PLUMS

Twenty six years after winning Pakistan’s first and only cricket World Cup, twenty four years after building country’s largest Cancer hospital and ten years after founding Namal College, Imran Khan sat down a wooden chair with paper in his hand at his Bani Gala residence. It was a delightful day in Islamabad; PTI had clean sweaped the Federal Capital and Rawalpindi. PTI won from Lyari and nine zero in Karachi after winning a simple majority in KP.

Just like a jeweler puts pearls in a string, one after another to end up with a magnificent necklace, IK hopped from one issue to another ever so smoothly, to describe his vision for Pakistan. There was continuity, as if the words he was uttering didn’t require any thinking. It felt so natural and melodic. The pauses, the word stress, the highs and lows were perfect to milliseconds. He spoke from the heart. For a moment the whole nation was just happy to see such an eloquent person as their Prime Minister.

Eloquence is one thing, content is another. In his speech, Imran touched all the key issues facing Pakistan. And the values that the founding fathers had envisioned for this country.

For decades, Balochistan has suffered from oppression, poverty and terrorism. Pakistan finally got a Prime Minister who started his victory speech by remembering the brave people of this province. In an era, where the Muslim world looks perplexed in its own history and ideology, he reminded us of the Meccan welfare state. Pakistan finally got a PM who spoke openly for half of the population that lives below poverty line, a PM who emphasized on education, health and human development, a PM who emphasized on accountability and social justice. Pakistan finally has a Prime Minister, who has conveyed in his very first speech to the World that Pakistan wants peace. He extended a hand of friendship to India and talked about the real deal (Kashmir). A Prime Minister, who instead of falling in one camp, carefully balanced himself between Iran and Saudi Arabia while proposing a mutually beneficial relation with the US.

Earlier, he had started his speech by mentioning his twenty two year long journey from absolutely nowhere to the corridors of PM house; maybe he had been preparing this speech for twenty two years. How can someone so aptly squeeze the cure for seventy years of blunders in just one speech? Clearly, there is a vision, a purpose and most importantly a direction. Nations rise and nations fall, but too often they just need the right man at the right time with the right vision. Ata Turk, Jinnah, Mandela and the list goes on. Whether, Khan will make it to that illustrious list, we shall know soon. This speech will be remembered for a long time as a speech that gave hope to the nation in a hopeless time. Imran Khan has made it clear that this government will be rule of the common man; it will stand with the weak and hold everyone accountable of their actions.

“I give you the ball Mr. President and now the ball is in your court,” said Vladimir Putin as he handed over the World Cup ball to Donald Trump. It seemed a light hearted gesture at the moment but had a far-reaching meaning. It indicated how Russia was now in a position to dictate the terms to an American President and how symbolically the ball was actually in Trump’s court. Just a few hours later, he had to face a barrage of criticism back home after making a fatal error during his conference. Helsinki was bound to be remembered for a long time.

It is not the first time that a US President held out an olive branch towards his Russian counterpart but Trump’s actions were completely out of the playbook. Trump has repeatedly called the investigations into the 2016 Elections a “witch hunt”. But never before has it happened that an American President chose to believe his rival’s words over those of his own establishment. That too when Putin said that “there had been no involvement from Russian state”; not denying any Russian involvement at all. Consequently, he was labeled with words like “Sold out” and “Traitor” in the media.

This pattern of reaching out to Russia and admiration for its leader is not something on Trump’s part. During his election campaign, he called Putin a “leader of people” at a time when Russia had just been expelled from G-8. Political commentators claim that Trump courting Putin is due to Putin holding some compromising evidence regarding him. This for obvious reasons forces him to reach out of his way to Russia. But I believe Trump thinks that with his eccentric Foreign Policy tactics he can manage to win over Putin and lead towards a new era of co-operation between Russia and US. This would open up new avenues in US international relations and give Trump the adulation that he so desperately craves.

