Imran Khan – Ayaz Ahmed Siddiqui

Making sense of the Imran Khan ‘Narrative’ in the Information Age

Published on August 3, 2022August 18, 2022 by SidLeave a comment

Image source: Imran Khan on Twitter @ImranKhanPTI

It has been nearly five months since the ouster of Ex-PM Imran Khan through a vote of no confidence. The legendary cricketer turned politician remains popular as ever amidst a worsening political crisis. His party continues to draw citizens in large numbers in major cities and townships across Pakistan.

Much has been said about the effectiveness of the party’s campaign strategies in carving out an ‘anti-status quo’ vote bank. However, we will not capitalize on changes happening within Pakistani society if we conflate this constituency with extreme populism in advanced democracies. Consequently, we may inflate the importance of familiar avenues of service delivery – democratic or dictatorial – even as there is a consensus that the system requires drastic overhaul.

In this essay, I argue that it makes sense to focus on PTI’s tendencies towards extremism that are a product of Pakistan’s contentious political culture in the Information Age. I will show that clarity requires for all sides to look beyond their position on the political spectrum in an increasingly multi-polar world. I will also show that a personalization of politics due to new media is influencing identity-based citizen mobilization in ways we don’t fully understand. But a cultural perspective is necessary for a closer examination.

This modest effort is based on a study of campaign messages of mainstream opposition parties since 1988 I have pursued as part of a doctoral thesis.

From populism to extremism

In recent times, populism has gained significant attention by news media globally. In our mainstream media images of hyper conservative former President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Borris Johnson in the United States and United Kingdom respectively, and former French Presidential candidate Marine Le Pen, are evoked. Special focus is placed on their extreme views towards Muslims, immigrants, and other marginalized communities in the West.

Recent scholarship on the subject however cautions against attributing neat political positions or programs to populists. It points out the slippery definition of the term and rather see it as a political dynamic that can entwine itself in a range of historical trajectories.

In May 2014, Podemos (Spanish for ‘We Can’), won 8% of the vote in general elections and ranked 4^th in overall result. The democratically elected, progressive, and Left-oriented party achieved this despite being just four months old. The party arrived at the aftermath of Los Indignados (Spanish for ‘the indignant ones’) anti-austerity demonstrations that were held in Spain near elections in 2011 and 2012. It is characterized with employing a clear populist style and frequently uses social media to engage citizens.

Populism does have recurring themes in the literature, such as an ‘idealized sense of historical nation or community, and a virtuous, homogenous, people whose rights are being usurped by a corrupt elite and a set of dangerous ‘others’. But some communication scholars argue that this should be seen as a set of political styles rather than a consistent set of values.

Alvares and Dahlgren (2016) point out in a paper published in the European Journal of Communication, that populism is episodic, appears in moments of crisis, claims to be revolutionary but leans towards reforms, often with limited efficacy. It is hostile to representative politics but lives symbiotically with it. It’s a term usually aimed pejoratively at others.

They argue that populism is an outcome of an inherent tension within liberal democracy. A tension between how a sovereign ‘the people’, and their rights, are imagined within the polity, and constitutionalism, which is traditionally concerned with complicated institutions, safeguards, laws, and practices meant to modulate the direct political impact of ‘the people’ in the name of freedoms (including safeguards to private property).

Populists often fail to appreciate necessity for constitutional limits on direct democracy. Meanwhile, constitutionalists are not always able optimize citizen input into a stable institutional order veering democracy towards marginalization. A world where traditional institutions of governance, including political parties, are clustered at the center, and many see no real alternatives, people feel frustrated and abandoned and populism is an outcome.

The complex debate on populism rages on but at present many around the world are more concerned with populist tendencies towards extremism and violence. This can also be the locus of public debate around political communication in Pakistan given our precarious context that gives space to violent political actors.

To better understand this it is useful to try to untangle Khan’s populism from Pakistan’s political culture.

Is Khan’s politics an outcome of our political culture?

