Today, Explained - Pakistan’s vote of no Khanfidence

Episode Date: April 12, 2022

Pakistan’s prime minister was ousted. He blames the US. This episode was produced by Haleema Shah, edited by Matt Collette, engineered by Efim Shapiro, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, and hosted by Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Over the weekend, Pakistan's Prime Minister Imran Khan lost his job. The country's parliament held a vote of no confidence despite his fervent attempts to stop it. Has been passed by a majority of the total membership of the National Assembly. The new Prime Minister? Shahbaz Sharif. I minister? Shahbaz Sharif. I, Muhammad Shahbaz Sharif, the brother of a three-time former prime minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif,

and himself a three-time former chief minister of Punjab. Experience and family connections. But the story of how he got into office and how Imran Khan was removed. There is intrigue. There are allegations of conspiracy. And there is a U.S. president who maybe should call once in a while. I'm Noelle King. That story is coming up on Today Explained.

Get groceries delivered across the GTA from Real Canadian Superstore with PC Express. Shop online for super prices and super savings. Try it today and get up to $75 in PC Optimum Points. Visit Superstore.ca to get started. Madiha Afzal is a fellow at the Brookings Institution. She's been watching Pakistan carefully, like a lot of people, because a little over a week ago, then Prime Minister Imran Khan gave a speech before a cheering crowd.

He was holding two microphones and he was speaking in earnest. At one point, he used the words in English, off the record. And then he took a folded piece of paper out of his breast pocket, and he made an allegation. Madiha, what did he say? Khan is claiming that the U.S. is part of a conspiracy to oust him, that the U.S. wanted regime change in Pakistan. The letter he was waving around, he called it a threat letter, but the letter is really a diplomatic cable written by a former ambassador of Pakistan to the U.S. about his meeting with the Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia. And the letter Khan says was written on March 7th, the day before Pakistan's opposition parties filed a motion of no confidence against Khan.

But Khan claims that the letter basically says that the U.S. relationship with Pakistan depends on whether Khan stays in office or not. If Khan stays, the relationship will be bad. But if Khan were to leave office and Khan claims here that the vote of no confidence was referenced, the relationship would be good again. Did anyone actually see the text that was written on this letter? Pakistan's National Security Committee, basically the equivalent of the National Security Council, has been shown a text of that letter, but that's it. Opposition parties, the public, have not seen that letter. And Khan claims it's because, you know,

it's government protocol not to share these letters. But there are big questions about what the letter actually says. This is quite a big deal. You have the then leader of a country saying that the United States wants him out of office and has conspired against him. What does the United States say in response to this allegation? The prime minister of Pakistan accused the U.S. of working with the opposition to remove him from power. He just said that today. What's the White House reaction?

The spokesperson literally said there is absolutely no truth to that allegation. Why was Imran Khan facing this crisis of confidence? What happened? Essentially, the opposition parties say that Khan came into power because he was the favored candidate of Pakistan's military and that they helped him along in the election. And they've been calling for his ouster since 2018. The reason all of this gained traction is because Khan had slowly,

but increasingly so in recent months, lost the favor of Pakistan's military. And when that happens in Pakistan, that essentially means that, you know, a prime minister or a government's time can be really limited. How did he come to be prime minister in the first place? What was the root of his popularity? Well, Imran Khan was an extremely popular cricket star. Internationally renowned, he was the captain of Pakistan's cricket team who took Pakistan to a pretty amazing World Cup victory in 1992. For cricket crazy Pakistan, you know, he was really revered. He then went into philanthropy. You know, he formed a network of cancer hospitals named after his late mother that are considered to provide very good care and free care for the poor, which is unusual, again, in Pakistan.

He entered politics in the late 1990s, kind of refashioning himself from this international playboy that he was to sort of a born-again religious politician. Whether it's a cricket player, businessman or lawyer or anything, it surely has to depend on the individual. And in 2013, you know, his party became the third largest party in parliament. Before that, power had always alternated between two major parties in Pakistan and Khan's party was not significant. Since he first started his party, Pakistan Tarik-e-Insaf, 15 years ago,

he has never been able to draw such large crowds. In 2013, he became a significant force politically and then became a politician and an opposition leader who really became a thorn in the side of Pakistan's major political parties, holding huge opposition rallies, clamoring for the ouster of then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. Ironically, it's Sharif's brother who has now replaced Khan. What were the promises he made when he was running for office? What did he say he would do? Two major promises.

One was to root out corruption. I assure you that you do not need rocket science here in Pakistan. We only have to correct the system. We have to bring an honest team that is accountable to itself. Khan has railed against corruption his entire career. Despite four governments being dismissed on corruption charges, only few people are held accountable. The rest who are known crooks get away with it, come back to fight another election.