Before taking a glance at Trump’s foreign adventures, a look needs to be taken on his global geopolitical vision. Trump’s foreign policy is an anomaly. During his election campaign he had asked his voters to put their trust in him as he would make America great again and set things straight. From the moment he took oath, it was evident that his tenure would encompass the most unprecedented era in 70 years of American global leadership. He believes that US is being drained by the very system it created and to overcome this problem a new system needs to evolve. He believes that America can envisage its new global role by projecting its unmatched strength overseas and using it to create a new balance of power. Adding to this his own personal thinking- his colossal belief in his negotiating skills, his undying admiration for strong men and his inclination for stirring up conflict – we come to picture his hit and miss diplomacy.

Trump’s track record in international relations is evident of all this. Over the course of the past two years, he has treaded an unfamiliar terrain. Putin is not the only dictator that Trump has been trying to win over. As mentioned earlier, he has a certain liking for strong autocratic leaders; he likes dealing with them and it gives him a sense of power. And he has repeatedly throughout his tenure negotiated with such people. The list includes people like Philippines’s Rodrigo Duterte, Saudi Arabia’s Salman and Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu.

Without a doubt, the most notable mention in that list is North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. Trump had begun his presidency by dealing with Kim with a strong arm. He hiked the military operations in South Korea and the Sea of Japan and labeled Kim as “Little Rocket Man”. Bound to get a response, North Korea threatened to let nukes loose on US. Along with all this happening Trump also tried to bring Kim to the dialogue table, much to the dismay of his some of his allies. He succeeded in 2018 and held a meeting with him in Singapore. In the declaration passed, he gave way too many concessions trying to win persuade Kim. He even moved back from US’s most fundamental demands from North Korea like inspection of nuclear weapons and abandoned military exercises with South Korea, one of its most trusted and loyal allies. And as per now, the agreement had been nothing but a time gaining tactic with no concrete progress.

This was not the only time Trump abandoned or attacked his allies. Trump has been known to threaten, exploit, ridicule and humiliate his allies throughout his tenure. He had declared before coming to the office that the allies were not doing enough for America and he would straighten it out. And moreover, he relishes overpowering and exploiting others. No event encapsulates all this more vividly than his current trip to Europe. In a single NATO summit, he embarrassed most of the Western leaders and declared European Union an “economic foe”. This fractured decades long Trans-Atlantic relations of trust and harmony. He then made a behemoth entry in UK. As a giant inflatable baby Trump balloon flew over London, he publicly criticized the British PM and cited her Brexit policy as weak and useless.

And days later, at Helsinki, he praised the leader that most of the NATO perceives as the biggest threat to world peace. This was not some coincidence or lapse of error on Trump’s behalf. All the behavior of bullying his allies and greeting the Russian dictator with open arms and a smirk is straight out of Trump’s foreign policy playbook. So the question arises what Trump hopes to achieve by moving closer to pariah states like Russia and North Korea and by alienating his allies?

As mentioned earlier, Trump wants to establish a new world order. He perceives China as a major economic threat. European Union though financially secure, is considered weak by Trump. He wants to ally with powerful nations to contain China, and Putin led Russia after the Crimean annexation is quite strong. In the 1970’s US aligned itself with Communist China to counter USSR; Trump sees this a mirror image of that ploy, with just sides switched

Such a radical change to American Foreign policy is bound to cause polarization and have consequences in different parts of the world. America’s NATO and West European allies have stood with it through thick and thin but it is said nothing precedes national interest. Trump believes that threatening them he would make them agree to his terms but they seem to have called his bluff. They are rapidly moving on from US; the most vivid example being the recently signed trade deal with Japan. It is the largest trade deal ever involving EU. Europe is also looking to form cordial economic ties with China who is itself struck with heavy American tariffs. All these are very significant changes.

All this reflects that the major powers have sensed a shift in global and are adapting themselves. Many of traditional American allies have given up hope from Trump and are moving towards its rivals. On the other hand Trump continues to draw towards dictatorships like Russia and North Korea who can never be fully trusted. This leaves US in a very precarious position devoid of friends and in murky waters. Looks like Trump’s hit and miss policies have finally borne fruit in the most extraordinary ways.

