THE principle that no one is above the law is a cornerstone of democratic governance, ensuring accountability, stability, and national integrity.
However, the recent decision by Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) to abstain from the National Security Committee (NSC) meeting is deeply concerning and warrants serious scrutiny.
By choosing to prioritise its political interests and the persona of its leader, Imran Khan, over national security concerns, PTI has not only undermined its responsibilities as a political entity but has also set a dangerous precedent that could weaken Pakistan’s ability to address its security challenges cohesively.
National security is not a partisan issue; it is a fundamental duty that transcends political affiliations.
The NSC is a vital institution where key stakeholders come together to deliberate on the country’s security landscape, strategize responses to emerging threats, and ensure the safety of citizens.
Participation in such discussions is not optional for any political party, particularly one that has previously held power and continues to have significant influence in the country’s political sphere.
PTI’s decision to boycott the NSC meeting raises serious questions about its commitment to national interests.
By refusing to engage in a crucial dialogue on security matters, PTI has signaled that its priorities lie elsewhere—specifically, in political maneuvering and positioning itself as a perpetual opposition rather than a responsible stakeholder in Pakistan’s democratic process.
Since losing power, PTI has continuously attempted to frame its political struggle as a fight against an alleged unjust system.
While opposition politics is a legitimate and necessary part of democracy, it should never come at the cost of national security.
The NSC meeting was an opportunity for PTI to present its views, raise concerns, and contribute to strategies aimed at safeguarding the nation.
Instead, its absence demonstrated a lack of willingness to engage constructively, choosing instead to perpetuate a narrative of victimhood and confrontation.
By prioritizing political optics over meaningful engagement, PTI is reinforcing the notion that it values its own agenda over the collective well-being of the country.
This approach is not only irresponsible but also dangerous, as it weakens the unity needed to address security challenges effectively.
Imran Khan’s personal political ambitions seem to have taken precedence over the broader interests of the country.
His legal battles and defiance of state institutions have become central to PTI’s political strategy.
This unwavering focus on Khan as the singular leader of the party has resulted in decisions that often disregard institutional responsibility.
PTI’s non-participation in the NSC meeting reflects a troubling pattern: the party is willing to sideline national security discussions in favor of championing Khan’s political and legal struggles.
This raises a fundamental question—does PTI exist to serve Pakistan’s interests, or has it become solely a platform for Imran Khan’s personal political ambitions?
A responsible political party should recognize that governance does not end with being in power; it continues through active participation in crucial national dialogues, regardless of one’s position in the political hierarchy.
By boycotting the NSC meeting, PTI has chosen to operate in isolation, further polarizing the political landscape and undermining collaborative efforts to safeguard Pakistan’s security.
Refusing to participate in high-level security discussions not only weakens PTI’s credibility but also undermines Pakistan’s institutional framework.
National security is a collective responsibility, and decisions made in isolation, or worse, neglected altogether, can have long-term repercussions.
Pakistan faces a multitude of security challenges, including threats from terrorism, cross-border tensions, and internal instability.
The NSC is the primary platform where strategies are devised to counter these threats, and PTI’s absence from such discussions sends a troubling message both domestically and internationally.
It signals disunity among Pakistan’s leadership, which can embolden adversaries and weaken Pakistan’s stance in global diplomacy.
Moreover, PTI’s refusal to engage in the NSC meeting could set a precedent where political parties disengage from security dialogues based on partisan considerations.
This trend, if allowed to continue, could erode the fundamental principles of democratic governance and weaken Pakistan’s ability to navigate complex security issues effectively.
If PTI aspires to be a party that champions democratic values, it must demonstrate a commitment to responsible governance, even from the opposition.
Engaging in national security discussions is not an endorsement of the ruling government but rather a recognition of the need for unified efforts in safeguarding Pakistan.
PTI must reconsider its approach and acknowledge that national security cannot be sacrificed for political gain.
It must rise above petty political rivalries and commit to active participation in forums that shape the country’s security policies.
By doing so, it can contribute meaningfully to Pakistan’s stability while also reinforcing its image as a responsible political entity.
PTI’s decision to abstain from the NSC meeting is a stark reminder of how political self-interest can overshadow national duty.
National security should never be a bargaining chip in political disputes, nor should any party place individual ambitions above the broader interests of the country.
If PTI truly believes in the principle that no one is above the law, it must start by demonstrating that it is willing to participate in the very institutions that ensure Pakistan’s safety and sovereignty.
——The writer is regular contributor, based in Rawalpindi
