Latest news with #NayaPakistan
Express Tribune
09-07-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
A blowback of narrative engineering
Listen to article The recent move by National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency to seek a court order against 27 YouTube channels marks yet another chapter in the state's long and complicated history with controlled narratives, political engineering and use of media as a weapon. Most of the YouTubers targeted in this latest crackdown are being accused of promoting an "anti-state" narrative. But to understand how we got here, one must revisit the not-so-distant past, where the voices that are now being criminalised were the chorus, singing praises of the state's chosen political order. Before the fall of Imran Khan's government, many of these journalists aka Youtubers were the darlings of the power elite. One of the now-banned YouTubers, who has since fled abroad, proudly broke the news of Nawaz Sharif's disqualification on his channel. His tone was celebratory, his posture triumphant. That moment symbolised the height of their influence These individuals were not just reporting the news — they were creating it, packaging it to build two carefully crafted perceptions. First, that Nawaz Sharif and the PML-N were inherently corrupt. Second, that Imran Khan was the only saviour who could rescue Pakistan from this swamp of corruption. Even the PPP was not spared. Despite Asif Ali Zardari being one of the most compliant presidents in Pakistan's history — tolerating the removal of his Prime Minister, Yousaf Raza Gillani, and quietly recalling Ambassador Hussain Haqqani during the Memogate scandal — he was forever branded as "Mr 10 Percent." The 2014 sit-in at D-Chowk, jointly orchestrated by PTI and Tahir-ul-Qadri's PAT, was celebrated, not critiqued, by the same YouTubers now under scrutiny. Their content was a mix of sensationalism and state-sanctioned propaganda, camouflaged as patriotism. But what the state failed to grasp — or perhaps chose to ignore — is that narratives, once unleashed, are not easily controlled. The same platforms that were cultivated to malign one set of political actors eventually turned their gaze elsewhere. When the hybrid model began to crack — when the promised "Naya Pakistan" failed to deliver, when Imran Khan's governance proved hollow, compromised and confused — these same YouTubers pivoted. Some began questioning the very institutions they had once idolised. Others, aligned with Imran Khan's political ideology, refused to toe any new line that emerged after the regime change. With Khan now in the opposition, the institutional support that once helped shape his image into that of a messiah vanished. But the media warriors did not stop. They turned their criticism toward the invisible hands that had orchestrated not just his rise but also his fall. The state, which once weaponised these voices to sow division and discredit democratic parties, now finds itself at the receiving end of the same vitriol. The poison allowed to ferment in the political ecosystem has not dissipated — it has simply changed direction. And now, rather than being used to destabilise political opponents, it is being wielded against the very architects of that destabilisation. Many of the banned YouTubers now live in exile. Others have been jailed or are facing intimidation. Some have lost jobs and rely solely on their YouTube earnings to support their families. This isn't just a story of censorship; it's a case study in narrative collapse. When journalists are nurtured as political tools, when they are paid to promote disinformation and ideological conformity, it does not end with a controlled message. It ends with chaos. Intelligence agencies must realise that domestic political manipulation is a dangerous game. Their role is to protect the state, not to distort the democratic process or create media mouthpieces. If they wish to project a positive image of Pakistan, there are countless international platforms through which to build the country's narrative. But when they entangle themselves in local political rivalries — by nurturing one party and discrediting another — they not only delegitimise democracy, they erode institutional credibility. Pakistan is not suffering from a crisis of political leadership alone, but from a systemic refusal to let institutions function independently. Whether it's manipulating elections, engineering alliances or scripting media narratives, the long-term cost has always outweighed the short-term gain. The fallout is not just political instability but also widespread public distrust, deepening polarisation, and a media industry that lurches from sycophancy to rebellion. The crackdown on YouTubers is not a solution; it is a symptom. A symptom of a state struggling to rein in the chaos it once helped unleash. If the state truly wants stability, it must start by ending the practice of nurturing journalists as touts and stop interfering in the political process. Let the media hold power accountable — whichever party is in power. Let institutions operate within their constitutional limits. And let the people, not power brokers, decide who governs them. Until then, every narrative engineered in the shadows will eventually break free — and when it does, it will haunt its creators far more than its targets.
