The long-awaited negotiations between the coalition led by the Muslim League of Pakistan (PML-N) in Pakistan (PML-N) and the opposition Pakistan Tehreek-e-insaf (PTI) suddenly collapsed, leaving many interrogations why a Rare moment of commitment ended before producing a tangible results. Ironically, the failure of these talks once again highlighted the deep political distrust among key actors and powerful stakeholders, which continues to define the country’s volatile political landscape more associated with economic and judicial misfortunes. Negotiations between the government and the opposition began on December 23, 2024, with the aim of finding friendly solutions to the country’s political and economic challenges, and to resolve long -standing disputes between the two parties. However, the process struck a hook after only three sessions. The PTI had presented its charter for requests to the government in the third round, which required, among other things, the formation of separate judicial commissions on the incidents of May 9, 2023 and November 26, 2024. In addition, PTI Charter also asked for the "support" Federal and provincial governments in the deposit, the suspensions condemned "political prisoners" identified by the PTI. He said that these requests were presented as a "prerequisite for broader negotiations" on other questions. The brutal exit of PTI now that the five -week talks are over, political analysts believe that PTI’s decision suddenly moving away from the negotiation table was premature and prejudicial to its own interests. Ahmed Bilal Mehboob, president of the Pakistani Institute for Legislative Development and Transparency (Pildat), argued that PTI should have exercised more patience.
"The sudden dissociation of PTI in the talks was not a very wise decision. They should have stayed engaged to give government a little more time to answer or at least should have attended the fourth round," Said Mehboob. "They should have negotiated with the government and ask them to explain why PTI requests could not be satisfied."
Mehboob stressed that PTI’s lack of experience in political negotiations could have played a role in its hasty withdrawal. Unlike traditional parties accustomed to the ups and downs of negotiations, PTI had a hard time reconciling the democratic standards of compromise with its own rigid political culture.
"Negotiations are never a mechanical or linear process; They go back and forth before concluding an agreement. PTI was not a party of negotiations and probably does not have the experience and patience necessary for political negotiations," Mehboob added. "Although giving and taking or compromising is an integral part of democracy," he argued, "PTI qualified them as negative features."
The distrust of Govt Insecurity & Pti although PTI’s decision suddenly returns talks criticized, the government’s approach for talks also left something to be desired. According to Mehboob, the power alliance may be distrusted with the potential rehabilitation of PTI in traditional politics.
"I also think that the government felt unsure of PTI concluding an agreement and becoming acceptable again for the establishment, and it was also lacking in the eagerness to conclude an agreement," he noted. This skepticism was reflected by PTI, who considered the government’s reluctance to respond to its requests as proof of insincerity. Professor Tahir Naeem Malik of NUML University thinks that PTI considered that the government deliberately blocked the process.
"PTI estimated that the government was not serious because its requests were not difficult to answer," Professor Malik explained. However, the government, he added, was also frustrated by the urgency of PTI. "Conversely, the government estimated that PTI has shown an unusual emergency in talks without reason."
Lack of culture of negotiation The failure of talks highlights a broader problem: Pakistan’s political culture remains largely devoid of supported negotiation mechanisms. While democratic systems thrive on dialogue and compromises, said Malik, political and powerful actors continue to consider negotiations as a sign of weakness rather than a necessary governance tool. The withdrawal of the PTI and the hesitation of the government also reflect the reluctance of both sides to engage in the prolonged, difficult and often frustrating process of significant negotiation. As Mehboob pointed out, a real political dialogue requires patience, experience and the ability to make concessions – qualities that no part seemed to be fully prepared to embrace. What is the next step? With the sudden collapse of talks, political blockage is likely to persist and increase economic and governance challenges. If a significant commitment must take place in the future, PTI and the management coalition will have to lose their winning-perdante approach. Until then, the breakdown of negotiations will remain another chapter of the long history of the political deadlock of Pakistan.
