ISLAMABAD: The high-level stakeholders meeting in the Gulf state of Dubai is not considering an electoral alliance or seat adjustment for the elections. According to several senior sources involved, it is rather aimed at devising a coherent strategy to deal with the fallout from Imran Khan.
Strong leaders of both Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) and Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) discussed various options to control and manage public sentiment and ensure abstention. Took part in closed-room, off-camera sessions. of any destabilizing vacuum that could potentially undermine civilian governance.
Since being removed from power by a no-confidence vote on April 22, Imran Khan’s support has seen a phenomenal rise, especially in urban areas. This base of support has led to a series of consultations between PML-N, PPP and other representatives with the main objective of strategizing a political response in the event of Khan’s conviction and subsequent impeachment.
A number of observers have offered their views on what the agenda of the meetings in Dubai might be. An observer believes that these meetings are being held to iron out misunderstandings and iron out any divisions in the ruling coalition. Other observers believe that the purpose of these meetings is to formulate the election strategy and its methodology, including the decision to contest the election as a coalition, the date of the election itself and the possible election of PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif. Returns included. It was also agreed that who will be the next Prime Minister. However, a reliable source close to these developments has refuted all these claims and emphasized that the sole focus of these meetings is to prepare Imran Khan’s future scenario.
“Ongoing consultations between PML-N, PPP and other parties concerned are aimed at strategically preparing for possible consequences of Imran Khan’s conviction and disqualification,” the source revealed. Another high-level source said that the purpose of the meeting is to play a positive role for democracy and economic stability. All the parties involved are ready to put aside any internal differences and interests to face the national challenge before us through a united front.
Several sources from different political parties have confirmed this. The narrative prepared by the former prime minister has now become the focus of a wide-ranging military-led investigation into the events that unfolded on May 9. That day, Khan’s supporters attacked more than 200 military installations across the country armed with nuclear weapons. Leaving behind the marks of desecration of the nation’s martyrs.
The violent blast followed Khan’s arrest by paramilitary forces as he faced a corruption probe linked to a massive £190 million scam. Those in the corridors of power believe that the May 9 coup was not a spontaneous coup. Rather, Imran Khan and the party leadership of PTI had been doing ground work for him for more than a year. In several speeches, Khan had threatened state agencies against arresting him, saying that he would face the wrath of the people if any such action was taken against him. Additionally, he resisted arrest several times when the police arrived at Zaman Park, calling his supporters to act as human shields. All this was preparation for violent protests if he was indeed arrested. This idea was expressed in DG ISPR’s press talk on June 26.
“Investigations conducted so far have shown that the May 9 events were being planned for the past several months,” he said. Under this plan a favorable environment was first created and people were incited and incited against the army. A false and exaggerated narrative was then spread on social media within and outside the country in this regard, DG ISPR said. Following the crackdown on the May 9 arson and attacks, most senior leaders within the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) party have distanced themselves from Khan. Moreover, the majority of these leaders have hastily joined a newly formed political party called the Isthikam Pakistan Party (IPP), marking a significant shift in their loyalties and further intensifying the political landscape. .