To better understand the ‘PTI juggernaut’ it’s useful to look at our mainstream political messages since 1988 through a lens of contentious politics. This is when political leaders frame their performance, or promise, in front of the public, in a way that is antagonistic to their opponents.

This antagonism usually boils down to some version of – support us if you want to save Pakistan. A zero-sum game that pits the win of some as a loss for others.

Observe the political rhetoric in our English press since 1988 and no mainstream political party can claim to be free of contentious claims. If one reads speeches of Benazir Bhutto, it will be impossible to ignore that among other things, Nawaz Sharif’s corruption, incompetence, lack of vision, popular will and Sindh’s sacrifice for Pakistan, were one of the mainstays of her public persona.

Nawaz Sharif, initially a protégé of Zia, projected an aura of a Punjabi strong man, a considerate modern Muslim, capable of executing glamorous infrastructure and consumer projects explains Iftihikar Dadi, in his study on political posters in Karachi between 1988-1999. Notable is that Sharif was tasked by the powers that be with organizing dharnas, against his main rival PPP, of the kind PTI is known for today.

Meanwhile, the ever present civil-military imbalance in the polity has arguably resulted in the notion of evil civilian politicians etched in our collective psyche. Whereas the modus operandi of political clerics in public is usually to declare their opponents as bad Muslims.

More recently, a fiery Mulana Fazlur Rehman, vanguard of PDM, opined in a presser before the controversial SC verdict, that to save Pakistan it is necessary to take Imran Khan to task.

Of course, no political actor has mastered the art of contentious discourse the way PTI has. The party operates like a tactical PR firm as it readily evokes tropes of corruption, chor, incompetence, revolution, mafias, conspiracy, treachery, and more, against whoever and whatever the party organizers perceive as a hurdle in Chairman Imran Khan’s mission to save Pakistan.

Yes, political messaging of our mainstream parties is not always contentious. The hum drum of everyday parliamentary debates is informative. We see contention more often when political temperatures rise, such as during elections, protest events and arguably, military rule. Suffice to say that Pakistan’s political culture is often polarizing, contradictory, argumentative, emotionally charged and there is a sense of existential insecurity that can be traced back to our very foundation.

So, if Imran Khan’s politics in these uncertain times appear contentious and extreme, it is possible that is an outcome of a populist style, within our mainstream political culture, rather than a coherent political program. It is an expression of a contention within our political discourse that any political actor with national aspirations must adhere to stay relevant. This makes more sense when we assume that like all mainstream parties and military rulers, PTI also lacks substance.

But my perspective is to not equate PTI’s politics with democratic parties and dictatorships. Rather it’s a call for a dispassionate reflection in polarizing times when our position on the political spectrum is more likely to cloud judgement.

It’s a call to reflect upon the lexicon from a Cold War era expressed in rigid terms like: ghadars versus patriots, honestversus corrupt, Musalman versus Kafir, freedom fighter versus terrorists, secular versus religious, leftists versus rightistand indeed many more.

In this regard a creative slogan of Aurat March is telling: Ye binary, Wo binary, No binaries!

Also read: Aurat March a Threat to Mainstream Tribalism in Pakistan

Creating a vocabulary to describe what can be called a wholesome Pakistani world view is a contentious task on its own. Existing literature revolves around the troubled relationship between Pakistan and its Islamic identity. Such cultural work turns even more challenging in the Information Age where new media is shaping the debate in unforeseen ways.

Mobilizing support through political identity and new media

In Making Sense of Pakistan, Farzana Shaikh argues that a major reason for Pakistan’s troubled relationship with Islam is that solutions have been sought mostly in material terms. She writes that a generation of scholars inspired by the neo-Marxist tradition of Cambridge School of History have looked at socio-economic and political interests as causal factors of state dysfunction, rather than as symptoms of underlying uncertainty about identity. Less attention is placed on “the very real force of powerful normative concerns informed by an Indo-Muslim religious discourse” (p. 10).

As Pakistan turns younger the question of Pakistani Identity remains ever present. But we lack the vocabulary to even describe the world beyond a good Muslim right wing and bad Muslim West liberal dichotomy.

