The juvenile demand for Imran Khan’s release, as seen on Twitter and other social media platforms, reflects a widespread call among Pakistanis, both at home and abroad, for the restoration of democracy and the holding of free and fair parliamentary elections. The February 2024 elections, which were reportedly rigged, have sparked outrage, with many calling for the release of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, who has been incarcerated since August 2023 under allegedly inhumane conditions.
However, this demand raises a crucial question: What does it truly mean for the common people of Pakistan? From a pragmatic perspective, the focus should be on the impact of political actions on the standard of living and the overall well-being of the population. The test of any political act, after all, is whether it improves the lives of the ordinary citizens.
In this context, the controversy surrounding the rigged elections and Imran Khan's imprisonment becomes secondary. If the elections had been fair, the PTI would likely have secured a majority, and Imran Khan might have become Prime Minister again. But what difference would that have made to the average Pakistani? The country would still grapple with massive poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, and inadequate healthcare and education. In fact, the economic situation under Imran Khan's premiership deteriorated, with food and essential commodity prices soaring. His government had to seek substantial loans from the IMF, despite his earlier pledge to die before resorting to such measures.
Imran Khan's political campaign, which emphasized integrity in public life, took a different turn when he granted PTI tickets to a number of dubious candidates, including corrupt sugar barons, who were elected as MPs. He failed to take action against them, knowing that their support was crucial for his government's survival.
The ordinary Pakistani, burdened with the daily struggle to earn a living and provide for their families, has little time for political intricacies. The question of whether there is army rule or civilian rule, or whether Imran Khan is free or not, holds little significance for them. The reality is that, regardless of who is in power, the issues of poverty, unemployment, and lack of essential services persist.
When the PMLN, PPP, or PTI were in power, these problems remained unaddressed. Similarly, under the current de facto army rule, there has been no significant improvement. The Pakistani army leaders, it seems, are more concerned with maintaining their comfortable lifestyles and amassing wealth, rather than addressing the country's socio-economic challenges.
The truth is that freedom and democracy, while important, are not ends in themselves. They are means to an end, and that end is the improvement of people's lives. Mustafa Kemal, the Turkish army general who overthrew the corrupt Sultan and Khalifa in the 1920s, understood this. He swiftly modernized Turkey, abolishing sharia and the burqa, and compelling parents to send their daughters to school. He did so through military means, as he was an army general, and his methods might have been controversial. However, the result was a significant transformation for the country.
In Pakistan, the situation is different. The army leaders are not driven by the same sense of modernization and improvement. Instead, they seem more interested in personal gain and maintaining control. The civilian rulers, such as former Prime Ministers Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto, also engaged in similar practices, looting the country and enriching themselves.
The Panama Papers revealed that Nawaz Sharif and his family owned numerous luxurious flats in London, in addition to other assets in the UK and other foreign countries. As for Imran Khan, his economic policies and strategies are in question, as indicated in the article 'The Truth About Imran Khan'.
From the perspective of the average Pakistani, the distinction between civilian rule and army rule is negligible. The issues of poverty, unemployment, and lack of essential services persist regardless of the political system. The demand for democracy and Imran Khan's release, therefore, seems to be a futile cry, much like Shakespeare's words in Macbeth: 'It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing'.
Markandey Katju, an Indian jurist and former judge of the Supreme Court of India, highlights these points, emphasizing the need for a pragmatic approach to politics that prioritizes the well-being of the common people.
