The recent meeting between Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur, his Information Adviser Barrister Saif and PTI supremo Imran Khan at Adiala jail has reignited speculation regarding the PTI’s potential -- and till now rather unsuccessful -- engagement with the establishment. Media reports suggest that Imran Khan has tasked Gandapur and Saif with negotiating on the PTI’s behalf, though PTI Information Secretary Sheikh Waqas Akram has categorically denied these claims. Such rumours are not new though; similar speculations followed a January meeting between COAS General Asim Munir, PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar and KP CM Gandapur -- though security sources had clarified that the discussion was strictly limited to security matters.
Since Imran Khan’s removal via a no-confidence vote in April 2022, there have been persistent reports of the PTI’s alleged backchannel contacts with the establishment. While sources close to former army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa confirmed such interactions in the past, the current military leadership has largely denied engaging in political manoeuvring. However, political observers argue that the PTI is now realising that its strategy of street agitation has only deepened its predicament. The violent events of May 9 and the November 24-26 protests escalated tensions between the PTI and the powers that be, making reconciliation seem like an increasingly necessary option for the party’s survival. With the opposition alliance also facing internal discord -- especially due to JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s distrust of the PTI -- the party appears to have limited political pathways available.
However, the broader issue remains unchanged: Pakistan’s political instability stems not only from the undue influence of one or two institutions but also from the failure of political parties to resolve their differences independently. Time and again, political parties have sought intervention from unelected power centres rather than negotiating with each other. This cycle has severely weakened democracy. The Charter of Democracy (CoD), signed between the PPP and PML-N in 2006, was a crucial moment of political maturity that helped ensure relatively stable democratic transitions. Despite political missteps between 2008 and 2013, both parties refrained from undermining each other’s governments, with the PPP even backing the PML-N during the PTI’s 2014 sit-in. Frustrated by this unity, the usual players ultimately facilitated Imran Khan’s rise to power -- a mistake the PTI itself must now acknowledge. If the PTI is truly serious about political stability, it must abandon its reliance on the establishment and instead focus on rebuilding trust with other political parties. Unfortunately, government-PTI negotiations initiated in December 2024 collapsed by January 2025. This breakdown underscores a fundamental issue: when political parties bypass democratic engagement and place their trust in unelected forces, they contribute to the persistence of hybrid regimes. History has shown that once political space is ceded, reclaiming it is an uphill battle. The PTI -- and indeed all political forces -- must recognise that true political stability will only come from intra-party dialogue and democratic consensus, not from seeking the blessings of unelected institutions.