Follow us on social

google cta
2023-05-09t141328z_150938224_rc21v0aoscnn_rtrmadp_3_pakistan-politics-khan-scaled

Imran Khan arrest sparks rare violence against police, military across Pakistan

The government is now weighing its response, as whatever happens now will affect security, politics, and even US relations.

Analysis | Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

UPDATE 5/12, 6:30 AM EST: Islamabad's high court has ordered former Pakistan prime minister Imran Khan released on bail after he was arrested on Tuesday, sparking nationwide protests and violence.


Former prime minister Imran Khan's arrest by Pakistani Rangers on Tuesday has sparked unprecedented protests targeting police and military installations. The outrage reached a boiling point when protesters ransacked the Lahore Corps Commander's House.

Although arrests of politicians and large political protests are common in Pakistan, it is rare for them to target military installations.

Khan’s arrest is purportedly connected to the Al-Qadir Trust case, which revolves around allegations of fraud. However, many Pakistanis, including some of Khan's opponents, claim that the detention is a consequence of his clash with the security establishment. Khan has accused Major General Faisal Naseer of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of plotting (and failing) to assassinate him last November. But the optics of the Rangers taking Khan into custody from the Islamabad High Court has even prompted staunch critics of Khan and his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) political party to express messages of support on social media.

While demonstrators have been seen setting fire to military facilities, police vehicles, and even attempting to breach the army headquarters in Rawalpindi, the military appears to have made a conscious decision to lightly protect these installations and not respond violently in Islamabad or Lahore. 

There are potentially three factors contributing to this approach. First, the military might be speculating that the protests will naturally lose steam over time. Secondly, the leadership could be aiming to avoid violent confrontations that could further endear the protesters to the general public or alienate their own officers and rank and file, many of whom may support Khan. Instead, they may assume that allowing the protesters to inflict damage on government property and residences will eventually turn the masses and PTI supporters within the military against them.

Furthermore, the demonstrations could be used as a justification to limit Khan’s participation in politics and place restrictions on PTI. 

Lastly, taking no action might be perceived as a more powerful short-term response. Nevertheless, protesters in some areas have been met with tear gas and the internet is down in parts of the country. There are some reports of clashes in provincial cities, a situation that could easily escalate into more violence.

Imran Khan’s arrest intensifies an already escalating political crisis and adds fuel to the fire as the nation teeters on the edge of an economic precipice. The impact of this situation extends beyond Imran Khan himself, potentially dealing a severe blow to Pakistan's efforts to overcome its economic crisis and secure regional assistance, including an IMF bailout.

It also has potential ramifications for U.S.-Pakistan relations. In April 2022, Imran Khan was removed from the position of prime minister through a vote of no confidence. He attributed his removal to a U.S.-backed conspiracy for regime change. While some of his supporters interpreted this as a literal U.S. conspiracy, others understood it as a metaphor for the alleged desire of the military establishment to oust him. 

To distance themselves from accusations of a U.S. regime change conspiracy, senior members of the PTI have recently been observed engaging in public meetings with U.S. officials. This crisis presents a dilemma for Washington as it strives to publicly support a healthy democratic process in Pakistan, while also maintaining cordial relations with all major political parties and relying on Pakistan's military establishment as a partner in counterterrorism efforts. Any public or private comments from Washington could potentially do more harm than good, and involving itself in what essentially amounts to a domestic political struggle would be unwise.


A woman gestures next to a burning police vehicle during a protest by the supporters of Pakistan's former Prime Minister Imran Khan after his arrest, in Karachi, Pakistan, May 9, 2023. REUTERS/Akhtar Soomro TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY
google cta
Analysis | Reporting | Middle East
US missiles
Top photo credit: . DoD photo by Staff Sgt. Vince Parker, U.S. Air Force.

Trump: We have 'unlimited' weapons to fight 'forever' war

QiOSK

In a startling Truth Social post overnight on Monday, President Donald Trump defied reality and claimed that U.S. weapons were "unlimited" and the U.S. could fight "forever" with "these supplies."


keep readingShow less
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Starmer Macron Merz
Top image credit: France's President Emmanuel Macron, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrive at Kyiv railway station on May 10, 2025, ahead of a gathering of European leaders in the Ukrainian capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS
Europe's snapback gamble risks killing diplomacy with Iran

Craven Europeans give US and Israel a blank check for illegal war

Middle East

In the aftermath of the new U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, the transatlantic alliance has offered a response that confirmed what many both in the West and outside knew all along: that for London, Paris, Berlin, and Brussels, the "rules-based international order" has been reduced to a simple, brutal premise: might makes right, provided the might is Western.

The joint statement from the E3 — France, Germany, and the United Kingdom — is a master class in evasion. "We did not participate in these strikes, but are in close contact with our international partners, including the United States and Israel," they declared. The text also lists all the references and rationalizations used by Iran hawks — “nuclear program, ballistic missile program, regional destabilization and repression against its own people.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.