Pakistan General Election 2018

With some violence, many revenge stories and immense hope, Pakistan votes on July 25 is an election which is both historic and eventful. It is the second time one civilian government will hand power to another after a full term. The country will decide the nature of democracy it wants to safeguard. The incumbent PML-N party has chosen to take on military as strong contender Imran Khan of PTI plays ball with the “establishment”

What is building up in Pakistan?

The only sure thing about the July 25 election in Pakistan is that it is too close to call.

A public opinion survey conducted by the Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) and the Herald magazine shows that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) enjoys a slim lead at the national level over the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N). However, does not take into account the fact that 13 per cent of the respondents remain undecided. PMLN, in turn, is leading the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) by 5 percentage points.

This is going to be an exciting showdown between PML-N and PTI. The survey shows strong voting intentions among the supporters of both the parties. Approximately 70 per cent of their supporters have reported a ‘strong’ or ‘very strong’ intent to vote. A bigger challenge for both of them is that a much smaller portion of the undecided voters in Punjab (52 per cent) reports a ‘strong’ or ‘very strong’ intent to vote. Being able to get these voters out on the polling day will be the real organisational test for the two parties.

This survey, like most surveys, can be consumed with a pinch of salt. Even otherwise, the build-up to the elections has been mostly exciting and occasionally worrying.

Pakistan's general election on July 25 is poised to be a transformative moment for the nuclear-armed country, as it continues to deal with the fallout of the arrest and conviction of former leader Nawaz Sharif on corruption charges. Tensions are running high amid deadly terrorist attacks, arrests media censorship and accusations of interference by the military.

As campaigning enters the final stretch, charismatic populist and former cricket star Imran Khan of PTI and the deposed leader's brother, Shahbaz Sharif of PML-N, have emerged as the two frontrunners. PPP’s Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, the 29-year-old son of former leader Benazir Bhutto, is also attracting widespread support, seeking to reestablish his family's party as a viable political force.

Bilawal is not expected to win the race, but his party’s performance will be critical in deciding the winner. He may even get to play the king-maker as polls suggest the race is too close to call, and could result in coalition negotiations which leave Bhutto Zardari's smaller party with the balance of power.

It’s going to be a fascinating fight to the finish. At stake are 272 seats in the 342-member national legislature. The party that ends up with the most seats will likely select the next prime minister, who will inherit the challenges of a depreciating currency, water and electricity shortages and persistent violence by anti-government militants.

Why is the military expected to win the election?

The generals have long pulled the strings of Pakistani politics. But rarely, short of taking power themselves, have they meddled so directly. The Economist contrasts this trend with the lack of it in India: “Pakistan’s miserable failure to develop a stable democracy compares ever more starkly with the rude progress of its arch-rival, India”.

Five years ago, one elected government in Pakistan stepped down to make way for another, marking the first peaceful democratic transition in a country that has been under military rule for much of its independent history.

Now Pakistan is attempting to repeat the feat. But the run-up to July 25 elections suggests that its powerful army is not done interfering in politics. While the military generals are loath to retake power themselves — risking U.S. and international sanctions that could jeopardize their economic interests — analysts say they appear determined to keep former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif out of politics.

Sharif, a longtime adversary of the generals who was removed from office last year on corruption charges, was convicted on questionable evidence this month and sits in jail. Leading members of his party have been defecting in recent weeks to join his main rival, PTI. A news channel whose coverage was sympathetic to Sharif was mysteriously forced off the air, and rallies by his supporters have been blocked or subjected to media blackouts.

To many Pakistanis, the pattern of intimidation and manipulation is a hallmark of the army, which has staged three coups since independence in 1947 and ruled indirectly for many of the intervening years.

Whether in the 1970s in the era of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, or in the 1990s during Sharif’s earlier terms, the army’s “jeep wallahs” first endorsed and promoted pliant civilian leaders, then squeezed them when they grew too independent, and in the end got rid of them.

