What Went Wrong for Imran Khan?

Imran Khan, a former cricket icon and philanthropist, transitioned into politics with a vision to eradicate corruption, foster accountability, and build a prosperous “Naya Pakistan” (New Pakistan). His rise to political prominence culminated in his party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), forming a government in 2018. However, his tenure as Prime Minister, marked by both hope and controversy, has led many to view him as a failed politician. This article explores both the successes and failures of his political career, focusing on his time in office.

Background

Imran Khan’s journey from cricket to politics is one of Pakistan’s most compelling stories. As a celebrated cricketer, he brought home Pakistan’s first-ever Cricket World Cup in 1992, earning him nationwide admiration. Post-retirement, he founded the Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, solidifying his reputation as a philanthropist. In 1996, he entered politics by establishing Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), a party built on the promise of justice, accountability, and change. After years of political struggle, PTI gained momentum, particularly among the youth and urban middle class, eventually winning the 2018 general elections with a vision for “Naya Pakistan.”

Unfulfilled Promises

One of the key reasons critics label Imran Khan as a failed politician is his inability to deliver on the ambitious promises that defined his campaign:

1. Eradicating Corruption: Khan vowed to eliminate corruption within 90 days of coming to power. While his government pursued high-profile cases against opposition leaders, many perceived these efforts as selective accountability rather than systemic reform. Corruption at lower levels of governance remained largely unaddressed.
2. Economic Stability and Jobs: Khan promised to create millions of jobs and build five million affordable homes. However, unemployment rose during his tenure, and the housing project fell short of expectations.
3. Reducing Debt: Despite campaigning against reliance on foreign loans, his government turned to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other lenders, increasing Pakistan’s debt burden.

These unfulfilled promises created disillusionment among his supporters, who had placed immense faith in his vision. Public reactions ranged from peaceful protests and social media campaigns criticizing his leadership to dwindling voter turnout in PTI’s subsequent electoral campaigns. Many supporters voiced frustration over the lack of tangible progress, particularly on economic reforms and anti-corruption measures, further eroding the trust he once commanded.

Economic Challenges

Imran Khan inherited an economy already in distress, but his government’s handling of economic issues further exacerbated the situation:

• • Inflation: Prices of essential commodities, including food and fuel, skyrocketed, disproportionately affecting lower-income groups.
  • Currency Devaluation: The Pakistani Rupee lost significant value against the US Dollar, increasing the cost of imports and public debt servicing.
  • Reliance on Loans: Despite his anti-loan rhetoric, Pakistan’s reliance on external borrowing grew, raising concerns about fiscal sustainability.

Supporters argue that external factors, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and global economic downturn, worsened the situation. For instance, the pandemic disrupted global supply chains, while rising oil prices exacerbated inflation in Pakistan. However, critics contend that Khan’s government failed to implement a coherent economic strategy to mitigate these challenges. Policies such as abrupt changes in tax regulations and reliance on short-term external borrowing were seen as inadequate responses, further straining the economy.

Leadership Style

Imran Khan’s leadership style has been both a strength and a weakness. While his charismatic personality inspired millions, his approach to governance drew significant criticism:

1. Authoritarian Tendencies: Khan was accused of sidelining Parliament and relying heavily on executive powers. Critics argued that his governance style undermined democratic institutions.
2. Handling of Opposition: Opposition leaders faced frequent arrests and investigations, leading to accusations of political victimization.
3. Media Freedom: Journalists and media outlets reported increased censorship and intimidation, raising concerns about freedom of speech.

These actions contributed to political polarization and strained democratic norms in Pakistan.

