PTI’s Betrayal and EU’s Dirty Game Against Pakistan

It is often said that for a household to remain strong, all decisions must be made collectively by its own members. When outsiders begin interfering in its affairs, it is either driven by an agenda to break it apart or fueled by financial motives. When Imran Khan was dismissed and the PDM government took over, it was none other than Imran Khan himself who convinced the public that Pakistan’s governments were being formed and dissolved under external influence something the Pakistani nation should outright reject. And yet, he is now diving headfirst into the same murky waters, seeking foreign assistance. Whether through the UK Parliament or the European Union (EU), PTI is shamelessly outsourcing its political agenda to external forces.

Examining the EU’s recent statements, it is evident that they do not appear to be independent but rather influenced. Growing evidence suggests that Imranist lobbies are actively shaping international opinion in favor of PTI. The party continuously reaches out to foreign governments and international organizations, ironically doing so without fully grasping the consequences of foreign interference. Experts believe this is not an isolated effort but a structured campaign that aligns with external elements conspiring against Pakistan’s stability in the long run. Is it merely a coincidence that the EU’s statements mirror PTI’s narrative almost word for word? Why are these international organizations taking such a selective interest in Pakistan?

The manipulation of Pakistan’s GSP+ status by the EU, seemingly under PTI’s influence, is another example of how external forces are being weaponized to interfere in Pakistan’s internal affairs. The EU’s sudden and inconsistent focus on Pakistan’s domestic legal matters, particularly those related to PTI, raises serious concerns. Instead of following a neutral and systematic review process, the EU appears to be using trade privileges as leverage to pressure Pakistan’s institutions while aligning closely with PTI’s political interests.

The EU’s selective involvement in Pakistan is highly suspicious. If the EU is genuinely concerned about human rights, as it claims when commenting on the so-called “Islamabad Massacre” or the PECA Amendment Act (2025), why was there no similar EU outcry when Gaza was being bombed daily? Why was Kashmir’s bloodshed ignored? The fact that the EU’s statements focus exclusively on PTI suggests that its agenda is not about “human rights” but about favoring a particular political party. The EU’s disproportionate interest in PTI’s legal troubles while disregarding much larger global crises strongly indicates that its involvement is neither neutral nor principled, but rather driven by strategy and lobbying.

The demand for a ceasefire in Gaza was echoed by people across the world, yet the EU remained indifferent, failing even to acknowledge the crisis or express sympathy for the Palestinian people. If the brutal killing of innocent children fighting for their basic rights does not move one’s conscience, then all debates about supporting PTI during the November 26, 2024, incident and opposing military courts for the May 9 violence seem meaningless. Pakistan’s internal matters should be handled by its own government—because only Pakistan’s institutions are responsible for delivering justice within the country.

A closer look at the visits of EU officials further confirms the agenda behind PTI’s engagement with foreign powers. EU officials have become guests of PTI’s lobbying networks. Imranists hold meetings with these officials in Brussels, London, Washington, and other key locations, selling their party’s narrative at the expense of Pakistan’s sovereignty. These visits are not coincidental; they are carefully orchestrated as part of a lobbying strategy.

PTI’s own statements further reinforce these claims. From day one, instead of addressing accountability or cases of corruption, PTI’s press conferences, social media campaigns, and official statements have focused on seeking foreign validation. Why does PTI now want foreign intervention? Instead of self-reflection, why does the party believe that appealing to foreign entities is the solution for returning to power? This is not the first time PTI has relied on international lobbying to build a narrative. Regardless of what Pakistanis democratically decide, PTI always positions itself in opposition.

This strategy comes at a cost. When a political party seeks foreign intervention in domestic affairs, it undermines national sovereignty. If such interference is accepted, then celebrating August 14 as Independence Day becomes meaningless. However, Pakistan is a free nation, fully capable of determining its own path, and no foreign influence should be tolerated. PTI had the opportunity to mobilize its supporters and achieve its objectives by building public trust through accountability and peaceful engagement but instead, it chose a different route.

Now, the question arises: how credible is the EU in all of this? An international body that can be swayed by lobbying and political bias cannot be trusted. Today, it is supporting PTI and manipulating facts; tomorrow, this same biased organization could deny the Indo-Pak partition, should we still trust it blindly? This situation is alarming for Pakistan’s policymakers and institutions. Rather than allowing PTI-driven international narratives to shape the country’s political discourse, Pakistan must take control of its own future. If PTI has legitimate concerns, it should address them through legal channels. If the EU is genuinely involved, it must remain neutral and unbiased, rather than serving as a political tool for any party. This is a serious issue that requires immediate attention; not just for Pakistan’s sovereignty but for the integrity of global governance and diplomacy as well.