Sharif lent his name to his party, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), which held a majority in the outgoing assembly. He was forced from office last year after judges upheld a petty charge of failure to disclose a company directorship, then banned him from politics for life in April; he was later given ten years in prison on more serious charges of hiding assets abroad. It was probably expected by his rivals and the military that Sharif will take refuge outside Pakistan.

But, by returning to Pakistan to face jail, Sharif has turned himself from a selfish politician into something of a martyr. Nobody quite knows why the army turned against him. Most probably it is because of Sharif making goodwill gestures to India or for his quiet questioning of the deep state’s attachment to hardliners.

“The military has been trying to induce — if not death by a thousand cuts — then some kind of critical injury” for Sharif’s party, said Arif Rafiq, a nonresident fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington. “To use an army term, they are shaping the electoral battlefield using a variety of measures that fall short of direct rigging.”

The army dominates many aspects of life in the $305 billion economy and weighs in on economic policy. Army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa has voiced concern over Pakistan’s "sky high" debt, calling for fiscal discipline and a broadening of the tax base in a country known for rampant avoidance. The military’s main business arm, the Fauji Foundation, has seen asset growth of 78 percent from 2011 to 2015, according to the company’s most recent financial statement, and has an annual turnover in excess of $1.5 billion.

The military wants to run the economy. But the establishment, if they truly care for Pakistan, must see that they are harming the country they claim to defend. In the 70 years since partition, Pakistan has been torn by war, terrorism, coups, instability and religious extremism. The generals must retreat to the barracks.

But the elections are taking on an unmistakably martial tone, with the army announcing that on election day it will deploy more than 371,000 troops at polling places — more than five times as many as in 2013, when security nationwide was far worse. Election authorities have also agreed to place army personnel in charge of transporting ballot papers to and from polling stations, raising concerns about the transparency of the vote.

The generals “want to set up an elected government that plays their tune,” said Aasim Sajjad Akhtar, a political science professor at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad. He described the campaign against Sharif as “yet another example of a state apparatus that simply cannot countenance a diminution of its status as arbiter of power.”

Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, a PMLN leader who took over as prime minister when Sharif was ousted last July, said moves to “engineer” the election began while his party was in government. At one party meeting three months ago, he said almost half those present said they had been approached by people from the military to switch parties.

In May, as many as 21 PMLN politicians from Punjab province formally joined Khan’s PTI, giving the party a major boost ahead of elections. Earlier this month, more than 11 candidates decided to return PMLN tickets and instead contest under the new “jeep” symbol as independent candidates. That’s how brazen the attempt to influence has gotten. They are contesting for the jeep wallahs, and everybody should know it. The symbol has widely come to be seen as an umbrella grouping for those plied away from the PMLN by the military.

The damage is probably already done.

When does the fourth pillar appear helpless?

Hameed Haroon, CEO of the Dawn Media Group, in a recent BBC interview accused the security establishment of interfering in politics, including in favour of former cricketer Imran Khan and his PTI party.

But the HARDtalk interview prompted claims that Haroon and his newspaper were biased in favour of ex-PM and rival to Khan, Nawaz Sharif. Others criticised his lack of evidence against the military. Dawn is among newspapers that have faced censorship and intimidation ahead of the 25 July vote.

The lead-up to the polls has been blighted by violence and political controversy. In the interview, Haroon, who is also president of the All Pakistan Newspapers Society, accused the powerful military of an "unprecedented assault" on the freedom of the press. He told HARDtalk host Stephen Sackur that the "deep state" appeared to be working in favour of its preferred candidates - a charge that has been widely echoed by other political observers ahead of the polls.

Many journalists and online activists say they are under pressure to promote the PTI and mute criticism of the army or coverage of the PMLN. Pakistani journalist Taha Siddiqui fled to France in January with his family after surviving an attempted armed abduction on a busy highway in Islamabad. About 10 men ambushed the award-winning reporter as he travelled during the capital’s morning rush hour, beating him and bundling him into a car. He only escaped by jumping out into oncoming traffic. Taha Siddiqui is the Pakistani bureau chief of Indian television channel WION. He has previously reported for France 24. Siddiqui has, from his exile, written a defiant and emotional ‘open letter’ to the military chief of Pakistan. That letter we are producing at the end of this section.

