Information Minister endorses DG ISPR’s assessment of Imran Khan as a national security concern.
Tarar Rules Out Dialogue With PTI, Sets Conditions for Future Talks
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s Information Minister Ata Tarar on Friday declared that there would be no negotiations with the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) unless the party apologises for actions deemed anti-state and acknowledges the embarrassment caused by its leadership.
Speaking on a private news channel, Tarar said “those who espouse divisive, violent, and extremist views” have no scope for engagement. He referred to PTI’s recent statements and actions, describing them as hostile to Pakistan’s national interests and the integrity of state institutions.
“They have missed the bus,” Tarar said, adding that a conditional dialogue could only occur if PTI leaders apologise and demonstrate accountability.
Supporting DG ISPR’s Remarks
Tarar endorsed the earlier press briefing by ISPR Director General Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, reiterating the view that Imran Khan poses a threat to national security. He condemned PTI’s attempts to deny Pakistan international aid and other activities aimed at undermining state institutions.
Highlighting the May 9 incident, he stated:
- Attacks on military installations
- Arson at MM Alam’s aircraft
- Burning of Jinnah House
- Desecration of Colonel Sher Khan’s statue
“Even enemies do not do what they did,” Tarar said, framing the narrative as evidence of PTI’s extremism.
Jail Meetings and Public Gatherings Under Scrutiny
Tarar emphasised that jail visits must strictly follow legal procedures. He specifically cited Uzma Khan’s jail meetings as a violation of protocol. Going forward, he warned that:
- FIRs and legal action will be taken against anyone disrupting law and order
- Public gatherings or meetings will require strict compliance with the law
- Government will enforce the “writ of the state” without exception
“The gloves are off,” Tarar stated, signalling a no-tolerance approach to anti-state activities.
Conditional Dialogue and Governor’s Rule
While ruling out unconditional negotiations, Tarar left the door slightly open:
- Dialogue could occur in parliament without Imran Khan
- Only possible after PTI apologises and acknowledges wrongdoing
He also mentioned that governor’s rule remains a constitutional option if law and order deteriorate or governance gaps emerge. He noted that cooperation from the PTI chief minister at the NFC meeting was a positive sign but warned that failure to deliver could prompt federal intervention.
CDF Notification Explained
Addressing questions about delays in issuing the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) notification, Tarar said structural changes required careful planning. He clarified that the office of the Joint Chiefs had ended, and the new framework needed to be fully operational before appointments were formalised. He criticised speculation and said those who doubted the process “owe an apology to the nation.”
Political observers note that:
- Tarar’s statements reinforce the government’s alignment with the military’s framing of PTI as a national security concern
- Conditional dialogue based on apology signals a hardline approach while maintaining a token channel for parliamentary discussions
- The mention of governor’s rule underscores the use of constitutional mechanisms to enforce compliance at the provincial level
- Analysts caution that this approach may further polarise politics, reducing opportunities for bipartisan conflict resolution
WHAT happened?
Information Minister Ata Tarar ruled out negotiations with PTI unless an apology is issued, aligning government policy with the military’s assessment of national security risks.
WHY does it matter?
The government’s tough stance sets the tone for political engagement with PTI and signals strict enforcement of law and order after the May 9 events.
WHERE did this occur?
In a private news channel interview with nationwide broadcast.
HOW will the government enforce its stance?
Through:
- Suspension of non-compliant jail meetings
- Strict monitoring of public gatherings
- FIRs and legal proceedings against disruptions
- Possible consideration of governor’s rule if governance fails