Like him or hate him, he is the only major leader who disrupts the traditional two-party monopoly that has dominated Pakistan for decades. Removing him entirely would only strengthen those two parties and make them even more unmanageable
By Ansar Mahmood Bhatti
The latest press conference by the Director General Inter-Services Public Relations (DG ISPR) marked perhaps the harshest institutional criticism of Imran Khan to date. While previous briefings had carried undertones of disagreement or veiled admonitions, this one was direct, pointed, and focused particularly on the controversial interview given by the former prime minister’s sister to an Indian media outlet. The military spokesperson termed the move unacceptable and deeply irresponsible, and to an extent, he was not wrong. No matter the political circumstances, using Indian media as a platform especially at a time when relations remain strained was ill-advised and bound to create national discomfort.
However, the argument offered by Imran Khan’s camp also carries weight: they allege that Pakistani media is so tightly controlled that the opposition is denied meaningful coverage. According to them, interview slots, airtime, and narrative-shaping opportunities are skewed to the point that opposition figures must look elsewhere to get their message out. Yet, even then, resorting to a hostile foreign platform was not an excuse. It gave ammunition to critics and raised unnecessary suspicions.
The truth is that problems exist on both sides. Political actors consistently cross red lines, while state institutions respond with disproportionate measures. But within this entire debate lies a fundamental reality that Pakistan as a nation must confront: the primary responsibility for the rise, fall, and resurgence of Imran Khan lies with those who brought him to power in the first place. Everyone knows the role the establishment played in shaping and sustaining Imran Khan’s political career. Therefore, the introspection that is being demanded today must begin at home. One cannot create a phenomenon and then expect it to disappear through force and coercion.
Imran Khan’s governance record was far from ideal. In fact, to many, his rule was chaotic. Corruption remained widespread, governance suffered, and institutional paralysis deepened. Mismanagement was visible across multiple sectors, and had he been allowed to complete five years unhindered; it is very possible that public disenchantment would have naturally peaked. Many argue that by the end of five years, no one would even be willing to speak his name politically. That is how poor the performance was.
But the way he was removed from power and more importantly, the way he and his family have been treated since turned him into something far more powerful than a politician: a symbol of victimhood. The entire narrative shifted. His flaws were overshadowed by the perception that he was wronged. Every attempt to discredit him, instead of diminishing his popularity, only increased it exponentially. The more he was pushed to the wall, the stronger his public support grew.
Why? Because the method adopted to neutralize him has been deeply flawed. In politics, perception is stronger than facts. And the perception created over the past two years is that Imran Khan is being singled out unfairly, persecuted, and silenced. This is why all efforts to damage him politically have failed.
There is only one credible way to make Imran Khan politically irrelevant: good governance. Not press conferences, not media restrictions, not court cases, and definitely not confrontation.
People today are struggling. They cannot afford basic necessities. Inflation is crushing households. Jobs are drying up. There is no sense of security, political stability, or economic direction. Under such conditions, no one is ready to listen to lectures or accusations. People judge governments by what ends up in their kitchen, not by press briefings.
All credible national and international surveys repeatedly highlight the same depressing picture: Corruption remains rampant, Poverty has surged, foreign investment has evaporated
The country’s international image has been damaged, CPEC stands frozen, businesses are shutting down, public frustration is at its peak.
Add to this the controversial lifetime immunity granted to certain figures, and the public anger becomes understandable. In such an environment, Imran Khan can never be defeated through force or narrative manipulation. The only force powerful enough to counter him is performance real, tangible, visible governance that delivers relief to ordinary people.
This is why, if free and fair elections were held today, PTI would likely win by a landslide. This victory would not necessarily be because PTI is a highly organized or ideologically superior party. Rather, it would be because of how the party has been treated and continues to be treated. The sense of injustice, deprivation, and victimization resonates with millions.
The operational strategy toward PTI must change if the goal is to stabilize the political landscape. However, it is equally important to recognize that completely eliminating Imran Khan from politics is neither feasible nor desirable. Like him or hate him, he is the only major leader who disrupts the traditional two-party monopoly that has dominated Pakistan for decades. Removing him entirely would only strengthen those two parties and make them even more unmanageable.
From a strategic standpoint, the establishment also understands this. A controlled, balanced political system requires more than two poles of power. Eliminating Imran Khan may satisfy certain short-term impulses, but in the long run, it will create a vacuum that will be quickly filled by forces less predictable and harder to negotiate with.
At the end of the day, no one in Pakistan is a traitor. They all believe they are acting in the interest of the country, even if their methods or interpretations differ. A more inclusive approach is needed. Dialogue is needed. Tolerance is needed. The economy is in shambles, inflation is at historic highs, foreign investment has dried up, and CPEC—once hailed as a game-changer—is practically dormant. This is not the time for internal wars. It is the time for reconciliation and reconstruction.
The DG ISPR’s press conference may have been aimed at correcting narratives, but the real correction that Pakistan needs goes far deeper. Until governance improves, institutions learn from past mistakes, and genuine democracy is allowed to function, Imran Khan will remain an unstoppable political force.
And perhaps, despite everything, Pakistan needs him not necessarily in power, but in the system to prevent a return to the suffocating two-party formula that has already inflicted decades of damage.
