FOLLOWING the imposition of emergency and governor’s rule in KP on Oct 11, many lawmakers of the PTI remain untraceable. The matter has been raised in parliament and in the courts. During a hearing of related petitions in the Peshawar High Court yesterday, PTI chairman Gohar Ali Khan said that 12 MNAs and 14 MPAs belonging to the KP Assembly had been “picked up”.

Soon after the proclamation of emergency, Federal Minister of State for Interior Talal Chaudhry had confirmed that KP’s non-functional Chief Minister Sohail Afridi and some members of his cabinet were in “preventive custody”. Meanwhile, on Monday, PTI lawmakers in the National Assembly demanded production orders for their fellow party MNAs. Opposition Leader Mahmood Achakzai endorsed the demand, while Raja Nasir Abbas, the opposition leader in the Senate, raised the issue in the Upper House.

One PTI MNA has been arrested at his madressah in Bannu, but the whereabouts of most of the missing lawmakers remain unknown, with their families also in the dark. Some lawmakers have reportedly been in detention since before Oct 11.

This is not the first time that opposition lawmakers in Pakistan have gone ‘missing’. The proclamation of emergency should not, however, mean holding fundamental rights in abeyance. Whether it is members of the assemblies, or ordinary citizens, the Constitution — if that document still holds any value for the wielders of power — guarantees due process to every Pakistani.

Therefore, Mr Afridi, as well as other PTI lawmakers, must be produced before the courts forthwith. The state must announce publicly what they are accused of, so that they can defend themselves, and engage counsel of their choice. Mr Chaudhry had said that if there are cases against the PTI leaders they would be charged, and if no evidence is found against them they would be released.

The state must keep its promise, and also grant the lawmakers access to their families. Members of the ruling coalition — belonging to both the PML-N and PPP — were on the receiving end of the state’s excesses during their time in opposition. Perhaps they should remember their own experiences, and the commitments their leaders made to upholding the rule of law.

Published in Dawn, October 21st, 2026

A YEAR after Islamabad severed commercial ties with Kabul over security concerns, the border trade disruption is taking a growing toll on KP, where livelihoods, businesses, farm markets, and a large number of workers depend on cross-border commerce. Bilateral trade has fallen by more than 72pc, from $1.3bn in FY25 to $358m in FY26 — which means fewer customers for local shops, lower earnings for farmers, idle trucks, and lost jobs.

KP was already struggling to attract investment and create work amid rising terrorism; the loss of an established market makes recovery harder. The damage is not confined to the province. Farmers and factories in Punjab and Sindh, too, have been hit, and Pakistan’s exports to Central Asia have been badly disrupted.

Afghanistan has long been KP’s natural outlet because of its proximity and the long-standing commercial and tribal networks. Traders built their businesses around moving food, cement, pharmaceuticals, and other goods across the border. Medical tourism, hotels, and other services catering to Afghan visitors are suffering as well. When crossings shut, traders cannot send their goods to distant markets without facing higher costs, finding new buyers, and adapting to unfamiliar commercial conditions.

In fact, most services cannot be shifted at all. Rerouting shipments is not an easy fix. Pakistan’s shortest land routes to Central Asia run through Afghanistan. Alternatives mean longer distances, higher freight costs, and thinner margins. Small enterprises with little financial cushion are the most exposed to prolonged border trade closures.

KP needs expanding markets and productive investment to employ a growing workforce; it cannot afford to lose existing ones before alternatives are in place. Islamabad has valid security concerns — the Taliban must prevent Afghan territory from being used for attacks on Pakistan. But border closures also hurt citizens on both sides, who have nothing to do with Kabul’s policies.

Islamabad must find the right balance between its security priorities and the economic strain on KP’s residents. Sustained efforts to obtain genuine security assurances from Kabul and carefully monitored arrangements for legitimate trade may offer a way to protect both. It should also assess the losses of traders, transporters, and farmers, and help businesses find new markets. The government must protect its people from terrorism without restricting their livelihoods.

Published in Dawn, October 20th, 2026

A WEEK after the federal government imposed governor’s rule and emergency in KP, PPP Chairperson Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari invited the opposition to engage ‘positively’ with the centre, saying this could lead to their reversal.

