Editor’s note: We did a detailed explainer of how Imran Khan’s government collapsed—and the roots of his break with the military. We strongly recommend reading it to really understand what’s happening and why.

The story so far…

Here is how we got here:

• Khan came to power in 2018—with the open support of the military—in what many called “the dirtiest elections in the history of the country.”
• But over the past year, he has fallen out with the military—which appears to have decided to yank its backing (for reasons explained previously).
• And the military establishment signalled that it was perfectly fine with the growing movement to oust Khan.
• Opposition parties banded together with some of Khan’s coalition allies—plus members of his own party—to file a no-confidence motion against his government.
• If it passed in the Parliament—and the numbers indicated it would—Khan would be summarily dismissed along with his cabinet ministers.
• The Opposition also had enough seats to show a majority—and it had already announced its PM-of-choice: Shehbaz Sharif—former PM Nawaz Sharif’s brother and president of the PMLN party.
• The vote was scheduled for today—but Khan had already indicated that he would not accept the outcome: “How can I respect the result when the whole process is discredited?”
• He also said that the “establishment”—widely known as code for the military—had given him three options: “resignation, no-confidence (vote) or elections”—after the no-confidence vote was filed. And he had picked elections as the best choice.

Khan’s big ‘bouncer’ 

Here’s what happened on Sunday, the day of the vote:

• The Opposition assembled in the National Assembly (lower house) ready to vote—but Khan never showed up.
• The Law Minister then claimed that the no-confidence motion “is an effective operation for a regime change by a foreign power”—and therefore unconstitutional. 
• The deputy speaker—also a Khan loyalist—agreed and blocked the motion, and adjourned proceedings. 
• Within minutes, Khan got on television and announced that he had advised President Arif Alvi to dissolve the Parliament and call for fresh elections—which Alvi had accepted—adding: “I ask people to prepare for the next elections. Thank God, a conspiracy to topple the government has failed.”
• The Opposition has called the move blatantly illegal—and has moved the Supreme Court—which will hear the petition on Monday.

The military’s response: Its PR spokesperson said: “Army has nothing to do with the political process.”

The constitutional crisis: Everything hinges on whether the Supreme Court rules the deputy speaker’s decision is legal: “If the top court says that the ruling is according to laws, then the advice by the prime minister [to dissolve Parliament] will also be as per law.” OTOH, if it is illegal, then a PM facing a no-confidence vote cannot dissolve the Parliament—or call an election.

Key point to note: It is widely accepted that the military leaned on the Supreme Court to disqualify Nawaz Sharif from running in the 2018 election—and convicted him of corruption. So what the Court rules could well reflect what the ‘establishment’ wants. 

About that ‘foreign’ conspiracy…

Imran Khan has long used anti-US rhetoric to whip up popular outrage—and threatened to shoot down American drones when he was running for election. All of which earned him the nickname ‘Taliban Khan’. And in recent years, he has drawn Pakistan even closer to China. But all of that was tempered by talk of seeking a “balanced” relationship with Beijing and Washington. But now he has openly accused the US of conspiring to overthrow his government—a claim that centres on a certain “secret memo.”

The secret memo: For weeks now, Khan has claimed that he has proof of a document that proves the Opposition is being funded and supported by foreign powers—but he never named names. But on Thursday, he said this at a rally:  

“On March 8 or before that on March 7, the US sent us a...not the US but a foreign country sent us a message. The reason why I am talking about this...for an independent country to receive such a message... this is against me and the country… It stated that if the no-confidence motion passes, Pakistan will be forgiven, if not, there will be consequences.”

All this while he waved a piece of paper around:

He also accused the three main opposition leaders of being “three stooges” taking direction from Washington.

What we know: Khan has not publicly shared the actual memo—either with the Parliament or with the media. Pakistani news reports suggest it is a diplomatic cable sent by the Pakistani ambassador in Washington—which contains notes of his meeting with a US official. And this when a direct threat regarding the no-confidence vote was allegedly issued—along with other “horrifying details” that Khan has not specified. 

Point to note: On Thursday, the Pakistani government also lodged a formal protest with the acting US envoy in Islamabad. When asked, the White House spokesperson simply said: "There is absolutely no truth to that allegation.”

