The federation in crisis

Pakistan’s federation confronts an extraordinary convergence of threats that, if not addressed with diligence and resolve, could undermine its unity. Three concurrent crises — the resurgence of TTP terrorism in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, escalating instability in Balochistan driven by the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) and the Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC), and an intensifying dispute between Sindh and the federal government over the Cholistan canal project — pose significant challenges.

Each issue originates from distinct federating units, regions long marked by grievances over political marginalisation, inequitable resource allocation and a federal structure perceived as favouring Punjab. These internal divisions are compounded by credible allegations of external interference from regional adversaries in KP and Balochistan, alongside an emerging water conflict in Sindh. Economic stagnation restricts the federal government’s capacity to respond effectively, while the continued influence of the military in civilian governance adds further complexity. These are not routine administrative concerns; they represent fundamental risks to Pakistan’s cohesion as a sovereign state.

The leadership options available to navigate these challenges are limited, and all but one are constrained by significant drawbacks. The PML-N under Maryam Nawaz remains predominantly focused on Punjab, lacking the national appeal necessary to unify disparate regions. The PTI, led by Imran Khan, has prioritised political disruption over constructive solutions, exacerbating instability. Direct military intervention, a recurring feature of Pakistan’s history, has historically intensified rather than resolved underlying tensions. This directs attention to the PPP, led by Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, whose leadership presents a potential pathway to stability. With extensive international connections and a party associated with fostering federal unity, Bilawal is positioned to address this critical moment, offering an opportunity to shape both Pakistan’s future and his own political legacy.

In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the TTP’s renewed offensive has reversed years of progress in stabilising the northwest, with persistent attacks targeting security forces and civilians. The group’s operational freedom is facilitated by sanctuaries across the Afghan border and Indian covert assistance. This deterioration stems from a policy decision during the PTI’s tenure to repatriate Afghan militants onto Pakistani territory, a move that negated prior counterterrorism achievements. Addressing this threat requires a coordinated, intelligence-driven military strategy within Pakistan, coupled with efforts to neutralise cross-border safe havens. Such an approach demands political consensus, which remains elusive.

The PTI, as KP’s governing party, opposes decisive action, possibly due to concerns over local repercussions, fear, or lingering ideological affinities. The PML-N’s historical response offers little confidence; Shehbaz Sharif, during his time as Punjab’s chief minister, sought to placate TTP militants by referring to them as “brothers” and urging them to spare his province. By contrast, the PPP has a proven record of rallying support against militancy, notably through its backing of operations in Swat and North Waziristan and its role in formulating the original National Action Plan. Bilawal has recently advanced this legacy, calling for a revised security framework in his March 13 address to the National Assembly and proposing a reconvening of the National Security Council, extending an invitation to the PTI. The 2007 assassination of his mother, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto, by terrorists provides him with a personal imperative to forge a unified response.

Balochistan constitutes a second critical threat to Pakistan’s federal stability. The BLA has escalated its insurgency, conducting 175 attacks over the past year, up from 110 the previous year, resulting in nearly 700 casualties. The assault on the Jaffar Express, which claimed 28 lives, demonstrated the group’s increasing tactical proficiency. While Pakistan attributes material support to India, the insurgency is primarily driven by domestic factors: prolonged economic neglect, underdevelopment, and political exclusion.

Simultaneously, the BYC has harnessed widespread discontent into an organised campaign to further delegitimise the state, heightening the risk of Balochistan’s detachment from the federation. As the PPP governs the province, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari holds a strategic position to address both the violence and its underlying causes. He is capable of engaging influential Baloch leaders, like Sardar Akhtar Mengal, Dr Abdul Malik Baloch, or even Mahrang Baloch, by offering substantive governance roles and ensuring transparent electoral processes within Pakistan’s constitutional framework. This approach builds on the PPP’s historical contributions to national unity, exemplified by the 1973 constitution, the Charter of Democracy and the 18th Amendment.

Managing Balochistan’s complexities requires reconciling provincial demands with the military’s significant security interests — a balance Bilawal has maintained in coalition governments since 2022. Neither the PTI’s inconsistent governance nor the PML-N’s limited engagement in the province matches this capacity.

The third crisis emerges from Sindh’s mounting disagreement with the federal government over the Cholistan Canal project, an initiative under the Special Investment Facilitation Council’s Green Pakistan Initiative. Supported by considerable Gulf investment, the project seeks to convert the Cholistan desert into productive farmland, yet Sindh contends that it jeopardises the Indus River’s flow, threatening its agricultural foundation and fragile delta ecosystem. Although comprehensive technical assessments are pending, the dispute aligns with Sindh’s longstanding perception of federal neglect and resource inequity, fostering provincial sentiment that could be exploited by external actors.

The PTI’s tendency to amplify such tensions for political advantage contrasts with the PML-N’s Punjab-centric perspective, which undermines its credibility as a neutral mediator. Sindh requires a representative rooted in its context, capable of advocating its interests unequivocally. Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has assumed this role, asserting on January 12, 2025, that Sindh feels relegated to a “stepchild” by the federal government — a view reinforced by former President Asif Ali Zardari’s March 10 caution against unilateral actions. With deep ties to Sindh, Bilawal is well-placed to negotiate with Islamabad and through institutions such as CCI, ECNEC and IRSA, ensuring the province’s critical needs are met.

These crises coincide with broader national difficulties. Economic stagnation and Pakistan’s civil-military dynamic, characterised by the military’s dominant role as the self-designated guardian of stability over seven decades, continues to constrain civilian authority. This governance structure diverges from conventional democratic models, necessitating leadership capable of aligning military priorities with civilian oversight without veering toward authoritarianism. Allegations of Indian efforts to exploit these vulnerabilities through proxy operations in Afghanistan and Balochistan heighten the stakes within a nuclear-armed state situated in a volatile region, where the consequences of collapse could surpass regional precedents.

Amid this complex environment, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari emerges as a leader with the potential to address these multifaceted challenges. Combining his heritage with a contemporary approach, Bilawal can resonate with a younger generation disillusioned by political fragmentation. Bilawal’s established relationships with the UAE, Saudi Arabia, China, Turkey, and Western capitals provide him with the diplomatic leverage to counter alleged Indian destabilisation efforts and secure vital international support.

He can offer a comprehensive strategy: decisive counterterrorism measures in KP, inclusive governance in Balochistan and equitable negotiations in Sindh — actions that collectively offer a prospect for stability amid significant national pressure. Success in these efforts could reposition the PPP as a unifying force across Pakistan’s federating units, alleviating Punjab’s recurring role as a target of provincial grievances and fostering greater national cohesion. His combination of historical legacy, governance experience and international credibility distinguishes him within a political landscape often constrained by narrow interests.

The TTP’s resurgence requires coordinated action; Balochistan demands a blend of security and inclusion; and Sindh necessitates careful negotiation to resolve resource disputes and reinforce federal trust. These substantial challenges present Bilawal with an opportunity to establish his leadership, elevate the PPP’s national stature and guide Pakistan toward renewed stability.

At this decisive moment, Bilawal holds the capacity to sustain and strengthen the federation his family has long influenced. His ability to capitalise on this opportunity will shape his political legacy and determine Pakistan’s trajectory for decades to come. The need for strategic leadership is paramount; this moment must not be allowed to pass unaddressed.

The writer holds a Master’s degree in International Public Policy from SAIS, Johns Hopkins University, is a political worker of the PPP, and participates in electoral politics from Nankana Sahib, Punjab.