And against the two major political parties that have run Pakistan for much of the last few decades. And then to build an Islamic welfare state was his second. The founding fathers of our country wanted Pakistan to be what was called an Islamic welfare state. Islamic welfare state. What does that mean exactly? Essentially what he means is, you know, he often looked to sort of Scandinavian countries to talk about, you know, their concept of a welfare state and then linked it to the initial days of Islamic rule in Saudi Arabia. All the policies which we make in Pakistan are towards that end,

to make it into a humane country where the government takes responsibility of the weakest section of its society. Okay, so I see why he might be very popular. He's a celebrity, he's brought great honor to the country, and then he's saying, we are also going to take care of people who need care. Did he keep his promises? By and large, while there was progress on some of the promises he made, he was unable to deliver on all the expectations he set up. Two of the three and a half years that he was in power were taken up by the pandemic. The pandemic is actually one of the places where Khan and his government actually did well. Pakistan has not had the death rate of neighboring India, for instance,

and of other countries with huge populations. Pakistan is a country of 220 million. And part of the reason is because Khan said, look, we can't engage in a blanket lockdown. The poor will not be able to survive. And so he engaged in what are called smart lockdowns, you know, essentially kept the country going while still shutting down key areas and key sectors, keeping the spread of the pandemic limited while not allowing the poor to starve, essentially. So that's one. He also launched a health insurance scheme, started from one province, has spread to others. And while there are problems with its implementation, it's good in theory. But the big thing that Pakistan needs are not these sort of smaller piecemeal schemes, but, you know, institutional change, you know, figure out how to shore up, you know, an ailing economy, figure out how to control inflation, to control unemployment. Khan's economic team was not able

to do this. So ultimately, it's his handling of the economy that made the common Pakistani really upset. Okay, so some promises kept, some not. A bad economy is bad for any leader. That said, Imran Khan was ousted through a legal parliamentary procedure. He was not ousted in a coup. Pakistan has had coups before, and they are inevitably a sign of real instability in any country. The fact that he was taken out through a parliamentary procedure, is that a positive? Is that a good sign for this democracy? It is. And that is essentially the reason he was taken out through a no-confidence vote,

becoming, by the way, the first prime minister in Pakistan to be ousted from power through a no-confidence vote. That being said, it's still part of a long history of Pakistani prime ministers never lasting five years in office. No Pakistani prime minister has lasted five years in office. And it's a parliamentary system, not one, not one. And only two civilian governments in Pakistan have lasted full five-year terms and handed over power to the next civilian government. A lot of the analysis about what's happening in Pakistan right now focuses not just on Imran Khan and on the man who will replace him, but also on Pakistan's military. And this, I think, raises the question, if we have a democratic country that holds democratic elections,

why does it matter what the military thinks about anything? Right. I mean, I can totally understand why this is confusing. Essentially, this is part of a really long cycle in Pakistan, where prime ministers and civilian governments don't complete their terms in office, precisely because they lose the support of or they fall out with Pakistan's military. In the past, it's been through sort of other means, right? Coups in some instances, the president dissolving parliament in others. In this case, essentially what the military's lack of support for Khan meant was that the military had become ostensibly neutral when it came to Pakistan's politics.

So it withdrew its support from Khan. It gave the space to the opposition. It let the opposition do what they wanted to do to oust Khan. You have a situation in which a week ago, the prime minister of the country whips out a piece of paper and says, a vast international conspiracy is trying to take me down. He did this right before he faced a vote of no confidence. Do ordinary citizens of Pakistan look at this gentleman and say, you are out of your mind. There's no vast international conspiracy. You didn't do good at your job. Pakistan is incredibly polarized right now. So I will say that Khan's supporters look at this and say, oh my God, what he's saying is totally right. This is what is happening. The other side, the opposition parties and their supporters are trying to play this down and arguing repeatedly

that there is no international conspiracy. But Pakistan has a long history of blaming other countries for what happens in Pakistan and, you know, pointing fingers at the U.S., also pointing fingers at India for what's happening in Pakistan, this really lands. Why, though? India makes sense. Longtime rivalry there and also their neighboring countries. Why is the United States involved in this narrative? It really sort of took hold starting in the 1980s. When the U.S. was involved in the region with the Soviet-Afghan jihad, the U.S., Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia were involved in helping fund, arm, train the Mujahideen to fight the Soviets

in what was a covert war for the U.S. In Pakistan, it was very much in sight, and the U.S. left the region. Once the U.S. left the region, Pakistan felt it had been abandoned, and the US left the region. Once the US left the region, Pakistan felt it had been abandoned, and so there's a blame of everything that went wrong in the 90s was because of US abandonment. Then the narrative that took hold after 9-11 was that Pakistan allied with the US in the war on terror, in helping the US in Afghanistan, and Pakistan saw

the blowback of that in the form of terrorist attacks, which killed tens of thousands of Pakistanis in Pakistan post 9-11. Khan really seizes upon this narrative. Thank you. end of every month. And now you can get $250 when you join Ramp. You can go to ramp.com slash explained, ramp.com slash explained, R-A-M-P.com slash explained. Cards issued by Sutton Bank, member FDIC, terms and conditions apply. We'll be right back. Slam Dunk, an authorized gaming partner of the NBA. BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. Must be 19 years of age or older to wager. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have any questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600

