eader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Mahmood Khan Achakzai has called for the formation of a national government and asked major political forces to come together to resolve what he calls the deepening political and institutional crises.

Speaking in the National Assembly, Achakzai argued that Pakistan could not make progress in the current atmosphere of rampant confrontation and polarisation. He insisted that “we have to move toward a national government” built on constitutional supremacy and parliamentary authority. He also stressed the need for consensus on democratic principles and called for political space to be created for all stakeholders. The question now arises whether the largest opposition party – Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf, which had supported his appointment as leader of the opposition, also supports his call for a national government.

Achakzai’s remarks come at a time of extreme political polarization in Pakistan. Ever since the 2024 general elections, opposition parties have alleged electoral fraud. I recent days, the government appears to have grown stronger both in the domestic theatre and internationally. There is also strong coordination between the civil and military leadership.

Some analysts say the context explains the push for a broad-based political arrangement to ensure internal and political stability by including marginalised political parties.

“A national government can be formed in two situations. First, when the opposition parties in parliament join the government/ cabinet, the national government will be constitutional. Such a setup is difficult to achieve and may not be practical,” said Ahmed Bilal Mehboob, the Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency president. “The second way is beyond the National Assembly, by bringing in technocrats. Such a government can only be formed in violation of the constitution.”

The PTI leaders The News on Sunday talked to said the national government idea was not on their agenda. The government, too, does not look keen. Mahboob said, if the PTI were willing, a national government could be formed first by including them in the government and that this would not be unconstitutional.

However, in Mehboob’s view, such a government will likely struggle to function. “Decision-making will become complicated. The crucial question is: what if Imran Khan opposed this idea. If Khan does not want what Achakzai has proposed, then it means nothing considering Achakzai’s party has only one seat in the assembly,” he said.

The concept of a national or unity government is not new. It has emerged during moments of crisis, particularly when a political deadlock coincides with economic instability or security challenge.

Achakzai’s remarks come at a time of extreme political polarisation. The government appears to be gaining strength both domestically and internationally. Coordination between the civil and military leadership too appears strong.

In the 1990s and early 2000s, proposals for consensus governance were floated amid confrontation. More recently, similar calls surfaced during the political turbulence of 2022-2024, when some opposition alliances and civil society voices suggested inclusive arrangements to restore stability.

The grand opposition alliance, Tehreek-i-Tahaffuz Ayeen-i-Pakistan, had demanded last year the establishment of a national government to deal with the internal and external challenges, saying the situation required unity. “The general elections, held in 2024, were rigged. The incumbent government does not have the mandate of the masses. It should be dismissed,” Achakzai had said.

Pakistan has not had a national government in the classical sense. Instead, there have been some coalition governments — often fragile and contested. Some analysts say that what gets described as a ‘national’ government in Pakistan tends to be a political compromise rather than a genuinely inclusive power-sharing arrangement.

In theory, a national government would include all major political parties. It could have a consensus prime minister or a caretaker leadership. Agreement would be required on key policy priorities such as economic stabilisation and electoral reforms and a timeline for fresh elections. The practical hurdles are significant. The political landscape is highly polarised and major parties see it as a zero-sum contest. The trust deficit between political actors and tensions other state institutions further complicate the matters.

Achakzai himself hinted at this challenge by calling for political actors to stop blaming each other for the problems and instead agree on “some democratic points.” He has been pressing the demand for two years. The idea has always drawn a mixed response. One side argues that Pakistan’s current situation — marked by economic stress, institutional imbalance and political fragmentation — does justify a temporary consensus arrangement. It says a broad-based government could help restore confidence, particularly if it prioritises electoral transparency, judicial independence and economic reforms.

The other side warns that such an arrangement could end up undermining democratic norms. They argue that national governments tend to dilute opposition oversight, weaken accountability and blur the distinction between government and opposition — a core feature of parliamentary democracy. There is also scepticism about whether powerful stakeholders, including political parties and institutions, are genuinely willing to share power. Without that willingness, analysts say, a national government risks becoming either symbolic or short-lived.

Some sections also see the demand for a national government as an attempt to renegotiate the balance of power within the state. Others interpret it as a strategic shift by opposition forces seeking greater space in a constrained environment.

There is little indication so far that major political parties are ready to move toward a power sharing arrangement. The ruling coalition continues to defend its mandate and opposition forces remain fragmented in their strategies. And even among those supporting the idea, there is no clear blueprint for how a national government may be formed, what its mandate would be and how long it may last.

“At the moment, the national government idea looks impractical to me,” Mehboob says.

The author is a staff reporter. He can be reached at [email protected].