By: Qamar Bashir

Macomb, Detroit, Michigan

The recent initiation of dialogue between PTI and the broader political spectrum marks a pivotal and positive step toward resolving political conflicts through democratic means. This development reflects a notable shift in PTI’s earlier stance of isolating itself from political actors it had dismissed as powerless, illegitimate, and lacking public mandate. Previously, PTI sought engagement exclusively with the establishment, which it deemed the true power holder, undermining the democratic principle that governance should be conducted through civilian institutions and elected representatives. This shift suggests that PTI may have received assurances from the establishment to support its demands if it engages with civilian political forces, signaling a strategic recalibration.

PTI’s demands in these negotiations can be divided into short-term and long-term goals. In the immediate term, PTI is likely to prioritize the release of its leader, Imran Khan, and detained political activists, as well as the restoration of the February 8 election mandate, which it views as critical to reclaiming governance in the center and Punjab.

However, PTI’s far-sighted demands focus on systemic reforms to strengthen democratic governance, reduce military interference in civilian affairs, and establish a stable governance framework. Key reforms include an independent Election Commission with biometric voter verification, judicial independence through transparent appointments, and institutional accountability. PTI also seeks to redefine civil-military relations by confining the military to defense roles, removing military officers from civilian positions, and introducing parliamentary oversight of defense budgets. Additionally, fostering national unity through inclusivity, empowering marginalized communities, and addressing socio-economic issues like poverty, healthcare, and education forms a cornerstone of PTI’s vision.

Rather than seeking short-term concessions, PTI should demand the reversal of recent constitutional amendments and legislative changes enacted by the incumbent government. These amendments have drastically altered the balance of power, weakening the judiciary, reducing parliamentary authority, and enhancing military influence. For instance, the 26th Constitutional Amendment has increased parliamentary involvement in judicial appointments and altered the process of selecting the Chief Justice, replacing the seniority-based system with parliamentary discretion—a move widely criticized for undermining judicial independence. Similarly, amendments to the Pakistan Army Act extended the tenures of military chiefs, consolidating their authority, while legislative measures granted the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) unprecedented powers of communication interception, raising concerns about privacy and civil liberties. Additionally, the government’s perceived non-compliance with Supreme Court orders, including those opposing the trial of civilians in military courts, has further eroded democratic principles and institutional balance.

These recommendations align with a concept paper I presented to PTI leadership in May 2024, emphasizing the importance of resolving political issues on political platforms rather than relying on the establishment. The paper highlighted that PTI’s refusal to engage with other political parties weakened its ability to build consensus on national issues and reinforced a narrative that the military remains the ultimate arbiter of power. It urged PTI to shift from isolationist rhetoric to meaningful dialogue, recognizing that democratic governance rests on the strength of civilian institutions and collaboration among elected representatives.

However, the feasibility of these negotiations remains uncertain. If frivolous cases against PTI leadership and workers are withdrawn under due process, PTI would quickly regain its footing and mobilize its supporters, potentially crippling the government through street agitation. If the establishment remains neutral, the government might not last more than a few months. Similarly, conceding to PTI’s demand to restore the “stolen mandate” of the February 8 elections would immediately delegitimize the government, leading to its collapse. Furthermore, undoing constitutional and legislative amendments would strip the military and ISI of their enhanced powers, restore election tribunals, eliminate military courts, and reinstate the judiciary’s full authority. These changes would likely result in the government’s swift disintegration, as PTI’s restored position would render it ungovernable.

Under the current circumstances, the government is likely to offer limited and calculated concessions to PTI, aimed at placating the opposition without jeopardizing its own hold on power or antagonizing the establishment. These concessions may include the partial withdrawal of minor or frivolous cases against PTI leaders, the selective release of detained workers, and symbolic gestures reaffirming democratic principles without enacting meaningful reforms. Discussions on electoral reforms, such as biometric voter verification or improved oversight, might be entertained, but any implementation would likely be delayed. The government is unlikely to address demands that threaten its legitimacy, such as restoring the February 8 election mandate or reversing constitutional amendments that enhance establishment powers. These constraints highlight the delicate balance the government must maintain—appearing conciliatory enough to prevent unrest while avoiding concessions that could undermine its authority or provoke institutional backlash. As a result, any offered concessions are expected to be superficial, prolonging political instability without addressing PTI’s core grievances.

Interestingly, any or all concessions would not significantly dent the deeply entrenched establishment, which has consolidated unprecedented power since February 8. For the establishment, shifting support between political parties is routine. Regardless of the ruling party, the establishment’s authority remains unassailable. If it chooses to remove the incumbent government, it will do so decisively, installing a new party of choice and supporting it until it falls out of favor. This cyclical process underscores the disposable nature of civilian governments and the enduring dominance of the establishment in Pakistan’s power dynamics. Without addressing this imbalance, any progress toward genuine democratic governance will remain illusory.

