Introduction
Since its inception in 1947, Pakistan has grappled with a complex interplay of power dynamics and ideological differences. The country’s two most potent regions, Punjab and Pashtun-majority Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), have maintained a tenuous alliance that has historically dictated the state’s political and military direction. This union, a marriage of convenience rather than ideological harmony, has been held together mainly by the coercive might of the military and the carefully crafted myth of a unified national identity. However, the recent wave of protests spearheaded by Imran Khan, compounded by growing sectarian and ethnic divisions, threatens to tear this fragile balance apart, potentially delivering the final blow to the state’s cohesion. Discontent, Animosity, and Sectarian Rifts in Pakistan: Is the State Approaching Its Breaking Point?
Historical Context: An Uneasy Alliance
With its economic might, bureaucratic dominance, and historical allegiance to the military establishment, Punjab has long been the linchpin of Pakistan’s power structure. In contrast, though vital for their strategic position and contributions to the military, the Pashtun regions have remained ideologically distinct and often alienated from the Punjabi-dominated centre. This disparity has given rise to long-standing grievances, particularly among Pashtun communities, who feel they have been used as pawns in the state’s geopolitical ambitions, such as during the Afghan wars and the so-called “War on Terror.”
The military, primarily dominated by Punjabi officers, has historically been the glue binding these regions. However, its policies—marked by suppression, exploitation, and an over-reliance on coercion—have only deepened the mistrust between these key regions. The current political upheaval has brought these simmering tensions to the forefront, with Imran Khan’s ouster and subsequent confrontations with the military as a catalyst for broader discontent.
Imran Khan and the Breakdown of the Status Quo
Imran Khan’s rise to power in 2018 was seen as a carefully orchestrated move by the military to maintain its grip on the country. However, his eventual fallout with the establishment marked a significant turning point. Khan, a Pashtun by ethnicity, has strategically played on his dual identity as a national figure and a representative of Pashtun aspirations. His fiery rhetoric against the military establishment and its alleged interference in political affairs has resonated deeply in KPK and other Pashtun-dominated areas, reigniting ethnic and regional loyalties.
The events of 2023-24, particularly Khan’s arrest and the violent protests that followed, have exposed the fault lines within Pakistan’s power structure. For the first time, the military faced direct and widespread public opposition in urban centres and historically militarized regions like KPK. The attacks on military installations during the May 9 protests highlighted a significant shift: the Pashtun-dominated areas were no longer willing to accept the dominance of the Punjabi-led army establishment unquestioningly.
Sectarian and Ethnic Rifts: A Widening Chasm
The mistrust between Punjab and KPK is not merely political but deeply rooted in cultural and ideological differences. Punjab’s historical alignment with a centralized, authoritarian governance model contrasts sharply with the Pashtun ethos of tribal autonomy and resistance to external control. This divergence has been exacerbated by the military’s heavy-handed approach in regions like KPK and Balochistan, where operations against insurgents and militants have often indiscriminately targeted local populations, fueling resentment.
Furthermore, sectarian divisions have added another layer of complexity. While Punjab has a significant Sunni majority, the rise of sectarian militancy in recent decades has created fractures even within this demographic. Meanwhile, the Pashtun regions, though predominantly Sunni, have historically adhered to a more tribal and less rigid interpretation of Islam, which clashes with the growing influence of hardline Sunni groups often backed by Punjabi networks.
The result is a state where ethnic, sectarian, and regional identities are increasingly asserting themselves against the narrative of a unified “Pakistani” identity. Economic woes, political instability, and a lack of coherent national leadership have accelerated this fragmentation.
The Role of the Military: Protector or Perpetrator?
The military’s dual role as both a stabilizing force and a self-serving power broker is at the heart of Pakistan’s current crisis. For decades, the military has justified its dominance by presenting itself as the guardian of Pakistan’s territorial integrity and Islamic identity. However, its repeated interventions in civilian politics and its failure to address underlying socio-economic issues have eroded its credibility.
Imran Khan’s narrative of the military as an overreaching and corrupt institution has found fertile ground among the Pashtun population, who already view the establishment with suspicion. The growing perception that the army serves Punjabi interests at the expense of other regions has further alienated Pashtuns and other marginalized groups, such as the Baloch and Sindhis.
The Economic Dimension: Fueling Discontent
Pakistan’s economic crisis has only amplified these divisions. The disproportionate allocation of resources to Punjab, coupled with the economic marginalization of regions like KPK and Balochistan, has fueled resentment. The failure of successive governments to address these disparities has created a sense of economic apartheid, where the benefits of development are perceived to be concentrated in Punjab. At the same time, other regions are left to languish.
Imran Khan’s ability to channel this discontent into a coherent political movement has further destabilized the status quo. By framing his struggle as one against an unjust and exploitative system, Khan has united a diverse coalition of supporters, ranging from urban middle-class Punjabis to rural Pashtuns, in opposition to the military and its civilian allies.
Is This the Final Nail in Pakistan’s Coffin?
The current crisis represents a perfect storm of political, ethnic, and economic challenges threatening to unravel the state. The Punjab-KPK alliance, always fragile, is now under unprecedented strain. The military, long seen as the ultimate arbiter of power, is facing a legitimacy crisis that it may be unable to overcome.
Several scenarios could emerge from this crisis:
- Increased Militarization: The military may attempt to reassert its control through even more aggressive tactics, risking further alienation of Pashtun and other marginalized populations.