Meanwhile, in a relatively short time, Pakistan’s political culture has transformed from being driven by a mass media logic where messages flow from – one to many – to a new media logic where they flow from – many to many. This transformation is powered by information and communication technologies. It has resulted in a fragmentation of our fragile public sphere where much of opinion formation takes place. It has facilitated a new kind of personalized politics that was absent only a decade ago when elites, partisans, pundits and lobbies dominated public discourse.

A study of print advertisements of three major parties, the PPP, PMLN and PTI, in the general elections of 2013, found that the PTI had advertised the least amount (Yousaf, 2016). A plausible explanation, the author concludes, is the party’s “integrated approach, using different communication avenues to reach prospective voters…” (p. 48). Another study of these election campaigns in 2013 showed that while most parties used Twitter, PTI Twitter messages were most diverse, interactive, focused on specific social and political issues, provided real time updates and called out citizens to vote (Ahmed & Skoric, 2015). Such reports open up new ways to see media politics and its evolution in Pakistan and also reveal our limited understanding of how political entrepreneurs are using information and communication technologies globally.

This tech-led disruption is not just a fad, and we are witnessing just how those stuck in the usual ways are slowly getting sidelined in nearly all disciplines. Although the effect on politics is more visible and researched.

PTI’s new media strategy has facilitated Khan’s rise as the most significant political actor in the country. Much of the support is also possible through successful mobilization of the electorate in spectacular rallies. At these rallies hip contemporary and spiritual Pakistani music and flood lights peppered with short speeches of political leader’s centre stage create a festive atmosphere akin to a rock concert. Celebrities, artists, opinion leaders, young and old either attend these rallies or participate through screens.

For many, the experience of these media spectacles is of a diverse, energetic, hopeful, changing, and post-modern Muslim Pakistan. It runs in stark contrast to traditional tropes of sacrifice, injustice, veiled women, ethnicities, incompetent civies and victimhood upon which mobilizations in Pakistan are based.

Conclusion: countering hate & nation building through the medias

However Khan and his influence is characterized it may be simplistic to see this strange newness through a lens of extreme populism alone. We must be mindful of our historical baggage. One may disagree but in the mediated space created by PTI is also a unity in practice (not just words) which goes against policies of exclusionism that fuels extremism.

Imran Khan’ narrative then is not only what he utters but also what happens in response; parliamentary debates, constitutional battles, polarizing new media discourse, research in institutes, arguments in our homes, bazaars, work places, public squares and even our foreign relations.

Is it so bad that this strange populism appeals to a perceived urban middle class, and diaspora, as well as working class citizens of Tehreek-e-Labbaik? How is migration from rural to urban areas influencing society? What practical solutions do Pakistanis of a secular ilk have to bring diverse people together for common objectives?

Literature on hate speech tells us that no matter how satisfied we think citizens are political entrepreneurs can exploit identities for myopic objectives. It also shows that countering hate is simpler for governing small homogenous communities then it is for large diverse populations.

Making sense of Naya Pakistan therefore is not a straightforward task given Pakistan’s complicated issues of identity. The experiment can be traced back to the liberalization policies of early 2000’s. It is arguably an outcome of a weak state’s strategies to build governance capacity through cultural production. Much good has come out of it in terms of giving ordinary citizens a voice while policies, such as the Single National Curriculum, alerts us of excesses.

I’m not a blind supporter of PTI but my politics doesn’t change the fact that many voters don’t see any other option. The last time so many Pakistanis stood on one political platform was in the late 90’s when they did with Nawaz Sharif. This public momentum can be turned into our advantage as we realign our priorities away from rent seeking ones.

It will likely get worse before it gets better. But opportunities are there for those willing to accept radical change. For the moment we all know who is leading the race.

