You and I tend to agree on most things here. But here we differ.
My basic point is Imran was a power hungry stupid arrogant person not suitable to rule a complex country like Pakistan. Sincerity and financial proprietary without a brain just doesn't cut it. There are tens of millions of well-meaning Pakistanis who are absolutely not corrupt. Probably the Moulvi of the mosque near my home in Karachi would qualify as 'Sadiq and Amin', as would the greats like Sattar Edhi. But were they the 'material' to rule a country like Pakistan?? No.
Also, I am sad to see even otherwise smart people like you and
@PakFactor can't see that Imran made HUGE blunders and the roots of his blunders were in his stupid, arrogant brain.
He is too stupid to lead Pakistan. I am resisting accusing him of corruption or manhandling of opponents and of his other faults because I don't have any proof of those and I am a very careful person in forming my opinion. But I have formed my opinion and I don't see anything in Imran Khan's behavior to make me change that opinion.
He is the 'Nadaan Dost' of Pakistan, at best.
PS. You are likely to see in coming weeks that the recent changes have the blessings of Pakistan's foreign friends, starting from China. There were already hints about that before the May 9 events. One of my favorite Chinese PDF Members said months ago that Imran's agitation was not good for Pakistan. Often people not too deep into the fanboism in Pakistan have the perspective to make objective analysis.
It’s not that I found him the best or even decently capable of running the country, but he was trying and learning on the job. I for one had hoped he would have had the courage to keep on Atif Mian, for instance, but I did call him out when he made disappointing decisions, but gave him the benefit of the doubt consider the alternative choices we have.
I didn’t find him corrupt but just over his head with the task in front of him. A skilled political actor with decades of expertise, domestically and internationally would have known better what faux pas and downright undiplomatic things not to say. It’s not that I didn’t mention it over the years, but had hoped his team would help him along. As they say, you dance with the one who brung ya, so the blame also has to fall on his team from all institutions and backgrounds. He was a Kennedy figure, but even Kennedy had some experience and a decent team with decades of experience, and a foundation laid by Eisenhower.
At this point, the nation needs a thought out narrative along with a political and economic off-ramp, which is why IMHO, IK needs to be brought back in, but as a one term President, akin to Zardari in 2008-2013. Ayesha Siddiqi, an expert on the army, in a recent blog with Wajahat Khan said IK only came to parliament 3 times in his tenure, so I think at best he’s himself would be better off as the president and a fundraiser for the country (especially amongst investors and the diaspora), but this time kept on an agreed upon message, for the sake of the country and for him to ride into the sunset with dignity.
The political and economic changes, under an IK presidency, could also allow the state to craft a more appealing situation with regards to our efforts vis a vi Kashmir. Equally. IN could be instrumental in crafting a better understanding with the Afghans, and speed up the realization of our geopolitical and economic interests in Central Asia, and by that globally.
Let someone else, possibly SMQ, take over as PM and have a team of actual experts craft a diplomatic and economic plan to see the country through the next 5 years, balancing east and west.
The issue is that people’s expectations have been raised for decent governance for over ten years now; especially since PTI won a decent number of seats in 2013. So it’s been building for well over a decade. In fact expectations have been growing for decades now. Before this turn of events, People have been hoping the nation would turn the corner when Zia’s plane crashed and the Cold War ended.
Benazir, for example, was also very well spoke and charismatic, the first female leader of a Muslim majority country, I grew up in New York where the Pakistani community was largely “liberal leaning” and not politically focused. We could have remade our image back then, we still had somewhat of a decent economy and the goodwill in the world, the effects of Zia’s rule had only been felt by the country for 12 years at that point. But it seems that wasn’t to be.
Benazir could have led, in the 90s towards the same reforms being done at the time in India, and we could have been in a better political and economic state. But the back and forth with PMLN turned the politics and economic landscape into a circus, with many in the community here happy to see Musharraf take over.
IK came into power because electables joined his party, by whatever means that happened. So the cycle continued. But why do we have to live with a cycle? Also the kabuki theater that is Punjab politics, doesn’t allow the best to rise from the bottom on purely merit.
The crux of my argument is why is the public being toyed with. Very few years the nation pivots and only in 2013 could the PPP hand over power to the PMLN, the first time a government completed its term. No stability and no true development.
We need a Deng Xioping figure; “I don’t care if the cat is white or tabby, as long as it catches mice”. IK tried to be a cat,
the others don’t seem to even be trying.
gfycat.com
