Defense Minister questions the sincerity of the PTI in talks with the government


Defense Minister Khawaja Asif on Monday expressed doubts over the sincerity of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) in the upcoming negotiations with the coalition government, questioning the party’s abrupt change of approach.

Speaking to a private news channel on Monday, he described the PTI’s willingness to talk as a “complete U-turn”. “I am repeatedly asking what happened to the person [PTI founder Imran Khan] who didn’t want to shake hands [and is now desperately seeking dialogue with the government]”he added.

The comments came after National Assembly Speaker Sardar Ayaz Sadiq formally called a closed-door meeting between committees representing the government and the embattled PTI. Scheduled for January 2, 2025, the talks aim to calm current political tensions in the country.

Asif reiterated his skepticism about the PTI’s motives. “I don’t see sincerity in PTI [leadership]” he commented, adding that while he is not opposed to negotiations, the ruling coalition must remain cautious.

Taking a swipe at the former ruling party, he said: “Look at their desperation, the PTI wants to hold talks with the establishment through us.” In response to a question, he emphasized that the government would not compromise Pakistan’s nuclear and missile programs.

On Saturday, the Defense Minister had called for inclusive talks involving all power centres, including the military, judiciary, politicians, media and bureaucracy, to resolve the country’s challenges.

“There is the army, the bureaucracy, the politicians, the judiciary and the media. “These are the centers of power and they need to sit together to solve the country’s problems,” he stated.

However, Asif cautioned the government’s negotiating team to remain alert and warned that PTI founder Imran Khan might try to “take advantage”.

During the talks, the PTI is expected to push for a judicial inquiry into the May 9 riots and the nighttime crackdown on November 26, along with the release of “political prisoners.”

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *