Sanaullah says TLP was created to steal PML-N’s votes; rules out negotiations Azad News HD
Adviser to the Prime Minister on Political Affairs Rana Sanaullah’s Revelation: TLP’s Creation and Political Manipulation in Pakistan’s Power Landscape
In a startling revelation that reignited debate over Pakistan’s political engineering, Adviser to the Prime Minister on Political Affairs Rana Sanaullah on Friday disclosed that the now-banned hardline religious party, Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP), was originally “created in a bid to cut into the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N)’s vote bank.” His statement has sparked intense political, legal, and social discussions across the country, shedding light on the murky relationship between state institutions, religious extremism, and electoral politics in Pakistan.
Rana Sanaullah’s comments have opened a Pandora’s box, exposing the dynamics of how political manipulation has historically influenced Pakistan’s democracy. The statement is being interpreted as both a confession and a warning — a confession about how establishment forces used religious outfits for political purposes, and a warning that such strategies ultimately backfire, eroding the democratic foundations of the state.
Background: The Rise of Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP)
Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan emerged in 2015 following the execution of Mumtaz Qadri, the police guard who assassinated Punjab Governor Salman Taseer over alleged blasphemy remarks. Led by the late Khadim Hussain Rizvi, a fiery cleric with extraordinary oratory skills, the TLP quickly rose to prominence by rallying around the issue of blasphemy, an extremely sensitive and emotive topic in Pakistan. Its slogan “Labbaik Ya Rasool Allah” resonated with millions who perceived the movement as a defense of Prophet Muhammad’s honor.
By 2017, the party had become a significant street power. Its sit-in at Islamabad’s Faizabad interchange paralyzed the capital for weeks, demanding the resignation of then-Law Minister Zahid Hamid over a controversial amendment to the election oath concerning the finality of Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) Prophethood. The protest ended after an apparent agreement brokered by security officials, sparking allegations that elements within the establishment had supported the TLP’s mobilization to weaken the ruling PML-N government.
Rana Sanaullah’s Allegation: Political Engineering Exposed
Rana Sanaullah’s latest statement provides a rare insider perspective confirming long-standing suspicions among political observers. He stated that “the TLP was not a natural political movement but a manufactured one,” created with the clear objective of dividing the conservative and religious vote bank that traditionally supported PML-N. According to him, the idea was to empower a religious alternative that could dilute the PML-N’s dominance in Punjab, Pakistan’s most populous and politically decisive province.
“The TLP was created to hurt us politically, but in the end, it hurt Pakistan,” he reportedly remarked during an interview, highlighting how political short-termism led to the empowerment of a movement that later became uncontrollable.
Analysts have echoed his view, suggesting that the use of religious proxies for political purposes has been a recurring theme in Pakistan’s history — from the creation of sectarian outfits in the 1980s to the mobilization of religious sentiment for electoral gains. Rana Sanaullah’s remarks suggest that this pattern continued even in the recent past, reflecting the deep-rooted nexus between religion and politics.
The Political Context: PML-N’s Historical Vote Bank
The PML-N, led by former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, has historically drawn its strength from Punjab’s middle class, traders, and religiously conservative voters. The party’s emphasis on economic development, infrastructure, and Islamic identity has long resonated with Pakistan’s heartland. However, by 2017–2018, amid rising political tensions and the disqualification of Nawaz Sharif by the Supreme Court, PML-N faced a systematic campaign to erode its political influence.
During that period, TLP’s aggressive campaigns against the PML-N government created significant challenges. The party accused PML-N leaders of being “soft” on blasphemy issues, using street protests, sermons, and social media campaigns to turn religious sentiment against them. The result was a major dent in PML-N’s support base in the 2018 general elections, where TLP contested and secured over two million votes nationwide — mostly from constituencies that were traditional PML-N strongholds.
Although the TLP did not win any National Assembly seats, its presence significantly split the right-wing vote, indirectly benefiting the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) led by Imran Khan. This outcome strengthened the perception that TLP had been used as an electoral tool.
Blowback: From Proxy to Power
What began as a supposed political instrument soon spiraled into a national security challenge. TLP’s ability to mobilize tens of thousands of supporters, paralyze major cities, and confront law enforcement agencies revealed its deep grassroots penetration. Following Khadim Rizvi’s death in 2020, his son Saad Rizvi inherited leadership and continued the confrontational stance, often clashing with the government.
