Pakistan in the next Six Months

What this session covered

This session took the form of a one-to-one interview: the host in conversation with a single guest, introduced as a Pakistan-born human-rights activist and commentator living in exile, with a long record of advocacy at United Nations forums on Muhajir and minority rights. The question put to him was how Pakistan would fare over the following six months. The speaker argued that political stability was not attainable because the army effectively directs Pakistani politics, with parliamentarians changing parties at the direction of the intelligence services. He described Imran Khan's movement as having lost its popular base, noted that a court had that day issued non-bailable arrest warrants against him, and predicted he would be disqualified before elections expected around October, when the sitting parliament's five-year term ends. In the speaker's assessment, the army was steering defecting parliamentarians towards the Pakistan People's Party, which he expected to be favoured in the polls, while criticising that party's record of governance in Sindh at length. The host pressed him on whether Imran Khan, whose party still controlled two provinces, might instead reach an accommodation with the army; the speaker rejected this.

On the economy, the speaker stated that Pakistan faced repayments of about $13 billion over the coming six months, said credit-rating and financial-press assessments suggested an agreement with the IMF was unlikely, and suggested a formal default could follow in July or August. He pointed to the reported handover of Karachi port operations to the United Arab Emirates as evidence that strategic assets were being sold, and described the decline of Pakistani agriculture, including flour shortages and a new dependence on imported cotton. He contrasted conditions in Pakistan-administered Kashmir unfavourably with those in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, raised the recent migrant-boat disaster near Greece as evidence of desperation to leave, and made claims about the abduction and forced conversion of Hindu girls in Sindh.

On the wider region, the speaker contended that unresolved disputes with India are the Pakistan army's justification for its size and budget, and would therefore not be settled; that China's interests lie in Pakistan remaining intact and in Pakistan-administered Kashmir staying under Pakistani control; and that the United States, whatever its warmth towards India, has historically stood by Pakistan. His concluding contention, offered in response to the host's final question about a way out of the crisis, was that the country's break-up was the only resolution, and that India held the decisive hand, asking why India does not support Baloch, Sindhi and Pashtun movements. The host closed by expressing the hope that Pakistan's intelligentsia would find a way through the present situation.

Key points raised

• The session was a host's interview with a single guest, a Pakistan-born human-rights activist in exile, not a panel discussion.
• The speaker argued that army control of politics rules out stability, predicted Imran Khan's disqualification before elections expected around October, and expected the Pakistan People's Party to be favoured.
• On the economy, the speaker stated Pakistan faced about $13 billion in repayments over the six months, said an IMF agreement looked unlikely, and suggested a default could follow in July or August.
• The speaker contended that unresolved disputes with India sustain the Pakistan army's rationale and would therefore not be resolved, and that China's interest lies in Pakistan remaining intact.
• The speaker's concluding position was that break-up was the only way out of Pakistan's crisis and that India held the decisive role in its future.
• Conditions in Pakistan-administered Kashmir were contrasted unfavourably with those in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, including by reference to migration attempts.