veteran journalist Zebunnisa Burki, the rolling back of democratic freedoms actually began in 2018, when the military establishment went out of its way to bring Mr. Khan to power.
“Nothing is in a vacuum. Everything that is happening right now is linked to what was happening back then,” she says. “I wouldn’t lose hope completely, but it’s very difficult to find any because civilian space has been ceded terribly.”
Akhtar Soomro/Reuters/File
The election of Mr. Khan in the summer of 2018 was seen as the beginning of a kind of hybrid democracy, where major policy decisions were taken by the Pakistan army and defended by the civilian facade of Mr. Khan’s government. Cracks began to appear a few years later when Mr. Khan tried to assert his constitutional authority as prime minister, eventually leading to a complete breakdown in civil-military relations. After Mr. Khan’s government was removed in an army-backed vote of no confidence in April 2022, the incoming coalition government adopted a policy of appeasement toward the generals.
“If civilian space was ceded, say, 70% back then [during Mr. Khan’s tenure], the rest of it has been given away as well,” says Ms. Burki.
In spite of these problems, however, some politicians and civil society remain hopeful of a turnaround in the country’s fortunes.
“One of the best things in many ways has been an awakening of the PTI supporters because they’re younger people,” says Ms. Burki, who’s an outspoken critic of the PTI. “At some point, history does teach you lessons, and when they’re over the toxicity of all of this, perhaps there will be some kind of reckoning of what has gone wrong in Pakistan over the years and perhaps the younger voter, the younger lot, can demand a little more.”
As for Mr. Khan and the future of his party, supporters remain bullish that he will eventually prevail.
“I just feel Imran Khan and PTI will succeed one way or another because he’s just got tremendous support everywhere in the country,” says Mr. Bukhari, the PTI official. “I’ve always categorically said that in Pakistan, we’re overdoing it and it’s not so bad. Other countries have fixed themselves, but what you need is five to seven years … to turn Pakistan around.”