Human rights organizations including Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders and Human Rights Watch say Siddiqui’s experience is consistent with an increasing pattern of violent intimidation, censorship and political manipulation in South Asia’s second-largest economy ahead of the election.

"Now that Nawaz Sharif has been sidelined, and former President Asif Zardari is about to be, maybe you should take care of the scourge called Imran Khan, too, as he will not spare anyone either?" Express News reporter Ahmed Mansoor asked this daring question from Pakistan's military spokesperson, Major General Asif Ghafoor, at a press conference on July 10. His comment implied what many in Pakistan have been wondering about: the perceived meddling of the security establishment in politics to pave the way for its favourite candidate, Imran Khan of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Party (PTI), to win the upcoming general election. And it seems Mansoor's ‘truth or dare’ approach was not well-received. He was suspended.

But it’s not easy for the military to shackle the media in this new age.

Today, it is quite difficult to steer the public discourse in Pakistan in one direction. Gone are the days when there was only one state-owned television channel that tightly controlled what people were allowed to hear or believe.

Pakistan now has dozens of independent news channels, and thanks to high mobile and internet penetration, the public lives and breathes politics. News shows are the most popular form of entertainment, and a vibrant social media allows the public to follow and comment on minute-to-minute developments. Conversations on militancy, foreign policy and court cases of politicians are staples at work, the dinner table and social gatherings.

As a result of all this, the general public has acquired a certain level of independence of thought and is no longer buying official narratives. And despite the presence of security-establishment-friendly journalists and anchors, who push a certain discourse and observe the red lines, there are still some others who continue to do what journalists must - factual reporting.

In April, Geo TV, the most critical of the lot and the market leader, was taken off the air and its journalists were threatened. It came back only after its management reportedly agreed to all demands of the military. However, its broadcast is still being blocked in several areas of Pakistan.

In May, the circulation of Dawn, Pakistan's oldest and most-respected English-language daily newspaper, was blocked across the country. This came right after it published an interview with former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in which he questioned the lack of progress in the trial of the alleged mastermind of the November 2008 Mumbai attacks, Hafiz Saeed - a sensitive matter for Pakistan's security establishment.

Then, in June, at another press conference, spokesman Ghafoor declared that the military is monitoring "social media and who's doing what" and warned of "social media cells". He also showed a presentation slide with the social media avatars of prominent Pakistani journalists which some perceived as a veiled threat.

The defiant mood in the non-conformist media is captured by Taha Siddiqui in his open letter:

To the chief of the army of Pakistan,

I did not want to write an open letter to you. But after much deliberation, I thought it was important – not just for you to know what is happening in our beloved country, but also for the world to be aware of how dissent is being targeted in Pakistan, forcing journalists like me into exile.

It is also important to write this now. This week Pakistan’s leading news channel, Geo, is being shut down across the country, under orders alleged to have come from your office.

Insiders say the intensification of attacks on the press is part of an organised campaign by the army of Pakistan to ensure that efforts to engineer and manipulate the 2018 elections are not openly discussed in the media. But did you not just recently say that you are the biggest supporter of democracy? If that statement was true, then you must stop your men from pulling the plug on freedom of speech, which is an essential characteristic of democracy.

But before I tell you more about why freedom of speech is a fundamental right, I want to bring you up to date with what has been happening in my life. I currently live in Paris and have been here for the last seven weeks. When I decided to go into exile from my homeland, my wife and I were on the same page about it.

After my failed abduction attempt on 10 January this year by people I suspect to have been under your command, and the arrest warrants issued for me last year for “maligning the army”, we were left with no choice but to escape our own country. But we had to deal with another person in our family – Miranshah, our four-and-a-half-year-old son. We did not tell him what had happened or why we were being forced into exile. We decided to keep his childhood intact and to not burden him with the dark realities of his country of origin. Instead we told him that we were leaving to find better work in France.

He started to cry, and would not stop asking us what was wrong in Islamabad, and saying how he did not want to go to any other school as his friends would not be there. He screamed and shouted at us, and eventually just sobbed, with his head in his mother’s lap.