The TLP’s protests over blasphemy-related issues, particularly its demand to expel the French ambassador over caricatures of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), led to violent clashes in 2021. The group’s ability to challenge the state militarily exposed the dangers of empowering religious populism. Subsequently, the government declared TLP a proscribed organization under Section 11B of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, citing credible evidence linking it to violent extremism.
The Broader Implications: Political Shortcuts and Long-Term Damage
Rana Sanaullah’s disclosure is not merely about one party; it reflects a chronic ailment in Pakistan’s political culture — the persistent manipulation of religion for political advantage. Successive governments and institutions have often used religious rhetoric to delegitimize opponents, only to find themselves constrained by the forces they unleashed.
Political scientists argue that such strategies undermine democratic institutions by legitimizing extremism. When mainstream actors flirt with religious radicalism for votes or power, they blur the line between constitutional politics and street vigilantism. The case of TLP exemplifies this — a party that started as a street movement but ended up challenging the state’s writ.
Public and Political Reaction
Rana Sanaullah’s remarks have triggered strong reactions. Supporters of the PML-N see his statement as vindication, arguing that their party was targeted through engineered tactics that manipulated public sentiment. Conversely, critics accuse him of hypocrisy, pointing out that the PML-N itself engaged with religious groups when politically convenient.
The PTI, for instance, responded by saying that “blaming others for political miscalculations is not a solution,” insisting that the PML-N’s failures stem from its own governance lapses. Meanwhile, religious leaders affiliated with TLP rejected Rana Sanaullah’s claim, describing it as an attempt to “rewrite history” and malign a movement rooted in religious devotion.
Historical Pattern: Religion as a Political Tool in Pakistan
Rana Sanaullah’s assertion fits into a long pattern where religion has been instrumentalized for political purposes. From the Islamization drive under General Zia-ul-Haq to the use of madrassah networks for geopolitical ends, Pakistan’s political elite has repeatedly invoked faith to consolidate power or discredit rivals.
In the 1980s and 1990s, sectarian groups like Sipah-e-Sahaba and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi emerged, often with political patronage. Similarly, during elections, mainstream parties have courted clerics and religious organizations to secure votes. The TLP’s rise represents a modern iteration of this trend, where digital media, populist preaching, and social mobilization intersect to create a powerful religious narrative.
TLP’s Impact on Pakistan’s Political Spectrum
The TLP’s entry into politics significantly reshaped Pakistan’s right-wing landscape. It challenged traditional religious parties like Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (Fazl) and Jamaat-e-Islami, which struggled to compete with TLP’s emotional appeal and direct connection with street-level religious sentiment. Unlike older religious parties that operated through institutions and alliances, the TLP thrived on populist outrage, social media campaigns, and charismatic leadership.
This shift also complicated Pakistan’s international image. The violent protests and confrontations associated with TLP drew global concern about Pakistan’s handling of extremism. Countries like France, the UK, and the U.S. closely monitored the developments, linking TLP’s rise to Pakistan’s broader struggle against radicalization.
Lessons Learned and the Road Ahead
Rana Sanaullah’s revelation is an opportunity for Pakistan to introspect. Political engineering — whether through military intervention, judicial manipulation, or the creation of religious proxies — has repeatedly destabilized democratic progress. The country must learn that sustainable governance cannot be built on short-term political games.
The government’s decision to proscribe TLP marks a recognition of this reality, but the real challenge lies in preventing the emergence of similar movements in the future. Experts argue that Pakistan needs comprehensive electoral, educational, and ideological reforms to address the root causes of religious populism. Only by strengthening democratic institutions and ensuring a level playing field can the cycle of political manipulation end.
Conclusion: A Warning from History
Rana Sanaullah’s statement is more than a political remark; it is a reminder of Pakistan’s enduring struggle between democracy and manipulation. The creation and eventual banning of TLP encapsulate how opportunistic strategies can backfire, creating monsters that turn against their makers.
Pakistan’s political landscape today stands at a crossroads. The state must decide whether to continue repeating the mistakes of the past — using religion as a weapon in politics — or to chart a new course rooted in genuine democracy, tolerance, and constitutional supremacy.