Tussle with the Military Establishment

One of the most defining aspects of Imran Khan’s tenure was his relationship with Pakistan’s powerful military establishment. Initially, his rise to power was seen as having the tacit support of the military, which played a significant role in shaping Pakistan’s political landscape. However, tensions began to emerge over key policy decisions and appointments, leading to a gradual breakdown of this alliance:

• Support and Fallout: Critics allege that the military’s backing was instrumental in PTI’s electoral success in 2018. However, as Khan’s government struggled with governance and economic challenges, the military reportedly distanced itself from his administration.
• Conflict Over Appointments: Disagreements over high-profile military appointments, including the extension of the army chief’s tenure, further strained relations. These disputes signaled cracks in the civil-military relationship, traditionally a cornerstone of political stability in Pakistan.
• Political Isolation: As tensions escalated, Khan’s reliance on the military’s support waned, leaving him politically isolated. This loss of a powerful ally weakened his government and contributed to his eventual ouster through a no-confidence vote in Parliament.

The tussle with the military not only exposed the fragility of civil-military relations but also highlighted the challenges of governance in a system where the establishment wields considerable influence. In Pakistan, the military has traditionally played a dominant role in shaping political narratives and decisions, often operating as a parallel power center. Khan’s fallout with the military significantly impacted his ability to govern effectively, as the loss of this influential support base weakened his administration and fueled political instability.

The Cipher Controversy and Fall of Government

Another critical event that marked the end of Imran Khan’s tenure was the controversial “cipher” case. Khan alleged that his government was ousted through a foreign conspiracy orchestrated with the help of internal actors. According to him, a diplomatic cable from a foreign country contained threats aimed at undermining his leadership.

• Allegations of a Conspiracy: Khan claimed that the cipher, reportedly sent by a U.S. diplomat, contained a warning against his continuation in office due to his independent foreign policy decisions, particularly regarding Russia and China.
• Impact on Political Discourse: The cipher narrative became a rallying cry for Khan’s supporters, who viewed it as evidence of foreign interference and betrayal by domestic political opponents.
• Outcome: Despite the controversy, opposition parties capitalized on growing dissatisfaction with Khan’s governance and successfully passed a no-confidence motion in April 2022, leading to his removal from office. The controversy further polarized the nation, with his supporters framing him as a victim of an international conspiracy and critics dismissing his claims as baseless rhetoric.

The cipher case remains a contentious issue in Pakistani politics, symbolizing the complex interplay of domestic and international factors in Khan’s political downfall. While Khan framed the cipher as evidence of a foreign conspiracy against his leadership, opposition leaders and analysts have critiqued this narrative. They argue that the lack of substantive evidence and Khan’s selective disclosure of the document undermined the credibility of his claims. Some analysts interpret the cipher controversy as a strategic move by Khan to divert attention from his governance failures and rally public support by portraying himself as a victim of external meddling. This polarized public discourse, intensifying debates about transparency, foreign influence, and the accountability of political leaders in Pakistan.

Foreign Policy

Imran Khan’s foreign policy had notable highs and lows:

• Successes:
  • He gained global attention for his speeches at the United Nations, particularly his advocacy against Islamophobia.
  • His government played a key role in facilitating peace talks between the United States and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
• Missteps:
  • Relations with traditional allies like Saudi Arabia and the United States became strained.
  • Pakistan’s growing economic reliance on China raised concerns about sovereignty and long-term debt.

While he positioned himself as a bold and independent leader on the global stage, his foreign policy achievements were overshadowed by domestic challenges.

Public Perception

Imran Khan’s reliance on populism was both his greatest asset and his undoing. Initially, his rhetoric of change and accountability resonated deeply with the public, especially the youth. However, as his government struggled to deliver results, public opinion shifted. His repeated blame of previous governments for Pakistan’s problems eventually wore thin, and many began to see his leadership as lacking substance.

Legacy and Lessons

While Imran Khan’s tenure is viewed by many as a failure, it also offers important lessons for Pakistan’s political future:

1. Balancing Vision with Pragmatism: Leaders must align their promises with practical, achievable goals.
2. Strengthening Institutions: A leader’s legacy depends on building resilient institutions, not personal charisma.
3. Economic Prioritization: Sound economic management is crucial for political stability and public trust.

To his supporters, Imran Khan remains a reformer battling an entrenched system. To his critics, he is a cautionary tale of how populism without effective governance can lead to disillusionment. Whether he learns from his mistakes and redefines his political legacy remains to be seen, but his tenure serves as a reminder of the complexities of leadership in Pakistan.