Once he had calmed down, all he asked was whether he could take his toys. We immediately said yes. But his simple request broke my heart. It was so tough for me, a father, and for my wife, his mother, to see our young child being asked to wrap up his life in Pakistan. Given the urgency of the situation, we had to do it all in a couple of weeks. And in return, all he asked for was his toys.

During those last days in Islamabad, I remember meeting Pakistan’s interior minister, Ahsan Iqbal, who invited me over for a cup of tea to discuss my abduction attempt. It was there that I had the idea of writing this letter, as the interior minister, who is technically your boss, suggested that I write to you to say sorry, and seek a pardon. He told me I should explain how I am a patriot, and want the best for Pakistan.

It was then that I decided that if the highest law enforcement officer in the land, the federal interior minister, could not help me, I was on my own, and I needed to get out to stay alive.

Now I am taking up his suggestion of writing to you. But I want to do this publicly, and to make some different points to those he had in mind. As a journalist I am trained to speak about issues publicly, and since the matter of freedom of speech does not concern just me or you, but our homeland, there needs to be an open dialogue about it.

As I write these words, news has come in of a tribal belt journalist picked up by men from security agencies. And I know journalists back home will not talk openly about this or the hundreds of other enforced disappearances, fearing for their own safety. When I was abducted,your men did it in broad daylight, on one of the the main highways of Islamabad. There was traffic all around, and everyone saw the whole episode, but apart from one female student no one has come forward to talk about it.

Is this the society you want future generations to grow up in, where those in power can do what they like and no one even dares to come forward to help or speak about it?

Back in 1947, my grandparents left everything behind in India to migrate to Pakistan. They wanted the freedom they would enjoy in a country where they were not in a religious minority. Little did they know that this freedom would be short-lived, and their own grandson would be forced out of the country. Is this why our ancestors struggled to create Pakistan?

Pakistan was, is and will always remain my home. My life in Islamabad was comfortable. I had a lovely two-storey residence overlooking a garden, where I made my son plant trees – an early lesson for him in making Pakistan a greener place. I had a good job, and so did my wife.

Now I live in a foreign country where they do not speak my language and I do not have proper means to provide for my family. My wife is unemployed and my child has no friends at school. I am pointing this all out for you so that you and your team of social media trolls understand that being uprooted from one’s homeland is not as charming as you perhaps want to make it sound.

Our country faces a great deal of turmoil. The only way to address this is to first talk about the issues, and not silence that conversation, because dissent is an essential part of progress. If you do not get to hear what is wrong in Pakistan, you will live in a fool’s paradise, thinking all is well. And one day you will wake up to find the country imploding, as it did in 1971.

And suppressing dissent only makes it more credible. In my case, after my exile, not only has my voice become louder, given the safety I now enjoy, but what I say now has more weight. Was that the best strategy for your men to follow? Perhaps not, since I now speak at international summits about attacks on press freedom in Pakistan.

I therefore humbly request you revisit the idea of censoring the truth. This censorship only promotes ignorance. If you wish to see a pluralistic, progressive and democratic Pakistan, as we all do, you and your organisation need to allow dissent, and permit dissenters like me to return and enjoy the freedom our forefathers intended Pakistan to symbolize

Where can things go wrong for Pakistan?

In the context of an election where two of the three main parties have cast doubt on the legitimacy of the vote, analysts expect a tight race between the Sharifs' PML-N and Khan's PTI. If neither party wins a clear majority, the support of Bhutto Zardari's PPP and other parties could be crucial to forming a governing coalition.

If the PML-N wins, India and the US may breathe a sigh of relief, given Khan's perceived closeness with the military and accusations that he is soft on extremism. It must also be noted that Khan has carefully cultivated the image of a conservative candidate. The events of his life speak otherwise.

If the PTI wins, the PML-N could lead its supporters into the streets - especially if Sharif remains behind bars. That would be the last resort. The worst case scenario is the military taking on PML-N members on the streets of Pakistan. The country would hope and pray that, regardless of who wins, innocent blood is not shed after the election. And, no matter who wins, the military will seek to maintain its extremely powerful role in Pakistan.

