Imran Khan’s Presumed Death A Pivotal Moment ?

Poonam Sharma
Rumors of Imran Khan’s death-infection-induced assassination, according to some reports-have sent Pakistan into shock, but not surprisingly so for those familiar with the country’s brutal history of political engineering. For a long time now, Pakistan has been a country where no elected prime minister ever completes five years in office. Imran Khan, the charismatic cricketer-turned-populist leader, thus became the latest victim in a vortex of an unaccountable military establishment, shifting geopolitical games, and a fragile democratic façade.

Whether he is truly dead or kept incommunicado, one thing is for sure: Imran Khan had become too powerful for the entrenched system of Pakistan. In Pakistan, that is often a fatal crime.

The Rise of a Leader Who Bucked the System

When Imran Khan swept to power in 2018, he believed Pakistan could be reshaped through civilian authority-something no leader had dared to attempt. The global sports icon could have lived a peaceful celebrated life. But his dream of delivering a “Naya Pakistan” collided with an old truth: in Pakistan, the army, not voters, determines power.

His popularity, especially in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the tribal regions, made him a threat to the military. The Pashtun belt has traditionally harboured deep anger against Pakistan’s army, particularly after years of US bombings in FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa that killed civilians. Khan stood with these communities, condemning both Pakistani and American militarism. That earned him massive support—and powerful enemies.

The US Angle: From Washington’s Favourite to Washington’s Problem

For years, Imran Khan was viewed as the West’s “soft face” of Pakistan, until he began to push for an independent foreign policy, questioning US drone strikes, criticising American intervention in Afghanistan and calling out Washington’s pressure on Islamabad.

The infamous allegation that a senior US official, Donald Lu, had expressed displeasure with Imran Khan’s policies became a political earthquake. In the political folklore of Pakistan, it is an oft-held belief that US dissatisfaction often leads to instability at home.

Perhaps Imran Khan’s greatest miscalculation lay in the belief that he could take on Washington’s geopolitical interests and Rawalpindi’s military ambitions simultaneously.

Faiz Hameed, Treason, and the Internal Crackdown

A central figure in Khan’s downfall was Lt. Gen. Faiz Hameed, the former ISI chief. Imran openly backed him, hoping Faiz would help stabilise his government and check the army’s interference. This move crossed a red line. No civilian is allowed to “choose” their favourite generals in Pakistan.

Today, Faiz Hameed is accused of treason, and Khan’s political empire—Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf or PTI—is being systematically dismembered. The message is stark: any civilian leader who tries to step in to alter the internal pecking order of the army will be crushed.

General Asif Munir’s War Against Imran Khan

Current Chief of Army Staff General Asif Munir perceived Imran Khan as a greater threat to the establishment’s power structure. The GHQ was rattled by Khan’s mass popularity and anti-military rhetoric. It is widely alleged that Munir ensured his isolation, imprisonment, and now—some claim—his death due to an “infected disease” without clear symptoms.

Whether this is confirmed or remains speculation, the political message is unmistakable: Pakistan’s hybrid regime has no space for leaders who stand outside the system.

The Larger Crisis: Pakistan’s State versus Its People

Imran Khan’s conflict was not limited to the army or the US. It symbolised a deeper structural imbalance.

A legislature that hardly existed.

A military that looks upon civilian rule as temporary

A foreign policy scripted by foreign powers.

An urban middle class that is increasingly rejecting the old order.

Imran Khan stirred a political consciousness among city-bred Pakistanis, mostly young voters, who perceived him as the only leader unsullied by corruption. Even in death—or disappearance—his ghost will haunt the political elite. The youth of Pakistan are unlikely to forget the man who promised dignity, sovereignty, and justice against military interference.

Western Silence and Hypocrisy

One of the most glaring questions is: Where is the West now?

The same Western governments that preach human rights, democracy, and protection of political prisoners have remained silent. No statements, no sanctions, no moral outrage.

Why? Because Imran Khan had transformed from a useful ally into an inconvenient one, criticizing the US, opposing foreign intervention, speaking up against strikes by drones, and being unpredictable in geopolitics.

His removal suits many power centres.

What is Next for Pakistan?

The real question is not about the fate of Imran Khan but that of Pakistan’s:

Will the Pashtun belt rise in anger once again?

Will urban Pakistan continue to revolt against military dominance?

Will the US–Pakistan relationship stabilize or destabilize post-Khan?

Will new movements emerge demanding real democracy?

Imran Khan’s absence-perceived or real-creates a dangerous political vacuum. And if history has any parallels, every time such vacuums are created in Pakistan, instability, militancy, and geopolitical turmoil soon follow.

Conclusion: A Ghost That Will Haunt Pakistan

If Imran Khan is dead, his death will not silence him. If he is alive, his detention will not erase him. His supporters—spanning Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, urban Punjab, the diaspora, and disillusioned youth—will keep his narrative alive. Imran Khan challenged the most powerful institutions in Pakistan: he fought corruption, called out US meddling, defied military manipulation, and paid the price. Martyr or prisoner, his ghost will haunt Pakistan’s political landscape for decades. And the world must now watch how the US, the Pakistani army, and a restless population navigate the turbulent chapter of post-Imran Pakistan.