Pakistan: The Realpolitik State

In a recent exchange, Kabir suggested that Pakistanis often feel unwelcome in our discussions on Brown Pundits, and that constant criticism of their country creates a sense of unease. It is worth pausing to reflect on this. Pakistanis, like all of us, are shaped by history and circumstance. And yet, there is something in the cultural tenor of Pakistan that makes open engagement difficult.

I say this not to provoke but to observe. Pakistan, as a society, often leans heavily on hierarchism, patronage, and a culture of deference. To borrow an old saying about the Somalis, that every man thinks himself a Sulṭán, one might say that Pakistanis often view themselves through the prism of status and validation. This instinct is hardly unique; Indians, too, have their caste-bound privileges and invisible hierarchies. But in India, these structures are embedded in a dense cultural fabric; family, caste, neighbourhood, ritual, that, for all their flaws, anchor society. Pakistan, by contrast, feels less rooted. It is a younger country (with old traditions), with fewer inherited cultural layers to draw on.

This is not simply an abstract point. When I married, we drew freely from Hindu rituals (dual ceremonies, Bahá’í incl.), Persian customs, and Sindhi traditions, blending them into something whole. But I realised there was nothing distinctly “Pakistani” to contribute; no cultural motif that stood outside India or Iran (we didn’t do a Walima, which is Muslim). Pakistan is, in many ways, a derivation: a state forged through separation, rather than a civilization with deep roots of its own. The cultural space it occupies has been overlaid with militant nationalism and, too often, Hindu-phobia (Kabir is so inured to it that he isn’t able to recognise that but on the flipside so is the Commentariat towards Islam).

To acknowledge this is not to deny the prejudices of Indians toward Muslims, which are very real and enduring. Nor is it to ignore the deracinated, secular archetype embodied by figures like Benazir Bhutto, who seemed neither fully Muslim nor fully Western, suspended between worlds and who are the cultural elite of Pakistan (what they give up on their bridge is their Hindu origins; more than being half-Persian, Benazir’s nani was Hindu). It is simply to note that Pakistan’s cultural story remains unsettled & thus interesting.

Validation and Audience

Kabir’s call for fairness is understandable. But it is also true that Brown Pundits need not constantly chase Pakistani validation. The site’s founding DNA is already marked by Muslim and Pakistani antecedents. Today, however, our audience is predominantly Indian and Indian-American. This is not pandering; it is reality.

That said, fairness does matter. Pakistan deserves serious analysis, not caricature. At times, our commentary lacks texture or nuance, and I do not defend that. But nor do I think it is a hill worth dying on. Pakistan is both compelling and frustrating. It is a society I know well, yet cannot always reason with.

Yet the Commentariat has missed a crucial point: Pakistan has seized moral, diplomatic, and even strategic ground in the post-Pahalgam landscape. From pariah in April to statesmanlike in September, Islamabad courted China, the US, and Saudi Arabia in a single breath. Those five planes downed, almost mythical symbols of both defiance and desperation, seem to have forced a moral recalibration. Few states have thrived so deftly in the chaos of Trumpworld.

Pakistan’s Shift: From Ideology to Pragmatism

Where Pakistan becomes truly interesting today is not in its cultural struggles but in its politics. After Imran Khan, arguably the last great ideological Pakistani leader; the country has entered a different phase. Its leaders are no longer guided by abstract visions of Islamic nationalism or moral grandstanding. Instead, Pakistan has become the ultimate realpolitik state.

This is a striking contrast with India. Prime Minister Modi, for better or worse, is constrained by Indian democracy. Popular opinion shapes policy. India’s deep-rooted democratic ethos both strengthens and shackles its politics. China, by contrast, is free of such constraints, but at the cost of cultural vitality. China is rich, but soulless. India is poorer, but soulful. And that soul, messy, contradictory, spiritual, is what allows Bollywood to exist, what gives India its strange, stubborn cultural power.

Pakistan, in this light, sits uncomfortably between models. It is not fully democratic, but neither is it an outright dictatorship. This semi-authoritarian posture allows its leaders to make pragmatic choices, sometimes brutally so, while its culture remains trapped in older reflexes of pride and grievance. It’s essentially a GCC state with a serious army but without the oil.

Culture vs. Politics

Here lies the paradox: Pakistan’s politics may be maturing into realism, but its culture lags behind. Ordinary Pakistanis still carry the weight of ideological nationalism, of religious pride, of unresolved identity. Yet the state itself increasingly acts with cold calculation. This disconnect between culture and politics is unusual in South Asia. India’s politics may be turbulent, but they are tethered to its people. Pakistan’s politics, by contrast, float above its culture.

This tension may prove unsustainable or it may define Pakistan’s future. It could become the model of a state that thrives on pragmatism even when its culture resists. Or it could unravel under the strain.

India, Pakistan, and the Value of a Soul

The contrast with India is instructive. India remains a flawed but vibrant democracy. Its poor may lack material wealth, but the country possesses something priceless: a civilizational soul. It is the birthplace of spirituality for the world, the source of philosophies and traditions that outlived empires. That soul is both a blessing and a burden. It slows India down, but it gives India meaning.

Pakistan, by contrast, is still searching for its soul. Perhaps it will find one in pragmatism, in a new realism forged by necessity. Or perhaps it will continue to define itself only in opposition, to India, to history, to itself.

A Closing Reflection

Brown Pundits is not here to pander. Our role is to reflect, to critique, to question. And in doing so, we must be expansive, not dogmatic. Pakistan deserves analysis not because we owe it validation, but because it sits at the crossroads of culture and politics, ideology and realism, identity and survival.

If India is the land of the soul, perhaps Pakistan is becoming the land of strategy. That may be its destiny. And perhaps that is enough.