A group of Pakistani parliamentarians, including prominent figures from the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), Balochistan Awami Party (BAP), and Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P), issued a letter directed at Pakistan’s Prime Minister, Shehbaz Sharif. The letter aimed to counter the recent Congressional push led by U.S. Representative Greg Casar, signed by 62 U.S. lawmakers, calling for action against human rights abuses allegedly committed by Pakistan’s military, particularly targeting General Asim Munir. This American letter not only highlighted political oppression in Pakistan, specifically the treatment of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, but also demanded sanctions on top military officials, travel bans, and asset freezes.
Big news! In a bold move, 160 Parliamentarians of Pakistan have penned a scathing letter to the Prime Minister of Pakistan in response to the US Congressmen’s letter to the US President. pic.twitter.com/5DShE2LwQS
— Wajahat Kazmi (@KazmiWajahat) October 31, 2024
The Pakistani parliamentarians’ response labels the U.S. congressional letter as “inaccurate,” “unwarranted,” and a “skewed view of realities,” accusing the U.S. Congress of being swayed by “political propaganda” circulated by Imran Khan’s supporters. The Pakistani letter also attacks Imran Khan, depicting him as a divisive figure and holding him responsible for recent political unrest in Pakistan. While intended as a defense of Pakistan’s internal politics, the letter raises serious concerns about the credibility and integrity of Pakistan’s own institutions and political stability, and it showcases a dismissive attitude toward concerns raised by international observers.
The Influence and Weight of Greg Casar’s Congressional Letter
Casar’s letter holds notable diplomatic weight as it comes at a time of increasing scrutiny of Pakistan’s internal political dynamics. Signed by influential figures such as Maxine Waters, Rosa DeLauro, and Barbara Lee, each holding powerful committee positions, the letter aligns with key U.S. legislative authority on sanctions, financial oversight, and foreign relations. This demonstrates a serious U.S. interest in addressing Pakistan’s alleged human rights abuses and political repression through tangible policy measures.
URGENT: ASK YOUR CONGRESSMEMBER TO SIGN HISTORIC LETTER CALLING FOR IMRAN KHAN’S RELEASE!
Reps. Casar, McGovern, & Lee (PA) are circulating a letter asking @POTUS to take action to free political prisoners and defend democracy!
CONTACT YOUR REP HERE: https://t.co/kHKSjQwUBM
— FirstPakistanGlobal (@FirstPakGlobal) September 27, 2024
The letter does not merely offer criticism; it demands specific actions from the Biden administration to hold Pakistan’s military leadership accountable for violations of democratic norms. This kind of high-level Congressional advocacy, backed by legislative authorities, places substantial pressure on the U.S. State Department and signals to Pakistan’s government that concerns over human rights abuses cannot be ignored. For Pakistani lawmakers to dismiss these actions as “propaganda” disregards the credibility and influence of the U.S. Congress in shaping international diplomatic stances.
Pakistani Parliamentarians Label Facts as “Propaganda”
The Pakistani parliamentarians’ response categorically dismisses the Congressional letter, labeling its claims as “propaganda” and “disinformation.” However, this rhetoric is conspicuously devoid of substantial counter-arguments to address the issues raised. The Congressmembers’ letter specifically highlighted concerns over human rights abuses, political imprisonment, and threats to Pakistan’s democratic structure. These are significant issues raised not only by U.S. lawmakers but also by numerous international human rights organizations and observers, suggesting that the concerns are neither isolated nor invented.
Instead of presenting evidence-based rebuttals or addressing the claims regarding Imran Khan’s imprisonment, the erosion of civil liberties, and the military’s political dominance, the Pakistani letter instead reiterates familiar narratives against Khan, such as his alleged incitement of violence and misuse of social media. Pakistani Parliamentarians failed to address the core of the Congressional letter’s argument, which focuses on broader systemic issues. In casting the Congressional letter as “political propaganda,” Pakistani lawmakers sidestep the underlying issue: the need for transparent governance and the protection of democratic rights.
Conflating Imran Khan with Human Rights Concerns
The Pakistani letter takes an overtly combative stance against Imran Khan, accusing him of instigating violence, manipulating social media, and fostering division. It argues that Khan’s narrative is detrimental to Pakistan’s reputation and harmful to the nation’s political fabric. The lawmakers’ decision to conflate Khan with broader calls for human rights reform indicates a reluctance to engage with genuine criticism. By focusing solely on Khan, the letter appears more defensive than constructive, suggesting that any international critique of Pakistan’s human rights record is inherently rooted in support for a single political figure rather than concern for democratic principles.
Read More: Pakistani-Americans Push Congress for Action Against Gen. Asim Munir’s Regime
The Pakistani response further defends ‘exceptional measures’ taken by the state against political unrest, comparing these to U.S. policies on surveillance and national security. This whataboutism conflates security policies within entirely different governance contexts, which is problematic as it fails to acknowledge the democratic rights expected of a country’s citizens, particularly during times of political contestation. Attempting to justify crackdowns on dissent and political freedoms under the guise of national security only underscores the very concerns raised by Casar’s letter.
Ignoring Structural Democratic Concerns
Perhaps most telling is the Pakistani letter’s assertion that the congressional concerns reflect “a skewed view of realities.” Such a blanket dismissal fails to recognize the legitimacy of the U.S. Congress as an influential body that impacts foreign policy decisions. By labeling the Congressional concerns as “unsubstantiated political propaganda,” the Pakistani response implicitly suggests that it is above reproach, a stance that stands in stark contrast to the democratic principles Pakistan purports to uphold.
The Congressmembers’ call for asset freezes and travel bans against top Pakistani officials, specifically targeting General Munir, represents more than symbolic pressure. These measures, if implemented, could hinder the officials’ access to U.S.-based financial assets and curtail their international mobility, signaling that the U.S. is unwilling to overlook actions that undermine democratic freedoms. The Pakistani lawmakers’ letter, in failing to engage with these serious diplomatic implications, risks deepening the divide between the two nations, potentially alienating Pakistani-Americans who support democratic reforms.
Pakistan’s Diplomatic Path Forward: Confrontation or Engagement?
As the Congressional letter continues to gain support, the Pakistani government must carefully consider its diplomatic response. While the parliamentarians’ letter asserts Pakistan’s sovereignty and condemns perceived interference, it overlooks the potential impact that dismissive rhetoric could have on U.S.-Pakistan relations, particularly in light of upcoming U.S. elections. The Pakistani-American diaspora, increasingly politically engaged, could serve as a bridge in fostering positive relations and supporting democracy in Pakistan, but the Pakistani parliamentarians’ letter does little to encourage such cooperation.
By prioritizing nationalistic narratives over diplomatic engagement, Pakistan risks isolating itself from influential international voices and damaging its own credibility. A more pragmatic response would involve acknowledging international concerns, initiating transparency, and inviting independent reviews of human rights practices. Such measures would not only foster international goodwill but also strengthen Pakistan’s democratic institutions in the long term.
Read More: US Congressmen Demand Release of Imran Khan and Change of American Ambassador in Pakistan
In sum, the Pakistani parliamentarians’ response misses an opportunity to present a constructive and credible stance on human rights and democratic accountability. Instead, by framing these issues as foreign “propaganda,” the letter only underscores the concerns raised by Greg Casar and his Congressional colleagues.
Watch Congressman Greg Casar speak with Dr. Moeed Pirzada, CEO of Global Village Space Publications: