Ahsan Iqbal Fact Checks Article and Calls Out False Narrative

In a recent article published from his confinement, former Prime Minister Imran Khan has painted a bleak picture of Pakistan’s current state to the world, describing it as facing “one of the most tumultuous and testing periods” in its history. A strongly negative perception for the world to see of our beloved country. His strongly worded critique has drawn an equally forceful rebuttal from Federal Minister Ahsan Iqbal, who presents an evidence based starkly different assessment of the country’s trajectory, to correct the misrepresentation of Pakistan globally.

Khan’s article describes Pakistan as a country “gripped by authoritarian rule”, he alleges widespread suppression of his political party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), and frames his imprisonment as politically motivated and part of a broader crackdown on democratic voices. He Maligns the judiciary and the security managers in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa ( where PTI is in Government) and Balochistan.

Khan’s article also reaches out internationally, congratulating newly inaugurated U.S. President Donald Trump and expressing hope for strengthened U.S.-Pakistan relations based on “democratic principles, human rights, and the rule of law.” Which is again interesting since he was the one to bring up the “Cipher” when it suited him.

In direct contrast to Khan’s assessment, Federal Minister Ahsan Iqbal presents evidence and fact checks claims proving to the world that Pakistan as a country has made remarkable economic and stability gains, adding to the confidence in the country’s brand and opportunities.

Iqbal’s response emphasizes objective economic indicators to counter Khan’s narrative:

“Pakistan today is far more stable, resilient, and secure than the state in which Mr. Imran Khan left it in April 2022—teetering on the brink of economic default,” Iqbal stated. He points to concrete economic improvements: inflation dropping from 38% to below 4%, policy rate reductions from 23% to 12%, and the stock market index surging from 42,000 to a historic high of 115,000.

Iqbal further notes improved international credit ratings as evidence of growing investor confidence in Pakistan’s economy. He characterizes Khan’s tenure as one of “economic mismanagement” and “political instability,” highlighted by the turnover of five Finance Ministers in just four years.

The exchange between Khan and Iqbal represents competing narratives about Pakistan’s recent history and current trajectory. There is nothing wrong in differing opinions, however there is everything wrong in presenting a bad image of the country globally jeopardising the future of the country’s growth and the prosperity of the people.

Khan is trying to position himself as a defender of democracy fighting against authoritarianism, although his tenure in government proved otherwise; while Iqbal shows how the current administration as responsible stewards who rescued the economy from Khan’s alleged mismanagement.

Khan takes a threatening tone towards Pakistan’s future in a global publication, warning that Pakistan risks losing preferential trade status with the EU due to human rights (i.e his arrest) concerns, which would “devastate our economy, particularly the textile sector.” Iqbal counters by describing economic indicators that prove Pakistan is “back on the path to progress and prosperity” through “responsible governance and sound economic policies.”

The narrative presented by former prime minister has significant implications both domestically and internationally. Within Pakistan, this discourse shapes public opinion about the legitimacy of the current government and the state of democracy. For international observers and potential investors, it create uncertainty about Pakistan’s stability and economic outlook. It is hard to believe that someone who is claiming to be the “defender of democracy” is creating a discourse against is his country in an attempt to destabilise democracy. In Pakistan, all political parties have come together for the future of the country, except PTI. So the questions remains is Imran Khan for democracy or only his own rule and power?

Khan’s appeal to international bodies like the UN and countries including the EU, UK, and US suggests an attempt to leverage international pressure. Meanwhile, Iqbal’s focus on economic metrics is designed to reassure international financial institutions and investors that Pakistan is now on solid footing.

As these narratives continue to unfold, Pakistan faces critical challenges in establishing political stability, ensuring economic growth, and addressing security concerns. There is a need to address the deeply polarized nature of Pakistan’s political landscape.

What remains to be seen is how these competing narratives will influence Pakistan’s domestic politics and its relationships with key international partners, particularly as the newly inaugurated Trump administration develops its South Asia policy. Will those who don’t want Pakistan to prosper continue to promote a narrative of an undemocratic and unstable Pakistan or will Pakistanis and friends of Pakistan come together to share the true picture and ensure Pakistan prosper and the lives of the people of Pakistan improve.