One can admire Chief of PTI Imran’s Khan’s principled stance on the disputed seats in elections 2013. One can admire his principled stance on Panama Leaks. However, one cannot understand his stand in boycotting the Joint Parliamentary session to discuss Indian hostilities at the Line of Control and situation in occupied Kashmir.

In spite of his differences with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, it was extremely important to send out a unified message to the world that all Parliamentarians are united in face of the naked aggression by the neighbor. It was important for all to join hands and be seen to rise above our differences on this issue. Irrespective of what some may think that such a step would have supported Nawaz Sharif on other issues. This thought process is just not correct.

This decision has come in the wake of Raiwind March. The March coming on heels of a critical scenario of India having allegedly conducted ‘surgical strikes’ against Pakistan could not have been more ill-timed.  Though he was able to garner the support of a large number of people, the question that was raised by many was whether he took the limelight away from a sensitive situation for political gains.  Whether or not this may be true, the one fact that stands out that Imran Khan did not act as a statesman as was expected of him. Had he delayed the march, it would have increased his stature in eyes of the people and won him better brownie points.

His refusal to attend the Joint Parliamentary session in face of opposition by senior leaders Asad Umar and Shah Mehmood Qureshi goes against the democratic norms. According to Duniya News, “Imran Khan, Chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf has boycotted joint session of the Parliament summoned on Wednesday after alleging the premier of misusing Kashmir dispute to sway nation’s attention from probe of Panama leak. He cleared that PTI stood with all the political parties in support of Kashmiris but Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would not be allowed to divert attention.” By any long shot and distrust and dislike of Nawaz Sharif cannot possibly lead any rational person to this deduction. It is ludicrous at best.

Too much thrust on boycott politics and dharna has led some to ask if this is being used as a substitute to lay down roots of his party at base level countrywide. This is back breaking work. What he just does not understand is at ground levels in rural areas what he is doing are completely irrelevant. The needs there are different. The dharna politics will win no votes. Note, I am not talking of urban area.

Uzma Kolsy, writing for The Atlantic misses the point completely when she writes, “In a country whose urban middle class is becoming increasingly wired, Khan’s ability to connect to his varied fan base is loosely predicated on utilizing Obama’s voter outreach template. New media revolutionized modern day campaigning in the U.S. and played a pivotal role for Obama in 2008. Khan’s camp– a conglomerate including foreign imports, a telecom executive, women and members from opposition parties — has become incredibly web savvy, and PTI’s presence in Pakistan’s cyberspace is unparalleled.” (April 2, 2013) However, she is right when she writes, “Online popularity, however, by no means guarantees votes. Voter turnout is low in the country, and a majority of Pakistanis, including crucial voters in rural areas, don’t have direct access to the Internet.”

The least he should have focused is on making KP a model province. There are improvements but so far, the thrust has been on dharna politics.

There is no doubt his campaigns have raised better awareness among urban masses about the corruption but I doubt it will create any massive political balance changes in 2018 elections. He has destructively chosen this path to the exclusion of others. Too many marches have just become a talk point for TV programmes.

That he should not have boycotted the Joint Parliamentary session on Kashmir is something few with political acumen will disagree with.

He must understand we cannot pursue one route to the exclusion of others.

His tenacity is appreciated, but needs to be balanced with multi pronged steps.

Imran Khan opposes the sitting government, the foreign policy, different developmental projects to name a few. However, one would have expected him to lay the foundation of modern democratic politics by utilizing the educated and professional people of the party to draw up doable, smart programmes for all he criticizes. Unfortunately, he has not gone beyond criticism alone.

Nauman Sadiq, in his column writes, “This obstructionist politics by Imran Khan was a clever strategy; he knew that he couldn’t beat PML-N through the electoral process, at least, in the next couple of elections. The difference of parliamentary seats was just too big to have been easily bridged: PML-N’s 166 National Assembly seats to PTI’s 35…. If we take a cursory look at the PTI’s membership, it is a hodgepodge of electable politicians from various parties, but most of all from the former stalwarts of PML-Q. Here is a list of a few names who were previously the acolytes of Musharraf, and they are now the “untainted” leaders of PTI, which has launched a nation-wide “crusade” against corruption in Pakistan: Jahangir Tareen, a billionaire businessman who was formerly a minister in Musharraf’s cabinet; Khurshid Mehmood Qasuri, who was Musharraf’s foreign minister; Sheikh Rasheed, although he is not officially a PTI leader but during the protests he became closer to Imran Khan than any other leader except Imran Khan’s virtual sidekick, Jahangir Tareen; and Shah Mehmood Qureshi, a feudal from People’s Party who served as foreign minister during the Zardari Administration until he was forced to resign after the Raymond Davis affair in 2011, to name a few.” (CounterPunch July 25, 2016)

Hardly a pretty picture of Naya Pakistan?

Whereas it is true that PTI has kept the opposition alive-it is also true that no party can hope to win the hearts and mandates of people on politics of boycott and dharna alone.

Imran Khan, if he can take the advice of well-wishers would do better to balance his politics.

The writer is a lawyer, academic and political analyst. She has authored a book, ‘A Comparative Analysis of Media and Media Laws in Pakistan.’ She may be contacted at [email protected] and tweets at @yasmeen_9