PTI's external outreach: a gamble or a misstep?

Richard Grenell, recently appointed by US President-elect Donald Trump as an envoy for special missions to address complex foreign policy challenges, has called for Imran Khan's release. This statement has sparked celebrations within PTI circles, with supporters hailing it as a significant diplomatic win and evidence of growing international pressure on the Government of Pakistan. The sentiment gained further traction on social media, where PTI figures enthusiastically welcomed Grenell's remarks, interpreting them as a boost to the party's narrative.

PTI has found itself navigating turbulent waters since the incarceration of its founder, Imran Khan. Facing a litany of charges and a waning political presence, the PTI has turned to external factors, particularly lobbying in the US, to secure Khan's release. While this approach has garnered significant media attention and occasional diplomatic statements in its favour, it also raises serious questions about the party's leadership and its strategy as well as implications for Pakistan's sovereignty and economic stability.

This reliance on foreign endorsements also raises concerns about the PTI's understanding of domestic politics and its strategic priorities. The party's emphasis on external support appears incongruous with its earlier rhetoric, which was vehemently critical of foreign influence in Pakistan's internal affairs. Khan himself famously blamed the US for orchestrating his ouster through a purported cipher.

The question is: does not by seeking Washington's backing the PTI risks undermining its credibility and alienating segments of its support base that were drawn to its nationalist and anti-imperialist stance.

On the flip side, turning to international advocacy to resolve domestic political challenges is a double-edged sword, especially for a country like Pakistan that is heavily reliant on the US for economic and military support.

First, it exposes Pakistan's political disputes to international scrutiny, potentially eroding the country's sovereignty. By involving external actors in its domestic affairs, the PTI sets a precedent that could be exploited by rival political factions or foreign powers to further their agendas. Second, this reliance on the US - a country often criticised for its selective approach to democracy and human rights - risks creating a perception of inconsistency and opportunism within the PTI's ranks.

The PTI's dependence on international endorsements also reflects deeper issues within its leadership and strategy. Once hailed as a party of reform and accountability, the PTI has struggled to maintain its ideological coherence and organisational discipline. During its tenure in power, the party failed to deliver on key promises, from eradicating corruption to establishing a self-reliant economy. Instead, it perpetuated many of the governance challenges it had vowed to eliminate, including political cronyism and reliance on external borrowing.

Khan's leadership, once seen as a beacon of hope for disillusioned Pakistanis, has also come under scrutiny. His inability to assemble a competent team or implement structural reforms has weakened the PTI's credibility. The party's current strategy of seeking international support underscores its lack of a robust domestic plan to address its challenges.

While external intervention can amplify a party's message and apply pressure on governments, it cannot substitute for a coherent domestic strategy. The PTI's global campaign may provide temporary relief or headlines, but it does little to address the structural issues that have contributed to its current predicament.

For Pakistan, the stakes are particularly high. The country's economic vulnerabilities and geopolitical significance make it imperative for political actors to prioritise stability and self-reliance over short-term gains. It risks exacerbating divisions within Pakistan's polity and undermining its economic recovery efforts. It also raises uncomfortable questions about the party's commitment to the principles of democracy and national sovereignty.

In the broader context, Pakistan's political parties must collectively acknowledge the risks of involving external entities in their disputes.