Mr Bhutto-Zardari, addressing reporters at a Sunday memorial for the 2007 Karsaz attack on his late mother Benazir Bhutto’s homecoming procession, spoke about the need for a national effort to address the growing economic crisis, resurgent terrorism, and Pakistan’s increasingly dysfunctional electoral system. But his offer, however well-meaning, stands little chance of leading to a political breakthrough in the current climate. Without concrete confidence-building measures initiated by the ruling parties, the opposition is unlikely to put much faith in mere assurances, given that the centre has crossed a major political red line by deposing an elected provincial government and supplanting it with a setup handpicked by Islamabad.

Mr Bhutto-Zardari seemed to be missing the point when he called the ‘non-functional’ KP chief minister a “coward” who was “not ready to defend his own land”. Whatever his failings, the people of KP had elected him, and the remedy lay with them, not with Islamabad. By forcing him aside, the centre has signalled that it does not need public consensus to do as it pleases. The centre’s dispute with KP, after all, was not about whether terrorism needed confronting, but how. KP had resisted the centre’s approach to fighting terrorism, and the resulting stand-off had stymied any progress. In dismissing the provincial government, the centre had signalled that security policies would be prescribed for the province rather than derived in consultation with it. That bridge has already been burnt.

It is commendable that the PPP chairperson is at least talking about a path back to normalcy, but the PPP is a partner in the very government that imposed governor’s rule. If it wants the decision reversed, it should convince its ally in Islamabad, not ask the opposition to be ‘positive’. It is hoped that the PML-N will also reconsider its position. The latter party would do well to recall that, in 2009, when its government in Punjab was dismissed and governor’s rule imposed, it had itself joined a ‘long march’ on Islamabad to press its demands.

It is unbecoming of that party to have denied its opponents the same right to protest now, when it is in power. It will not be easy to build bridges with the opposition, but the PML-N, more than any other party, has the power to concede some ground to show goodwill. It should take up the National Assembly opposition leader on his offer to engage the jailed PTI chief, and facilitate that effort if it is serious about national reconciliation and a unified response to Pakistan’s crises.

Published in Dawn, October 20th, 2026

SOUTH Asia may see a vast movement of people as climate change makes parts of the region harder to live in. According to the International Organisation for Migration, as many as 40.5m people could be forced to move by 2050. The warning deserves attention for what such displacement could mean for a region already struggling with poverty, overcrowded cities, unemployment, and competition for resources.

From the sinking coastlines of Bangladesh to the drought-hit districts of Pakistan, climate pressures are threatening millions of livelihoods. But it is not just the communities directly affected that will feel the impact. As farmers abandon unproductive land and families leave disaster-prone areas, towns and cities will have to accommodate growing populations.

Competition for housing, employment, water and public services could make life harder for poorer communities and generate social tensions. Countries with limited resources may struggle to provide for both established residents and newcomers. The danger is particularly acute in South Asia, where weak regional cooperation could hinder a coordinated response. Climate displacement could then become another source of instability unless governments prepare for it together.

The warning raises questions about how Pakistan intends to accommodate people whose homes and livelihoods become impossible to sustain. Our urban centres already struggle with inadequate housing, sanitation, transport, and job opportunities. An influx of climate-displaced families could deepen these problems.

Yet migration need not mean destitution. As the IOM chief has pointed out, moving can itself be a means of adapting to climate change. Pakistan must, therefore, recognise climate mobility as a permanent consideration in development planning. Provincial and local governments need reliable information about communities likely to leave, destinations likely to receive them, and services required to support their transition. Land-use policies, affordable housing, vocational training, and access to schools and healthcare must reflect changing population patterns.

Equally important is protecting the rights of displaced families, who should not lose access to documentation, education or public assistance simply because they have moved. Regional cooperation on forecasting, disaster preparedness and population movements could help countries anticipate shared pressures. The challenge is to ensure that people forced to move by climate change can rebuild their lives.

Published in Dawn, October 19th, 2026

“WE will eat grass or leaves, even go hungry, but we will get one of our own … We have no other choice!” Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had famously remarked as he voiced this nation’s determination to build an indigenous nuclear deterrent programme that had, by the mid-1960s, become an existential necessity.

