By Irfan Khan*
The American media generally and the New York Times specifically has had shown derogatory and armature remarks over the rise of Imran Khan, which reflects the bellyache of the American corporate power. Comparing the editorial pages of the time, Imran Khan assumed Prime Minister(PM) office in August 2018, with editorial pages of the time, when Nawaz Sharif of Pakistan Muslim League-N won election in May 2013, there is a significant hoax.
Both the editorials start off with quite contrasting languages. When Khan won the election, the editorial titled “A New Batsman for Pakistan” says, “Imran Khan, cricket-star-turned-politician, promises a new path for Pakistan. But his ties to the military, and his own at-times erratic behaviour, may stand in the way”. “The news from Pakistan is often terrible…The election was a welcome repudiation of militants who are trying to overthrow the state.”
With Sharif set to becoming the Prime Minister in 2013, the editorial said, “Pakistanis deserve credit for their courage, and the military for allowing the election to go ahead and deploying 73,000 troops to keep order.” In July 2018, however, the editorial said, “Mr. Khan’s victory is not free of taint. The powerful military and intelligence services threw their considerable and suspect weight behind him, and rival parties cried fraud.” The Times praised the election in 2013 as a peaceful transition of power and said that Prime Minister Sharif “wisely made his finance minister his first appointment, selecting Ishaq Dar.” We now know how wise a decision that was for the people of Pakistan.
The US media biased-hype about Imran Khan was not limited only to him but a twitter war initiated by Trump, was another attempt to make dubious Pakistan role and stance, military and geographical efforts for Afghanistan in the war on terror. In various conferences and interviews, after the election 2108 winning and before, Imran Khan told that, military use was/is not the solution in Afghanistan and Pakistan has fought many years for America. Rather, Imran Khan encouraged peaceful talk always.
In a tweet Mr Trump blamed Pakistan, for their failure in Afghanistan. Responding with a vivid tweet, diplomatic arithmetic was seemed equal with America, which occurred rarely in the country history. In 6 December interview with The Washington Post by Lally Weymouth, Mr Khan clearly dictates the stance of Pakistan, concerning the diplomatic relationships with America. This opened the eyes of Trumps and so he wrote a letter to Pakistan, asking to facilitate America in peaceful talk with Taliban. It revealed Imran Khan, is rare and confident leader, ruling out of US Influences.
Not only the US media, but IMF behavior with the Imran Khan led government was primarily different than Nawaz led government. In an address to Economics Journalists at PM house, Imran Khan argued “the IMF’s attitude towards the PTI government was different than the one it had with the last government, there was a political reason behind IMF’s attitude but now it understood the view of the government”.
A great leader always dictates reality, what he did. He is a visionary leader, having vibrant and potential mindset. His efforts for ending economics crisis via financial packages negotiations with China, UAE and Saudi-Arabia, pull out the country from financial crisis.
*Irfan Khan, Researcher at Quaid-i-Azam University Islamabad, Pakistan and Islamabad-based columnist having interests in Asian Politics, Human rights, Muslims and Jewish theology.