Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Sher Afzal Marwat has shed light on the controversial decisions leading to the abrupt end of the party’s recent protest, revealing a growing rift within the leadership. Marwat attributed the decision not to hold a sit-in at Sangjani to PTI founder and chairman Imran Khan, noting that Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister (CM) Ali Amin Gandapur opposed marching towards D-Chowk in Islamabad. These revelations underscore internal divisions and strategic missteps as the PTI grapples with political and legal challenges in a high-stakes environment.
Conflicting Decisions and Their Fallout
The decision to push towards D-Chowk instead of settling for a protest at Sangjani led to direct confrontations with security forces, exposing PTI workers to intense crackdowns. This move has since sparked widespread condemnation within the party. Marwat revealed during an appearance on Geo News that Gandapur was particularly opposed to moving beyond the Kulsoom Hospital limit, let alone towards the heavily fortified D-Chowk. Gandapur’s reluctance extended to Chungi Number 26, emphasizing his concerns about escalating tensions with security forces.
According to Marwat, the government’s offer to allow a protest at Sangjani was communicated to Imran Khan through Barrister Gohar Ali Khan and Barrister Saif, who visited him at Adiala Jail. However, upon their return, they relayed that Imran was unwilling to accept the Sangjani option. This contradicted earlier reports that Bushra Bibi, Imran’s wife, had insisted on heading to D-Chowk, an allegation Marwat dismissed. He stated that the initial party decision was to march towards D-Chowk, making it inappropriate to single out Bushra Bibi for blame.
Gandapur’s Resistance and Leadership Gaps
Marwat described Gandapur’s visible hesitation to proceed beyond certain limits. Gandapur reportedly visited Bushra Bibi’s vehicle twice during the march to discuss his reservations. However, Marwat claimed he was unaware of any disagreements between Gandapur and Bushra Bibi during this period. The situation highlighted growing tensions among the leadership and a lack of unified direction.
The chaotic protest was further hampered by logistical issues. According to Marwat, the power supply to the leaders’ container was cut off, leaving them unable to effectively coordinate. The absence of a technician exacerbated the confusion. Moreover, no clear instructions were provided to workers regarding their roles, leaving many unsure of how to proceed amidst the turmoil.
Internal Rifts and Mismanagement
The “do-or-die” protest fiasco has intensified internal criticism of the party’s strategic decisions. PTI has been struggling to regain its footing in the face of political and legal obstacles, but the internal rift only compounds its challenges. The abrupt end to the protest, coupled with leadership disagreements and inadequate logistical preparations, revealed a lack of cohesion within the party.
Gandapur’s reservations, Imran Khan’s rejection of alternative protest venues, and the logistical failures collectively contributed to a perception of mismanagement. The resulting chaos has sparked debates within PTI over accountability and future strategy.
Moving Forward
As PTI seeks to recover from this setback, addressing internal divisions and improving organizational efficiency will be crucial. Clear decision-making structures, effective communication, and contingency planning are essential to avoid similar fiascos in the future. With its leadership under scrutiny, PTI faces the dual challenge of rebuilding trust among its supporters and presenting a unified front amidst a turbulent political climate.
This episode has underscored the importance of strategic foresight and the risks of miscalculated decisions in high-stakes political confrontations. Whether PTI can learn from this experience and emerge stronger remains to be seen.
