There is a growing illusion in certain circles that opinion pieces in foreign newspapers can bend the judicial system of a state. That if enough columns are written in places like Washington or Tel Aviv, pressure will build, and Pakistan will be forced into decisions it would not otherwise take. This assumption is not just flawed, it shows a deep misunderstanding of how states function and how power actually works.

The question is simple. Can articles in foreign publications secure the release of Imran Khan? The answer is no. States do not reverse legal or political decisions because of commentary written abroad, especially when that commentary is seen as hostile or agenda driven. What such efforts can do, however, is raise uncomfortable questions about intent. Why are certain foreign voices suddenly invested in Pakistan’s internal matters? What do they really seek?

There is another, more serious problem. In its current approach, Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf has blurred the line between opposing a government and confronting the state itself. This is not a minor distinction. Governments change. States endure. When a political movement begins to treat the state as its rival, it steps onto dangerous ground.

The events of 9 May were not a routine political protest. They reflected a deeper confusion within the party’s thinking. This was not about policy disagreement or electoral contest. It carried the tone of confrontation with institutions that form the backbone of the state. Any attempt to create division within those institutions is not politics. It is something far more serious.

What is striking is that even after these events, there has been little reflection within the party. Instead of recalibrating its approach, it has leaned further into........

© The Patriot