What effect will the failure or success of Imran Khan's 'True Freedom March' have on Imran Khan's politics?

BBC NEWS

May 25, 2022

At the political level in Pakistan, there was an earthquake with the no-confidence motion in March, but in the extraordinary heat of May, the political temperature of the country is also rising. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) under the leadership of Imran Khan is starting long march from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa today after holding meetings in different cities.

But the manner in which the Long March was announced is also an important point. Earlier, a long march towards Islamabad was supposed to be announced at the Multan meeting but it did not happen and it was suggested that PTI may be reconsidering the decision.

But when Imran Khan suddenly announced the long march during a press conference in Peshawar, political and social circles wondered how the long march would take place in the hottest weather and then the location of the camp on Srinagar Highway, where the shadow There is also a lack. Why is that?

Until a few days ago, there were voices in government circles calling for early elections. An important faction within the PML-N was in favor of early elections and was also expressing this in its statements. But then came statements from the government and coalition parties that the government would complete its term and would not go to the polls in any way. In this context, Imran Khan's decision for a long march is very significant.

Addressing the youth wing in Peshawar on May 24, the chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) said, "This movement is being started to announce elections and this movement will continue till the end of the present government."

If this long march fails to achieve its desired results, what difference will it make to Imran Khan's popularity and to what extent will it affect his party's performance in the coming elections? And if Imran Khan's demand is met, then what is the harm to the ruling coalition? All of these questions require in-depth analysis.

Failure and success of Long March: What will be the benefit or harm to the government and Imran Khan?

In response to this question, analyst Karshail Warraich expressed his views as follows: 'The failure and success of this long march will make a difference in the politics of the government and Imran Khan. If this long march had been successful as a good show. If so, the morale of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) will increase and if it fails, their morale will weaken.

How much pressure will the government feel for this long march and how many people can come in the long march? In response to this question, Sohail Warraich said, "I think the government will bear the pressure. Although the government is arresting PTI members and obstructing them, there is an effect of Imran Khan's popularity and a large number of people could be part of this long march.

When PTI leader Waleed Iqbal was asked if it would turn into a long march sit-in and how many days it was planned to stay? "Even though the top leadership of the party is being arrested, it will be a big show," he said. Fawad Chaudhry has said how many days will the march be? What is the duration of stay in Islamabad? It will be announced on June 3.

Another important question is if the Long March show succeeds, what harm will it do to the government and what effect will it have on Imran Khan's politics. Also, how will the success or failure of this long march affect the overall politics of PTI and the popularity of Imran Khan?

In response to this question, political analyst Zaigham Khan said, "If this long march succeeds in the event that the government is forced to announce the next elections, then Imran Khan will be able to say who fired me." I drove them out too. '

If the government does not announce the next election immediately and complete its term, the perception will be strong among the voters that those who were expelled will not be brought back. In that case, the PTI will suffer.

He said that all Imran Khan's efforts are for immediate elections. The reason for putting pressure on the army is to help hold early elections. Imran Khan realizes that time is running out, that elections will be held as soon as possible and that he will make the important appointments (Army Chief) himself in November.

In response to this question, political analyst Salman Ghani said that Imran Khan wants immediate elections. The interval in the new elections is not months but months. One and a half months ago, all the parties in the government wanted immediate elections, but now they are saying that elections should be held on time.

"Whether the long march succeeds or fails, and the elections are on time or early, regardless, I think the current situation should end and the political parties should formulate a joint strategy."

Imran Khan first said stay neutral, then appealed for intervention, why is that?

The important question here is that when PTI Chairman Imran Khan was the Prime Minister and in office and no no-confidence motion was filed against him,it was said that the army and the government were on the same page.Then, when the no-confidence motion was tabled, voices began to emerge that the military was neutral in all of this.

Until the no-confidence motion against former Prime Minister Imran Khan was presented and succeeded, the PTI chairman had not so enthusiastically appealed to the army to remain neutral and then intervene, as he did during this long march. Are visible

It also has two aspects. When the long march was announced on May 22, former Prime Minister Imran Khan said, "I also tell the army that you said you are neutral, then stay neutral in this matter."

But at a press conference in Peshawar on May 24, he said, "Allah does not allow us to be neutral in the Qur'an. Let me make it clear to those who call themselves neutral that their oath is to protect the integrity and sovereignty of Pakistan.

Here the question arises as to why the army was first asked to remain neutral and then appealed for intervention.

Sohail Warraich said that perhaps they have the support of the Establishment now and the families of the ex-servicemen are also with them."

When the same question was asked to Yasmeen Rashid, the female leader of PTI, she said that the army should remain neutral and may God remain neutral in this matter. This is a matter for the civilians, they will resolve their own political issues for the stability of democracy.

When political analyst Zaigham Khan was asked whether the reason for the army to remain neutral and then appeal to the army to intervene was simply a policy of pressure? So he said that the government and the ruling coalition parties want the Establishment not to interfere in politics and they remain neutral while Imran Khan now says that the army should not be neutral and support me. This is an attempt to put pressure on the army. "

Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Waleed Iqbal said that the PTI would not need the help of the army or anyone else. However, if institutions can play a positive role, they should.

Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Ali Nawaz Awan briefly commented that "everyone should come forward for the future and sovereignty of Pakistan."

On the other hand, political analyst Salman Ghani said that elections will be held in October this year. Neutral is very concerned about Pakistan. No one else will benefit from holding elections in October, the political forces will benefit.

What is the difference between the 2014 sit-in and the current Long March?

The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) staged the longest sit-in in the country's history in 2014, lasting 126 days. But the PTI failed to achieve any major political goals on the immediate basis of such a long sit-in.

Imran Khan, then chairman of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), had launched the Islamabad Long March from Lahore, saying, "I am going to accept the resignation of Nawaz Sharif from Islamabad." But keep in mind that the sit-in was called at a time when the government was only one year old.

At that time, immediate re-election would not have been possible and the resignation of the Prime Minister would not have been easy. At the time, the PTI apparently had the support of the establishment.

In his speeches, Imran Khan repeatedly spoke of raising the finger of the umpire while in the current situation, there is an impression that the establishment is neutral and Imran Khan has even appealed to the neutral to intervene.

The question is, what is the difference between the 2014 sit-in and the current Long March and its aftermath? Also, why is Imran Khan standing up for the long march by putting everything at stake?

Asked about this, Yasmeen Rashid, a female leader of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), said: The sit-in at that time was against the government internally while one of the elements in this sit-in is against the influence of external forces.

Can sit-ins and long marches end the government?

What is the difference between the 2014 sit-in and the current Long March, if it turns into a sit-in, and what will be the outcome? In this regard, Zaigham Khan said that in the sit-in of 2014, the then government and Mian Nawaz Sharif did not use force. The sit-in was supported by the PTI as its workers and voters mobilized.

"If it had failed or succeeded, it would not have made any difference to the government and the PTI government, while the effects of this March's failure and success will be clear."