Pakistan News
Diaspora Dissent: Not for Sale
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 an unprecedented wave of political activism, overseas Pakistanis—particularly staunch supporters of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and Imran Khan—have mounted a global campaign of defiance against the current Pakistani regime. From London to New York, Toronto to Berlin, these protests have transcended symbolic gestures to become aggressive assertions of political will. The Pakistani diaspora has turned global cities into battlegrounds for democratic accountability, branding those allegedly involved in electoral manipulation as persona non grata.
These protests reflect deep-rooted disillusionment among overseas Pakistanis toward what they perceive as a civilian-military coup. The Form-45 regime, symbolizing electoral rigging, has become a rallying cry for expatriates who feel democracy has been hijacked. These protests have evolved into personal confrontations, with Pakistani officials—civilian and military alike—being heckled and humiliated abroad.
Overseas Pakistanis have effectively shrunk the world for those they hold responsible for undermining democracy. These individuals can no longer travel abroad in peace—they are harassed mid-flight, greeted at airports with derogatory slogans, and often followed to their hotels or residences. Even during public events, speakers perceived to be aligned with the alleged illegitimate regime are frequently interrupted, insulted, and publicly shamed.
In response, the government resorted to repressive measures. The relatives of vocal expatriate Pakistanis were reportedly detained and mistreated while the expatriates were made to listen via phone—an intimidation tactic designed to silence dissent. Passports and national identity cards of active overseas Pakistanis were suspended, barring them from returning home. Laws were swiftly enacted to curtail digital speech, with social media platforms blocked and internet speeds deliberately slowed during key protests.
These coercive actions were accompanied by an expansive state-led propaganda campaign. The Ministry of Information, effectively reduced to an auxiliary arm of the ISPR, was mobilized to downplay protests, suppress online dissent, and discredit critics. Despite these efforts, the resolve of the overseas Pakistani community remained unshaken. Rather than diminishing in strength, the protests gained momentum and international visibility.
Realizing that intimidation alone was failing, the state pivoted toward engagement. Delegations comprising serving and retired generals and senior diplomats were dispatched to diaspora hubs to appeal for support. These officials implored expatriates to differentiate between state institutions and individual actions, warning that criticism of the army was tantamount to treason. The government’s outreach primarily targeted embassy-affiliated individuals—those who maintain close ties with diplomats in return for favors and visibility. These individuals, often viewed with suspicion by the broader community, lack genuine grassroots legitimacy and are regarded as mouthpieces rather than representatives.
These select figures were later included in choreographed trips to Pakistan, where they were feted with VIP treatment and praised as “the lifeline of Pakistan.” These public relations exercises, orchestrated and funded by ISPR, were designed to create the illusion of overseas unity and support. Simultaneously, the government rolled out investment incentives, preferential immigration procedures, and tax breaks for expatriates—misguided attempts to purchase silence.
But this strategy ignored a fundamental truth: overseas Pakistanis are not fighting for personal gains. They are fighting for the soul of their nation. Their commitment stems from a deep emotional bond with their homeland and a belief in democratic values, human dignity, and national justice.
Their agitation against the army was fueled by the perception that the civilian government, judiciary, and parliament have been rendered powerless, acting only to bolster military dominance and implement the vision of General Syed Asim Munir. His leadership has come to symbolize the transformation of Pakistan into a “hard state”—a nation where dissent is not debated but disciplined.
General Asim Munir’s thinking pattern to deal with dissent follows a strict, militarized doctrine. He sees public demonstrations, political activism, and journalistic inquiry not as democratic exercises but as threats to national cohesion. His public statements reflect an unwavering commitment to rooting out what he describes as “internal enemies,” “foreign agents,” or “facilitators” of chaos. Whether dealing with Baloch separatists, the TTP, or dissenters on social media, his response framework remains rooted in control through surveillance, suppression, and force.
This worldview—conditioned by years of counterinsurgency and military strategy—is ill-suited for civilian governance. In his formulation, peace is imposed, not negotiated; order is enforced, not earned. In practice, this leads to silencing voices, curbing freedoms, and criminalizing criticism. Such a posture may be effective in battlefield logistics, but when applied to civilians, it risks alienating populations and undermining the very fabric of the nation.
