ANALYSIS: Yes, he Khan … but now the real battle begins

Pakistani politician Imran Khan, chief of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party, arrives to address an election campaign rally in Islamabad, Pakistan, on July 21, 2018. (AP/file)
Updated 26 July 2018
Follow

ANALYSIS: Yes, he Khan … but now the real battle begins

  • As no party seems likely to win an overall majority, the PTI must form a coalition
  • Khan’s coalition will face strong opposition from the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and the Pakistan Peoples Party

ISLAMABAD: Imran Khan is likely to become the next prime minister of Pakistan, with unofficial results on Wednesday night showing his Pakistan Tahreek-e-Insaf (PTI) ahead in the election race.

While the international community wants to know more about the foreign policy of this unknown actor in the international political arena, challenges at home are more likely to test his mettle.

As no party seems likely to win an overall majority, the PTI must form a coalition, probably with independent candidates or the religious parties’ alliance, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal. 

Though the PTI is a center-right party, it is also home to many leftists and liberals, and may struggle to find common ground with the right wing after agreeing with religious parties on issues such as the blasphemy law and legislation relating to women; Khan may be pragmatic and meet the ultra-right half way, but that is not what many of his supporters want to see.

Joining hands with independent candidates — mainly the “Jeep” party of the former Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, who is bound to have a long list of demands — would also raise eyebrows in the PTI ranks.  

Khan’s coalition will face strong opposition from the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and the Pakistan Peoples Party, and might exhaust its strength in striking a balance between political allies and strong competitors who have each ruled the country three times before.

Against these challenges, Khan may be more engaged in keeping his house of cards standing than in delivering on the promises with which he wooed the nation.

Being prime minister, with his own priorities, will test Khan’s relations with Pakistan’s strongest institution — the army. 

He has often said he views the military as the most organized and corruption-free institution of the state, but finding a balance of priorities could soon end the honeymoon period.     

The cricketer-turned-politician has dreamed of this day since he left sport for politics. He will have to chart a judicious course, or his first steps in the corridors of power could be his last.   

 


Trump insists he struck Iran on his own terms

Updated 04 March 2026
Follow

Trump insists he struck Iran on his own terms

  • “We are now a nation divided between those who want to fight wars for Israel and those who just want peace and to be able to afford their bills and health insurance,” Marjorie Taylor Greene posted on X.
  • Rubio himself doubled down on Tuesday after meeting with US House and Senate members, while insisting that “No, I told you this had to happen anyway”

WASHINGTON, United States: President Donald Trump and his team scrambled Tuesday to reclaim the narrative on why he decided to attack Iran, after his top diplomat suggested the US struck only after learning of an imminent Israeli strike.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio alarmed Democrats — who say only Congress can declare war — as well as many of Trump’s MAGA supporters on Monday when he said: “We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action.”
“We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t pre-emptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties,” Rubio told reporters.
Administration officials quickly backpedalled, insisting Trump authorized the strikes because Tehran was not seriously negotiating an accord on limiting its nuclear ambitions, and the United States needed to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities.
“No, Marco Rubio Didn’t Claim That Israel Dragged Trump into War with Iran,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt posted Tuesday on X.
At an Oval Office meeting later with Germany’s chancellor, Trump went further, saying that “Based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they (Iran) were going to attack first. And I didn’t want that to happen.”
“So, if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand.”

- Had to happen? -

Rubio himself doubled down on Tuesday after meeting with US House and Senate members, while insisting that “No, I told you this had to happen anyway.”
“The president made a decision. The decision he made was that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide... behind this ability to conduct an attack.”
Critics seized on the muddied messaging to accuse Trump of precipitating the country into a war without a clear rationale, without informing Congress — and without a clear idea of how it might end.
They noted that just two weeks ago, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pressed Trump again in Washington to take a hard line, in their seventh meeting since Trump’s return to power last year.
Some Republican allies rallied behind the president, with Senator Tom Cotton, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, insisting that “No one pushes or drags Donald Trump anywhere.”
“He acts in the vital national security interest of the United States,” Cotton told the “Fox & Friends” morning show.
But as crucial US midterm elections approach that could see Republicans lose their congressional majority, Trump risks shedding supporters who had welcomed his pledge to end foreign military interventions.
“We are now a nation divided between those who want to fight wars for Israel and those who just want peace and to be able to afford their bills and health insurance,” Marjorie Taylor Greene, a top former Trump ally and a major figure in the populist and isolationist hard right, posted on X.