Some seven years later, Pakistan made it a policy imperative. That one call guaranteed the future security of the republic. Decades later, working through sheer grit and determination, Pakistan showed the world that it was more than capable of looking after itself. We stand at a very similar juncture today.

The ongoing arms race in AI threatens to upend the global economic and security order, and the turning point is likely to arrive well before we will be prepared to confront it. That is, unless we once again take control of our destiny and start shaping it with our own hands today.

A large part of our annual $4.6bn in IT exports is freelancing work, call centres, and entry-level coding, which modern AI directly imperils. At the rate at which the technology is progressing, it will rapidly render many of those services and products either low-value or useless. There is also the question of what we, as an economy, must pay in terms of compute bills if our companies continue to license AI usage from foreign corporations.

As dependence on AI grows, the bill could reach hundreds of millions of dollars by the end of the decade. At most critical risk is our defence infrastructure, where drones, electronic warfare, and high-end sensors already run on AI technology, and are only going to grow more dependent on it to maintain their efficacy. The national leadership must, therefore, make haste. In the 1970s, Pakistan was able to offer expat talent a compelling reason to return. Similar arrangements need to be made once again.

Talented computer scientists and experts from around the world must be called home, given a deadline, generous budgets, and autonomy. The systems and data centres can be placed close to where power is cheap and stable, while the research can take place where our universities are. A realistic target would be to host open-weight models at home, have researchers and technologists fine-tune them on Pakistani data and languages, run all government and defence needs within the country, and own the data pipelines as well. This would make Pakistan sovereign enough in AI without requiring a frontier-level lab or the 100-billion-dollar budgets that they need. We can build on our ambitions once the basics are in place. The Chagai test took more than two decades; the clock on AI runs much faster than that. Pakistan cannot afford to delay this project. The downside risks are too great.

Published in Dawn, October 19th, 2026

AS reports continue to do the rounds of possible Russian mediation to resolve the differences between Pakistan and Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, the Foreign Office has underscored that successful dialogue requires commitment from Kabul to end cross-border terrorism.

This demand is neither new nor unreasonable; it highlights the point that talks and support for anti-Pakistan terrorist groups cannot go hand in hand. On Friday, the FO said that while it was not aware of any formal Russian mediation initiative, Pakistan was open to engagement that produced tangible results. Representatives of Pakistan and the Taliban regime were both in Russia earlier this month as part of the Moscow Format regional consultations. A joint communique could not be issued at the conclave due to frosty Islamabad-Kabul ties, specifically because the Taliban objected to including any references to terrorism in Afghanistan. Russia had offered its good offices to resolve the impasse, if both sides required its help.

The official Taliban position amounts to a state of denial: it is hardly a secret that some of the world’s most dangerous terrorist groups find shelter in Afghanistan. Therefore, the Kabul regime’s denials hold no water. Many other third parties — Qatar, Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, and China — have tried to mediate between Pakistan and Afghanistan, with varying degrees of success. Russia is the only state that recognises the Taliban regime. Perhaps Moscow can be engaged by Pakistan and Afghanistan to try and give the peace process another chance.

Pakistan and Afghanistan share borders and linguistic and cultural links. Good relations are essential, even though bilateral relations have remained largely strained over the past several decades. However, the biggest obstacle to long-term peace is the Taliban’s sheltering of terrorist groups. Pakistan desires peace, but for talks to succeed, Kabul must offer visible CBMs, such as an end to cross-border terrorism. As the FO has said, a “verifiable mechanism” that ensures an end to anti-Pakistan terrorism emanating from Afghanistan can lead the way to peace. Kabul’s claims that it is not hosting violent groups are of little value.

Action against such groups is required, not hollow refutations. Moreover, regional states must realise that today it is Pakistan that is battling terrorist groups in Afghanistan. Tomorrow, similar violent actors based in that country can destabilise other regional states. Russia itself has been targeted by IS-K terrorism. The group finds a home in Afghanistan, even though it is at daggers drawn with the Taliban. If the Taliban regime commits to preventing groups based on its soil from attacking neighbouring states, the process of normalisation and regional integration of Afghanistan can begin.

Published in Dawn, October 18th, 2026