By: Qamar Bashir

Press Secretary to the President (Rtd)

Former Press Minister at Embassy of Pakistan to France

Former MD, SRBC

by Muhammad Mohsin Iqbal

The making of a true leader is an arduous journey, requiring clarity of thought, unwavering integrity, and unmatched perseverance. In history, there are rare individuals whose words and actions leave no ambiguity about their character and vision. Muhammad Ali Jinnah, later known as Quaid-e-Azam, stands as a shining example of such a leader. His struggle, sacrifices, and principles were not mere rhetoric but a practical demonstration of leadership. Muhammad Ali Jinnah earned the title of “Quaid-e-Azam” not by chance but through years of relentless effort and by proving that he was the only person who could command such respect and trust from his people.

Born on December 25, 1876, in Karachi, Jinnah began his professional journey as a brilliant lawyer. His rise to prominence was not an accident but the result of his commitment to hard work, honesty, and legal acumen. Early in his career, his character was already evident. He always refused to compromise his professional ethics despite financial pressures. His reputation as an upright lawyer who could not be bought or swayed earned him respect among his peers and society.

Jinnah’s transition into politics was driven by his desire to secure justice for Indians under British rule. Even when he joined the Indian National Congress, he was known for his balanced views and statesmanship. His speeches were marked by precision and clarity, leaving no room for ambiguity. Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s opposition to ill-considered measures such as the Rowlatt Act of 1919 exemplified his commitment to justice. This act allowed the British to imprison people without trial, and Jinnah stood firmly against it, demonstrating his unyielding resolve to defend fundamental human rights.

However, it was during the 1920s and 30s that Jinnah’s character truly shone. Faced with the growing communal divide and the rise of extremist narratives, Jinnah refused to compromise on his principles. His resignation from the Congress after Gandhi’s non-cooperation movement underscored his belief in constitutional struggle rather than emotional and violent means. Muhammad Ali Jinnah believed in achieving political goals through legal and democratic avenues, showcasing his deep respect for rule of law.

By the mid-1930s, Jinnah had emerged as the undisputed leader of the Muslim community. Yet, the title of “Quaid-e-Azam” was not conferred upon him overnight. It was his tireless efforts to secure the rights of Muslims that earned him the respect of millions. The example of the 1940 Lahore Resolution remains a defining moment in this regard. On March 23, 1940, Jinnah addressed the All-India Muslim League at Minto Park, Lahore, presenting the case for a separate homeland for Muslims. His words were clear, his arguments were logical, and his vision was compelling. He articulated the need for Pakistan with such clarity that it left no room for doubt in the minds of his followers. His powerful leadership during this time won him the title of Quaid-e-Azam, meaning the “Great Leader.”

Quaid-e-Azam’s character was tested repeatedly, but he never wavered. A significant historical example was his role in the Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946. Despite immense pressure, Jinnah stayed firm on his demand for Pakistan, knowing it was the only viable solution to safeguard Muslim identity. His calm demeanor and strategic brilliance during negotiations highlighted his qualities as a leader who prioritized the collective good over personal ambition. It was during these years that his followers saw a man of impeccable character, whose words matched his actions.

Another remarkable trait of Jinnah’s leadership was his simplicity and modesty. Despite his towering stature, he maintained a lifestyle that reflected humility. In one instance, during the partition in 1947, Jinnah traveled to Karachi on a commercial flight instead of a private one, reflecting his commitment to serving his people rather than indulging in personal luxuries. Even as the Governor-General of Pakistan, Jinnah chose to live in a modest house instead of the grand Governor’s residence, underscoring his character and dedication.

Quaid-e-Azam’s clarity of words and strength of character were further evident in his address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on August 11, 1947. He stated unequivocally that religion was a personal matter and that every citizen of Pakistan would enjoy freedom and equality. This speech remains one of the most significant documents in Pakistan’s history, as it encapsulated his vision for a progressive and inclusive nation.

Jinnah’s final years were marked by ill health, yet his resolve never weakened. In 1948, despite being critically unwell, he continued to work for the nascent state of Pakistan. On July 1, 1948, while inaugurating the State Bank of Pakistan, Jinnah emphasized the need for Pakistan to develop its own economic system based on Islamic principles rather than imitating others. His speech reflected his foresight and his commitment to building a strong and independent nation.

Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s life is filled with countless examples of integrity, determination, and selflessness. Whether it was his steadfastness in the face of opposition, his belief in constitutional means, or his unmatched leadership during the struggle for Pakistan, Jinnah proved time and again that he deserved to be called Quaid-e-Azam. His clarity of words and strength of character left no ambiguity about his intentions and values. As his birthday anniversary approaches on December 25, it is imperative to remember and reflect on the principles he upheld. Pakistan was not merely the result of political maneuvering but a testament to the character of a leader who embodied honesty, courage, and vision. It is through such examples that we understand the true essence of leadership.

Today, as we face numerous challenges, the life of Quaid-e-Azam serves as a guiding light. His character reminds us that leadership demands sacrifice, integrity, and unwavering commitment to one’s cause. The search for such leaders continues, but Jinnah’s legacy remains unparalleled, inspiring generations to come.