By Akhtar Hussain Sandhu

Pakistan has been passing through a turbulent phase by means of internal and external challenges. All the administrative authorities are trying to bridle this nuisance and menace. The crucial national and international problems, including terrorism, failure of the political parties, the impotent role of bureaucracy, and the external threats to the state, have popularized the military leadership. Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir leads the only organized institution of army in Pakistan that performs its duties tremendously and vigilantly.

The maleficent and precarious plans of India, the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, and Tehrik-i-Labbaik Pakistan, the violent role of political parties have multiplied the challenges for Pakistan. It is even Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaf Pakistan that supports extremist and violent activities, which ultimately damages the image of the country. Although the civil government is credited in restoring the performance of foreign affairs, but the real credit goes to the Chief of Army Staff Gen. Gen. Asim Munir, who paved the way for cordial relations with the Arab and powerful countries, including USA, China, and Russia. The Afghan Taliban government is already supporting TTP, which attacked the Pakistan Army’s posts and martyred 23 soldiers. The TTP had already martyred many civilians, law enforcement officials, and military officers and soldiers in the recent past.

Moreover, the Afghan foreign minister Amir Muttaqi’s visit to India set in a new collaboration against Pakistan. Under the influence of this Afghan-India understanding, the long Pak-Afghan border was hit by the TTP militants and the Afghan army, but the Pakistan army bulldozed their sinister and nefarious aims and defeated the Afghan army within two hours testifying the myth that Afghanistan never defeated any attacking nation without external support. The Pakistan Army has not interfered with the election process of the Chief Minister KPK, which indicates that the army would remain aloof from the politics. Gen. Asim Munir proved his professional ethics, fairplay, and impartiality to uplift the image of Pakistan in the world. Pakistan’s armed forces, with their great professionalism, defended the country and retaliated with full thrust when Iran, India, and Afghanistan attacked Pakistan. An honest and visionary leadership is the asset of a nation; therefore, the majority of Pakistani people are proud of their institutions especially the army and leadership.

On the other hand, such circumstances pave the way for a military dictatorship because the failure of the political parties results in the decay of the democratic system. Pakistan at the moment experiences the best model of collaboration between the government and army, along with the best model of foreign relations but at the same time, Pakistan is undergoing the worst phase because of the violent politics of PTI, TTP, TLP, along with grave danger on the eastern and western borders. India and Afghanistan are inflicting a collaborative aggression on the civilians and armed forces of Pakistan.

Despite this critical situation, moral and administrative corruption by almost all government institutions, including police, revenue, customs, smuggling, nepotism, drug sale, media abuse, atrocities by the rich, encroachments, leasing government lands, commission on contracts, weak performance in the education sector, impotent role in expelling the Afghan refugees, ill-treatment at the airports by the dealing staff, slave mindset of the bureaucracy, and sifarash  seem toeing the traditionally dirty politics, corrupt mindset and rotten governance by the government institutions which will definitely increase a favorable sentiments for the army chief and detestation for the political parties.

On all fronts, the people of Pakistan witness an effective role of Gen. Asim Munir that will result in the extension or direct rule of the Field Marshal. The performance of the political parties is declining their prestige in the eyes of the people as the PTI does not get rid of the violent and anti-Pakistan politics; PMLN, being in the government, is losing the sympathy base among the masses, and PPP has already no rising potential in the national politics. They have focused on the role of pressure groups confined to the provincial forces.

            The PPP confined itself to Sindh, PMLN in Punjab, PTI in KPK, while no political genuine process in Balochistan, Azad Kashmir, and Gilgit-Baltistan. Although the Pakistani establishment is away from the politics of Pakistan but it cannot remain silent on the assumptions perceived by the establishment. The Supreme Court of Pakistan is divided between the judges having a ‘populist approach’ and a ‘constitutionalist mindset.’ Most of the judges are inducted based on their political affiliation, and the political parties expect them to return the same love, which has led the Pakistani judicial system to the worst performance list issued at international level.

