When Internal Divisions Invite External Pressure

Dr Gohar 

Bajaur: Global politics rarely relies on direct force alone. Powerful states typically seek moral and political justification before taking action, and internal unrest in other countries often provides a convenient narrative. 

Where societies are divided and public trust in institutions is weak, external pressure becomes easier to apply—and easier to defend.

Recent developments in Iran illustrate this dynamic. Protests there emerged from genuine social and economic grievances, yet they were quickly absorbed into a broader international narrative.

The United States publicly highlighted the unrest while cautioning Tehran against the use of force, effectively creating political and moral space for sustained pressure. This framing allowed Washington to present its actions as reactive rather than strategic.

Despite prolonged external pressure, however, the Iranian state retained significant public support. That internal cohesion limited the impact of unrest and prevented it from escalating into prolonged instability.

Read More: https://thepenpk.com/americas-venezuela-gamble/

Pakistan’s situation is more fragile. Over time, a visible gap has emerged between state institutions and ordinary citizens. Economic stress has intensified, with inflation and unemployment affecting daily life, while political instability has further eroded confidence in governance. Alongside this is a growing perception that power is concentrated, accountability is weak, and policymaking reflects narrow interests rather than broad public consultation.

These conditions matter because unrest does not need to be manufactured where frustration already exists. When people feel insecure, excluded, and unheard, tensions escalate rapidly.

External actors do not need to create movements from scratch; they only need to amplify existing grievances or apply selective concern to influence outcomes. In such environments, unrest can be used to justify pressure, while responsibility appears shifted away from those applying it.

If Pakistan once again becomes strategically important to major powers, this vulnerability will increase. Unlike Iran—where the state still commands loyalty among large segments of society—Pakistan’s internal divisions make instability easier to trigger.

Read More: https://thepenpk.com/shifting-the-axis-of-power-the-challenge-of-2026/

Economic strain, political polarisation, and weak trust between institutions and citizens reduce the country’s ability to absorb external pressure.

This does not imply that dissent should be suppressed. Peaceful protest is a democratic right. The deeper danger lies in systems where citizens feel permanently unheard, authority appears unaccountable, and policies seem detached from public needs.

In today’s world, national security depends not only on military strength but also on public confidence, credible governance, and restraint in the exercise of power. Trust cannot be demanded; it must be earned.

Pakistan’s own history offers a clear lesson. Periods of unity have strengthened the country’s ability to withstand external challenges. Periods of division have weakened it. External pressure succeeds only when internal foundations are fragile.

Bridging the gap between the state and its citizens is therefore not merely a political choice—it is a strategic necessity.