References

Ahmed, S., & Skoric, M. (2015). Twitter and 2013 Pakistan General Election: The Case of David 2.0 Against Goliaths. In I. Boughzala, M. Janssen, & S. Assar (Eds.), Case Studies in e-Government 2.0: Changing Citizen Relationships (pp. 139–161). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08081-9

Alvares C, Dahlgren P. Populism, extremism and media: Mapping an uncertain terrain. European Journal of Communication. 2016;31(1):46-57. doi:10.1177/0267323115614485

Container Politics in Pakistan since 1988: Opposition Tactics in Response to Changing News Media Imperatives. SIDDIQUI, A. A. (Author). 27 Sep 2021. Doctoral Thesis

Dadi, I. (2007). Political Posters in Karachi 1988-1999. South Asia Popular Culture, 5(1), 11–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746680701210352

Yousaf, S. (2016). Political marketing in Pakistan: exaggerated promises, delusive claims, marketable development projects and change advocacy. Journal of Public Affairs, 16(2), 140–155. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa

Shaikh, F. (2009). Making Sense of Pakistan. New York: Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.1080/00358533.2012.661537

Check out my opinion on Pakistan’s collective action problem in The Wire

Published on October 3, 2019April 13, 2021 by SidLeave a comment

Originally published in theWire.in

An editor of an Urdu newspaper once told me how the discourse in Pakistan’s English press is detached from the needs of the ‘common man’.

The gentleman justified the paper’s pro-establishment editorial policy saying, “it is impossible to explain the nuances of Pakistani politics to a fruit hawker.”

Implicit in the remarks (hypocrisy aside) was the assumption that Pakistanis are irrational people which means, they must be told what is right.

Are Pakistanis really so irrational?

I can see why one can be inclined to believe so.

What else explains why they continue to skive off due share in tax? More taxes mean more funds for development.

Online campaigns questioning the ‘patriotism’ of some Pakistanis are common. Often, those who reside in Pakistan are considered more loyal as they have an innate (read irrational) love for the motherland. And those commenting from overseas are considered traitors as they have an irrational prejudice towards it.

However, the assumption that Pakistani citizens are incapable of reason reeks of elitism.

A collective action problem

A key concept of governance is the ‘collective action problem’. Such problems occur because of common goods in a society that everyone benefits from regardless of the effort society members put in to attain those goods.

An example of such goods is water. It is available for everyone residing in Pakistan where there is infrastructure. Rational Pakistanis freeride – they aim to have others pay the costs of providing water from which they then benefit. The cost can be borne by others by paying a water tax, reducing consumption of water even as others maximise it, having no water supply and so on.

The consequence of this problem is that if everyone thinks rationally and nobody works to provide the good, it is not attained. This leads to water scarcity.

Therefore, the outcome of our rational attitude is wholly irrational.

We can also bring this problem to bear on the on-going revenue drive. In theory, all Pakistanis residing in Pakistan will benefit from a higher development budget if everyone pay their due share of tax.

However, rational Pakistanis would aim to freeride – get away with as much undeclared wealth as possible, minimise the effort and cost of regulating their businesses, avoid the perceived risk at present of investing surplus revenue, etc.

The outcome of a rational response to the tax drive is that the government’s revenue targets will not be achieved.

A matter of perception

Dealing with collective action problems is also a matter of perception.

The contribution of any individual Pakistani to the overall benefits of everyone paying taxes is statistically rather low; the amount of benefits each Pakistani reaps are almost wholly unaffected by whether or not they pay their due share.

For instance, an opposition politician paid an agricultural income tax of Rs 3.83 million in 2017, according to the documents she submitted to the Election Commission. While the amount may appear substantial, it is peanuts (0.000383%) compared to the overall budget of roughly Rs 1 trillion allocated for development projects by the then Pakistan Muslim League (N) government for 2017-2018.

Meaning that in absolute terms, her share of tax hardly puts a dent on Pakistan’s development.

Thus, the rational strategy for the well-to-do like her could be to avoid taxes as they may not perceive their due share of tax as a significant contribution towards the exchequer.

What can Pakistani leadership do about it?

Collective action problems are difficult to resolve. Experts pose several solutions.

One is to limit the size of groups. Small groups are more homogenous (culturally for instance) and that increases the likelihood of cooperation.

Members of smaller groups are also likely to perceive the effect of their contribution and are therefore more willing to participate. Think about pitching in to fix your neighbourhood trash problem compared to that of your city.