- Civil Disintegration: The growing mistrust and hatred between Punjab and KPK could lead to open conflict, potentially pushing the state toward fragmentation.
- Reform and Decentralization: A less likely but hopeful scenario involves genuine political and institutional reforms that address regional grievances and redistribute power more equitably.
- External Interventions: Pakistan’s geopolitical significance means that external actors, such as China, the US, or Saudi Arabia, may intervene to stabilize the situation, though this could come at the cost of Pakistan’s sovereignty.
The Latest Rift Over Imran Khan’s Release: Punjab vs. Pashtun Divide Deepens
The recent release of Imran Khan from detention has ignited fresh tensions between Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), exposing the deep-seated mistrust and ideological differences between the two regions. Khan’s arrest earlier this year, widely seen as orchestrated by the military, triggered massive protests, particularly in KPK, where he enjoys widespread support due to his Pashtun heritage and anti-establishment rhetoric. In contrast, Punjab’s political elite and military loyalists largely toed the establishment’s line, viewing Khan’s populism as threatening stability.
The aftermath of his release has highlighted this growing divide. Pashtun communities celebrated the decision as a victory against the Punjabi-dominated military establishment, interpreting it as a pushback against years of perceived marginalization and coercion. In KPK, large crowds took to the streets, hailing Khan as a symbol of resistance. This contrasts starkly with the subdued reaction in Punjab, where the military’s narrative of maintaining “law and order” continues to resonate among its political and bureaucratic elite.
Adding fuel to the fire, many in KPK accuse Punjab of being complicit in Khan’s earlier arrest and judicial targeting. The perception that Punjab wields disproportionate influence over national institutions has further alienated Pashtuns, who view the military’s actions as yet another attempt to suppress their regional identity and political aspirations.
The rift over Khan’s release underscores the fragility of Pakistan’s ethnic and regional unity. As Pashtuns rally behind Khan and his defiance of the establishment, Punjab’s alignment with the military risks deepening the divide. This latest episode challenges the military’s dominance and raises existential questions about the sustainability of Pakistan’s federal structure as these two powerful regions drift further apart.
Conclusion: A State at Crossroads
Pakistan’s current predicament is not merely a political crisis; it is an existential challenge that calls into question the very foundations of the state. The growing mistrust between Punjab and KPK, exacerbated by Imran Khan’s populist movement, has exposed the fragility of a system built on coercion rather than consensus.
Whether Pakistan can navigate this crisis will depend on the willingness of its leaders—both civilian and military—to confront the root causes of discontent and embark on a path of genuine reform. However, if the current trajectory of repression, exclusion, and denial continues, Pakistan risks becoming a cautionary tale of a state undone by its internal contradictions. The stakes could not be higher, and the time for change is running out.
The recent release of Imran Khan from detention has ignited fresh tensions between Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), exposing the deep-seated mistrust and ideological differences between the two regions. Khan’s arrest earlier this year, widely seen as orchestrated by the military, triggered massive protests, particularly in KPK, where he enjoys widespread support due to his Pashtun heritage and anti-establishment rhetoric. In contrast, Punjab’s political elite and military loyalists largely toed the establishment’s line, viewing Khan’s populism as threatening stability.
The aftermath of his release has highlighted this growing divide. Pashtun communities celebrated the decision as a victory against the Punjabi-dominated military establishment, interpreting it as a pushback against years of perceived marginalization and coercion. In KPK, large crowds took to the streets, hailing Khan as a symbol of resistance. This contrasts starkly with the subdued reaction in Punjab, where the military’s narrative of maintaining “law and order” continues to resonate among its political and bureaucratic elite.
Adding fuel to the fire, many in KPK accuse Punjab of being complicit in Khan’s earlier arrest and judicial targeting. The perception that Punjab wields disproportionate influence over national institutions has further alienated Pashtuns, who view the military’s actions as yet another attempt to suppress their regional identity and political aspirations.
The rift over Khan’s release underscores the fragility of Pakistan’s ethnic and regional unity. As Pashtuns rally behind Khan and his defiance of the establishment, Punjab’s alignment with the military risks deepening the divide. This latest episode challenges the military’s dominance and raises existential questions about the sustainability of Pakistan’s federal structure as these two powerful regions drift further apart.
The deepening segregationist proportions between Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) are casting a long shadow over Pakistan’s unity, drawing eerie parallels to the events that led to the separation of East Pakistan in 1971. The growing mistrust, fueled by ethnic, regional, and ideological disparities, mirrors the historical resentment felt by Bengalis under a similarly Punjabi-dominated state. Just as East Pakistan’s grievances against economic exploitation, political marginalization, and cultural suppression culminated in its secession to form Bangladesh, there is a growing fear that a similar fate could await Pakistan if these divisions remain unaddressed.
The systematic sidelining of Pashtun voices within the military and government, coupled with the crackdown on dissent in KPK, risks alienating the region further. If Pashtuns, emboldened by Imran Khan’s anti-establishment rhetoric, continue to feel excluded from the national framework, the possibility of a separatist sentiment cannot be dismissed. The fragile “Hillali Pakistan” (crescent-emblemed Pakistan) could fracture into a “Jalil Pakistan” (a dishonoured or fragmented state) if the Punjabi elite fails to address these underlying tensions.
To avoid repeating history, Pakistan must confront its internal inequalities and adopt a federal structure that genuinely respects the autonomy and aspirations of all its regions. Without meaningful reform, the state risks descending into a cycle of fragmentation that could irrevocably alter its borders and identity, mirroring the very downfall it seeks to forget.
