BHTN2EU5YBHVZLPTZCRZYVHMFY

Political polarisation is not something new. All states around the globe practicing any form of government have had to deal with this phenomenon with varied degree of severity. Its undesired consequences (from varied examples) include societal division, communal anger, formation of hostile camps, violence against opposing groups, military coups, institutional delegitimisation, and erosion of democratic ethos. These make political polarisation a threat to the national, political, and social fabric of a country. This article is an attempt to examine the concept of political polarisation and its consequences in the context of diverse societies, like Pakistan.

‘Severe’ or ‘pernicious’ polarisation has been defined by Jennifer McCoy and Murat Somer as ‘a process whereby the normal multiplicity of differences in the society increasingly align[s] along a single dimension, cross-cutting differences become reinforcing, and people increasingly perceive and describe politics and society in terms of ‘us’ versus ‘them’’

According to McCoy and Somer, ‘pernicious polarisation’ has become a tool in the hands of political entrepreneurs to pursue their political interests and power game driven by declared perceived morals than actual values and morality. Such actors portray themselves and their opponents in highly contrasting terms of ‘good’ and ‘evil’. They use blame game tactics and push their opponents to the wall by holding them responsible for all the ills in society. This infusion of good and evil, moral and immoral, honest and corrupt activates ‘ethnocentrism’ in the population, according to Marc Hooghe – the belief that one’s own political ideology is superior to other existing ideologies and that one’s political ideology/strategy is the solution to all evils. This rising tendency can impact the social fabric and exacerbate social isolation and enmity amongst people with divergent political views.

Pakistan’s political history is replete with examples where political polarisation was used to achieve vested political results or to retain power. This has been evident since pre-partition when the anti-Pakistan Muslim polity labelled the idea of separate country with denigrating labels like ‘Paldistan’ and ‘Kafiristan’. Even the Founder of the Nation Quaid-i-Azam was belittled by them as ‘Kafir-e-Azam’. In the same vein, Mohtarma Fatima Ali Jinnah was drawn into controversies and labeled as a traitor during her election campaign in 1965. Unfortunately, such politically motivated controversies and blame games have dominated the country’s polity over decades. Even today, Pakistan’s political ethos has not improved, and the country is still vulnerable to controversies and conspiracies leading to political chaos.

A more current example is the ongoing party-political turmoil in the country in which various political parties are actively employing all kinds of polarisation tactics and engaged in disputes about who is a ‘patriot’ and who is a ‘traitor’. Such conduct of political leadership poses serious threats to the security and stability of the country and is inimical to the long-term national interests of the state.

This growing polarisation in our society calls for an effective ‘depolarisation mechanism’ based on four basic pillars, i.e., strengthening legal institutions, empowering the judiciary, independent election administration, and ensuring more civil participation in political affairs of the country. Other than this, there is need to deliberate and understand at the national level what has gone wrong over the past few years that has been slowly eating away at the political and social fabric of our society. Every political chaos leads to economic crises, and ultimately, it is the citizens of the land who suffer; thus, compromising the human security. Hence, for the same of the citizenry, there is a dire need of broader political and institutional reforms that will help overcome the current turmoil and crisis. This will help promote a more pluralistic democracy and restore the trust of people in the democratic process and institutes of the state.

Lastly, a political crisis of this nature calls for political acumen and a sense of responsibility from our political elites to minimise the negative effects of polarisation on society. At this point, the situation necessitates that both the ruling and the opposition parties should dispel antagonism towards each other in favour of collective national interests and join hands to detoxify and stabilise Pakistan.

Amna Tauhidi is a Researcher at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. The article was first published in The News International. She can be reached at [email protected].  


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »

Debunking the S-400 Shield: Lessons from the India-Pakistan Conflict

Air defense has always been a central aspect of warfare. In South Asia, the phenomenon carries immense significance due to compressed reaction times. In this context, one of the most-hyped systems is the Russian-made S-400, touted by New Delhi as a one-stop solution to counter aerial threats from both Pakistan and China.
The 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan marked an important chapter in testing the S-400 technology. The conflict began on May 7, when India attacked what it alleged were terrorist targets in both Pakistani-held Kashmir and Pakistan proper, using drone and missile strikes. The conflict lasted for four days, culminating in a U.S-facilitated ceasefire. However, the brief conflict debunked a lot of the myths regarding the S-400 technology.
First, India claimed that the mobile S-400 would be able to control Pakistan’s airspace. In contrast, Pakistani aircraft continued to operate freely, according to official briefings by the Pakistani military. Although the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft were in their own airspace, they were still within the air defense range.

Read More »