Populism in Pakistan: Imran Khan and the Politics of Polarization
In recent years, Pakistan’s political landscape has undergone a seismic shift, with populism emerging as a dominant force—most notably through the rise of Imran Khan and his p
arty, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). This thesis investigates how Khan’s brand of populism has redefined political discourse, eroded institutional trust, and reshaped the democratic trajectory of the country.
Populism, at its core, is a political strategy that frames politics as a struggle between the virtuous “people” and a corrupt “elite.” It simplifies complex governance challenges into emotionally charged binaries, often invoking nationalism and anti-elite sentiments to consolidate power. This approach is not inherently ideological—it can emerge on both the right and left—but it consistently personalizes politics and thrives on crisis narratives.
Imran Khan’s political ascent was built on the promise of Naya Pakistan—a new Pakistan free from corruption and ruled by the will of the common man. His rhetoric positioned him as the sole savior against a corrupt political status quo represented by dynastic parties like the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP). By constructing an “us vs. them” narrative, Khan cultivated an intensely loyal base that viewed dissent not as democratic contestation but as betrayal.This personalization of power led to the erosion of democratic norms. Institutions such as the judiciary and media were either delegitimized or weaponized, accused of bias when they did not serve the populist narrative. Khan’s government frequently bypassed institutional mechanisms in favor of direct appeals to the public, fostering a climate of mistrust and polarization. His reliance on charismatic authority over institutional consensus weakened the state’s capacity for neutral governance.
The thesis also explores how Khan’s populism facilitated the political re-entry of Pakistan’s historically dominant but non-elected actor: the military. By casting civilian institutions as inefficient and corrupt, Khan’s discourse created political space for the military to play an increasingly overt role in shaping political outcomes, ironically undermining the very democratic promise he once championed. Populism in Pakistan, therefore, functions not only as a political tool but also as a conduit for deeper authoritarian tendencies.The social impact of this rhetoric is equally significant. Public discourse has become hostile and binary, with online and offline spaces deeply polarized. Critics of Khan are branded traitors or “foreign agents,” while supporters are increasingly intolerant of opposing viewpoints. The populist narrative stifles democratic debate and reduces political engagement to loyalty tests, silencing nuanced perspectives and reinforcing echo chambers.
This phenomenon is not unique to Pakistan. Globally, leaders like Donald Trump, Narendra Modi, and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan have employed similar populist strategies—leveraging crises, attacking elites, and building direct rapport with the masses. However, in Pakistan’s fragile democratic setting, where institutions are still consolidating, the consequences of populism are particularly destabilizing.Importantly, it is noteworthy that parties like PML-N and PPP have also indulged in populist tactics—PMLN blaming “hidden hands” for failures and PPP in its emotional invocations of martyrdom. Populism, in this sense, is not a deviation but a systemic tendency within Pakistan’s political culture, used by various actors to mobilize support in times of political flux.
In conclusion, populism in Pakistan is more than a campaign strategy—it is a governing style that reshapes institutions, narrows democratic space, and fosters a volatile political culture. Imran Khan’s populism may have energized a disillusioned electorate, but it has also deepened divisions, politicized state organs, and undermined the foundations of democratic governance. As Pakistan moves forward, resisting the allure of simplistic populist narratives will be essential for building a more inclusive, democratic, and institutionally stable future.
By: M. Hamza Zubair, RaniyaA. Mirza, M. Abeel Khan, Mukhtar Wali
Department of Governance and Public Policy, NUST