The Police and other departments are used by the ruling party to embarrass the opposition. Even the political parties have internal groups that are taken and treated as rival political forces. The political parties use their offshoots in the educational institutions as their armed supporters. The lawyers have political and financial predilections; therefore, the main leadership producing institution has become a political stooge, blackmailer, qabza mafia, and drumbeater of the politicians and pseudo-religious leaders. Sometimes, some people assume that Pakistan is perhaps not suitable for democracy. I assume that western societies, where democracy is successful, develop different social and cultural dynamics. Pakistan’s socio-cultural reality is different from the West; therefore, the imported Western system cannot work effectively in Pakistan. It is the moral obligation of Pakistan’s social scientists to develop and adapt a conducive system fit to our socio-political reality. In this perspective, local cultures and mindset is to be considered to make democracy successful in our country. An honest and dedicated leadership is need of the time, our politicians are required to be trustworthy through their fair political decision-making.             Amidst the prevailing circumstances, one cannot find any honest, uncompromised, and strong leadership in the political parties of Pakistan. In the state of crisis, people look forward toward the military leadership in Pakistan. There has been a game of hide and seek between democracy and dictatorship in Pakistan. During the tenure of Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa, the political crisis emerged based on the doubt of the military intervention for ten years, but external and internal threats and economic crisis did not allow the military to occupy Islamabad. The coming years seem to be crucial, and the constant political crises may give chance to military leadership to lead the country directly.

Paris ( Imran Y. CHOUDHRY):- UNESCO has adopted Pakistan’s proposal on countering disinformation, misinformation and hate speech to safeguard freedom of expression. Pakistan’s Permanent Delegate to UNESCO, Ambassador Mumtaz Zahra Baloch, presented the proposal at the 222nd Session of the UNESCO Executive Board currently being held in Paris.

Pakistan’s proposal received broad cross-regional backing from Member States, underscoring a strong global commitment to protecting information integrity in the digital age. It reflects UNESCO’s centrality to promoting a safe, reliable, and inclusive information environment that upholds human rights, democratic values, and access to information for all.

The UNESCO Executive Board highlighted the new challenges to information integrity presented by emerging technologies, including Artificial Intelligence (AI), neurotechnology, and immersive digital environments. It also called on digital platforms to ensure transparency and accountability by detecting and labeling AI-generated or manipulated content and strengthening authentication measures.

