Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province has been facing a governance and security challenge that can no longer be treated as a purely provincial matter.
The province’s people need functioning institutions, effective public services, development and security. When these basic responsibilities are under sustained strain, the federal government has both a constitutional duty and a national interest in responding.
This does not mean taking away the province’s constitutional autonomy. It means ensuring that provincial autonomy does not become an excuse for administrative paralysis, political confrontation or failure to protect citizens.
The warning signs are difficult to ignore. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa continues to face serious security threats, particularly in districts bordering Afghanistan.
A recent attack on a police compound in Kohat killed and wounded scores of people, highlighting the continuing pressure on law-enforcement institutions.
At the same time, political confrontation is adding another layer of uncertainty.
The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf government in the province is responsible for governing the province it controls. Its political disagreements with the federal government, or its support for protests, cannot be ignored, as they overshadow the everyday needs of millions of residents.
The economic consequences extend well beyond Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb has warned that strikes, sit-ins, long marches and road closures could cause estimated losses of Rs120 billion a day. He put the potential losses at about Rs86 billion in services, Rs25 billion in industry and Rs9 billion in agriculture.
For a country attempting to move from economic stabilisation towards sustained growth, such disruption carries a substantial cost.
Roads, supply chains, markets and communications are national economic arteries. Any disruption affects workers, businesses, farmers and consumers far beyond the immediate location of a protest.
The question of governance in the recently merged districts also deserves urgent attention. These areas entered a new constitutional and administrative phase after the merger of the former Federally Administered Tribal Areas. They require sustained investment, effective administration and visible state presence.
The provincial government itself has allocated substantial resources to development. Its 2026-27 budget includes more than Rs500 billion for development, with separate allocations for the merged districts. Official budget documents list hundreds of development schemes in these areas.
The issue, therefore, is not simply how much money is allocated. It is whether projects are completed, services reach citizens, and public money produces measurable results.
Cases of corruption or political patronage should be investigated through transparent audits and due legal process instead of treating them as facts without evidence.
Security presents an even more urgent test. No provincial government can afford ambiguity towards terrorist networks, criminal groups or attacks on police and critical infrastructure. Law-enforcement agencies need political support, operational cooperation and clear institutional coordination.
The constitutional case for federal government intervention
This is where the federal role becomes unavoidable.
Article 148 of the Constitution places a duty on the Federation to protect provinces against external aggression and internal disturbances and to ensure that provincial governments operate in accordance with the Constitution.
Article 149 also allows the Federation to issue directions in circumstances involving a grave threat to peace, tranquillity or the economic life of Pakistan or any part of it.
These provisions should not be interpreted as a licence for arbitrary intervention. They must be used as a constitutional framework for cooperation, accountability and, where necessary, federal direction.
The immediate priority should be a joint federal-provincial mechanism for security, development and economic continuity.
It should monitor the implementation of development schemes, review spending in the merged districts, strengthen counterterrorism coordination, protect strategic infrastructure and ensure that police and civil administration can perform their duties without political interference.
The federal government should also insist on institutional accountability. Where allegations of corruption, criminal patronage or obstruction of security operations arise, independent investigations should establish the facts. Where officials or political actors violate the law, the law should take its course.
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa does not need another political confrontation between Peshawar and Islamabad. Its people need governance.
The province’s constitutional autonomy must be respected. But autonomy carries responsibility. When governance, security and economic stability are seriously threatened, the Federation cannot simply stand aside and watch.
The objective should not be to weaken Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s elected institutions. The aim should be to ensure those institutions work — for the people of the province, Pakistan’s security, and the country’s economic future.
