Not kidding, I was a staunch supporter of Usman Buzdar as chief minister. People often criticized him for his selection as the chief executive of Punjab.
My only argument used to be: Usman Buzdar is an elected MPA and any MPA can become chief minister. Period.
The departure of former Punjab Chief Minister Usman Buzdar from politics is not really surprising as the PTI is plagued by a defection pandemic. In fact, that Mr. Buzdar was the chief executive of the country’s most populous province in the first place remains a thing of wonder.
The departure of Buzdar from politics has sparked discussions about his selection and tenure as the chief executive of Pakistan’s most populous province.
My point of view is: give him benefit of doubt.
Many have questioned why the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman, Imran Khan, chose Buzdar for this crucial position in the first place.
Was Buzdar a bad choice?
From the outset, the selection of Usman Buzdar as Punjab’s chief minister was met with surprise and skepticism. Critics, of them many journalists, argued that Buzdar lacked the political experience and prowess necessary for such a significant role. His limited profile and unfamiliarity with public administration made it difficult for him to garner public trust and effectively navigate the complexities of governing a province as crucial as Punjab.
Speculations arose regarding Khan’s motivations for choosing Buzdar. Some theorized that Buzdar’s relative obscurity allowed Khan to maintain a firm grip on the province, avoiding the risk of other influential forces asserting control. Others suggested that Buzdar’s appointment was influenced by the trust Khan’s spouse placed in him, warning Khan of potential consequences if Buzdar was not given the position.
Was Buzdar incompetent?
Throughout his tenure, Buzdar faced heavy criticism for his perceived incompetence and inability to make decisive decisions. Both within the PTI and from external observers, doubts were raised about Buzdar’s effectiveness in addressing the challenges faced by Punjab. Concerns were voiced that his lack of political acumen hindered the province’s progress and hampered essential decision-making processes.
Despite mounting criticism, Khan staunchly defended his choice of Buzdar. Occasionaly I wrote in his favour in the Side Mirror. I cited his loyalty, simplicity, and honesty as reasons for Buzdar’s selection, consistently maintaining that these qualities were crucial for the position. However, alternative theories regarding Buzdar’s appointment continued to circulate, further fueling doubts about his competence.
Buzdar should not have left Imran Khan
Buzdar’s departure from politics and the PTI has led some to question whether he made the right decision. While there were legitimate concerns about his performance as Punjab’s chief minister, leaving the party altogether may not have been the best course of action.
Those critical of Buzdar argue that he should have remained within the PTI, using his experience to contribute to the party’s growth and development. By leaving, he not only disassociates himself from the PTI but also misses an opportunity to redeem his image and address the criticisms he faced during his tenure.
The selection and subsequent departure of Usman Buzdar from Punjab’s chief minister position have raised important questions about the decision-making process within the PTI. Buzdar’s appointment was met with skepticism due to his lack of political experience, and his performance in office further fueled doubts about his competence.
While Imran Khan stood his ground and defended his choice, Buzdar’s departure from politics has left many pondering whether he should have stayed within the PTI to address the criticisms he faced. Only time will tell what the future holds for both Buzdar and the PTI, but his departure serves as a reminder of the challenges faced by political parties when making crucial appointments and the need for careful consideration of competence and experience in such roles.
In the end, it is up to Mr Buzdar to decide whether or not he made the right decision. However, it is clear that he is a man of principle, and he will always be remembered for his loyalty and dedication.