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis: In the long arc of global politics, some stories are not merely about one man or one nation, but about the deliberate removal of obstacles that could derail larger designs. The imprisonment of Imran Khan, referred to by many as the forgotten “Prisoner 804,” is not only a chapter in Pakistan’s turbulent democracy but part of a larger geopolitical strategy in which the United States, Israel, and their allies sought to ensure that no disruptive force could interfere with their unfolding project in the Middle East. His incarceration is not just a punishment for defiance at home; it is a calculated silencing of a leader whose stubborn refusal to obey foreign dictates could have unsettled the plan to reshape Palestine, neutralize resistance, and entrench the vision of a greater Israel.
The United States has long been accused of thinking not just about present crises but of planning far ahead, identifying potential threats to its policies and eliminating them before they can materialize. From Latin America in the 20th century to the Middle East after 9/11, the record is replete with instances of intervention, destabilization, and regime change to pave the way for American interests. Pakistan, with its nuclear arsenal and ideological centrality to the Muslim world, has always been watched with particular suspicion whenever a leader emerged who spoke of independence, dignity, or solidarity with oppressed Muslims abroad. Imran Khan, by the time he matured into a national statesman, fit this profile perfectly: a man too self-confident to obey and too popular to be ignored.
It was during one of his interviews that the world caught a glimpse of his defiance. Asked whether Pakistan would allow American bases on its soil, his answer was sharp, unequivocal, and without diplomatic varnish: “Absolutely not.” For Washington, such a response was more than a sound bite. It was a warning that when the time came to launch broader operations in the region, including in Gaza, Khan would be an unpredictable and dangerous obstacle. The United States and Israel were moving towards their long-prepared campaign to dismantle Hamas and, more brutally, to ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank. In that plan, Pakistan mattered. Its nuclear status, its army’s conventional strength, its historic role in the Muslim world, and the ability of its leader to mobilize opinion could all complicate the campaign. And so, before the bombs fell on Gaza, before the massacres of civilians filled the headlines, Pakistan’s loudest and most defiant voice was removed from the stage and locked in prison.
Khan’s removal was achieved through the time-tested formula of intrigue, betrayal, and manipulation. Once firmly established in power, his popularity was not eroded by scandal or economic collapse but by conspiracies spun from within, aided by external encouragement. He was stabbed in the back by allies, deceived by those he trusted, and undermined by the very establishment that should have protected him. His removal through a no-confidence vote in 2022 was presented as constitutional theater, but the timing and the subsequent unfolding of events revealed a deeper orchestration. He was expected, even by detractors, to return to power after elections. Yet the military establishment, in close alignment with U.S. preferences, ensured that even that possibility was closed off. For Washington, it was not enough to remove him once; they had to make sure he could never again return to disrupt the silence that was required when Gaza burned.
What followed was a demonstration of how external powers reward obedience and punish defiance. The civilian government led by Shehbaz Sharif and the military leadership under General Asim Munir quickly aligned themselves with Washington’s designs. Donald Trump himself revealed that both Sharif and Munir had been taken into confidence during the preparations for the U.S. strike on Iran and Israel’s onslaught on Gaza. The symbolism was unmistakable. For the first time in living memory, the president of the United States bypassed Pakistan’s civilian prime minister and held direct consultations with a serving general, elevating a subordinate servant of the state to the rank of geopolitical partner. The bypassing of the civilian chain of command spoke volumes: it was a reminder that power in Pakistan could be stabilized or destabilized at Washington’s will, depending on whether it complied or resisted.
The results were immediate and telling. When Israel unleashed its fury on Gaza and the West Bank, demolishing neighborhoods, bombing hospitals, and slaughtering women, children, and journalists, Pakistan’s response was muted. The country that had historically been among the loudest defenders of the Palestinian cause was suddenly silent. The same Pakistan whose leaders once thundered in international forums against Israeli occupation now mumbled routine statements while ensuring that no real action was taken. The silence was not accidental; it was the price paid for staying in power. Washington, in turn, ensured that Pakistan’s economy did not collapse entirely. IMF loans were eased, debt repayments were tolerated, and inflation was kept under some measure of control. The army and police were allowed to unleash brute force against protesters without fear of sanctions or reprimand. In exchange for obedience, the state was stabilized enough to carry out Washington’s commands.
Meanwhile, Prisoner 804 remained behind bars. Courts disregarded arguments by senior advocates and witnesses, not because the evidence was weak but because justice was never the point. The plan was clear: Imran Khan was to remain imprisoned until the Israeli project in Palestine was complete. His release, whether legally warranted or not, would have risked giving voice to the Muslim world at a moment when silence was most precious to Israel and its backers. His love for Islam, his admiration for the Prophet, his ability to galvanize millions of ordinary Pakistanis, and his influence across the Muslim world posed the very real danger of rallying states to oppose the genocide in Gaza. He could have called for collective action, perhaps even kinetic action, uniting Pakistan with Iran or other Muslim nations to confront Israeli aggression. That risk could not be taken, and so he was kept locked away, forgotten by the courts, ignored by the establishment, and silenced by force.
In this tragic arrangement, Pakistan has been reduced to a pawn. Its elected leadership lacks legitimacy, having been installed “by hook or by crook,” without genuine majority support. Its military leadership has overstayed retirements and rules with impunity, rewarded for obedience and secured by foreign approval. Together, they preside over a silenced population, cowed into submission by fear of the army and police, pacified by small economic concessions, and deprived of the leader who once embodied their aspirations for independence. The entire spectacle demonstrates how Washington’s leverage works: stabilize those who obey, destabilize those who defy.
The case of the forgotten 804, therefore, is not merely about one man’s imprisonment. It is about the systematic silencing of resistance in the Muslim world to clear the path for Israel’s project of ethnic cleansing and annexation. It is about the quiet submission of a nuclear-armed nation to foreign diktats, reduced from potential leader of an Islamic bloc to a bystander while atrocities unfold before the world’s eyes. It is about the reminder that in the theater of geopolitics, legality, democracy, and even human life itself are subordinated to the interests of the powerful.
Yet history has a way of proving that silence never lasts forever. Imran Khan’s imprisonment may achieve its short-term purpose, but the questions it raises will not vanish. How long can Pakistan endure the contradiction between its people’s convictions and its rulers’ obedience? How long can the Muslim world remain fragmented when the suffering of Palestinians continues to demand a collective response? And how long can any leader who bends too easily to foreign will sustain their own legitimacy at home? The forgotten 804 may one day emerge, and if he does, it will not only be as a man but as the embodiment of a suppressed nation’s voice. Until then, his silence echoes in every demolished home in Gaza, every unmarked grave in the West Bank, and every tear of those who still look to Pakistan for leadership and find only compliance.