This hardline approach overlooks the methods used by progressive and democratic nations to resolve internal conflict: dialogue, negotiation, institutional reform, and civic inclusion. When citizens are treated with respect and their voices are heard, peace prevails. But when fear becomes a tool of governance, nations suffer: capital and talent flee, innovation dries up, and cultural expression is stifled. Pakistan, unfortunately, is heading down that path.
This internal repression mirrors a broader national crisis. In Balochistan, enforced disappearances and heavy-handed military tactics have ignited a rebellion. Rather than addressing long-standing grievances, the state continues to respond with brute force. In Sindh, tensions over water rights have deepened provincial resentment, with no meaningful resolution in sight. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is once again battling a surge in terrorism, while Punjab reels from rampant political victimization of PTI leaders, supporters, and even apolitical citizens.
The voice of the overseas Pakistani community is, therefore, not a disruption—it is an extension of this national cry for justice. Their message is consistent: without restoring electoral integrity, releasing political prisoners, and withdrawing military interference from civil governance, Pakistan will remain unstable both at home and abroad.
The solution lies not in suppression but in reform. The judiciary must be independent, political plurality must be safeguarded, and the media must be allowed to operate freely. Cosmetic PR campaigns cannot mask the truth, and the diaspora sees through them. Their activism is not for show; it is a principled stand for a democratic Pakistan.
No amount of choreographed visits, orchestrated praise, or economic incentives will pacify a politically awakened diaspora. The state has gravely misjudged their conviction. These Pakistanis abroad are not mere remittance-senders—they are informed, connected, and resolute agents of change.
The path forward requires a national reckoning. Real reform must replace propaganda. Justice must replace intimidation. Dialogue must replace threats. Until that transformation occurs, the voice of the overseas Pakistani community—amplified across borders and continents—will continue to grow louder. And that voice, forged in conviction and steeped in truth, cannot and will not be silenced.
QUETTA: The business community in Quetta on Friday condemned India’s boycott campaign against Turkish and Azerbaijani products and the cancellation of travel tickets to these countries by Indian citizens, calling it a reflection of frustration over support extended to Pakistan by Ankara and Baku during the recent conflict.
Quetta Chamber of Commerce and Industry President Haji Muhammad Ayub Miriani, Senior Vice-President Haji Akhtar Kakar, Vice-President Engineer Mir Wais Khan Kakar and former QCCI president and business leader Haji Ghulam Farooq Khilji said that in light of India’s decision, “it is the responsibility of the government of Pakistan and the business community to come forward and establish strong trade relations with the brotherly Islamic countries — Turkiye and Azerbaijan”.
“The business community of Balochistan is ready to play a frontline role in this regard,” the leaders said in a discussion at the QCCI, adding that they “hope the government will also take steps for stronger trade ties with both the friendly countries”.
https://www.dawn.com/news/card/1911469
The business figures claimed that during the recent conflict, where Pakistan launched “Operation Bunyanum Marsoos,” India suffered “heavy losses” and is now “trying to cover up its failure by blaming countries like Turkiye, Azerbaijan, and China”.
They contended, “The Modi government and the Indian public, in fear of Pakistan’s allies, are now boycotting their products and cancelling confirmed tickets to their tourist destinations.”
They also emphasised Pakistan’s aspiration to expand global trade ties, noting that economic growth depends on international cooperation.
“Pakistan aspires to have good trade relations with all countries of the world and is striving for rapid economic growth, which is not possible without expanding trade,” they said.
The QCCI officials also said their organisation is working to resolve issues faced by industrialists and workers across various sectors, including import-export, agriculture, livestock and transportation.
“We affirm that the Quetta Chamber of Commerce and Industry will play a leading role in improving business ties with countries like Turkiye and Azerbaijan,” they concluded.
Published in Dawn, May 17th, 2025
Former foreign minister and PTI leader Shah Mahmood Qureshi has been moved from Lahore’s Kot Lakhpat Jail to the Punjab Institute of Cardiology (PIC) on Saturday after he suffered heart pain, his lawyer said on Saturday.
Qureshi has been indicted in multiple cases pertaining to the May 9, 2023 riots and has remained behind bars since August 2023.
Speaking to Dawn.com today, Advocate Rana Mudassar, Qureshi’s lawyer, said his client suffered heart pain early in the morning after Fajr prayers. He underwent a medical assessment by prison doctors.
“He was shifted to the PIC by Rescue 1122 after his health failed to improve,” Mudassar said, adding that Qureshi was currently undergoing various tests at the hospital.
The PTI leader’s family had been informed about his condition, the lawyer added.
In July 2024, the PTI vice-president was indicted by a Lahore anti-terrorism court in a case registered by the Shadman police over allegedly attacking and burning the police station.
The same month, he was transferred from Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi to Kot Lakhpat on a police request. It had stated that frequent transportation of the PTI leader from Rawalpindi to Lahore was not feasible for the authorities as well as for the jailed ex-minister.
In November last year, a Lahore ATC indicted Qureshi and other senior PTI leaders in multiple cases relating to May 9 riots. The former foreign minister has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
To live along the Line of Control (LoC) – the volatile de facto border that separates India and Pakistan – is to exist perpetually on the razor’s edge between fragile peace and open conflict.
The recent escalation after the Pahalgam attack brought India and Pakistan to the brink once again. Shells rained down on both sides of the LoC, turning homes to rubble and lives into statistics. At least 16 people were reportedly killed on the Indian side, while Pakistan claims 40 civilian deaths, though it remains unclear how many were directly caused by the shelling.
“Families on the LoC are subjected to Indian and Pakistani whims and face the brunt of heated tensions,” Anam Zakaria, a Pakistani writer based in Canada, told the BBC.
“Each time firing resumes many are thrust into bunkers, livestock and livelihood is lost, infrastructure – homes, hospitals, schools – is damaged. The vulnerability and volatility experienced has grave repercussions for their everyday lived reality,” Ms Zakaria, author of a book on Pakistan-administered Kashmir, said.
India and Pakistan share a 3,323km (2,064-mile) border, including the 740km-long LoC; and the International Border (IB), spanning roughly 2,400km. The LoC began as the Ceasefire Line in 1949 after the first India-Pakistan war, and was renamed under the 1972 Simla Agreement.
The LoC cutting through Kashmir – claimed in full and administered in parts by both India and Pakistan – remains one of the most militarised borders in the world. Conflict is never far behind and ceasefires are only as durable as the next provocation.
Ceasefire violations here can range from “low-level firing to major land grabbing to surgical strikes“, says Happymon Jacob, a foreign policy expert at Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). (A land grab could involve seizing key positions such as hilltops, outposts, or buffer zones by force.)
The LoC, many experts say, is a classic example of a “border drawn in blood, forged through conflict”. It is also a line, as Ms Zakaria says, “carved by India and Pakistan, and militarised and weaponised, without taking Kashmiris into account”.
Such wartime borders aren’t unique to South Asia. Sumantra Bose, professor of international and comparative politics at Krea University in India and author of Kashmir at the Crossroads: Inside a 21st-Century Conflict, says the most well-known is the ‘Green Line’ – the ceasefire line of 1949 – which is the generally recognised boundary between Israel and the West Bank.
Not surprisingly, the tentative calm along the LoC that had endured since the 2021 ceasefire agreement between the two nuclear-armed neighbours crumbled easily after the latest hostilities.
“The current escalation on the LoC and International Border (IB) is significant as it follows a four-year period of relative peace on the border,” Surya Valliappan Krishna of Carnegie India told the BBC.
Violence along the India-Pakistan border is not new – prior to the 2003 ceasefire, India reported 4,134 violations in 2001 and 5,767 in 2002.
The 2003 ceasefire initially held, with negligible violations from 2004 to 2007, but tensions resurfaced in 2008 and escalated sharply by 2013.
Between 2013 and early 2021, the LoC and the IB witnessed sustained high levels of conflict. A renewed ceasefire in February 2021 led to an immediate and sustained drop in violations through to March 2025.
