ISLAMABAD:
With the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) ramping up preparations for a street movement and the establishment maintaining a firm stance against the opposition party, Pakistan’s political landscape remains fraught with uncertainty and deepening mistrust.
Against this backdrop, a senior minister in the PML-N government has once again floated the idea of a high-level dialogue involving the country’s main centers of power, an idea that has surfaced before but never moved beyond rhetoric.
Adviser to the Prime Minister on Political Affairs Rana Sanaullah recently outlined what he described as a meeting of the country’s five key stakeholders.
According to Sanaullah, two of these are Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif, while the third is President Asif Ali Zardari.
The fourth, he said, is jailed PTI founder Imran Khan, adding that “everyone knows who the fifth is”, a remark widely interpreted as a reference to the military leadership.
In reality, Sanaullah’s remarks constituted a call for dialogue between Pakistan’s political leadership and the establishment. However, analysts note that it is far easier to identify stakeholders than to persuade them to sit across the table.
Previous attempts to arrange such high-level engagements have failed, prompting skepticism about whether the latest proposal represents anything more than a political soundbite.
Former PTI leader Fawad Chaudhry dismissed the possibility of the proposal under the prevailing conditions.
“It is not possible in the current political climate,” he said, arguing that the real obstacle lies in the unwillingness of both the government and the establishment to engage in genuine dialogue.
His remarks underscore the depth of distrust that continues to paralyze political engagement.
Senior journalist and political analyst Mazhar Abbas echoed this assessment, saying Sanaullah’s proposal lacked practical substance.
“Rana Sanaullah’s proposal lacks practical follow-up,” Abbas said, stressing that the responsibility to initiate dialogue rests with the government.
He argued that confidence-building measures, including notifying leaders of the opposition in parliament and giving PTI leaders access to Imran Khan, were prerequisites for any meaningful engagement. In the absence of such steps, he suggested, the proposal appeared more symbolic than actionable.
Seasoned political analyst Hassan Askari also expressed doubts, saying dialogue was unlikely under the current circumstances due to wide political differences and entrenched mistrust. Without genuine confidence-building measures, he warned, the political deadlock would continue.
Adding another layer of complexity, Rana Sanaullah has said that confidence building would only be possible if social media accounts allegedly running hate campaigns against the army and its leadership were shut down.
Reacting to this, Mazhar Abbas said that such concerns could be raised once the negotiations were underway. The immediate priority, he argued, should be to initiate dialogue rather than setting preconditions that further delay engagement.
Meanwhile, Hassan Askari emphasized that confidence building must be mutual.
“Like Rana Sanaullah is making a demand, PTI also has certain demands. Both sides need to compromise rather than one expecting the other to act without offering anything in return,” he said. “Confidence-building happens on a mutual basis.”
As the debate continues over deadlocked dialogue, attention has also turned to whether Nawaz Sharif could play a more active role – an idea floated by Mehmood Khan Achakzai and other PML-N figures.
Mazhar Abbas noted that Achakzai enjoys direct access to Nawaz Sharif and that the former prime minister could take the initiative. Given their cordial relationship, Sharif’s involvement could help open channels between the government and the opposition.
However, Hassan Askari urged caution, arguing that it was premature to speculate on Nawaz Sharif’s role. In his view, those with real power must first adapt. Without an understanding between the prime minister and the army chief, he said, dialogue would remain elusive.
Similar questions have been raised about President Zardari’s potential role in breaking the impasse. Abbas noted that Zardari could not act independently and that his involvement would depend on a broader agreement between the government and the opposition.
Askari agreed and said that the President had no independent authority in this regard. Real influence, he argued, lies with the prime minister, the establishment and Imran Khan – and until these three accommodate each other, meaningful dialogue will remain out of reach.
Seen in this light, the options for flexibility from the establishment appear limited. Mazhar Abbas noted that the establishment continues to maintain a hard line on PTI, Afghanistan and terrorism-related issues, leaving little room for immediate accommodation.
Hassan Askari agreed and concluded that dialogue would only become possible when stakeholders prioritize engagement over confrontation, take mutual steps and move beyond entrenched grievances. Until then, Pakistan, he said, remains trapped in political limbo.