In Pakistan’s’ case this is essentially a call for greater provincial autonomy. A formula more successfully implemented in India.

Another solution is to introduce a cost of group membership that individuals must pay if they are to benefit from the common goods.

This can be as ‘simple’ as introducing water pricing. Or more elaborate carrot and stick tactics that incentivise tax payers and punish non-payers. A proposal much written about in the media.

To be sure, collective action problems are difficult to quantify. They are based on assumptions that people everywhere act rationally in pursuit of their individual interests.

So, the more one observes society through this perspective, the more likely it is to debate possible solutions to them.

In other words, leaders must first think of citizens as rational individuals capable of independent decision making.

This may seem unfamiliar as many of us are used to a steady diet of derogatory stereotypes about each other’s identity – caste, sect, religion, nationality, etc. And, perhaps even physical and mental abilities.

So, we must observe closely.

Emotional appeals by Prime Minister Imran Khan might persuade some to file their returns. However, aware of rampant corruption and the failure of such drives in the past to bring meaningful change in the broken tax system incentivises many rational Pakistanis to not comply. Good intentions alone are not enough.

Online trolls who challenge the patriotism of Pakistani expats may appear to be speaking from genuine emotion. But their contempt for any criticism of state policies can also belie a calculation that such criticism poses a challenge to the status quo. With limited choice to find opportunities overseas, trolls in Pakistan may not have the luxury yet to offend or destabilise the status quo.

In the introduction my intention was not to compare the quality of the English and colloquial press. It was to emphasise the need to trust people with the truth however unsettling that may be.

Truth and reason go hand in hand.

The ultimate prize of speaking the truth, i.e. treating the population as rational and capable is a society that has learned to function independently, in practice.

A society on board with the policies of its leaders.

Convinced – not coerced or duped – that it is in their interest to do so.

2012 and Gone

Published on January 5, 2012July 2, 2012 by Sid1 Comment

So the New Year is here in all its splendid glory. “The year 2012”. It has has come with much promise and change regarding our fate as the Human species, the World, us Pakistanis and individuals there is something in it for everyone.

The importance of 2012 is emphasized by the amazing events that have happened in the preceding year 2011. Incredible events, revolutionary events.. mind boggling events so much so that I have been left in a state of utter bedazzlement and quandary under the shadows of times yet to come.

So let us begin: In 2011 the Kepler Space Telescope, which is arguably the most significant scientific experiment ever conducted in line with the Hubble Space Telescope, discovered several planets outside our solar system. Now although discovering planets outside our suns gravity is not a new feat, even though the technology to discover planets itself is a relatively new phenomenon with only a decade since the first exoplanet was discovered and since then close to 2000 of them have been identified, what makes the discoveries so vital is that the newly discovered exoplanets are just the right distance from the sun, with just right size for the conditions hospitable for life to exist.

The Implications therefor are staggering. In our quest to discover life outside our solar system 2011 have been the most productive so far. Scientist are quite optimistic here since in a very short span of time we have discovered Earth like planets and by rational will discover life soon. Alien life! Yes it is no longer a myth we might not be the Asrhaf-ul- Maklookat after all, although the religious community will argue it was already given in the

Quran and bla bla bla. I am sure when the first life forms are discovered the zealots will claim it as a further glory to God, I really do not understand what they mean by this since they were the ones declaring the superiority of the Human Species. Any way the study of Earth like planets will further verify or improve on the Theory of Evolution and put an end once and for all on the ‘teleportation’ of Adam and Eve from ‘Heaven’ to Earth.

In our friendly neighborhood Earth things haven’t been quite serene. 2011 was a tumultuous year of Natural and man made environmental disasters. Who can forget the Chilean miners, the Japanese Tsunami and nuclear disaster, Hurricanes in United States, Earth Quakes and oil spills in Christchurch New Zealand, more earthquakes in Spain the disastrous flooding in Pakistan, wild winter all across Europe and much much more.

