Daily Times Editorial March 25, 2013

Imran Khan’s rally The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI’s) rally at Minar-e-Pakistan on March 23 was huge, with the vast majority comprising youth and women, the main support of the party. While the rally was well organised and managed, all the speakers who came before Imran Khan droned on and on, full of sound and fury, signifying little or nothing. Whether this annoyed the gods or not, a storm and heavy rain cut short Imran Khan’s speech and did not allow him to announce his party’s manifesto or complete the oath taking of the party’s newly elected office bearers. Nevertheless the turnout and enthusiasm on display amongst the crowd will strengthen Imran Khan and the PTI’s claim to have emerged as the third alternative to the PPP and PML-N. In the time available to him before the deluge, Imran Khan vowed to build a ‘New Pakistan’ and made six promises. He pledged to always remain honest, wage jihad against oppression, keep his assets inside the country, not misuse power if elected, protect the taxpayers’ money, and protect the rights of overseas Pakistanis. He said he would not indulge in false promises like raising the minimum wage to Rs 18,000 (a dig at the PPP and PML-N), and would commit only what he was able to deliver. He went on to assert that if brought to power, he would convert the Governor’s House into a public library and sports ground. He pledged that his party workers and newly elected office bearers would have the right to remove him as chairman of PTI if they found him dishonest or guilty of dishonouring his promises. Imran Khan has been trying to present his PTI as a different kind of party from our traditional mainstream. To the extent that the PTI has recently held intra-party elections despite the risks (and some friction) involved, certainly sets PTI apart from the dynastic political culture of most of our political parties. However, some objective realities have to be faced regardless. The support to the PTI from youth and women reflects more the disillusionment with and reaction against the traditional parties than something substantially different and positive. The cries of ‘change’ that ring through every public event the PTI mounts do not, despite ‘revolutionary’ pretensions, boil down to more than a change of faces rather than the system, which the PTI claims it can manage better, including the elimination of corruption. Second, big rallies do not necessarily an election victory make. Constituency politics, revolving around in the rural areas the influence of large landowners, clan and family ties, and in the urban areas interest groups, determine electoral fortunes. The PTI’s outreach in the rural areas is weak to non-existent, while it is in the urban areas its real constituency of the middle class youth and women reside. When the crunch comes on election day, therefore, it remains to be seen whether the ‘tsunami’ Imran has been boasting of is wishful thinking or real. On a rough guess, the best estimate for the PTI is from a low of 15-20 national seats to an optimistic 30-40. This will not provide Imran with the ability to make a government. If it gives him the possibility of holding the balance of power in what will once again probably be a hung parliament, his role may be diminished by his intransigence so far to cooperating, let alone allying with, any other party. In that sense, while the PTI may have seen benefits in its solo flight to keep itself free of the taint of being sullied by association with ‘corrupt’ parties, it may cost the party after the elections if its role remains marginalised in the new parliament.