The paradox of Pakistan's political parties

Pakistan's political parties suffer from a peculiar contradiction. The parties that encourage their workers to question authority risk being overwhelmed by internal revolt. Those that demand obedience may look disciplined, but they become helpless when their leadership is removed or pressured. One is noisy but fragmented; the other orderly but overly dependent. Neither has solved the problem of building an institution larger than its leader and this is what makes them vulnerable to implosion.

Imran Khan built much of PTI's political identity around challenging corruption, injustice and entrenched power. He encouraged ordinary supporters to speak against what they considered wrong. That message cultivated political confidence, but political empowerment is not the same as political organisation. Since Khan's imprisonment in 2023, PTI has struggled to translate an intensely committed support base into a coherent chain of democratic decision-making.

Workers accuse leaders of failing to pursue his release effectively; leaders face pressure from competing factions; and social-media commentators increasingly set the terms of internal debate. A public disagreement quickly becomes a test of loyalty. Someone asking for strategy is branded timid; someone urging talks is accused of betrayal. Party workers have every right to question decisions. Digital voices may expose failures that an inner circle would prefer to conceal. The problem begins when accusations replace evidence and online influence substitutes for authority derived from party members.

Who, then, speaks for PTI: elected officeholders, imprisoned leaders, street activists, overseas supporters or the loudest account on X? Without trusted rules, every faction claims to defend the founder while questioning everyone else's legitimacy. The deeper difficulty is the absence of a trusted referee. Where authority depends on personal access to a jailed founder, disagreements cannot be settled through regular procedures. Whoever claims the most authentic interpretation of the founder's wishes acquires influence without carrying the responsibilities of a formally accountable office.

Yet this is only one side of Pakistan's political paradox. In parties dominated by established families or entrenched elites, dissent often has limited influence on leadership succession. Workers may spend decades organising rallies and defending party leaders without gaining a realistic route to the top. Personal allegiance becomes the currency of advancement. Internal elections, where they occur, rarely settle fundamental questions of power. Such parties may display unity, but unity maintained by unequal access to power is not the same as institutional strength.

When pressure comes from outside, organisations with weak internal ownership can prove vulnerable to defections, patronage and negotiations conducted above the heads of ordinary members. This should not erase history. PPP workers and other opposition activists resisted Zia's dictatorship, notably through the Movement for the Restoration of Democracy. Many paid heavily for that resistance. The lesson is not that some parties have brave followers and others do not. It is that bravery cannot permanently substitute for institutions.

Meanwhile, Pakistan's civil–military imbalance makes these weaknesses more consequential. Political parties compete fiercely against one another, sometimes accepting interventions against rivals that they would condemn against themselves. The result is a familiar cycle: leaders rise with powerful backing, fall into confrontation, and discover that constitutional principles cannot be defended selectively. The October suspension of PTI's government in K-P, justified by federal authorities on security grounds and rejected by PTI as politically motivated, illustrates how sharply those constitutional disputes can escalate. With the government gone, divisions within the party have further widened rendering democracy weaker.

The tragedy is that Pakistan repeatedly produces powerful political personalities without producing equally powerful political institutions.

The next article will look into the way forward and reforms within political parties to make them strong, stable and credible!