Dialogue now

The PTI finds itself at yet another crossroads. Senior leader Omar Ayub Khan’s recent statement that the party is willing to engage in dialogue “be it with humans or angels” is as telling as it is perplexing. Coming on the heels of a threat by Imran Khan to launch a civil disobedience movement unless the government meets demands such as releasing ‘political prisoners’ and forming a judicial commission on the events of May 9 (2023) and November 26, the statement is reflective of the PTI’s recent shifting approach. The veiled reference to ‘angels’ has hardly gone unnoticed. But it is also hardly surprising. The PTI’s insistence in recent years on bypassing political dialogue in favour of dealing directly with the establishment is well-documented. The feeling has not been reciprocated, especially after the fallout of the May 9 protests. This realisation may have prompted the PTI to reconsider its strategy, even if reluctantly.

And so we come to the party’s newfound willingness to engage with ‘humans’ – read: political parties. This marks a significant, albeit overdue, shift in the PTI’s politics. Experts have long maintained that meaningful political resolutions require dialogue among political parties, not backdoor deals with non-political entities. That the PTI is entertaining the possibility of such dialogue may reflect a pragmatic acknowledgement of its dwindling political capital and internal divisions. The party’s internal fractures are glaring. From Bushra Bibi and Imran Khan’s family members to prominent leaders like Ali Amin Gandapur, it is now not much of an exaggeration to say that the PTI seems like a house fractured. These internal rifts have weakened the party’s ability to present a unified front, let alone lead a coordinated movement against the government. As Asad Qaisar’s most recent call for a joint opposition movement illustrates, the PTI’s rhetoric often outpaces its organisational coherence.

This disarray raises the question: is the PTI prepared to abandon its confrontational stance for constructive dialogue? The party has squandered numerous opportunities in the past – refusing to negotiate when the PDM government offered an election date, or rejecting the PPP’s coalition government proposal after the general elections. These missteps have left it increasingly isolated. This is why its recent bout of pragmatism is welcome – though one wonders how long that will last. Reports also suggest that some factions within the PML-N recognise the futility of attempting to politically sideline the PTI and are open to initiating dialogue. This presents the PTI with a critical opportunity: engage in sincere political dialogue to reclaim lost ground or risk further marginalisation. Grandstanding about civil disobedience or launching movements without a clear strategy will only exacerbate the party’s precarious position. The debacle of its final call should serve as a cautionary tale. Instead, the party should focus on rebuilding its internal coherence and engaging with other political forces in good faith. The PTI’s path forward must be one of dialogue, not discord. If it truly seeks to reclaim its relevance, it must trade its confrontational approach for a collaborative one. Failure to do so risks consigning the party to the margins of Pakistan’s political landscape, where neither humans nor angels will offer a lifeline.