What could the Cotswolds possibly offer JD Vance? I suggest a swim in one of its rivers | Marina Hyde

Apparently, the long winning streak of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) in Sindh is not due to the party’s popularity in the province, but because there is no other force effective enough to challenge the party’s electoral hold here. But Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) “is still very popular.” 

This is what most political analysts — especially from Punjab and those stationed in Sindh’s multi-ethnic capital Karachi — often posit. I’ll try to address both the perceptions. 

First of all, I find their view (regarding Sindh) rather imbecilic. For every election since 2008, multiple alliances of strange bedfellows have formed in the province to become that ‘effective electoral force’, but none of them have been able to break the PPP’s spell in the province. Why? 

The fact is, popularity alone is never enough to guarantee long winning streaks in elections. Functionality is more important. The PPP is now one of the most functional parties in Sindh, which attracts both the popular vote as well as the pragmatic vote. But, of course, then comes that rhetorical question about Karachi. Why is it so ‘mismanaged’ and ‘ignored’? 

There is no doubt that Karachi faces some major issues. But to suggest that this is so because the PPP does not have a large enough vote-bank in the city is now an outdated view. Karachi’s issues aren’t recent. The roots of its many social, political and economic problems actually lie in the 1980s.

The PPP’s hold over Sindh, despite what some may argue, isn’t because of weak opposition — it is the result of electoral functionality. So why is media analysis often based on perceptions without evidence?

Due to waves of migrations from other provinces of the country (and from Afghanistan) in the 1980s, Karachi’s population began to balloon. This put the city’s resources under tremendous pressure, triggering vicious ethnic violence and corruption.

From 1977 till 1988, Sindh was governed by Gen Ziaul Haq’s military dictatorship, and then by pro-Zia parties. The 1980s’ ethnic violence in Karachi and the rollback of the city’s economy crossed into the 1990s. For the next decade — from 1988 till 1999 — Sindh was governed twice by the PPP and twice by coalitions of anti-PPP outfits. 

Karachi eventually fell into the hands of the Mohajir (later Muttahida) Qaumi Movement (MQM). MQM had enough votes and street power to stall any economic manoeuvres planned for the city, if these were seen by the party as not being in its interest. Also, by the 1990s, cities such as Lahore in Punjab began to compete with Karachi in terms of industrial output, largely due to the security challenges in Karachi.

From 2002 till 2008, Sindh was in the hands of a military regime (Gen Pervez Musharraf) supported by a coalition of pro-Musharraf parties. Apparently, Karachi during this period was ‘getting back on its feet again.’ This was hogwash, really. On May 12, 2007, this farcical perception cracked and many tensions of the past that never went away came screaming to the surface again.

Fifty-eight people died in a single day of violence between ethnic groups, armed gangs, political parties and the security forces. What’s more, the city began to also see the influx of militant Islamists from the northern parts of the country, looking to get their share of the pie in Karachi’s notorious ‘underworld’ universe, which also never went away. 

It is true that, in 2008, when the PPP finally returned to power in Sindh, it was slow to address the city’s many issues, focusing more on the rest of the province. But it is also true that, after 2018, the party began giving the city more attention — especially after MQM broke into factions and the ‘popularity’ of PTI in the city started to erode because it had no clue how to do ‘constituency politics.’ Constituency politics is a vital function in Karachi’s many multi-ethnic constituencies. 

Mammoth cities such as Karachi have mammoth problems. But it would be naive (and maybe even somewhat dishonest) to suggest that the PPP ‘is doing nothing for the city.’ In the last few years, it has been quite active in initiating various developmental projects here, especially after it won the city’s mayorship in 2023.

Now, something about the PTI’s ‘popularity’ that one is constantly reminded of by analysts and vloggers. Those on PTI’s side doing this, is understandable. But more interesting is the way the so-called ‘neutral’ and even anti-PTI analysts and vloggers do it. 

For example, often at the end of a critical tirade against the PTI, one can actually predict that the tirade will end with these words: “Behar haal, iss mein koi shak nahin, PTI aik bohat maqbool jamaat hai [Anyway, there is no doubt that PTI is a very popular party].” I always find this amusing. It is as if, during their tirade, the analysts/vloggers begin to feel guilty. Of what, though? 

Indeed, the PTI did well during the February 2024 elections (under trying circumstances). It received 31.17 percent of the total vote. But this also means over 65 percent of the votes were cast for other parties. Nevertheless, things have moved in such a manner in the last one year that there is every likelihood that PTI’s vote-bank may have lost its shape a bit. 

PTI was always more of a movement than a functional party. And, today, it is not even a functional movement. Also, there has been no recent survey to ‘scientifically’ gauge its ‘popularity’. February 2024 now looks far away in the past. 

It is also possible that the perception of PTI’s ‘continuous popularity’ is the result of ‘feedback loops.’

A 2013 study in the Journal of Social and Political Psychology and a 2023 study in the journal Party Politics describe this as an intense focus on a political figure or movement that can create a feedback loop where media coverage, academic analysis and political discourse all contribute to a heightened sense of the importance of the political figures and movements. This can lead to an over-simplistic and homogenised picture of a political trend. 

