All does not appear to be well within the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI), particularly after the announcement by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi of a long march towards Islamabad on September 27. Afridi has said that the PTI leadership and the Tehreek-e-Tahafuz Ayin-e-Pakistan (TTAP) alliance have endorsed the planned protest. Yet the announcement has also exposed differences within the party, with questions being raised over the timing of the march and the decision-making process behind it.
Afridi has sought to address concerns reportedly raised by Aleema Khan about why the protest was scheduled for September 27 rather than an earlier date. He has said that he can convince her after explaining the “facts and figures” behind the decision. In a series of television interviews, the chief minister has also rejected allegations by PTI-affiliated figures based overseas that he agreed to the date as part of a secret deal. According to Afridi, such claims are intended to mislead the public and undermine the party’s protest campaign.
The chief minister insists that the PTI has little choice but to take to the streets because its political grievances have not been addressed by the authorities. Critics, however, accuse the party of repeatedly resorting to a politics of confrontation, unrest and protest. The PTI’s position is that repeated confrontation has become unavoidable because its political demands have consistently been ignored. Whatever the merits of these competing arguments, the party’s latest protest drive is unfolding against the backdrop of significant uncertainty within its own ranks.
Analysts are therefore justified in asking whether the PTI is fighting not only its political opponents but also a battle within itself. Senior office-bearers and leaders have increasingly been exchanging accusations over Imran Khan’s legal cases, the role and participation of PTI parliamentarians, party strategy and other matters. The sheer volume of allegations being aired publicly, while Imran Khan remains in prison and is reportedly facing restrictions on access to his lawyers, party colleagues and family, raises important questions about the state of the party’s leadership and its ability to maintain a coherent political strategy.
Infighting is hardly unique to the PTI. Political parties routinely experience disagreements over strategy, leadership and tactics, particularly during periods of political pressure. The circumstances confronting the PTI are undoubtedly difficult, and differences over how the party should respond are inevitable. There is, however, an important distinction between internal debate and the public airing of personal accusations. When disagreements turn into persistent public feuds, they can undermine morale, confuse supporters and weaken a party’s ability to present a united political position.
The PTI appears to have experienced more than its share of such divisions in recent years. Instead of allowing internal disagreements to be resolved through party structures, leaders and supporters have frequently taken their disputes to television channels and social media. This creates the impression of a party that is constantly reacting to internal crises rather than developing a long-term political strategy. At a time when the party’s founder remains behind bars and its political future remains uncertain, this is particularly damaging.
There is also a need to distinguish between legitimate criticism from within the party and the increasingly aggressive commentary coming from some PTI-affiliated vloggers based overseas. PTI leaders and workers operating inside Pakistan have faced considerable political and legal pressure. They may therefore have genuine differences over tactics, negotiations and the appropriate response to the authorities. Such disagreements deserve space within a political movement.
The same cannot necessarily be said of commentators who appear to question the motives of almost every PTI leader holding a position of responsibility in Pakistan. There is a growing perception among party supporters that some overseas commentators have turned internal conflict into a form of political content, with controversy and personal attacks generating attention, views and online revenue. Whether or not every such allegation is justified, the effect is clearly corrosive: party figures are repeatedly discredited, while supporters are encouraged to view fellow members of their own political movement with suspicion.
The treatment of journalists by some of these commentators is particularly troubling. Some overseas voices have left Pakistan citing censorship and restrictions on freedom of expression, yet they routinely target journalists who continue to work inside the country despite those same pressures. This includes journalists who investigate sensitive issues, question those in power and continue reporting from an increasingly difficult environment. The same hostility is sometimes directed at PTI leaders who advocate dialogue or argue that perpetual confrontation with the state cannot be the answer to every political dispute.
Political movements cannot survive indefinitely on confrontation alone. Protest is a legitimate democratic tool, and the PTI is entitled to pursue its political demands through peaceful and constitutional means. But a successful political strategy requires more than mobilisation on the streets. It requires organisational discipline, credible leadership, internal debate, political outreach and a clear understanding of what the party ultimately hopes to achieve.
The PTI therefore needs to address its internal divisions with urgency. Its leadership must create mechanisms through which disagreements can be discussed without turning every dispute into a public confrontation. Party supporters and affiliated commentators also need to recognise that constant attacks on fellow PTI figures can ultimately damage the very political cause they claim to support.
The party is operating under exceptionally difficult circumstances, with its founder in jail and considerable uncertainty surrounding its political future. That makes unity and strategic clarity more important, not less. The PTI can disagree internally, debate its tactics and challenge its own leadership, but it cannot afford to allow those disagreements to consume its political energy. Its future will depend not simply on how loudly it protests, but on whether it can develop a coherent strategy and maintain enough unity to pursue it.
Shafaqna Pakistan
pakistan.shafaqna.com
Note: Shafaqna do not endorse the views expressed in the article