to speak to an advisor free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. As we've learned, the U.S. and Pakistan have a history. But back in December, Joe Biden invited Imran Khan, along with a bunch of other world leaders, to a summit for democracy. It was a whole deal. Big names, a town hall for youth, panels on protecting human rights and fighting corruption. China, very explicitly, not invited. Russia, very explicitly, not invited. Pakistan was invited, but Imran Khan didn't go, which Madiha Afzal of Brookings says might have something to do with the fact that Joe Biden has not called Imran Khan in, you know, more than 14 months in

office. You know who had been calling meanwhile? Putin, meanwhile, called Khan three times since August and, you know, invited Khan to visit. Pakistan then felt it could not refuse that trip. The Russian invasion of Ukraine was imminent and Pakistan's trip was coming up. Many advised Pakistan's foreign office to cancel the trip. The foreign office felt it couldn't. Khan ended up being there, sitting next to Putin as Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine. Russia's President Putin met Pakistan's Prime Minister Imran Khan in the Kremlin today. And this was the first face-to-face talk since the start of the military operation in eastern Ukraine. You know, no doubt helping Putin in his optics, but hurting Khan.

Now, Khan remained sort of studiously neutral on the Russian invasion of Ukraine after that and even during his trip. In recent weeks, the prime minister lashed out at EU diplomats asking for public condemnation of Russia. I asked these EU ambassadors if they wrote a similar letter to India. Our country's economy lost $100 billion. I ask, did you appreciate or acknowledge us? Are we your slaves that whatever you order, we must comply?

Pakistan's military, on the other hand, just about a week ago now, essentially called it an invasion of Ukraine, which Khan hasn't done, and says... Sadly, the Russian invasion against Ukraine is very unfortunate as thousands of people have been killed, millions made refugees, and half of Ukraine destroyed. Adopting a strikingly different stance from Khan. We cannot be responsible geopoliticians without now asking, what does China think about all of this? Pakistan has had an increasingly close, as I said, relationship with China. Pakistan is the home of China's flagship project and its Belt and Road Initiative, more than $62 billion in investments as part of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.

And Khan was in Beijing. In the face of a Western boycott of the Olympics, Khan was at the opening ceremony. So was Putin, by the way. It's unclear how much Beijing is prevailing on Pakistan to stand by its side in remaining very neutral on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And Pakistan says that its relationships with the U.S. and with China are not zero-sum. But in some ways, Pakistan has had to choose a little bit between the U.S. and China. Here's what you've told me. We have the former prime minister of Pakistan, Imran Khan, who has now been removed from office.

He got paranoid at the U.S. at the same time that he appeared to be getting closer to Russia, which made the U.S. nervous, which made China happy, which made India nervous, which made Pakistan's military feel all sorts of conflicting things. Is it fair to say that this saga that is unfolding is reminiscent of the Cold War era, in which you have a country being torn between the United States and, in this case, Russia and China? I would say that Pakistan certainly has felt the tug from all sides here.

But where this is manifesting is in terms of the political divisions this is sowing in the country. Rather than any outside influence affecting things in Pakistan, it is actually manifesting itself as a rift between the major players in Pakistan, the military and Khan on foreign policy. The next leader of Pakistan, we've got a guy here who has some family ties, who is a name. What does he need to do differently than Imran Khan? Shabazz Sharif comes into power on April 11th of 2022 with a maximum of a year that he can be in power before the next election. Khan is going to make his life tough. They held massive rallies in Pakistan, all over the urban centres of the country.

Security is high after tens of thousands of people across the country answered Khan's call to protest against his removal from office. So the kind of agitational street politics is going to occur. They're saying they don't accept this government. They're calling it a government of thieves, referring to the corruption allegations faced by the Sharifs. And Shahbaz Sharif is actually out on bail. What is it? What is he out on bail for? Corruption charges. So Khan's... Wow. wow, wow. This country cannot win. No, it cannot. So Shahbaz Sharif has to contend with a very active Khan and a very mobilized opposition. At the same time, he will want to set things up so that the next election runs smoothly for he and his party, because ultimately this is not about coming into power right now.

This is about coming into power in the next election for that next term. So he'll want to set that up. He has a formidable challenge in front of him, and that's on two dimensions. The first and the biggest one is the economy. And at the same time, he has to deal with this foreign conspiracy allegation that Khan is leveling at him. So if Sharif tries to improve relations, let's say with the U.S., you know, he can have this charge leveled at him that, you know, look, he wasn't part of this conspiracy of regime change. So he's going to have to tread pretty carefully. But if he's able to set some things right with the economy, he might actually have a good chance going forward. But after all of this, in Pakistan's constitution, there are no term limits for a prime minister,

which means there is nothing stopping Imran Khan from making a comeback. Today's show was produced by Halima Shah, edited by Matthew Collette, engineered by Afim Shapiro, and fact-checked by Laura Bullard. I'm Noelle King. It's Today Explained. you