Former US special envoy for Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, has criticised Pakistan’s current situation three years after the imprisonment of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, saying the country has become worse off and needs a major political reset.

In a post on X marking the third anniversary of Khan’s imprisonment, Khalilzad questioned whether the move had benefited Pakistan, despite some foreign policy achievements.

“Are Pakistanis and the country better off than they were three years ago? The answer is clearly no,” Khalilzad wrote.

He said Pakistan’s economy was facing an “unsustainable” crisis, with the government struggling to secure financial assistance. He also pointed to worsening security conditions, saying Balochistan was experiencing a major insurgency, while Pakistan-administered Kashmir and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were also facing violence.

Khalilzad further argued that Pakistan’s foreign relations had suffered setbacks, particularly with Afghanistan and India.

“Overall, the situation is dire and a reset is required,” he said, adding that such a reset should include “internal reconciliation.”

Imran Khan, Pakistan’s former prime minister and leader of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, has been imprisoned since August 2023 after being convicted in several cases, which his supporters describe as politically motivated. Pakistani authorities have rejected those claims.

Abdul Hai Qanit, Director of the Strategic Studies Center of Afghanistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has said that major powers such as the United States, China, and Russia shape the course of global affairs, including matters of war and peace, leaving smaller countries to align their foreign policies with the decisions and strategies of these powers.

In a post on X on Tuesday, Qanit categorized countries into three groups: major powers, middle powers, and small states. He said middle powers—including Türkiye, India, Iran, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Indonesia, and Brazil—are influenced by the policies of major powers but retain significant influence in shaping political dynamics within their respective regions.

According to Qanit, small states generally pursue one of three foreign policy strategies: balancing between rival powers, aligning with a major power, or adopting a hedging strategy by maintaining relations with multiple major or regional powers without fully committing to any single side.

Referring to the recent conflict between the United States and Iran, Qanit cited Oman as a successful example of a small state employing a hedging strategy. He said Oman maintained relations with the United States, Western countries, and Iran simultaneously, enabling it to safeguard its security while also playing a constructive mediating role during the crisis.

Qanit concluded by saying that small states have limited choices in the international system and that achieving success requires strategic planning, adequate resources, institutional capacity, and prudent leadership.