Pakistan is passing through one of the most turbulent phases in its recent history. Political instability, an economy in deep distress, and widening internal unrest have combined to create a crisis that is now challenging the country's political and military establishment.

While violence continues to intensify in Balochistan, demands for greater autonomy and even independence are growing in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK), and anti-government sentiment is rising in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK). Against this backdrop, criticism of the government and the military is no longer confined to opposition parties but is increasingly emerging from influential political and religious leaders.
Among the strongest voices is that of Maulana Fazlur Rehman, chief of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (Fazl) (JUI-F) and a member of Pakistan's National Assembly. He has openly accused Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif's government of failing to address the country's mounting problems and has sharply criticised the military's growing influence over Pakistan's political affairs. Joining him is Akhtar Mengal, chief of the Balochistan National Party and a former Chief Minister of Balochistan, who has also launched a fierce attack on Islamabad and the military establishment.
Speaking at a public gathering at Kasur in Punjab, Pakistan , Maulana Fazlur Rehman said Pakistan's condition was deteriorating with each passing day and accused the government of being incapable of resolving the people's problems. He alleged that while ordinary Pakistanis were struggling with inflation, unemployment and insecurity, senior military officers remained confined to luxurious residences, issuing orders from their Bed Rooms without addressing the country's worsening crisis.
Since the creation of Pakistan in 1947, the military has remained the country's most powerful institution. Although elected governments have periodically assumed office, the Army has exercised decisive influence over national politics. Pakistan has witnessed long periods of direct military rule under General Ayub Khan, General Yahya Khan, General Zia-ul-Haq and General Pervez Musharraf. Even during civilian governments, analysts have frequently argued that the military establishment has retained the final say on major political and security decisions.
Pakistan's political history has also been marked by repeated dismissals, arrests, exile and disqualification of elected prime ministers. Political parties have risen and declined, but the Army has continued to remain the dominant force in the country's power structure.
Political observers believe that Maulana Fazlur Rehman's unusually aggressive criticism is significant because it comes at a time when Field Marshal Asim Munir is widely regarded as Pakistan's most influential figure.
The question being asked in political circles is why a leader who maintained cordial relations with the military establishment for decades has now chosen to directly confront both the Army Chief and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.
One possible explanation, according to analysts, is the deteriorating security situation across Pakistan. Balochistan continues to witness militant violence, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa remains volatile due to insurgent attacks, Pakistan's western border with Afghanistan has become increasingly unstable, and unrest has spread across PoJK. These developments have placed enormous pressure on the Pakistani military.
The immediate trigger for the confrontation appears to have been a recent appeal by Army Chief Asim Munir, who reportedly called for the mobilisation of new Lashkars( local militias ) or volunteer forces to support security operations in Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, where security personnel have suffered significant casualties.
Responding strongly, Maulana Fazlur Rehman rejected the proposal and reminded the military that defending Pakistan was the constitutional responsibility of the armed forces, not ordinary citizens. He declared that every institution—including Parliament and the Army—must operate within its constitutional limits.
In one of his sharpest remarks, the JUI-F chief questioned why citizens who finance the military through taxes should be asked to create armed groups( Lashkars) while soldiers receive salaries to defend the country. He asserted that if military leaders wished to engage in politics, they should resign from service, remove their uniforms and contest elections like civilian politicians.
Drawing international comparisons, Fazlur Rehman argued that soldiers in countries such as Iran and Ukraine had sacrificed their lives defending their nations without attempting to determine which governments should remain in power. Pakistan's Army, he suggested, should similarly concentrate on its professional responsibilities instead of political affairs.
Maulana also accused Pakistan's rulers of making the country weak and vulnerable while warning against allowing foreign powers to dictate Pakistan's policies. His comments reflect growing frustration among sections of Pakistan's political leadership regarding the military's continued dominance over civilian institutions.
Political analysts believe Fazlur Rehman's changing position may also reflect his increasing political distance from the present government and the military establishment. They argue that he has gradually been sidelined from major decision-making despite previously maintaining close working relations with the Army.
There is also speculation that JUI-F is moving closer to former Prime Minister Imran Khan's Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), whose leadership has repeatedly accused the military establishment of political interference. Such an understanding could strengthen opposition pressure on both the government and the military.
Meanwhile, Akhtar Mengal has escalated the political confrontation by resigning from Pakistan's National Assembly and renewing demands for greater political rights for Balochistan. He has accused the government of converting what was essentially a political issue into a military conflict through the excessive use of force. Mengal has alleged that military operations have devastated villages and resulted in widespread human rights violations.
The political temperature is also rising in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir ahead of the July 27 Legislative Assembly elections. Security has been tightened across Muzaffarabad, Mirpur, Bhimber, Rawalakot, Kotli and other major towns, with large deployments of Pakistani security forces.
At the centre of the unrest is the Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC), which has issued an ultimatum demanding acceptance of its 38-point charter before July 21. The organisation has warned of an intensified mass movement if its demands are ignored. Its campaign focuses on rising electricity tariffs, inflation, shortages of essential commodities, governance issues and the abolition of reserved Assembly seats allocated to refugees from Jammu and Kashmir.
According to activists, protests have continued for several weeks and security forces have launched a widespread crackdown involving arrests of political workers and youth activists. Authorities have deployed additional Federal Constabulary personnel, Rangers and Punjab Police units to reinforce local security.
The government has blamed the Joint Awami Action Committee for creating unrest, while the organisation accuses Islamabad of suppressing peaceful protests rather than addressing legitimate public grievances. Critics further argue that the reserved Assembly seats enable Islamabad to influence government formation in PoJK, thereby limiting genuine democratic representation.
Public resentment in PoJK has increasingly centred on demands for greater political rights, economic relief and reduced interference from Islamabad. Similar sentiments have also emerged in Gilgit-Baltistan, where sections of the population have demanded greater autonomy and improved regional connectivity.
Supporters of our Jammu and Kashmir, frequently point to differences in development between Jammu and Kashmir and PoJK, citing higher investments in healthcare, education and public infrastructure on the Indian side of the Line of Control. They argue that these disparities have contributed to growing dissatisfaction among sections of the population in PoJK. Jammu and Kashmir has more then one dozen medical colleges, while PoJK has only six medical colleges with admission of 600 MBBS students every year, while J&K has more than 1300 MBBS students.
The debate has also attracted international attention. British MP Bob Blackman has expressed concern over reports of unrest and the use of force against civilians in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir.
Whether the present wave of criticism from leaders such as Maulana Fazlur Rehman and Akhtar Mengal evolves into a broader political challenge remains uncertain. However, their unprecedented attacks on Pakistan's military establishment underscore the growing strains within a country already confronting simultaneous political, economic and security crises. The coming weeks will reveal whether Islamabad chooses dialogue, intensified security measures, or an even greater role for the military in managing Pakistan's internal challenges.