India Today
08-07-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Pakistan bans 27 YouTube channels for broadcasting 'anti-state content'
In a sweeping crackdown on dissent, a court in Islamabad has ordered the blocking of 27 YouTube channels, many of which are operated by Pakistani journalists, political commentators, and activists. The order was passed by Judicial Magistrate Abbas Shah on the plea of the country's Federal Investigation Agency (FIA).CHANNELS INCLUDED: IMRAN KHAN, ARZOO KAZMI AMONG OTHERS According to the two-page court order, the channels involved include those run by former Prime Minister Imran Khan, journalist Arzoo Kazmi and several others who have been vocal critics of the Pakistani military and the magistrate said the court was 'satisfied with the evidence provided by FIA', which showed that the channels were allegedly spreading 'anti-state content'.YOUTUBE INCHARGE OFFICER ASKED TO BLOCK CHANNELS 'The YouTube incharge officer is directed to block 27 YouTube channels,' the order stated, while also endorsing FIA's legal authority to act in the matter. The FIA reportedly began investigating the channels on June 2, and submitted what it called 'sufficient proof' before the is the list of YouTube channels identified in the court order:The list of channels identified in the court order includes that of Haider Mehdi, Siddique Jan, Sabeeq Kazmi, Orya Maqbool Jan, Arzoo Kazmi, Rana Uzair Speaks, Sajid Gondal, Habib Akram, Matiullah Jan, Asad Toor, Imran Riaz Khan, Naya Pakistan, Sabir Shakir, Imran Khan, Aftab Iqbal, Reel Entertainment TV, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, Daily Qudrat, Qadir Qadri, Chandasai Journalists, Naila Pakistani Reaction, Wajahat Saeed Khan, Ahmad Noorani, Nazar Chohan, Moeed Pirzada, Makhdoom Shahab ud Din and Shayan Ali. CHANNELS FACING TECHNICAL BLOCKS, EXILE AND THREATS In recent months, several Pakistani YouTubers have complained of shadow bans, restricted reach, or complete inaccessibility of their content within Pakistan. Some content creators have fled the country, continuing to broadcast from abroad over fears of arrest or even forced disappearances, often attributed to Pakistan's deep SAY BLOCKING NEEDS YOUTUBE'S HELPHowever, technical experts say such bans may not be fully effective unless YouTube's own management cooperates with the government to block or geofence the channels.'YouTube cannot be unilaterally blocked by a court without the platform being involved,' said a senior IT consultant, calling the move more symbolic than effective unless enforced at platform PAKISTAN BLOCKS ITS OWN VOICESThe development comes at a time when India has banned several Pakistani YouTube channels for misinformation and propaganda. Now, Pakistan is banning its own citizens' YouTube channels for allegedly pushing out anti-state content. Notably, Arzoo Kazmi's channel is now banned in both India and Pakistan. - EndsTune InMust Watch
Express Tribune
03-06-2025
- Business
- Express Tribune
Popularity does not equate to power or reform
Listen to article In the complex and often chaotic theatre of Pakistani politics, few figures have inspired as much devotion and division as Imran Khan. Once hailed as the harbinger of 'Naya Pakistan', his first term in office ended in disappointment and political isolation. Now, from behind bars and under sustained political exclusion, he paradoxically stands as the most popular leader in the country. But popularity does not equate to power, and even less so to reform. If he is to return to office — not just in name, but in effectiveness — Imran Khan must fundamentally rethink his approach. He must become what he wasn't in his first term: a pragmatic reformer grounded in strategy rather than idealism, and institution-building rather than rhetoric. His first term (2018-2022) was filled with soaring ambitions but lacked the capacity and discipline to fulfil them. The anti-corruption crusade became tainted by selective accountability. His appointments — notably in Punjab — undermined governance. Economic management was erratic, swinging from populist subsidies to IMF dependency. Above all, Khan failed to convert his mass appeal into a coherent policy framework capable of reforming Pakistan's entrenched institutions. This inability wasn't just about external conspiracies or establishment betrayals, as he often claimed. It reflected an internal contradiction between his transformative rhetoric and transactional politics. Imran Khan's current position is more precarious yet also more historically charged than ever. He is no longer the preferred choice of the establishment, whose support was once indispensable to his political rise. The institutional machinery, including the judiciary and civil service, appears aligned