“During periods of intense cross-border firing we’ve seen border populations in the many thousands be displaced for months on end,” says Mr Krishna. Between late September and early December 2016, more than 27,000 people were displaced from border areas due to ceasefire violations and cross-border firing.
It’s looking increasingly hairy and uncertain now.
Tensions flared after the Pahalgam attack, with India suspending the key water-sharing treaty between India and Pakistan, known as the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). Pakistan responded by threatening to exit the 1972 Simla Agreement, which formalised the LoC – though it hasn’t followed through yet.
“This is significant because the Simla Agreement is the basis of the current LoC, which both sides agreed to not alter unilaterally in spite of their political differences,” says Mr Krishna.
Mr Jacob says for some “curious reason”, ceasefire violations along the LoC have been absent from discussions and debates about escalation of conflict between the two countries.
“It is itself puzzling how the regular use of high-calibre weapons such as 105mm mortars, 130 and 155mm artillery guns and anti-tank guided missiles by two nuclear-capable countries, which has led to civilian and military casualties, has escaped scholarly scrutiny and policy attention,” Mr Jacob writes in his book, Line On Fire: Ceasefire Violations and India-Pakistan Escalation Dynamics.
Mr Jacob identifies two main triggers for the violations: Pakistan often uses cover fire to facilitate militant infiltration into Indian-administered Kashmir, which has witnessed an armed insurgency against Indian rule for over three decades. Pakistan, in turn, accuses India of unprovoked firing on civilian areas.
He argues that ceasefire violations along the India-Pakistan border are less the product of high-level political strategy and more the result of local military dynamics.
The hostilities are often initiated by field commanders – sometimes with, but often without, central approval. He also challenges the notion that the Pakistan Army alone drives the violations, pointing instead to a complex mix of local military imperatives and autonomy granted to border forces on both sides.
Some experts believe It’s time to revisit an idea shelved nearly two decades ago: turning the LoC into a formal, internationally recognised border. Others insist that possibility was never realistic – and still isn’t.
“The idea is completely infeasible, a dead end. For decades, Indian maps have shown the entire territory of the erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir as part of India,” Sumantra Bose told the BBC.
“For Pakistan, making the LoC part of the International Border would mean settling the Kashmir dispute – which is Pakistan’s equivalent of the Holy Grail – on India’s preferred terms. Every Pakistani government and leader, civilian or military, over the past seven decades has rejected this.”
In his 2003 book, Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace, Prof Bose writes: “A Kashmir settlement necessitates that the LoC be transformed – from an iron curtain of barbed wire, bunkers, trenches and hostile militaries to a linen curtain. Realpolitik dictates that the border will be permanent (albeit probably under a different name), but it must be transcended without being abolished.”
“I stressed, though, that such a transformation of the LoC must be embedded in a broader Kashmir settlement, as one pillar of a multi-pillared settlement,” he told the BBC.
Between 2004 and 2007, turning the LoC into a soft border was central to a fledgling India-Pakistan peace process on Kashmir – a process that ultimately fell apart.
Today, the border has reignited, bringing back the cycle of violence and uncertainty for those who live in its shadow.
“You never know what will happen next. No one wants to sleep facing the Line of Control tonight,” an employee of a hotel in Pakistan-administered Kashmir told BBC Urdu during the recent hostilities.
It was a quiet reminder of how fragile peace is when your window opens to a battlefield.
Indian boycott of Turkish goods condemned in Quetta
PTI’s Shah Mahmood Qureshi moved to cardio institute due to heart pain
-
Europe News3 months agoChaos and unproven theories surround Tates’ release from Romania
-
American News3 months agoTrump Expels Zelensky from the White House
-
Pakistan News2 months agoCan Pakistan be a Hard State?
-
Politics3 months agoUS cuts send South Africa’s HIV treatment ‘off a cliff’
-
American News3 months agoZelensky bruised but upbeat after diplomatic whirlwind
-
American News2 months agoTrump expands exemptions from Canada and Mexico tariffs
-
Art & Culture3 months agoInternational Agriculture Exhibition held in Paris
-
American News2 months agoU.S. Tariff Policies: A Historical Perspective