KARACHI: It won’t be a stretch to say that the PTI finds itself in a bit of an odd situation, without its founder-chairman Imran Khan at the helm. As a party that has long criticised the dynastic politics of the PPP and PML-N, the emergence of Imran’s wife Bushra Bibi, and sister Aleema Khan, as influential figures in the party has raised the inevitable question about the PTI’s adherence to its own rhetoric. Party leaders and representatives vehemently deny claims of familial control, but the perception persists, fueling speculation about the party’s trajectory.
The question of leadership succession remains pivotal. Who are the contenders? And what do they represent? There’s Barrister Gohar Khan, who could lead the party with a focus on legal strategy. However, his lack of grassroots appeal and political charisma might make it difficult for him to mobilise the party’s base.
Then there’s Chief Minister of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Ali Amin Gandapur whose provocative rhetoric pretty much embodies the PTI’s combative style. His leadership could energise the party’s hardline supporters but risks alienating moderate voters. As Imran Khan’s sister, Aleema Khan has stayed out of the political limelight, but her close association with his legacy could make her a unifying figure. However, till now at least the PTI founder has shown no signs of favouring his sister taking any kind of control of the party.
But the real headliner of this whole current situation is Bushra Bibi. Imran’s wife, reportedly his confidante, adviser, and someone who stood by him to the extent of going to jail too, has absolutely no formal political experience. But that has not stopped political spouses before and if she does take control of the PTI in Imran’s absence she will draw the strongest parallels to dynastic politics. If she assumes a leadership position, it would also represent a major shift for the PTI, blurring the lines between its ideological stance and the very dynasties it has mocked.
The Bushra factor seems to be the most visible in the PTI as of now. So would it be a dynastic or symbolic leadership — ala Asif Ali Zardari or Kulsoom Nawaz? Zardari’s leadership of the PPP after Benazir Bhutto’s assassination was characterised by institutional control and strategic political manoeuvring while Kulsoom Nawaz, who temporarily took the reins of the PML-N during Nawaz Sharif’s imprisonment, was largely a symbolic leader, aimed at maintaining unity and continuity rather than asserting personal authority.
Journalist and political analyst Suhail Warraich explains that a couple of factors are at play in choosing a leader for the PTI: “The first is that Imran Khan only likes loyalists. The second is that he is very impressed by Bushra Bibi. He has probably not given this much respect to anyone as much as he has to her — publicly as well.”
How does that translate into Bushra Bibi’s political career? Warraich says that in the face of Imran being in jail and Bushra not having much political experience, both seem to be seeing party failures as a failure of the leadership. “Bushra Bibi seems to be wanting to show initiative and motivation” in this context, says Warraich who likens her worldview to that of “Naseem Hijazi; one can tell by listening to her views on Erdogan or Mahathir Mohammed or the Muslim Ummah”.
While conceding that “there are some sensible people around like Barrister Gohar or Asad Qaisar etc”, Warraich adds that “they are dealing with a challenging time” and also reminds us that “the real leadership of the party lies with Imran, Bushra and Zulfi Bukhari — and the last also mainly because he works with Bushra Bibi”.
But wouldn’t Bushra Bibi as leader mean dynastic politics? And how will the PTI worker take that? Warraich says it doesn’t matter: “If Imran says it’s night, it’s night; if he says it’s dynastic politics it is; if he says it’s not, it’s not.”
According to journalist and political commentator Nasim Zehra, “No one will be leading the party in Imran Khan’s absence. Please remember he will be the one calling the shots.” While there can be input from Bushra Bibi, “for now, it seems Bushra is more on the Kulsoom Nawaz level, not the Zardari brand of leading a party.”
Journalist Mehmal Sarfraz agrees that it doesn’t matter who leads the PTI “because, at the end of the day, the person calling the shots is Imran Khan and only Imran Khan”. That doesn’t mean though that Bushra Bibi is irrelevant. Sarfraz says that “there’s no denying that his decisions — when in office as prime minister and when out of office — have greatly been influenced by Bushra Bibi. And now that he’s in jail and she has been released, it is clear that she has taken charge of the party.”
Journalist Asma Shirazi who keeps a keen eye on Pakistan’s politics would agree with this assessment. According to her, “Bushra Bibi has pretty much taken over the party. What remains to be seen is how much resistance there is in the party. If you see the current protest, this is being led by Bushra herself. Her insistence on reaching D Chowk despite everything is a clear sign that she will be leading the party”.
Shirazi explains why: “The PTI worker is still hanging on to Imran’s narrative and the politicians in the middle who speak somewhat with some sanity are not appreciated by the workers, especially those in KP. That hard line that they prefer is provided by Bushra Bibi.”
Shirazi says that as a hardliner, “Imran also prefers other hardliners. If you see Barrister Gohar, he is a sensible man — but going by Imran’s pattern of politics only Bushra Bibi seems to come to that standard.”
“Bushra Bibi”, says Shirazi, “has the authority and power via Imran to make decisions on her own. We saw that in her Saudi comment as well. In that sense, she has gained ascendancy over the PTI. I think she is now in a position where she can negotiate and counsel both.”
Mehmal Sarfraz also adds that this situation is neither like Zardari nor like Kulsoom: “Zardari took over the PPP after his wife was assassinated and that too as co-chairman. Kulsoom Nawaz became publicly active during Nawaz’s incarceration. It is said that she was a close advisor of Nawaz Sharif but it was not like the way party decisions Bushra Bibi is alleged to have made like the appointment of Buzdar”. The fact is, says Sarfraz, that “Bushra has now ‘formally’ entered politics — even though she was never not political.”
The mechanism for selecting the PTI’s future leadership will define its long-term identity. Will the possible framework be ideological commitment, democratic intraparty elections, dynastic leadership, the founder-chairman’s decision or a grassroots selection? Balancing these competing considerations will be critical for the PTI. With its founder temporarily sidelined, the party faces a choice: embrace its ideological roots, adapt to pragmatic realities, or risk becoming what it once opposed.
As far as ideology goes, Asma Shirazi says “the PTI didn’t really develop much of it from the get-go. They have only been able to ride the authoritarian wave and used military backing. In the past few years, the party created an anti-establishment narrative which had already been created by the previous opposition parties (of the PDM). Ideology doesn’t really matter in the PTI. Imran is the ideology. And Imran’s freedom is their goal.”
Nasim Zehra feels that “In a normal political situation, where you wouldn’t have the party gasping for oxygen and where its political leader and others are not in prison, then we could be discussing whether ideology or democracy etc would decide its leadership. But at the moment, the party’s survival and the end of the leadership’s incarceration will be the main goals.”
At the end of the day, the PTI is Imran and Imran is the PTI. That seems to be the going idea even now with the founder-chairman of the party behind bars. A gentle reminder by Mehmal Sarfraz: “Imran Khan never allowed the PTI’s second-tier leadership to grow or become important because he never wanted anyone to be his ‘replacement’, This is why newcomers took over the party when most of the old guard left post-May 9. As long as Imran is alive, he is the only one who matters”.
Originally published in The News
