The neo-colonial framing of Pakistan is rooted in history, geopolitics, and global discourse. It describes how external powers and institutions continue to shape the way Pakistan is seen and treated in the world, in ways that resemble colonial-era hierarchies.

In contrast to the direct rule of the British Raj, neo-colonialism operates in less obvious ways, in economic circumstances, pressures over security issues, and cultural stereotypes. These processes tend to constrain Pakistan’s freedom in determining its own agenda. Nonetheless, Pakistan is not an innocent bystander. Its state organs, in particular the government and the Army, have been resilient in resisting, adapting, and claiming sovereignty. The actual problem is how to withstand such external pressure while enhancing governance and safeguarding strategic independence.

When Pakistan gained independence in 1947, most of the structural issues left behind by the British colonial rule were inherited by Pakistan, which included a weak economy, weak industries, and administrative systems built for control rather than development. Partition aggravated such problems by bringing up population movements, unresolved boundaries, and institutional chaos. Immediately after becoming independent, Cold War grounded relations put Pakistan in the position of being a frontline state either against communism or during the war on terror. As the theorist Kwame Nkrumah warned, such alignments often lock postcolonial states into dependency, as they are valued mainly for their strategic utility. Over time, Pakistan was too often defined not on its own terms but as a tool for others’ agendas, whether American, Chinese, or regional.

The security narrative is the strongest neo-colonial frame since the events of 9/11. Pakistan has often been called a terror hub or a weak nuclear nation. This framing makes a complicated reality easier to understand and rationalizes future outside measures like drone........

© Eurasia Review