Opinion: The West cannot allow Pakistan’s democracy to weaken – The Globe and Mail

Omer Aziz is the author of Brown Boy: A MemoirRadcliffe Fellow at Harvard University and former policy adviser to then-Foreign Secretary Chrystia Freeland.

For weeks Pakistan, a nuclear-armed country of more than 220 million, has been on the brink of chaos. In May, paramilitary rangers arrested Imran Khan, the former cricket champion who became prime minister in 2018 in just the second democratic transfer of power in Pakistan’s history, on corruption charges. (Two days later, the Supreme Court ruled that his arrest was illegal and he is now out on bail.) Khan lost a vote of no confidence a year ago; a few months later, he was the target of an assassination attempt and accused a military officer of planning it.

Since then, protesters have taken to the streets, some even attacking military installations. The army has responded in kind, arresting peaceful protesters. A media blackout reigns. People live in terror.

It’s a volatile situation: Pakistan’s most popular politician confronting its most powerful institution, which wields more than 100 nuclear warheads. It is a battle between dictatorship and democracy in a country where two thirds of the population is under 30 years of age, and where countless young Pakistanis have told me that Mr. Khan represents integrity in a corrupt system. A nation with nuclear weapons threatens to descend into civil war.

So why has the West been mostly quiet?

Through his lawyer, I contacted Mr. Khan by teleconference from his home in Zaman Park, in the city of Lahore, where he has effectively been confined. Mr. Khan appeared on the screen in a black kurta, wiping sweat from his forehead. He seemed tired but stoic.

I asked him why he was in that position and if he could negotiate with the military.

“Well, negotiate on what?” said Mr. Khan. “The route that the military has taken is a disaster. They are rolling back Pakistan’s democracy. There has been a consensus, gradually developed after years of military rule, that whatever happens, even a bad democracy is better than martial law.”

Mr. Khan went on to list dozens of alleged human rights violations committed by the Pakistani army against his party, especially women

But hadn’t Mr. Khan himself been supported by the military? Wasn’t this just a case where he now decided not to play the game expected of him?

Mr. Khan emphasized that the military does not to oppose to the election of his party, but that they did not “make” him prime minister either. He had been voted for by Pakistanis of all persuasions, including millions frustrated by a system in which elites pay little in taxes and they do not even intend to put the country above their particular interests.

“I am convinced (that the army) put me in jail soon,” he told me. “In Pakistan, we now have the law of the jungle. Anything goes. Anyone can be picked up. The people are at a crossroads. We are headed for the abyss.”

Mr. Khan is known as one of the greatest cricketers to have ever lived.. But politics, especially in a country like Pakistan, is a real blood sport. When lines are crossed in such places, one may never see their family again. He says that he will never leave his country, and it seemed to me that Mr. Khan was sincere in his hope for Pakistan’s democracy.

However, the relative silence of the West around the protests effectively supports the failed status quo on the rule of law. Furthermore, the consequences could be catastrophic. An implosion of Pakistani democracy would unleash instability and violence in the region. No matter how tightly held the Pakistani military maintains over its society, history has shown that mass riots against the military regime unleash forces beyond anyone’s control. Then there will be nothing the West can do.

In other countries, such as Brazil and Russia, Canada has taken a tough stance when politicians have been jailed.. The West should demand that Mr. Khan is truly released and that elections, scheduled for this year, go ahead as scheduled. If Khan is not allowed to compete, world leaders need to understand that there is a genuine possibility of mass rebellion and nuclear crisis.

Abandoning Khan means giving up Pakistan’s democracy forever. It means telling Pakistan’s 150 million youth that they will never live in a country with free elections. Our silence tacitly gives the Pakistani military cover to continue violating human rights.

pakistan is vital nation with enormous potential. Another generation of Pakistanis cannot afford living under a military-run kleptocracy. While Khan awaits his fate, Pakistanis await his future, and it remains to be seen whether he will be democratic or totalitarian.