It was 3 PM. The weather was sweltering. The NAB Court was swamped by Journalists. No, they were not covering a spicy celebrity gossip or an already over advertised mega project. They had gathered to cover one of the most defining cases in Pakistan’s history; one whose ripples would be felt for a long time.
The verdict shocking to some and jubilating to others; dealt a hefty blow to Nawaz Sharif, three time PM. The judgment passed by Justice Muhammad Bashir in response to petition for Avenfield Apartments 16, 16A, 17, 17A, gave a 10 year prison sentence to Nawaz Sharif and a fine of 8 million pounds in a corruption reference; a 7 year sentence and a fine of 2 million pounds in reference pertaining to forgery to Maryam Nawaz and a one year sentence to Capt. Safdar. Moreover, the Court also ordered Avenfield properties to be confiscated.
First things first, I will look at the judgment closely and try to analyze it. The Court had under the Section 9 of the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) shifted the burden of proof on the accused (in this case the Sharif’s) and consequently the onus of rejecting the allegations and proving their innocence fell on them. This Section is applied in cases where there is a discrepancy in income and assets. And it was under the same Section 9 that they were found guilty for not being able to bring forward sufficient evidence. Application of Section 9 is not a common occurrence and is applied in cases for financial irregularities. Since this section has been applied and is now decreed by the highest Court in the land it will most likely become a judicial precedent for future cases and hence the significance of the judgment increases. With respect to the case, it also needs to be pointed out that the prosecution put forward a very weak case. They had almost two years of preparation since the start of the Panama Case in which they could have unearthed irrefutable and unquestionable pieces of evidence which would have removed any reasons for doubt. But they presented very lightweight arguments with a lack of substance, relying frequently on the fact that the burden of proof is not on them. This makes their side of the case not as watertight as people had expected from such a high profile case. Another very fascinating aspect of the judgment is that it has been found to have quite a few grammatical and spelling mistakes that point to the fact that it had not been well revised and was probably compiled in a haste. In spite of this, the case and its verdict is seminal in the legal history of Pakistan and should be commended for what it stands for and what it has achieved.
Now let’s take a look at PML N’s narrative on this case and ruling. Apart from raising the slogan in public that the decision is pre-determined as per the wishes of the army as a vendetta against them and all the judges worked as puppets, they also hold that according to the verdict Nawaz has been acquitted on corruption charges. This is similar to the Iqama narrative after the Panama case. Also, he and his party have repeatedly held that he has not been given level playing field and an adequate environment to defend himself.
First taking a look at their argument about Nawaz getting acquitted on corruption charges, it is only a politically motivated statement to woo his followers but has little significance in the eyes of law. The petitions brought in the Court were of corruption charges for Nawaz and submitting forged documents for Maryam. Given the special nature of the case, as explained earlier Section 9 had to be applied. In the verdict the Judge states that the prosecution has been unable to completely proof ownership of Avenfield Flats by Nawaz (due to a weak case put forward). But because in this case Sharif’s had to prove their innocence by providing sufficient evidence against the corruption allegations, once they were unable to do so they would be held guilty of corruption and will be sentenced on Section 9. So the ball is in Nawaz’s court that knowing the implications of Section 9 why didn’t he put up a solid defense and instead devoted all his energies to wooing his voters.
As for their claim that they have not been provided a level playing field and fair trial, is it true really? Certainly not. Let me remind you, the case had been running for almost two years from the Supreme Court to the NAB Court. That is more than enough time for one to defend himself. Also, they had at their disposal the most qualified and experienced legal team and the machinery of the Government but the best evidence they could present was the Qatari letter or the Calibri Font typed trust deeds. Imran Khan had also faced a similar trial brought forward by PML N but he had presented his money trail and got acquitted in the space of months. The time and resources they had to defend their case were greater than most of the people have in such situations. Also, how can they question the fairness of a trial conducted by judges he had himself suggested in the first place (when forming the commission). Claiming that they are mere puppets playing part in a conspiracy, ridiculing them in the public, is a very unfortunate practice and should be highly discouraged.
