KHAN FORCED TO RETIRE

Internal political crisis in Pakistan led to the change of the government. The leading power groups in one of Eurasia's largest and most populous nuclear-armed states are once again locked in a bitter power struggle. But there is a clear evidence of an external factor that contributed to development of the crisis.

Imran Khan's credo and American trail

It was the collapse of the ruling coalition led by Prime Minister Imran Khan and backed by a simple majority in the National Assembly that determined the formal aspect of current political tensions in Pakistan in the first place. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party lost the support of its key coalition partner, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement. This led to the proposal to pass a vote of no confidence in the Imran Khan government.

However, the vote was cancelled by Deputy Speaker of Parliament Qasim Khan Suri on the grounds that the move would have violated Article 5 of the Constitution, which declares the fundamental duty of every Pakistani citizen to be loyal to the state. In other words, he saw the attempt to oust the incumbent government as foreign interference.

Imran Khan has commented on the issue more broadly. He openly accused the US of plotting to remove him from power and called on his supporters to take to the streets to support the government and prevent a coup. This was followed by President Arif Alvi’s announcing the dissolution of the National Assembly, the lower house of the Pakistani parliament. Pakistan would have to hold new elections within the next 90 days, while Imran Khan would continue to serve as prime minister until then.

What is the real background to the current political crisis, which Imran Khan explicitly pointed out in his address to the nation?

Before the initial cancellation of the vote of confidence, Pakistan’s Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry admitted that as early as March 7, a day before the opposition's official request for a vote, they received a notice from "representatives of other countries". Those made it clear that "relations with Pakistan would depend on the success of the no-confidence vote. We were told that if it fails, Pakistan will have a difficult period ahead."

Faisal Vawda, chairman of the ruling Tehreek-e-Insaf party, also confirmed that there was a plot against Imran Khan over his refusal to "sell the country". Finally, there were media reports that the Pakistani intelligence agencies had uncovered a plot to assassinate the prime minister. Imran Khan's subsequent statement clearly implied Washington behind the coup attempt in Pakistan.

But why is the US so unhappy with Imran Khan? So much so that Washington decided to push the West-oriented domestic power groups to oust Khan.

First of all, Imran Khan has always been critical of the US policy in Eurasia. Particularly, he was dissatisfied that Washington valued Islamabad not enough as its instrumental ally in the war against terrorism. According to Khan, even Pakistan's joining the international coalition in the war in Afghanistan was a mistake. Because "no US ally has suffered in the anti-terrorist war as much as Pakistan has done", with 80,000 of its nationals lost during the war. As a bright example of Imran Khan’s position, we can recall his personal involvement in numerous protests against American drone attacks on Pakistani villages under the pretext of fighting terrorism. Remarkably, Imran Khan did not allow US troops to be stationed in Pakistan after their hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan last year.

But the key reason for Washington's displeasure with Imran Khan's government was that since 2018, Pakistan has considerably distanced itself from the Western influence and established closer relations with China and Russia. And Imran Khan's visit to Moscow, which almost coincided with the start of Russia's military invasion of Ukraine, has been yet another painful hit to the interests of Washington. Moreover, according to Pakistani media reports, the visit took place in spite of Washington's demands that Khan cancel his trip to Moscow.

Pakistan did not join the anti-Russian sanctions initiated by the West and abstained from voting on a resolution condemning Russia at the UN General Assembly. Moreover, Imran Khan lauded India, Pakistan's traditional rival, for similar actions. He reasoned that Pakistan "has friendly ties with the US, Russia, China and the EU and does not wish to be part of any camp". In response to attempts by the US and the EU to get Pakistan to have an acceptable vote, Imran Khan made the following statement that best describes his political credo: "I have not bowed to anyone so far, nor will I let my people do so.”

The possible loss of the US influence in Pakistan can hit Washington's interests in all the other regions of Eurasia. Experts remind that one of the crucial tasks that Washington is trying to implement today is the disruption of the Pakistan Stream gas pipeline project, which was one of the key topics of discussion during Khan's visit to Moscow. In addition, Washington relies on Islamabad as a tool to weaken Russia's position at the southern edge of its traditional influence in Central Asia. This includes using Pakistan's traditionally strong influence over Afghanistan, which is currently under Taliban rule.

Shahbaz Sharif in the arena

The US relies on political and military circles in Pakistan that have been closely linked with the American and European elites for decades. Hence Washington's reliance on opposition to Imran Khan, or rather the most influential opposition power groups that have previously ruled the country. Such as the Pakistan Muslim League led by members of the Sharif family, one of whom, Shahbaz Sharif, the brother of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, led the opposition in the National Assembly. The other one is the Pakistan Peoples Party led by the well-known Bhutto political dynasty.

By triggering its mechanisms of influence over individual Pakistani politicians, the US appears to have succeeded in splitting the Imran Khan-led coalition. However, this did not immediately lead to Khan's withdrawal from power. He and his supporters had seemingly succeeded in upsetting the scheduled vote of no confidence in the National Assembly. Thanks to the president's announcement of the dissolution of the lower house of parliament and the snap elections, Imran Khan had a serious chance to extend his stay in power.

However, the situation upset the Supreme Court of Pakistan, which received a lawsuit filed by opposition parties claiming the illegitimacy of cancelling the vote of no confidence and dissolving the parliament. As a result, the Supreme Court ruled that the decision to dissolve the National Assembly and the cancellation of the vote of no confidence in Prime Minister Imran Khan was unconstitutional.

Almost immediately, a vote of no confidence in the Khan government was held in the parliament. This was followed by a vote for new prime minister Shahbaz Sharif supported by the majority opposition in the parliament.

This is how the government was changed in Pakistan. Instead of Imran Khan, who came to power four years ago under the slogans of social reforms, fight against corruption, strengthening Pakistan's independence, and ousting the former ruling political elite, now a typical representative of the latter found himself in the prime ministerial post. Being a descendant of the powerful Sharif family, Shahbaz Sharif ascended to power even though he was released on bail last year following a high-profile corruption case associated with his tenure as a chief minister of the largest Punjab province of Pakistan. Same as his famous brother, the now London-based ex-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who was also released on bail after being imprisoned on corruption charges.

Meanwhile, the position of the army command appears to have also played an instrumental part in the change of government. The Pakistani army has traditionally been the most powerful state institution. It has repeatedly overthrown civilian governments to its credit. Besides, it also uses non-violent resources to shape the power of various political groups. It is even believed that it was army circles that supported Imran Khan's rise to power in 2018. But under the current circumstances, Khan has apparently failed to win the support of the army generals. First of all, because of the traditionally strong pro-Western sentiment in the army.

For example, one of Pakistan's most influential military leaders, Chief of the Army Staff General Qamar Javed Bajwa, have made statements against Imran Khan's foreign policy. Having expressed his bewilderment over Imran Khan's government's failure to condemn Russia's actions in Ukraine, he said that Pakistan's strategic ties with the US were important.

After a vote of no confidence in the Khan government, tens, if not hundreds of thousands of his supporters have turned out to protest in Pakistani cities, including the capital Islamabad. He himself favours immediate early parliamentary elections as the only way to determine "who the people want as prime minister".

In any case, the final solution to the political crisis, irrespective of which systemic power groups continue to rule in Pakistan now, seems to be a number-one priority. Especially given the serious economic and social problems in the country, as well as the threats posed by extremist and terrorist organisations. As a powerful, nuclear-armed state playing a significant role in Eurasian and global politics, also as a significant strategic partner to its allies, including Turkey and Azerbaijan, Pakistan cannot enjoy the privilege of complacency.