Politically we all know about the wave of protest and revolutions all over the globe no continent has been spared this time. The epicenter of protest was astonishingly the Middle East and the civilized West (who would have thought ey). The Occupy Wallstreet Campaign which started in New York and spread all across Europe. Greece, Spain and United Kingdom. UK saw a week of the most fucked up violent protest in its history I daresay some of my own friends and family were at risk that week.

Middle East came out as a big shock for everyone but its rulers. The melting pot spilled over in a wave of anguish and anger over the status quo. The status quo is the key word for 2012. Rulers everywhere must be pissing in their pants now in dread of changing times and if they are not they should be.

My theory on the fall of ruling regimes in Egypt, Tunis, Libya and agitation in Bahrain, Saudia Arabia, Yemen and Syria following their lead is that the rulers haven’t done so bad for the people: they have developed good infrastructure, open their markets to free trade and provided free education to the masses. The people I believe in the Middle East however have evolved beyond the basic necessities of life that we in the subcontinent are still striving hard to get. They have moved up the ladder in the Maslow’s Hierarchy lets call it that and want a better more autonomous life and living standards which is why the oldies need to go.

PAKISTAN.. Pakistan hahah one word that can be substituted for all the ironies of this

world. Well, Imran Khan is the man of the moment in 2011 and hopefully will continue till the elections at least. The challenge to the Pakistani status quo which includes all Waderas and pseudo-feudal culture, the Ulema and the false prophets, the Generation X and their obsolete ideals. We have grown up with Imran Khan as our hero in ‘sports’ pun intended and although some might argue that Shoukat Khanam Hospital was a very humanitarian struggle so was the strive of Abdul Sattar Edhi, big hats off to you old man but not everyone is a public administrator or a progressive politician. I will still be skeptical and the reason I will vote for the PTI is for lack of a better option.

..For me personally, this year has been one of soul searching and epiphanies. I got a wonderful job with my own office, a very lavish office if I may add! That was a good learning experience meeting the Governor of State Bank of Pakistan, the President of National Bank, President of HBL and many other whos who of Pakistan. See the thing with my ex-boss is he only speaks to the ‘Man in Charge’ someone who can understand where he is coming from. I was always awed by his influence since the first day I joined when he showed me his pictures with Quaid-e-Azam sahib.

Moving on, 2011 was also the year I finally concluded my two years of research and locked on the programs I need to apply for post-graduate studies. It has taken every ounce of

patience and intellect to do this. It was very frustrating and the last few months were critical as I locked on respective colleges and started preparing my applications. But thankfully most of the thinking part has been done and I will hopefully get out of this place this year which, by the way is my number 1 new year resolution.

Something else happened in 2011 which has affected a profound impact on me and perhaps changed me as a person. One day I will get in to the nitty grittys of the whole affair I am still trying to understand some of the things that happened and that will take time.

In a few words.. I went to Turkey to meet someone, someone who I have been in touch with for the past 8 years but only as online buddies. She was an Eastern European (I do not want to name the exact country at the moment) a beautiful, free spirited , crazy person who shared my ideals. We had a strange time, much too strange. I don’t know how to classify this, I felt so many different things in a span of few days that I was with her.Things I have never felt before. It was incredible, it was exciting, it was tumultuous… This also happened to be my first time outside Pakistan… Wow, what an experience it was. I want to say alot more and a few lines is not giving this justice at all. Maybe I will write a book about this, I have a structure in mind but not the time or the wisdom yet. But soon. Will definitely let you guys know when I do.

In all 2011 was spectacular for me personally, I have never been aware of myself so completely and feel that I am ready for anything. We are, I mean my friends and I in our 20s; This is the time people live up to their dreams, this is the time we are in our prime, this is the time we are following our passions, facing immense challenges and making our mark in this world before slowly and gradually becoming more stable and settling down after 30s.

All I have to say now is, I have no regrets what so ever about the choices I have made in life and neither should you for it is our very choices so far that have shaped our personality and made us who we are. Do not apologize and do not be harsh on yourself if you are in your 20s. If there was ever a time to experiment, this is it :-)… Happy New Year and God bless you all!