Yes, this isn’t the most crystal clear verdict given in recent times but there can be no doubt that after the time and effort given to the defendants they can have no further resentments from this ruling.
This is a hefty political loss for PML N and from now they will be in damage control mode. Its patriarch/ party head (whichever you believe him to be), Nawaz had already been barred from electoral politics and is now facing a ten year sentence. Moreover, the heir apparent and future leader of the party, Maryam is also facing a sentence of her own and is out of the election process. To make matters worse Shahbaz Sharif and his son Hamza are in a mess of their own with NAB probing mega projects under like Multan Metro and Ashiyana Scheme.
Nawaz Sharif and his party had already faced a steady decline in popularity since the Panama verdict. Many people were upset with the harsh anti-establishment tone and a lot of its leaders had defected. Most damaging was the Khatam-i-Nabuwat (saw) controversy that made the party highly unpopular in its conservative right wing voter base. With all this encapsulating over the past year, the Avenfield verdict is only going to give rise to anti-Nawaz rhetoric.
But does this mean it is game over for Nawaz? I do not believe to be so. Although the party’s current situation is quite fragile and the ruling has done nothing to amend that, there is also a window for opportunity. Now everything depends on Nawaz and how prudently he leads his party. If Nawaz decides to stay in London than N League is done for good. He would be branded as a coward and his remaining support would dwindle. The onus to lead the party would fall on Shahbaz Sharif who, although a good administrator, is considered an uncharismatic figure and has been ineffective thus far as the leader of the party.
But if Nawaz decides to return and faces his sentence than he can become the face of a popular civilian struggle. It needs to be understood that he still has significant following in Punjab and he needs to build on that. He has quite effectively utilized his “Mujhay kyun nikala” and “Vote ko izzat do” slogans, which have become very prevalent among his rural voter base. Now with another verdict against him and the elections looming, his party can cash on the victim card. The slogan can be further emboldened to project that he is being persecuted by the establishment for standing up and for fighting for his people.
A critical factor in politics nowadays is the optics projected through the media. Punjabis are generally very compassionate people; the image of their leader going to jail and facing his trial would not only strengthen the resolve of his supporters but also gain him sympathy votes among neutral voters. Politics in most of Punjab are based on the Baradari and tribal system since the British days. N league, for a long time, has penetrated this Baradari network effectively. They would continue to hold this edge even if Nawaz is in jail because there is still a chance his party might come to power. But given Nawaz decides to stay in England the tribal chiefs would expect his party to lose and consequently switch loyalties.
For Imran Khan and PTI it is a dream scenario; he is seen as the face for the fight against corruption by the public and media. In this struggle, he has received a lot of acclaim and political prestige. Imran Khan’s PTI is a much revamped party from the one in 2013. Over the past year or so it has absorbed a lot of so called ‘Electables’ from PML N and PPP which includes many seasoned politicians from Punjab and Sindh. This has given his party a significant standing in rural Punjab and helped make inroads in the Baradari networks.
Along with that there are a large number of independents (especially those contesting on the Jeep symbol) who are favoring PTI indirectly. PTI is also expected to get the support of a lot of fringe voters who after the Avenfield verdict switched sides. But in politics nothing is a certainty, and Imran has to be really clever with his political maneuverings. He has to make sure he keeps the support of small regional parties, whose role is going to be very important. And where will PPP come in all this? They have a massive following in Sindh and who they support in forming the government could be the decider.
Imran looks to be in the driving seat right now but we have to wait and watch.
Politics is ruthless and unpredictable. Who could have seen Nawaz Sharif, a three time PM in jail? On the face it looks like a huge PTI victory and an unmeasurable loss for PML N. But thinking on a grander scale for a second, it looks to be signaling towards a time where the powerful might also be held accountable. Yes this isn’t a perfect world and this wasn’t the most appropriate path adopted (pity Nawaz Sharif) but it still is the best possible under the circumstances.