The United Kingdom prides itself on being a champion of democracy and human rights, frequently condemning political repression and imprisonment in authoritarian states such as China, Iran, Russia and North Korea. 

Yet, its response to the arbitrary imprisonment of Pakistan’s former prime minister Imran Khan – an elected leader with extensive ties to Britain – has been muted at best and complicit at worst over the last two years. 

This glaring inconsistency reveals the self-serving nature of the UK’s foreign policy, which prioritises strategic defence and intelligence-sharing interests over democratic principles when dealing with countries like Pakistan.

Imran Khan’s British connections

Imran Khan has more personal and institutional linkages to Britain than almost any other political prisoner in the world. He was educated at an elite British school before completing a degree in Politics, Philosophy, and Economics (PPE) at Oxford University. 

He played county cricket for Sussex, and Oxford University’s own squad, and later became a cricketing icon in the UK, leading Pakistan to victory in the 1992 Cricket World Cup – a moment celebrated even in Britain. His first wife, Jemima Goldsmith, is a British citizen, and his two sons are British nationals, living in the UK.

Yet, despite these connections, the UK government has chosen to remain silent on his unjust imprisonment. His real crime, it appears, is not any of the absurd charges levied against him – ranging from treason to a so-called illegal marriage – but rather his refusal to bow to the demands of Pakistan’s military and foreign powers.

Special relationship with Pakistan’s establishment

Unlike China or Russia, where the UK has little political leverage, Pakistan presents a different dynamic. Britain enjoys deep-rooted defence, intelligence, and diplomatic ties with Pakistan, particularly with the country’s powerful military and intelligence services. 

The last three British High Commissioners to Pakistan have been seen more often with Pakistan’s military leadership than with elected officials, reinforcing the notion that democracy in Pakistan is merely a façade and that the UK is comfortable working within this hybrid system. Pakistan’s army chiefs are given red carpet treatment in the UK quite often too. 

The reason for this selective diplomacy is clear: Britain relies on Pakistani intelligence, primarily through the notorious Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), a relationship which is heavily dependent on Pakistan’s military establishment. 

Additionally, the UK has strong defence trade relations with Pakistan, including the reported sale of over $1 billion worth of military equipment via British defence companies, partly linked to ongoing conflicts like Ukraine. 

In this arrangement, an independent politician like Imran Khan – who has been critical of the military’s interference in governance and prioritises the welfare of the Pakistani people over foreign interests – becomes an inconvenient figure. 

His persecution is met with silence because challenging his imprisonment would mean confronting the very military generals with whom the UK maintains its strategic ties.

Imran Khan’s Sham trial

Since his imprisonment in August 2023, Imran Khan has faced an avalanche of politically motivated charges, including terrorism, treason, and corruption. Some of these carry the death penalty. 

In an attempt to discredit him, the military-backed government even pursued a case questioning the menstrual cycle of his wife. Despite being acquitted in several cases by Pakistan’s High Court, new charges are continuously manufactured to keep him behind bars. 

When the Islamabad High Court started to push back against this judicial persecution, the military regime simply stripped the court of its authority and installed more compliant judges. The goal is clear: ensure that Imran Khan never walks free again.

Pakistan’s February 2024 general elections were universally condemned as the most rigged in the country’s history. Independent watchdogs such as the PATTAN documented widespread electoral fraud, vote suppression, and manipulation. 

The UK, along with the US, the EU, and the UN, issued mild statements expressing concern over the elections, yet none have dared to directly confront Pakistan’s military or ISI – the real architects of the rigging. 

This contrasts sharply with the UK’s outspokenness against electoral manipulation in countries like Iran, Venezuela, or Belarus, where it has no strategic interests at stake.

Adding to the UK’s reluctance to take a firm stance, Pakistan’s weak response to the Gaza crisis aligns conveniently with British and American foreign policy interests. While many Muslim-majority nations strongly condemned Israel’s actions, Pakistan’s government – installed with the blessing of the military – offered only feeble concern.

Reports have also emerged of military-backed Pakistani journalists visiting Israel as a goodwill gesture, despite Pakistan officially not recognising Israel as a state. Such moves indicate a willingness to align with Western geopolitical interests rather than represent the will of the Pakistani people, a move that a truly democratic leader like Imran Khan would have never accepted.

Changing face of British-Pakistani diaspora

One factor the Foreign Office may not have anticipated is the shift in sentiment within Britain’s Pakistani diaspora, which numbers nearly two million, making up almost three percent of the UK’s population. 

Traditionally, British-Pakistanis remained indifferent to the frequent military takeovers and political feuds in their ancestral homeland. However, the crackdown on Imran Khan and the unprecedented human rights violations targeting not only his supporters but also British-Pakistanis in Pakistan have triggered a political awakening.

Today, a large number of British-Pakistanis are writing to their MPs, demanding explanations for the UK government’s silence. They are gathering outside 10 Downing Street, chanting against the tyranny of Pakistan’s generals and questioning why the UK, which preaches democracy abroad, turns a blind eye when its closest allies undermine it.

The imprisonment of British-Pakistanis in Pakistan and threats against dual nationals have made this issue deeply personal, forcing the UK government to at least acknowledge these concerns in private, even if it continues to avoid taking a public stance.

Time to drop the pretense

If the UK insists on maintaining its diplomatic silence over Imran Khan’s imprisonment, it should at least drop the pretense of promoting democracy and human rights in Pakistan. 

The British taxpayer deserves to know why their government selectively condemns political oppression in countries where it has little influence, while turning a blind eye to blatant authoritarianism in a country where it has significant leverage.

Imran Khan’s imprisonment is not just a Pakistani issue; it is a test of the UK’s credibility on the global stage. If Britain continues to prioritise short-term intelligence and defence interests over democratic values, it risks not only being on the wrong side of history but also alienating its own citizens of Pakistani heritage.

The question remains: Will Britain remain complicit in Pakistan’s descent into military dictatorship, or will it finally stand up for the principles it claims to uphold?

---

---