Despite the initial hoopla for changes with promises of ‘Naya Pakistan’, New Delhi has witnessed no U-turn of the type that it would rather see
Like any successful and unhinged politician, cricketer Imran Khan can seamlessly usurp accolades for things that he often didn’t do himself, eg invent “reverse swing”, as it was his lesser known teammate Sarfaraz Nawaz who did so. Imran, who infamously confessed to using a bottle-top to illegally scruff the ball and thereby generate unplayable “reverse swing”, carried those invaluable lessons from his previous calling onto his new avatar as the Prime Minister. The fast bowler who swung into the political citadel promising a truly democratic, liberal and empowered nation, free from the clutches of the Pakistani ‘Generals’, is now everything, except that. Imran’s U-turns in terms of political positions have the same “reverse swing” angularities, and his Government is accused of deriving its legitimacy from the same ‘Generals’ whom he once decried. Maryam Sharif recently called him ‘Tabedar’ Khan (‘Compliant’ Khan, referencing the Generals). Clearly, the man whose evolving marital preferences suggest a certain political trajectory and utility — from a British Jewish-billionaire’s daughter, to a British-Pakistani journalist of Pashtun lineage, to finally a veil-wearing, Punjabi-speaking ‘mystic’ or pirni! Contrary to writer Salman Rushdie’s banter of “Im the Dim” (as purportedly called during Imran’s Oxford days), Imran has read the political pitch rather well and exploited the conditions with multiple and successful “reverse swing”.
The proud ‘Niazi’ Pathan from Mianwali (though he chooses not to use the family name, perhaps owing to a certain clansman, Lt Gen AK Niazi, who surrendered to Indian forces in Dhaka!) has been an enigma, defying odds and stances. The contradictions were obvious from the start, when the Westernised playboy-turned-politician posited the reformatory idea of ‘Naya Pakistan’ (New Pakistan), along with more pietistic allusions of ‘Riyasat-e-Medina’ (Government of Medina). Like his bottle-top honesty, Imran did say, even if incredously so, “A leader who does not take U-turns (in the interest of the nation) is not a real leader” — that be the case, Pakistan does have a thoroughbred leader, even at the cost of shockingly empty coffers, economy in ICU, societal unrest, international opprobrium and a clear case of “hit-wicket” in neighbouring Afghanistan, that could enflame and engulf Pakistan sooner than later. With “iron brother” Xi Jinping and hardline Islamist Recep Erdogan in tow to solely defend the Pakistani positions after the Arab Sheikdoms have started shunning Pakistan — Imran is saddled with the reciprocal awkwardness of defending illiberalities, religiosities and interferences of the Turkish strongman, or the plain indefensibility of the Chinese authoritarian.
Imran, who took upon himself to write to Mark Zuckerberg about ‘Islamophobia’, forwarded brave missives to all Muslim countries, railed against Israelis, name-called the French President, alluded to ‘world jewry’ for economic ills, to fruitlessly invoked Kashmir at all possible forums — is rather meekly diffident on the beleaguered Uighurs in China. Initially, he pretended naivete or ignorance when he called it a “non-issue” but in the face of undeniable proof of the scale and intensity of the targeted oppression, Imran’s “reverse swing” couldn’t be glaring. The one-time, supposed ‘Lion of Lahore’ (who now proximates a much smaller feline) barely meowed: “Because of our extreme proximity and relationship with China, we actually accept the Chinese version”. Given the economical-diplomatic-military lifeline in the hands of the Chinese with China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), it is hardly surprising that the Chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Planning and Development had called the CPEC “another East India Company” in the making! King Khan owes his survival to the Chinese largesse, and if that means bowling in a few more “reverse swing” deliveries, why not?
From calling global terrorist Osama bin Laden a shaheed (martyr), signing deals with extremist organisations like Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) to muddying the war on terror with its own preferences and agenda in Afghanistan, Imran’s constant living under the shadows of getting blacklisted for support to terrorism is hardly the makings of any ‘Naya Pakistan’. Imran’s recent comment, “If women wear very few clothes, it will have an impact on men unless they are robots”, was counter-intuitively misogynistic and depraved; it did not behoove a graduate from Oxford if he felt that women were responsible for sexual violence in the third decade of the 21st century. ‘Taliban Khan’ is perhaps the most befitting moniker.
Like in cricket, “reverse swing” is a very effective capability to have but to win the game, a lot more is required — similarly so, in governance and politics. Talking of MA Jinnah and Muhammad Iqbal to publicly posit one narrative, while actually moving the ball towards the revisionism of General Zia-ul-Haq or even Recep Erdogan is patently “reverse swing”. Despite the initial hoopla for changes in Pakistani outlook with promises of ‘Naya Pakistan’, Delhi has witnessed no U-turn of the type that it would rather see, nor have the other neighbours like Iran or Afghanistan, or indeed the US. For Pakistan itself, the situation has got grimmer from all socio-economic indicators internally, and isolated from an international perspective. But the ‘Kaptan’ who was busy stitching his own cause and future in the speech after lifting the World Cup in 1992, much to the chagrin of the forgotten teammates who helped him rise to the winning podium — the dangerous legacy of “reverse swing” spares none.
(The writer, a military veteran, is a former Lt Governor of Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Puducherry. The views expressed are personal.)