Why is he doing it? For starters, Pakistanis do not have much love for the US. Many believe Washington simply used Pakistan as a pawn to fund the Afghan insurgency against the Soviet occupation—and then abandoned it to its fate. And the ‘war on terror’ made everything worse. Americans were perceived as constantly bullying Pakistan to do more—even as its soldiers and civilians died in extremist attacks. So playing the American conspiracy card works:

“The fact that it has such easy traction in Pakistan speaks to some of the damage U.S. foreign policy has done in the post 9/11 era in general and in Pakistan in particular. There is a reservoir of anti-American sentiment in the country, which can be instrumentalized easily by politicians like Khan.”

And Khan has paired his US rhetoric with a staunch defence of Islamic pride. As one of his supporters says: “Look out how he has spoken out against Islamophobia. Before we used to be like slaves.”

Not as impressed: The Pakistani press who have been calling out Khan for his ludicrous level of self-obsession—reflected in the number of times he used ‘main’, ‘mujhe’ and ‘mera’ in his recent speech:

General Bajwa’s view of the world

There have been a number of recent reports (here and here) that the Army is not pleased with Khan’s increasing cosiness with Beijing—to the point of wholly alienating the US. And the tipping point may well have been Khan’s decision to pay President Putin a visit on the eve of the Ukraine invasion.

The Moscow junket: On the day before Russia invaded Ukraine, Khan landed in Moscow for a pre-scheduled visit—which he refused to postpone despite clear signs of an imminent assault. Worse, he was video-taped at the airport saying this: 

It’s unclear whether the Pakistani military was in favour of the visit. But it is important to note that Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa (the man who really runs the show) was in Belgium at around the same time—talking up relations with the EU. And the military was clearly not happy with the fallout of the Moscow trip. Khan came back empty-handed, without having inked any major deals with Putin—and to even greater pressure from the West. 

Irony alert: Khan’s Ukraine policy basically mirrored that of India. Pakistan too abstained on all the UN resolutions condemning the Russian invasion—even though Ukraine has long supported it on Kashmir. And when EU nations—along with Britain, Japan and Australia—wrote an open letter to Khan to condemn Moscow, he wildly lashed out: “What do you think of us? Are we your slaves … that whatever you say, we will do?” In other words, Khan’s done his level best to make New Delhi look good.

Bajwa’s new tune: The military has not commented publicly on Khan’s ‘foreign conspiracy’—which is odd since it is a matter of national security. But at a public forum, the top general took pains to put forward what seemed to be a new foreign policy doctrine this weekend.

Bajwa spoke directly about the relationship with Washington: “We have a history of long and excellent strategic relationship with the US, which remains our largest export market.” While he also namechecked China, Bajwa insisted: “We seek to broaden and expand our ties with both the countries without impacting our relationship with the other.”

On Ukraine: Bajwa added this: “Sadly, the Russian invasion against Ukraine is very unfortunate. Despite legitimate security concerns of Russia, its aggression against a smaller country cannot be condoned.”

As for India: Bajwa also called for India, Pakistan and China to come together to peacefully settle their border disputes: “With one-third of the world engulfed in some sort of a conflict or war, it is important that we keep the flames of fire away from our region.” And interestingly, while Bajwa spoke of using “dialogue and diplomacy” to resolve Kashmir, at the same forum, Khan’s foreign minister railed: “Unfortunately, we face a toxic mix in India. An extremist ideological regime that thrives on anti-Muslim hate and hostility for Pakistan.”

Meanwhile, in Beijing: China too has sent subtle signals—and none of them offer great support for Khan. Refusing to comment on the political chaos, China instead praised the Pakistani Army—calling “military-to-military relations… the mainstay of the China-Pakistan friendship.” Point to note: When Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi visited Islamabad last week, he also paid Bajwa a visit in Rawalpindi. 

The bottomline: Imran Khan’s rise to power was rigged by the very military that seems ready to dump him. Whether he stays or goes too will depend on its whims. What remains to be seen: if this new churn will bring with it a new diplomatic orientation towards the rest of the world.

Reading list

• Deutsche Welle, BBC News and Associated Press have the most details of the latest developments. 
• Al Jazeera asked legal experts about the constitutionality of Khan’s actions.
• The Tribune (Pakistan) has more on the secret memo. 
• South China Morning Post has a good piece on why the Moscow visit was a mistake—while journalist Hamid Mir in the Washington Post explains why Khan’s sudden swing toward Russia was shocking. 
• For more on what Bajwa said about Pakistan’s foreign policy, read Dawn and Hindustan Times—or you can watch a snippet here. 
• New York Times reports on the military’s desire to restore its connections with Washington.
• The Diplomat argues that replacing Khan will not reset Islamabad’s relationship with China.