KP Needs A Healing Touch, Not Another Cut

The imposition of emergency rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on October 11, 2026, reflects a familiar cycle of failure in Pakistan’s politics: when elected leaders cannot resolve a political crisis through negotiation, extraordinary interventions begin to appear as convenient solutions. Yet the province’s deep-seated problems cannot be solved merely by changing who exercises administrative power. For decades, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has endured conflict, terrorism, displacement, and a persistent sense of alienation. Its socio-political fabric already bears too many wounds. What it needs now is a healing touch, not another cut.

This does not mean that the former provincial government should be spared scrutiny. After more than a decade of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) rule, the party must answer serious questions about its record on governance, public service delivery, law and order, and its fundamental duty to protect citizens. Now that emergency powers have been invoked, the true test is whether this step offers a credible path to restoring peace and accountable governance or merely prolongs political confrontation in the province.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s troubled relationship with the centre did not begin with PTI, nor can its present crisis be understood solely through the lens of contemporary party politics. The province’s history is marked by ethno-nationalism, contested political choices, and episodes of state coercion that have repeatedly deepened mistrust between its people and the central state. The roots of this friction can be traced to the birth of Pakistan. In June 1947, the Bannu Resolution called for an independent Pakhtunistan, rejecting a referendum that offered a choice limited to India or Pakistan. The subsequent referendum offered voters only those two options, prompting the Khudai Khidmatgar leadership to boycott the process. Although the result determined the province’s formal integration into Pakistan, it did not resolve the underlying political aspirations that had shaped the regional debate.

Pakistan’s AI Boom Needs More Builders, Not More Certificates

Afghanistan’s irredentist claims over Pashtun territories further complicated the region’s internal political dynamics in the years that followed. Successive federal governments viewed regional demands primarily through the narrow prism of national security, while many Pashtuns felt their political identity and legitimate grievances were treated with reflexive suspicion. This persistent mistrust reflected a deeper challenge: reconciling territorial integrity with the political aspirations and identities of the country’s constituent regions. The Babra massacre of August 1948, in which state forces opened fire on Khudai Khidmatgar supporters in Charsadda, became a lasting symbol of the violent suppression of political dissent. While precise casualty figures remain contested, the incident occupies a central place in the province’s collective memory. Such historical episodes cannot explain every contemporary grievance, but neither can they be dismissed when seeking to understand why institutional mistrust has endured across generations.

The federal government must demonstrate that the decision is justified by the circumstances and proportionate to the challenges at hand, with the emergency remaining in force only for as long as necessary to restore stability and normal constitutional governance.

 The creation of One Unit in 1955, and its eventual dissolution in 1970, formed part of a broader struggle over provincial autonomy and the distribution of power within Pakistan. These tensions found another expression in the confrontation between the National Awami Party (NAP) and the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) federal government in the 1970s. Following the breakup of Pakistan in 1971, the NAP and Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) formed coalition governments in what was then the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Balochistan. In February 1973, Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto dismissed the NAP-led government in Balochistan following allegations surrounding an arms cache discovered at the Iraqi embassy. The NWFP coalition resigned in protest. This confrontation reflected genuine political and security disputes, but it also exposed the inability of political leaders to resolve their differences without escalating them into zero-sum struggles for control at the centre.

The Poverty Trap: Why Pakistan Needs Economic Transformation, Not Temporary Relief

The aftermath of the Soviet-Afghan war, followed by post-9/11 regional conflicts and the expansion of domestic militancy, brought unprecedented devastation. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the former Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) became front-line regions in conflicts driven by foreign and regional rivalries. Thousands of citizens were killed, communities were displaced, businesses were destroyed, and social structures were ruptured. The province bore an immense human and economic burden, caught repeatedly between militant violence and state security operations.

The merger of the former FATA with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in 2018 was intended to end a long-standing regime of executive exceptionalism and extend constitutional guarantees, civilian courts, and public services to the merged districts. It represented a historic step towards equal citizenship. Yet the promise of integration remains incomplete. Insecurity persists across several districts, while continuing deficits in infrastructure, healthcare, education, employment, and administrative capacity, compounded by delays in the transfer of financial resources, continue to frustrate public expectations.

The persistent centre-province disputes over the calculation and payment of net hydel profits and the province’s share under the National Finance Commission (NFC) Award further compound these challenges. These unresolved fiscal issues not only constrain the province’s capacity to meet its development needs but also deepen the perception that its constitutional entitlements are not being honoured. Against this historical backdrop, the present crisis demands objective and impartial scrutiny. The federal government has cited worsening security and governance failures to justify invoking the Constitution’s emergency provisions. It must now demonstrate that the decision is justified by the circumstances and proportionate to the challenges at hand, with the emergency remaining in force only for as long as necessary to restore stability and normal constitutional governance.

The Grammar Of Division: Why Pakistan Needs Governance, Not New Maps

At the same time, the PTI leadership cannot shift all responsibility onto the federation. The party’s prolonged tenure in the province places a clear obligation on its leadership to account for its performance, acknowledge its governance failures, and present a realistic roadmap for institutional reform. The people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa deserve more than political rallies, competing accusations, and rhetoric of victimhood. They require functioning schools and hospitals, effective civilian law enforcement, an accountable civil service, and public representatives who treat public office as a public trust rather than a personal entitlement. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa needs peace, dignity, and a fair return on the resources it contributes to the nation. Above all, it requires leadership capable of listening to public grievances, correcting course, and fostering unity. The province’s wounds will not heal through another incision imposed in the name of emergency rule; they will heal when justice, security, economic opportunity, and responsible governance become everyday realities for its people.