PTI's political dilemma - between hope and realpolitik

Imran Khan remains the nucleus of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf's political structure. He is not merely a party leader but also an ideologue for the workers, from whom they draw their inspiration. For PTI supporters, Khan represents a vision of reform, justice and national dignity. His popularity and charisma have carried the party through electoral victories and political storms. Yet, this centralisation around a single figure, while energising, has also exposed PTI to a fundamental vulnerability.

The arrest of Imran Khan triggered spontaneous protests across the country. The streets of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa were among the most vocal, where thousands turned out to challenge the state's narrative. Notably, his wife, Bushra Bibi, and K-P Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur made their way towards Islamabad, marshaling supporters and defying state machinery. Their arrival in the capital was seen as a symbolic act of defiance, but events took a turn. Amid allegations of firing and crackdowns, the protest had to disperse. What began as a bold act soon lost momentum.

The protest's collapse also brought to the surface deeper issues within the party. PTI's internal rifts were no longer deniable. Factions opposing Ali Amin Gandapur's leadership accused him of compromising with the powers-that-be. Instead of projecting unity, the party's middle-tier leadership became embroiled in mutual blame. The absence of coordinated leadership at a critical juncture left workers disillusioned and leaderless.

One of the most glaring weaknesses was the failure to mobilise Punjab. Despite being the largest and politically most influential province, Punjab's response remained muted. Historically, no popular movement in Pakistan has succeeded without the active participation of Punjab. From the anti-Ayub Khan demonstrations to the Lawyer's Movement against Pervez Musharraf, Punjab's political pulse has often set the national tone. PTI's inability to generate momentum in Punjab exposed a significant gap in its political planning and organising.

As the days turned into weeks, the energy of the initial protests dissipated. Emotional outbursts, however genuine, cannot sustain a political movement in the absence of a well-crafted strategy. The state, predictably, adopted a containment approach - arresting key figures, shaping media narratives and allowing the protests to lose steam over time. It was a textbook case of how the absence of clear leadership and internal cohesion can transform a moment of potential into a missed opportunity.

In the face of internal setbacks, many PTI supporters began to look outward, hoping for intervention from global powers. A curious narrative began to take shape - that the return of former US President Donald Trump might shift the international environment in PTI's favour. This belief, however, was rooted more in emotion than realism. International politics, particularly for a country like Pakistan, is shaped not by personal affinities but by strategic interests. Whether in Washington or elsewhere, foreign policy is governed by national priorities, not ideological sympathy for opposition leaders.

Expectations of judicial relief have similarly met with disappointment. While PTI's legal team has made commendable efforts, the truth remains that politically sensitive incarcerations in Pakistan are rarely reversed through courts alone. The legal system often operates in sync with broader power structures. Courts, while independent on paper, are seldom insulated from political pressures in highly charged environments. Thus, relying solely on litigation, without complementary political mobilisation, reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the country's political and judicial mechanics.

The core lesson from this entire episode is sobering but necessary: political change is not delivered by courts or foreign powers. It is achieved through sustained, grassroots political mobilisation, coherent strategy and institutional strength. PTI, despite its mass appeal, has yet to develop a robust internal structure that can function effectively in the absence of its central figure. Its over-reliance on Imran Khan's personal charisma has left it exposed when circumstances demand broader institutional resilience.

There is still a path forward for the party - but it requires transformation. PTI must evolve from a personality-centric platform into an institutional political force. It must empower a credible second-tier leadership, reduce internal factionalism and develop issue-based political messaging that resonates with the wider public beyond emotional appeals. It must also return to Punjab - not merely in rhetoric, but through political organisation and reconnecting with voters on the ground.

Most importantly, PTI must shed its reliance on hope-driven politics - whether it is waiting for favourable judicial rulings, external endorsements or the return of sympathetic foreign leaders. Politics is shaped by action, not assumptions. The party must return to its roots - engage its workers, build organisational capacity and offer a clear alternative to the status quo.

Imran Khan remains a powerful political symbol. But for PTI to survive and thrive in his absence or continued confinement, it must rise above symbolic politics and embrace strategic, patient and grounded political work.

History has shown that political resilience, not emotional fervour, shapes outcomes. PTI has the opportunity to learn and adapt - but the window for course correction is narrowing. If it is to reclaim relevance and credibility, it must act now - with discipline, strategy and unity.