Beyond the rhetoric of change

'Change' for the better and 'hope' of a brighter future. For many, these ideas have great conceptual depth and act as sustenance at times of difficulty. Yet one needs to realise that history shows these concepts have been reduced to mere words time and again.
The last time the term 'change' was flaunted on the political stage was during the Obama campaign. President Barak Obama during his campaign made himself out to be the epitome of change yet his Government was unable to deliver. The only change President Obama was able to bring was become the first black President of the United States of America which, I submit, was an achievement of changing times rather than the then Senator Obama.
This brings us to present day Pakistan and the hope and change which Imran Khan is purporting to bring. One needs to see whether there is any substance to this notion of change or the only change that would result is the positioning of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) candidates as the 'powers that be', and a change of faces, much like the result of Obama's promised change. This article will look at the contents of Imran Khan's address at the recently held PTI rally and PTI as a party in general. The idea is to make an attempt to look beyond the rhetoric of change and ascertain some ground realities.
The rally held by PTI has achieved many things; at the very least it has shown that there are people around who are willing to listen to ideas for and of change. This does not mean that PTI has or will be able to deliver any real change if elected; it only means that people want change. In my opinion PTI missed a very unique opportunity to show the people of this country that they can provide substantial change if given a chance.
For instance in his address Imran Khan said how will the PML (N) defeat corruption if they cannot even defeat dengue. This sentiment alone shows two things, firstly, it shows a lack of respect for those departments which are fighting dengue and secondly, making such statements only show that one can make tongue-in-cheek comments.
This is not what is required at this point in time and the comment would not have seemed so hollow if it had been followed by some substantial argument as to why PML (N) would not be able to fight corruption, what do they lack in their armoury which makes them inadequate to do so or how the belated response to the dengue virus is a result of bad management and lack of foresight. Tongue-in-cheek remarks are used by all politicians but the good ones follow them up with some hard hitting.
A different route could have been to talk of how PTI would fight corruption and not go into why another party cannot. He could have at least given a basic roadmap (one can appreciate that this was not the forum to give a detailed one) of his plans to fight corruption. Imran Khan also talked about how he would stop the military operations and let the tribal leaders take care of terrorism themselves. By doing this, the state would accept that its writ in those areas is not only challenged but also that the state is 'OK' with having no government variables take care of problems which are the government's responsibility to resolve. Plus when the PPP tried something similar in Swat in February 2009, the results were appalling, the fighting and years of neglect has made the tribal people unwilling to budge from their demands, such as a full scale implementation of Sharia law in all of Pakistan, that is if they want to remain a part of Pakistan at all. How Imran Khan's idea of resolving such obstacles fare is something which cannot be commented on as yet as no details have been provided.
Imran Khan has made it clear that PTI is against the drone attacks and will be protecting the sovereignty of the state. Saying such things is one thing and having a plan to do so is another. The PML (N) has held protests against drone attacks as have other parties and no substantial plan of action against such attacks has come to the fore from any party. So all such parties are on the same level on this score and the PTI has not shown the public why the PTI and not one of the others would do better.
Imran Khan has declared at the rally that he would stand with labourers to get their rights. Does he mean he would make sure that they get the minimum wage of roughly around Rs 7,500 (set under the Labour Policy 2011) or push for policies/make policies which take into account that this amount is by no means enough to live on for an individual let alone raise a family on. A certain amount of clarity would have been good. During the rally Khan sahib touched on many other things such as power generation through coal (but did not even mention the pollution which would result from such generation or any means they can put in place to control it), the declaration of assets by politicians (which by the way is the current position as well but the issue is the implementation of such rules), etc. All parties purport such ideas and to date all such claims have served mostly as rhetoric, seldom as something which is delivered upon. It is submitted that change is not achieved by rhetoric and PTI has given little more than that.
Imran Khan embarks on this journey to change the political, social and economic landscape of the country with the support of his party members who are ever-growing in number. However, one needs to realise that most of the people in the PTI camp are ex-members of the PPP, PML (N) and the PML (Q), the very parties Imran Khan calls corrupt. This can mean one of two things; that even if these parties have a certain element of corruption in them, there are and were good people amongst their membership and management or alternatively all of them are corrupt, even those who joined the PTI.
Just by being ministers in previous governments does not make people corrupt even if those governments performance overall can be termed as such, just as in the same way all those who join the PTI cannot be termed as good just by virtue of them being now members of PTI. Whether these people will deliver for the people depends on how much work they have done for the people in their previous terms. Just because cases are registered against someone or articles written against others, does not make them bad, evil or corrupt. However, if one affords these luxuries to PTI members one should afford the same to members of all the other parties.
If we turn to the two major parties on the political landscape, the leadership of the PPP and PML (N) both purported during the 2008 elections that they are changed parties since their respective return to the countries. They wanted the masses to believe that exile has taught them an appreciation of their responsibilities. The PPP had its chance at governing and by and large as a party has failed, whether due to their alleged corrupt ways and/or their lack of policies.
However, credit should be given where credit is due and recently they have shown some level of leadership in both foreign and domestic matters. PML (N) on the other hand still has a level of credibility left due to it being the only power in one province and having to battle against the Federal Government time and again. PML (N) this time around, showed signs of trying not only to take Punjab forward but carry the extra burden of helping other provinces as well. Returning to PTI and more specifically Imran Khan, one should realise that he is a variable which at the moment does not have a value attached to it. One cannot decide whether Imran Khan is going to bring change or not and PTI's lack of details on policies at different forums should make this a big concern if the people of Pakistan require actual rather than superficial change.
Secretariat, a rare race horse who has gone down in history as one of the greatest athletes of all time was considered exceptional -amongst other ways- because he was bred for speed as well as long distance running which led him to winning the Triple Crown in 1973. The final of the three races was the Belmont Stakes, a race that requires not only speed but stamina along with the ability to not be bogged down by many other variables such as fatigue etc.
Imran Khan on whose vision PTI is formed and functions has proven himself a leader on the cricket field and a hard and relentless worker when working for a cause in the shape of the reality that is the Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital but whether he has the ability to act efficiently after becoming a key player in power and being exposed to variables which he is not exposed to yet is a question that is still unanswered, much like the unanswered question hanging over Secretariat before the Belmont Stakes. Whether all the people who came to the PTI rally are eligible voters and/or whether that popular support can be changed to votes is something that should be occupying the PTI leadership.
Regardless, the rally has proven that PTI in general and Imran Khan in specific are hugely popular and ever-growing in popularity. The PTI does not really need to uselessly bash its opposition by saying things along the line of what Imran Khan said when he accused PML (N) of having cable channels turned off during his rally (all the people I talked to said they watched uninterrupted broadcast of the rally on TV).
PTI needs to now show that it is policy-driven and can really bring substantial and meaningful change, something in which they are greatly lacking. PTI as a party has little to show in favour of the argument that it is the proponent of change it professes to be but one hopes that it is. It is submitted that PTI no longer needs to define itself as an opposition to another party but as a party in itself which should be elected on its own merit and let others worry about PTI's popularity and may be now others will define themselves by letting PTI influence their policies.