The narrative that state institutions, particularly the Pakistan Army, are unfairly interfering in political affairs gains dangerous traction when multiple political parties—be it the PTI, PML-N, or PPP—simultaneously level similar accusations. However, to accept this convergence as a sign of truth is to ignore a fundamental, self-serving pattern in Pakistani politics: the attack on institutions is often a defensive shield erected to distract from, or protect, documented corruption.
The Cycle of Convenience: From Patronage to Persecution
The political history of the last two decades demonstrates a clear transactional relationship with the Establishment. When a party is in power, it invariably seeks patronage, cooperation, and support from state institutions to solidify its rule and ensure the smooth execution of its agenda—including appointments and administrative backing. During this period, the institutions are praised as pillars of the state and guardians of national integrity.
The moment this political alignment breaks—when a party is removed from power, faces judicial scrutiny, or is denied a desired political outcome—the narrative shifts instantly. The same institutions are suddenly declared biased, undemocratic, and manipulative. This is not principled activism; it is a Cycle of Convenience. The motive for their united voice is not shared truth, but shared political and personal vulnerability once the shield of power is removed.
The Elephant in the Room: Documented Corruption Scandals
The most compelling argument against the accusers’ credibility is their own track record of corruption, which, unlike their vague accusations against institutions, often involves documented evidence and legal proceedings.
Consider the major scandals that have defined the tenures of the parties:
- Tosha Khana and Al-Qadir Trust Cases (PTI): The former ruling party faced and continues to face convictions and strong allegations regarding the illegal retention and sale of state gifts (Tosha Khana Corruption Scandal) and the alleged abuse of authority linked to a land deal concerning the £190 million recovered from a property tycoon (Al Qadir Trust Case). These cases involve formal legal findings on financial mismanagement and abuse of official position for personal and trust gains.
Facts of the 190 million pounds/Al Qadir Trust case that Imran Khan has just been convicted in.
Imran Khan has been handed a 14 year prison sentence and his wife has been given a 7 year jail sentence. This thread will lay down all the facts.
🧵
— Shehzad Ghias Shaikh (@Shehzad89) January 17, 2025
- Administrative Corruption and Failures (PTI): The PTI government faced specific allegations, such as the corruption scandal of CM Usman Buzdar involving the taking of bribes for the posting and transfer of bureaucratic officials (a notorious “transfer-posting scam”). Furthermore, the prolonged administrative failure of the KP government in areas of law and order, prosecution of terrorists, and development projects, despite a long tenure, also exposed a systemic collapse in governance and accountability.
- Past Scrutiny (PML-N and PPP): Both the PML-N and the PPP have faced their own periods of intensive accountability and international scrutiny, including cases related to the Panama Papers, allegations of money laundering, and grand corruption during their respective turns in power.
Questioning the Motive: The Halt of the Corruption Cycle
This history forces the public to ask the most crucial question: Why do these parties only have a problem with state institutions when they are out of power and their cycle of corruption is halted?
Their true grievance is not the health of democracy or the supremacy of civilian rule; it is the inability to continue embezzling state funds, awarding illegal contracts, or benefiting from ill-gotten gains. The attacks on institutions serve as a calculated deflection, designed to:
- Weaponize Public Anger: Redirect public frustration over high inflation, poverty, and weak governance away from their past failures and toward the institutions.
- Paralyze Accountability: Create so much political noise and crisis that the slow, methodical process of accountability in corruption cases is stalled, dismissed as ‘political victimization,’ or overshadowed by new controversies.
When a politician who has been implicated in multi-billion rupee corruption cases suddenly becomes the most vocal champion against institutional overreach, their motive must be treated with extreme skepticism. It is a desperate maneuver to substitute national interest for personal self-preservation and a defense of their embezzlement enterprise.
The Pursuit of Power, and the Illusion of Ideology
At the heart of this political maneuvering lies a singular, overriding ambition that supersedes all stated manifestos and public promises: the accumulation of absolute power, control, and the retention of a governing position. The true concern of these political elites is not the welfare of the ordinary Pakistani citizen, but the continuation of a system that allows them to maintain political and economic hegemony.
To achieve this dominance and manufacture public consent, these parties skillfully deploy powerful, emotional slogans. They strategically iterate narratives of religion, nationalism, civilian supremacy, and accountability—but only when such slogans serve to either attack a rival or legitimize their current position. This tactic aligns precisely with the theory of hegemony developed by Italian Marxist thinker Antonio Gramsci. Gramsci posited that the ruling class maintains control not just through coercion (force), but primarily through intellectual and moral leadership—winning the active consent of the subordinate classes by shaping the prevailing ideas and cultural norms. These Pakistani political parties similarly manipulate deeply held national values to construct a ‘historic bloc’ of support, ensuring their class interests are accepted as the universal, common-sense interests of the entire nation. The loud calls for ‘reform’ or ‘revolution’ are therefore not ends in themselves, but tactical tools used to establish their undisputed rule and sustain the financial structures that feed their elite class.
Conclusion: Demand Evidence and Ethical Consistency
To counter this disinformation effectively, the response must be resolute and simple: State institutions are national assets that operate under a constitutional mandate and deserve respect for their sacrifices, particularly in national security. They cannot be used as a political shield by leaders whose credibility is already compromised by documented corruption.
The public must demand evidence for accusations against institutions and, simultaneously, demand ethical consistency from politicians. Until political parties demonstrate a commitment to transparency and accountability while in power, their criticisms while out of power must be recognized for what they are: a predictable defense mechanism against justice and a threat to national stability.