Pakistan has many problems to solve, and cannot afford political instability

For Pakistan’s friends abroad who don’t understand this internal mess, they wonder how the only nuclear-armed Muslim country, with the longest history of alliance with the United States, which opened channels with Israel, China, and Russia, has no say today in the shifting realities of the region. The wars in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Yemen have created new opportunities and have seen the rise of new powers. Pakistan has major interests across the region, so its absence is surprising.

Closer home, Afghanistan has become a battleground for a regional proxy war. Islamabad used to be an astute player of the strategic great game. Today, America and Pakistan are at odds while together facing a joint defeat in Afghanistan. And Kashmir is back on the international agenda as the United Nations ends its silence on the long-simmering conflict. This paves the way for a possible international intervention, which Pakistan has long demanded, but Islamabad appears unprepared to optimally deal with the new opportunity. This suits India, a country which has proved to be increasingly adept at geopolitical games.

China’s massive multibillion-dollar investment in the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), linking Pakistan to markets in the Gulf and Africa, is centered around the strategic port city of Gwadar. But the vision of a future freeport and a cosmopolitan international city in Pakistan requires bold and visionary leadership that does not exist and seems improbable in Islamabad anytime soon.

Islamabad needs to restore its regional influence, establish an international presence, repair relations with the United States, and prepare itself for the impending diplomatic battle over Kashmir. But first, it has an election to take care of, and all fingers will remain crossed on the day.

Who are the showstoppers?

Nawaz Sharif as represented by his brother

His show is over, but not yet. He has many lives, remember?

The world noticed Sharif for the first time when he was toppled, in 1999; when he embraced his former foe Benazir Bhutto in London, so they could jointly confront the military, in 2006; when he tried to return from exile, in 2007; and when he became a prime minister, in 2013, the only politician in Pakistan to thrice hold office. This year, the world watched again when he was sentenced to 10 years in prison along with his daughter and successor, Maryam, who was imprisoned for seven years.

He blames the military for conspiring against him because he has openly criticised them and seeks better relations with India. The military denies any role. Nawaz's brother, Shehbaz Sharif, has led the PML-N campaign and will be looking to become the next prime minister. Nawaz has been banned from running for office for life by the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

Shahbaz Sharif has long been the crown prince of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML) and once considered the natural successor to the leadership. Despite his brother Nawaz Sharif's conviction and jailing, the family still garners considerable support and is a formidable force in the province of Punjab. Shahbaz is an efficient administrator, but lacks the charisma of his brother and his rival, Imran Khan.

Former Pakistani ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani says the electorate is divided over the Sharifs: "some think the entire family is crooked; some think that they're crooked but deserve due process; then there's some who say: 'we don't care - they're our people'."

Imran Khan, who wants to win the World Cup again

Khan has led a life most people would kill for, and comes with a following most politicians would die for.

Arguably one of the best cricket all-rounders in the history of the game - skilled at both batting and bowling - he dominated the crease throughout the 1980s, culminating in helping a struggling Pakistan national side to the World Cup title in 1992. In a nation obsessed with the sport, the 65-year-old has cleverly engineered his legendary status to transition into a career in politics.

He's the leader of the center-right Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), otherwise known as the Justice Party, and has adopted a hardline, religious persona to appeal to a wide base of voters, according to Mosharaf Zaidi, a newspaper columnist and political analyst.

While PTI has seen some success at the provincial level, analysts said Khan remains a policy lightweight. Journalist and author Zahid Hussain said the former cricketer has "never had a serious political philosophy."

Khan has been a figure - though not a force till now - in Pakistani politics since the late 1990s, but Zaidi said his populism has "never been quite so effective or successful as today," owing in a surge in support from Pakistan's "angry (and) disenchanted" middle classes. "He's one of the drivers of restrictions of the press, he publicly feuds and attacks newspapers and journalists. He doesn't stand for freedom unless that press freedom entails praising Imran Khan," Zaidi added.