Imran Khan and his PTI are in shambles today. But the thing that is keeping them afloat is a ‘popularity’ constructed by feedback loops, in which even those who oppose PTI have become stuck. In the current reality, the party’s electoral pull might actually be loosening.

Anyway, so, should I too end this column with, ‘Behar haal, iss mein koi shak nahin, PTI aik bohat maqbool jamaat hai’?

Published in Dawn, EOS, August 10th, 2025

PTI leaders Zartaj Gul and Ejaz Chaudhry filed appeals in the Lahore High Court (LHC) on Saturday against their convictions by anti-terrorism courts (ATC) in May 9 riots cases.

On May 9, 2023, PTI supporters, protesting party founder Imran Khan’s arrest, staged violent protests throughout the country, following which thousands were arrested.

On July 31 this year, an ATC in Faisalabad sentenced PTI leaders, including Gul, to 10 years of imprisonment for their involvement in the riots. The Election Commission of Pakistan later disqualified her and other PTI lawmakers following their convictions. Chaudhry was convicted in another May 9 case by an ATC in Lahore on July 22 and sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Gul filed an appeal against her conviction and sentencing in the LHC today. A division bench of the LHC will hear the case on Monday.

The appeal was filed through Gul’s lawyers, Barrister Ali Zafar and Muhammad Hussain, and pleaded the court to set aside her conviction and acquit her in the case.

It said that Gul was not nominated in the case or “found physically participant in the occurrence”. It added that no justification was provided by the prosecution for her being included through the supplementary statement, which it claimed cast doubt on the authenticity of the occurrence which had not been considered at the trial stage.

It stated that the ATC passed the “impugned judgment … in a hasty and slipshod manner”, based on three witnesses who had admitted in cross-examination that they had not nominated her but she was nevertheless convicted on their statements with a hefty punishment.

“The prosecution has failed to make out a case for such a punishment,” the petition argued, adding that the witnesses themselves had many times misstated and “cheated” the trial court with additions and deletions in their statements making their testimonies unreliable, but ultimately all exonerated the appellant.

“The other ATC court at Sargodha has disbelieved the same prosecution witnesses … but this is ignored in making (the) impugned decision,” it said.

It also stated that no evidence for conspiracy had been brought forward on the case file, challenging her punishment under section 120-B of the Pakistan Penal Code.

The petition pleaded that as “the prosecution also failed to establish the involvement of the appellant in the occurrence and instigation/abetment beyond the shadow of doubt, then there were no reasons to award punishment to the innocent appellant.”

It stated that the judgment was against “facts and law and resulted in (a) misreading of justice” and that, being passed hastily, material parts of evidence were not considered “despite the facts that the prosecution failed to adduce unimpeachable evidence and there was (every) chance of false implication”.

In particular, it cited the lack of material evidence to establish the intention to abet, instigate and conspire to facilitate the other accused parties. According to the petition, the investigation was “biased” and “flawed” but this was ignored by the court. It further criticised that more weight was given to witness statements than evidence by the court, failing to “properly appreciate” the prosecution’s evidence.

It added that 77 co-accused had been acquitted based on the same evidence, while Gul was convicted without valid reasoning.

The petition called for the judgment to be set aside as the case had not been proven “beyond the shadow of a doubt” due to a lack of unimpeachable evidence, adding that the evidence contained contradictions. It called the judgment of the court “arbitrary, capricious, indiscrete, non-speaking and without lawful authority based on no evidence”.

The petition noted that Gul was seeking leave from the court to advance further grounds at the time of argument.

Meanwhile, Chaudhry filed two petitions in the LHC through Advocate Mian Ali Ashfaq.

Chaudhry pleaded the court to suspend his sentence and conviction, along with ordering his release on bail.

He further requested the court in the second petition to set aside his conviction and acquit him in the case in the “interest of justice”.

ATC reserves verdicts on two May 9 cases involving Chaudhry, Rashid, Qureshi, others

Separately, the Lahore ATC reserved its verdicts in two arson cases related to the May 9 riots, in which PTI senior leaders Shah Mehmood Qureshi, Dr Yasmin Rashid, Chaudhry and Omar Cheema are accused, with the judge slated to announce the decisions on August 11.

According to Advocates Rana Mudassar and Rana Maroof, who represented the PTI leaders during the hearing, the trials in the cases of burning vehicles outside Rahat Bakery and arson near Shadman Nazar were completed and ATC Judge Manzar Ali Gul reserved his verdict.

They said the verdicts would be issued on Monday.

They said a total of 25 accused were named in the Rahat Bakery case, while seven accused were declared absconders. They added that the trial of 12 accused was completed in the Shadman Nazar police station arson case and five accused were in custody in this case, while one accused had died.

The lawyers said Qureshi, Dr Rashid, Chaudhry, Cheema, Mian Mahmoodur Rashid and other accused were present in the courtroom.

Daniel Montgomery’s love of books started as a youngster with weekly visits to the public library, which fittingly led him to a nearly two-decade career as an English teacher. As an educator, he became a union leader. That led to another long tenure, this time as president of the Illinois Federation of Teachers, where he…

Lula approved the controversial bill easing environmental licensing rules, but struck down or altered 63 articles.