THE Times of Israel published an article titled “An Unlikely Ally: How Imran Khan Could Shape Israel-Pakistan Relations,” which has caused a stir in Pakistan’s political landscape. The piece presents a contentious viewpoint on the possibility of diplomatic connections between Israel and Pakistan. The article, which was written by AynurBashirova, is centered around how Imran Khan, the founder of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), could have a significant impact on the future relationship between the two countries. Historically, Pakistan, as an Islamic republic, has been one of the staunchest supporters of the Palestinian cause. This unwavering support is deeply ingrained in Pakistan’s constitution, political identity, and public sentiment, making any suggestion of rapprochement with Israel a sensitive and highly controversial issue. The article contends that Imran Khan, despite his vocal pro-Palestinian stance in public, maintained a covert willingness to build bridges with Israel during his tenure as Prime Minister, utilizing personal connections, particularly through his ex-wife Jemima Goldsmith’s influential family.
According to Bashirova’s article, Jemima’s family, particularly her father, Sir James Goldsmith, who was a prominent British financier and had ties to the pro-Israel lobby, may have facilitated initial contacts between Khan and Israel. This connection is seen as pivotal in Imran Khan’s behind-the-scenes engagement with Israeli diplomats. It is suggested that Khan’s leadership skills and ability to mediate between conflicting ideologies could have placed him in a unique position to steer Pakistan towards a potential softening of its stance on Israel, an issue that has historically been non-negotiable in Pakistani politics. His relationships with the Goldsmith family, who are part of the British aristocracy, gave him an international platform, and it is believed that during his tenure as Prime Minister, he quietly worked towards normalizing ties with Israel, despite maintaining an outwardly pro-Palestinian narrative. This revelation has further complicated Imran Khan’s political legacy. Throughout his career, his ties with Jewish figures, particularly through his marriage to Jemima, have been a point of contention.
During the 2016 London mayoral elections, Imran Khan publicly supported Zac Goldsmith, Jemima’s brother, against Sadiq Khan, a British-Pakistani Muslim. This decision drew heavy criticism from Muslim communities in both Pakistan and the UK, reinforcing suspicions about his allegiances. Despite this, Imran Khan’s political career in Pakistan continued to thrive, largely due to his charismatic appeal and his emphasis on anti-corruption and reform. However, with the publication of the Times of Israel article, these long-standing accusations are likely to resurface with greater intensity, potentially damaging his reputation among his core supporters, many of whom view Israel as an enemy of the Muslim world. The Abraham Accords, which saw several Arab nations normalizing relations with Israel, have shifted the regional balance of power, and Pakistan, with its large Muslim population and nuclear capabilities, remains a critical player in the Islamic world. Bashirova argues that Imran Khan, with his ability to bridge the gap between Western and Islamic perspectives, could have been the ideal leader to guide Pakistan towards a more nuanced foreign policy regarding Israel.
Moreover, the article hints at the possibility of Western powers, particularly Israel’s allies, playing a role in bringing Imran Khan back to power. It speculates that there is a concerted effort to restore Imran Khan’s international stature, possibly by positioning him for prestigious roles such as the Chancellor of Oxford University. By elevating him on the global stage, the West could present Khan as a leader who champions democracy and human rights, a narrative that could appeal to international audiences while glossing over the complexities of his domestic political struggles. This would also position Khan as a counterweight to more conservative elements within Pakistan’s political landscape, which have traditionally been critical of any engagement with Israel. The article even suggests that there might be efforts to nominate Khan for a Nobel Peace Prize, further cementing his status as a global statesman. The recent escalation of violence in Gaza has fueled deep-seated anger towards Israel in Pakistan. An Israeli newspaper article praising Imran Khan’s potential as a mediator between Israel and Pakistan could complicate his political future. Critics may question Khan’s loyalty to Pakistan’s support for Palestine and erode his popularity, despite his past rhetoric in support of the Palestinian cause.
The article in the Times of Israel has added a new layer of complexity to Imran Khan’s political legacy, raising questions about his true intentions regarding Pakistan’s foreign policy. While he has always portrayed himself as a defender of the Palestinian people, his personal connections with pro-Israel figures and the suggestion that he could have been open to normalizing relations with Israel paint a different picture. As Pakistan grapples with its own internal political turmoil and the shifting dynamics of the Middle East, Imran Khan’s legacy will continue to be scrutinized, particularly in light of the growing influence of Israel in regional geopolitics. Whether he will be able to navigate these challenges and reclaim his place in Pakistan’s political landscape remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the road ahead for Imran Khan is fraught with challenges, both at home and abroad.
–The author is an independent researcher who writes on issues concerning national and regional security, focusing on matters having critical impact in these milieus. She can be reached at [email protected]