Khan is perceived to be the preferred candidate of the country's powerful military, which has directly ruled the country for almost half of its independent existence since 1947, and has maintained an outsized influence over politics throughout that period. The country is divided into two camps, said journalist and former Pakistani ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani, those "who think the military has a right to run the country," and those who don't. A lot of the former have rallied to Khan, he said.

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, not an ‘also ran’

Leadership and ability to grab it is in the blood of the scion of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP).

The son of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto - the first woman to lead a Muslim nation, who was assassinated in 2007 - and former President Asif Ali Zardari - the only elected Pakistani president ever to have completed a full term in office - 29-year-old Bilawal is unlikely to cause an upset in the two-horse race between the PML-N and the PTI.

He comes from PPP stock that is reasonably pragmatic, multilateralist and internationalist, said Zaidi, and the Bhutto name still has a lot of currency, particularly in the family's heartland in southern Sindh province. Success in this month's vote could see him revive the fortunes of the PPP, which suffered during his father's tenure, though the elder Zardari remains a co-leader of the party.

Haqqani, who is close to the Bhutto Zardari family, said Bilawal is "running for the election after this election." "He's said nothing negative about anybody, while putting out the most praised manifesto, most elaborate document on what Pakistan needs in policy terms," he said. "He's reached out to his mother's support base, bringing them back - the PPP had lost support after his father's stint as president. He's still young, he's in no hurry and he's showing that."

While it's unlikely the PPP could win an outright majority, a strong showing by the party could leave Bilawal in the position of kingmaker for future coalition negotiations. In the event of a hung parliament, his father is likely to push for a partnership with either of the opposition parties, though Bilawal may be less keen to be a junior partner. That kind of arrogance comes with youth.

The younger politician "will probably not want to go along with either of the two major parties right now if he wants to stake a claim to principle," Haqqani said. "But his father is still a political creature ... Zardari wouldn't mind forming a coalition with either party, based on what his party can achieve in a pragmatic sense."

How unfair is the election to the Ahmadis?

Voters belonging to the minority Ahmadi community will boycott the July 25 elections in Pakistan to protest the “discriminatory” move to have a separate voter list for them, a community representative said on July 18.

Though the elections are being held under a joint electoral system, there is a separate voter list for the Ahmadis in the country. “The forms issued for the registration of the voters include religion box and oath-declaration. Under the current circumstances, for the Ahmadis to cast votes they first have to distance themselves from Prophet Muhammad and this is something that no Ahmadi can countenance,” said Saleemud Din, a spokesman for the Ahmadi community in Pakistan.

He said all religious groups including Muslims, Hindus, Christians and Sikhs are part of a voter list, whereas in the case of Ahmadis, a separate voter list is being prepared, bearing the titles “Qadiani men/women”.

Election observers believe if the country’s 500,000 Ahmadi were to participate, their vote could swing the results of more than 20 closely contested seats in Punjab, the most populous province where Pakistani elections are won and lost.

Pakistan’s election laws place Ahmadis on a separate voter registration list categorizing them as non-Muslim. Community leaders say this violates their right to religious self-identify as Muslim.

They also say anti-Ahmadi rhetoric has intensified in the lead-up to the general election, as politicians seek to shore up support among religiously conservative voters and head off the challenge posed by two new Islamist parties.

Last year, a row over proposed changes to the election law that would have eased some of the barriers on Ahmadis participating in elections saw the group denounced on the floor of Pakistan’s parliament, while one of the new Islamist parties held street protests.

The Ahmadis consider themselves to be Muslims but their recognition of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who founded the sect in British-ruled India in 1889, as a “subordinate prophet within the fold of Islam” is viewed by many of the Sunni majority as a breach of the Islamic tenet that the Prophet Mohammad was God’s last direct messenger.

By law they cannot call their places of worship mosques or distribute religious literature, recite the Koran or use traditional Islamic greetings, measures they say criminalize their daily lives.

It is now forgotten that the country’s founding father Mohammad Ali Jinnah chose Chaudhry Zafrulah Khan, an Ahmadi, as Pakistan’s first representative to the world (foreign minister).