against him. PTI's organisational structure has been dismantled, its leaders jailed, silenced, or coerced into defection. Media coverage is restricted. And yet, his personal popularity continues to soar among a broad and disillusioned public, especially the youth. This paradox — of a leader loved by millions but isolated from the levers of power — raises a fundamental question: If given another chance, could Imran Khan actually lead the systemic change Pakistan desperately needs? To do so, he would have to abandon some of the very impulses that defined his first term. The confrontational stance toward the establishment, while politically energising, proved unsustainable. If he returns with the same antagonistic posture, his second government may face the same fate as his first — resistance from powerful institutions and ultimate paralysis. What he needs instead is not submission, but strategic coexistence. The military remains a stakeholder in Pakistan's statecraft. Rather than wage open war, a better approach would be to negotiate a redefined civil-military relationship within a constitutional framework. This would mean reviving bodies like the National Security Council to institutionalise dialogue and minimise backdoor manipulation, while reasserting parliamentary supremacy through consistent democratic performance, not just moral claims. Equally important is a complete overhaul of his economic strategy. Khan's past economic governance was marred by indecision, mixed messaging, and policy U-turns. If he wants to stabilise Pakistan's battered economy, he must bring in an empowered, professional economic team with both vision and autonomy. Reforming the Federal Board of Revenue to expand the tax base, especially targeting under-taxed sectors such as real estate and retail, must become a top priority. International negotiations with lenders like the IMF should be handled transparently and professionally, balancing fiscal discipline with social protection. Economic patriotism must replace elite capture — and that begins not with slogans, but with enforceable reforms. One of Khan's signature failures was the politicisation of accountability. Institutions like the National Accountability Bureau became perceived tools of political vendetta rather than justice. In his second term, if there is to be one, Imran Khan must establish a credible, independent anti-corruption mechanism. That would require bipartisan legislation, full transparency in asset declarations across the board, and reforms in the judicial process to fast-track white-collar crime cases. Only when accountability is applied across political and institutional lines can it gain legitimacy in the public eye. Education and social harmony, often overshadowed by political battles, must also be central to any reform agenda. Khan's attempt to introduce a Single National Curriculum was well-intentioned but shallow in execution. A truly unified national education system must foster critical thinking, civic values, and respect for diversity — not just uniformity of textbooks. Parallel efforts must target hate speech, sectarian networks, and violent extremism, which continue to corrode Pakistan's social fabric. A peaceful society cannot emerge without inclusive education and active de-radicalisation. Yet all these reforms, however well-planned, cannot succeed without a complete transformation of leadership style. Khan must govern less like a charismatic crusader and more like a consensus-building statesman. That means empowering his team, tolerating dissent, and abandoning the politics of constant confrontation. His combative attitude towards political rivals, the judiciary, and even the media during his first term created more enemies than allies. To implement real change, he will need a broad coalition — not of convenience, but of purpose. The art of governance lies not in defeating opponents, but in converting them into stakeholders. The challenges are immense, but so is the potential. If Khan returns as the same leader who governed from 2018 to 2022, Pakistan may see a repeat of instability, isolation, and unfulfilled promises. But if he evolves — if he learns from failure, adapts to political realities, and builds bridges instead of burning them — he could still emerge as a transformative figure. Not because he is flawless, but because he may be uniquely positioned, given his popular mandate, to defy the inertia of Pakistan's status quo. Imran Khan does not need to be a saviour. He needs to be a builder - of institutions, of trust, and of a democratic culture. That will require more than charisma. It will demand patience, humility, and strategy. The question is no longer whether he can return. It is whether, if he does, he can finally deliver.
